Undereducation is afoot: Assessing the lack of acral lentiginous melanoma educational materials for skin of color.

Acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) is a subtype of cutaneous melanoma notorious for poor outcomes that disproportionately affect individuals with skin of color (e.g., African-, Hispanic-, Asian-descent) when compared to mortality rates among non-Hispanic White populations. There are several societal factors that contribute to racial disparities in ALM, including a lack of representative educational material in the context of patient education and medical instruction. This gap in representative information for the US population includes risk of disease, patterns of incidence, and differences in disease presentation in skin of color. The atypical presentation of ALM on acral volar skin sites makes early detection challenging and necessitates an increased index of suspicion on the part of physicians and patients alike. Studies underscoring the importance of early detection in reducing mortality risk make the availability of adequate representative educational materials indispensable.

Transparency in the Ophthalmology Residency Match: Background, Study, and Implications.

Background Medical students are applying to dramatically more ophthalmology residency programs than in the past, causing an increased administrative burden for programs and financial harm to students. This study considers the background of this situation and looks at how a lack of transparency surrounding potential residency match filters contributes. Furthermore, this study raises several potential solutions to this lack of transparency that may increase the functionality of the ophthalmology residency match. Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the availability and consistency of potential ophthalmology residency match filters through training program websites and the American Medical Association's (AMA) Residency & Fellowship Database (FREIDA). Methods This study was a cross-sectional observational study of ophthalmology residency program websites and AMA's FREIDA database entries. For 119 ophthalmology residency programs, five potential filters were evaluated for both availability and consistency on individual residency websites and FREIDA. These filters were: (1) whether a program required a minimum United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 score; (2) minimum number of letters of recommendation required; 3) whether a minimum USMLE Step 2 score was required; (4) if the program accepts the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) sequence in lieu of the USMLE; and (5) ability of the residency to sponsor a visa (J-1, H-1B, or F-1). Each program's website and FREIDA entry were independently evaluated by two authors to increase validity, with a third author brought in to break the tie in case of a disagreement. Results Only two ophthalmology residency programs had information about all five filters both available and consistent on their website and FREIDA. Inter-reviewer reliability was 92.5%. Conclusions Information about potential filters used in the ophthalmology residency match is neither publicly available nor consistent. This lack of transparency may contribute to the phenomenon of medical students applying to dramatically more ophthalmology residency programs. A standardized database of these filters is needed to increase transparency to applicants, which may reduce the expenses of medical students and the workload of program directors.