151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37012141)
1. Objective Residency Applicant Assessment Using a Linear Rank Model.
Shaffrey EC; Moura SP; Wirth PJ; Attaluri PK; Schappe A; Edalatpour A; Bentz ML; Rao VK
J Surg Educ; 2023 Jun; 80(6):776-785. PubMed ID: 37012141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Applicant Characteristics Associated With Selection for Ranking at Independent Surgery Residency Programs.
Dort JM; Trickey AW; Kallies KJ; Joshi AR; Sidwell RA; Jarman BT
J Surg Educ; 2015; 72(6):e123-9. PubMed ID: 26073713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Rise Above the Competition: How Do Plastic Surgery Residency Applicants with NCAA Experience Fare in the Residency Match?
Shaffrey EC; Edalatpour A; Nicksic PJ; Nkana ZH; Michelotti BF; Afifi AM
Aesthetic Plast Surg; 2024 May; 48(9):1867-1873. PubMed ID: 37500905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Association Between Interview Day and Rank Order in Plastic Surgery Match: Is Recency Effect to Blame?
De May H; Marquez JL; Scott K; Pires G; Crombie C
J Surg Educ; 2023 Aug; 80(8):1172-1178. PubMed ID: 37301643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Linear Modeling to Reduce Bias in Plastic Surgery Residency Selection.
Elmaraghi S; Rao VK; Christie BM
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2021 Mar; 147(3):538-544. PubMed ID: 33587559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Recent trends in applicants and the matching process for the integrated plastic surgery match.
Super N; Tieman J; Boucher K; Rockwell WB; Agarwal JP
Ann Plast Surg; 2013 Oct; 71(4):406-9. PubMed ID: 23407248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Impact of Socioeconomic Factors on the 2022 Plastic Surgery Match.
Girard AO; Lopez CD; Khoo KH; Lake IV; Yusuf CT; Lopez J; Redett RJ; Yang R
Ann Plast Surg; 2023 Apr; 90(4):366-375. PubMed ID: 36880766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Association of Mentor-to-Program Contact and Applicant Rank Disclosure With Vitreoretinal Fellowship Applicant's Final Match Outcome in 2016 and 2017.
Christiansen SM; Osher JM; Riemann CD
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 136(6):642-647. PubMed ID: 29710103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Integrated plastic surgery residency applicant survey: characteristics of successful applicants and feedback about the interview process.
Rogers CR; Gutowski KA; Rio AM; Larson DL; Edwards M; Hansen JE; Lawrence WT; Stevenson TR; Bentz ML
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2009 May; 123(5):1607-1617. PubMed ID: 19407635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Analysis of the 1990-2007 neurosurgery residency match: does applicant gender affect neurosurgery match outcome?
Durham SR; Donaldson K; Grady MS; Benzil DL
J Neurosurg; 2018 Aug; 129(2):282-289. PubMed ID: 29882698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Predictors of Plastic Surgery Applicant Success: An Analysis of the Texas STAR Database.
Hallman TG; Qureshi U; Soltani H; Gutowski KS; Arcelona C; Donaldson R; Mihalic AP; Gosain AK
J Craniofac Surg; 2024 Jun; 35(4):1084-1088. PubMed ID: 38709027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Implicit Bias and the Association of Redaction of Identifiers With Residency Application Screening Scores.
Pershing S; Stell L; Fisher AC; Goldberg JL
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2021 Dec; 139(12):1274-1282. PubMed ID: 34673889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. New Heuristics to Stratify Applicants: Predictors of General Surgery Residency Applicant Step 1 Scores.
Lund S; D'Angelo J; D'Angelo AL; Heller S; Stulak J; Rivera M
J Surg Educ; 2022; 79(2):349-354. PubMed ID: 34776371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Outcome analysis of factors impacting the plastic surgery match.
Wood JS; David LR
Ann Plast Surg; 2010 Jun; 64(6):770-4. PubMed ID: 20489406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Mentorship is Critical: An Analysis of the 2022 Plastic Surgery Match.
Lopez CD; Khoo KH; Girard AO; Yusuf C; Lake IV; Redett RJ; Yang R
Ann Plast Surg; 2023 Jun; 90(6S Suppl 5):S645-S653. PubMed ID: 36921340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Trends in the 10-year history of the vascular integrated residency match: More work, higher cost, same result.
McMackin KK; Caputo FJ; Hoell NG; Trani J; Carpenter JP; Lombardi JV
J Vasc Surg; 2020 Jul; 72(1):298-303. PubMed ID: 32037082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Insights from the San Francisco Match rank list data: how many interviews does it take to match?
Malafa MM; Nagarkar PA; Janis JE
Ann Plast Surg; 2014 May; 72(5):584-8. PubMed ID: 24667882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of moral reasoning skills in the orthopaedic surgery resident applicant.
Bohm KC; Van Heest T; Gioe TJ; Agel J; Johnson TC; Van Heest A
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2014 Sep; 96(17):e151. PubMed ID: 25187595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The Independent Plastic Surgery Match (2010-2018): Applicant and Program Trends, Predictors of a Successful Match, and Future Directions.
Azoury SC; Kozak GM; Stranix JT; Colen DL; Piwnica-Worms W; Fosnot J; Serletti JM; Kovach SJ
J Surg Educ; 2020; 77(1):219-228. PubMed ID: 31405800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Applying to Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Programs: Trends in the Past 5 Years of the Match.
Tadisina KK; Orra S; Bassiri Gharb B; Kwiecien G; Bernard S; Zins JE
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2016 Apr; 137(4):1344-1353. PubMed ID: 26761515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
