CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Academic Ophthalmology 2023; 15(02): e280-e286
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1777413
Research Article

The Big Data Gap: Asymmetric Information in the Ophthalmology Residency Match Process and the Argument for Transparent Residency Data

1   Retina & Macular Disease Service, New England Eye Center, Boston, Massachusetts
2   Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Shilpa Desai
1   Retina & Macular Disease Service, New England Eye Center, Boston, Massachusetts
2   Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Background The ophthalmology match is an important step for graduating medical students that defines their future career. Residency programs demonstrate significant variability due to differences in size, location, research output, subspecialty exposure, surgical case load, and alumni fellowship/practice placement. Despite the importance of informed decision-making, applicants often find limited, inconsistent information about potential programs.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to characterize and identify gaps in the information available to residents in the 2022 to 2023 Match.

Methods The SFMatch Web site was reviewed to identify programs included as well as characteristics cited on each program's webpage. Program webpages were used to evaluate availability and consistency of data on site surgical caseload, fellowship slots, and teaching staff.

Results Of the 121 programs included on SFMatch, 23 (19%) provided no data on August 15, 2022 (15 days prior to application submission deadline) and 9 (7%) lacked program data on October 15, 2022. Though most programs provided mean cataract volume, data on volume of other procedures for graduating residents was highly variable and occasionally misleading. Programs did not provide information on several academic and social considerations that may influence match ranking choice.

Conclusion Applicants often must read “between the lines” to identify residency program strengths and weaknesses. Data crucial to informing the application process remain sparse, unavailable, or spread across resources. Limited data increases applicant dependence on word-of-mouth knowledge to inform decision-making. This might reduce diversity by limiting successful applicants to those with existing connections within the field.

* Investigation performed at New England Eye Center in Boston, MA. Stephen Le Breton is a medical student at Tufts University School of Medicine and a research assistant at the New England Eye Center. Dr. Shilpa Desai is a retinal specialist at New England Eye and Ear and an Assistant Professor at Tufts University School of Medicine. In addition to seeing patients, she is the Director of Medical Student Education for the department of ophthalmology.




Publication History

Received: 28 February 2023

Accepted: 09 November 2023

Article published online:
11 December 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 
  • References

  • 1 2023 Summary Report - Ophthalmology Residency Match. SFMatch; 2023
  • 2 Markle JC, Ahmed H, Pandya K. et al. Transparency in the ophthalmology residency match: background, study, and implications. Cureus 2021; 13 (11) e19826
  • 3 Berger JS, Cioletti A. Viewpoint from 2 graduate medical education deans application overload in the residency match process. J Grad Med Educ 2016; 8 (03) 317-321
  • 4 Venincasa MJ, Cai LZ, Gedde SJ, Uhler T, Sridhar J. Current applicant perceptions of the ophthalmology residency match. JAMA Ophthalmol 2020; 138 (05) 460-466
  • 5 Siatkowski RM, Mian SI, Culican SM. et al; Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology. Probability of success in the ophthalmology residency match: three-year outcomes analysis of San Francisco Matching Program Data. J Acad Ophthalmol (2017) 2018; 10 (01) e150-e157
  • 6 2022 - 2023 Ophthalmology Residency Match FAQs SFMatch.org: Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology; 2022. Accessed February 20, 2023 at: https://sfmatch.org/files/fcb2882dbb2b4c5bb394f87d089bc1df
  • 7 Zastrow RK, Burk-Rafel J, London DA. Systems-level reforms to the US Resident Selection Process: a scoping review. J Grad Med Educ 2021; 13 (03) 355-370
  • 8 SuzieKaran. Confessions of a Program Director: Interacting with the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) on September 15th, 2019. Accessed November 23, 2023 at: https://thalamusgme.com/electronic-residency-application-service/
  • 9 Loh AR, Joseph D, Keenan JD, Lietman TM, Naseri A. Predictors of matching in an ophthalmology residency program. Ophthalmology 2013; 120 (04) 865-870
  • 10 Texas STAR [Internet]. UT Southwestern Medical Center; 2023
  • 11 Liebman DL, Armstrong GW, Shah AS, Lorch AC, Miller JW, Chodosh J. The case for transparency in the ophthalmology residency match. Ophthalmology 2021; 128 (02) 185-187
  • 12 SFMatch Ophthalmology Program Profile Info [Internet]; 2022. Accessed November 23, 2023 at: https://sfmatch.org/specialty-programs-compare/97baf738-9b5b-4b50-b715-444111a28b6d
  • 13 Caretta-Weyer HA. An outcomes-oriented approach to residency selection: implementing novel processes to align residency programs and applicants. Acad Med 2022; 97 (05) 626-630
  • 14 ACGME. ACGME Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Ophthalmology; 2020