Predicting General Surgery Match Outcomes Using Standardized Ranking Metrics.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Objective measurements for applicant ranking are becoming increasingly important, not only to help address the growing number of general surgery applicants each year but also to minimize bias and ensure consistency. We assessed if our general surgery applicant scoring system was an effective tool for accurately predicting the results of the resident match. METHODS: A retrospective review of applicant rank lists from 2017 to 2020 was conducted. Applicants were ranked based on the sum of preinterview and interview scores. The preinterview score is an objective metric related to the applicant's academic portfolio. The interview score is a standardized score based on interview performance. We reviewed match results from ranked candidates and categorized them as academic categorical (AC), community categorical (CC), preliminary surgical (PS), nonsurgical specialty (NS), or unmatched (UM) positions. RESULTS: A total of 378 applicants were interviewed. Forty-nine percent matched into AC, 22% into CC, 11% into PS, and 5% into NS positions, while 13% of the interviewees were UM. Applicants who matched into AC positions had significantly higher preinterview and interview scores than applicants in other categories. Applicants who matched into CC positions had significantly higher interview scores than those categorized as UM, but their preinterview scores did not differ significantly from the UM group. Applicants who did not match into a categorical position (PS, NS, or UM) did not have significantly different preinterview or interview scores from one another. CONCLUSIONS: Our standardized scoring system was effective in stratifying which applicants would match into categorical general surgery residency programs.