183 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37325553)
1. Inefficiencies in Residency Matching Associated with Gale-Shapley Algorithms.
Wu Y; Taravati P; Yanagihara RT; Francis CE; Blazes M; Lee CS; Lee AY; Van Gelder RN
J Acad Ophthalmol (2017); 2021 Jul; 13(2):e175-e182. PubMed ID: 37325553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Applicant Characteristics Associated with Retina Fellowship Match from 2010-2019.
Burton E; Mishra K; Arsiwala LT; Zafar S; Justin GA; Mruthyunjaya P; Woreta FA
Ophthalmol Retina; 2022 Dec; 6(12):1253-1259. PubMed ID: 35772695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Applicant Characteristics Associated with Glaucoma Fellowship Match from 2010 to 2017.
Burton E; Arsiwala LT; Johnson TV; Srikumaran D; Zafar S; Woreta FA
Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2022; 5(2):233-240. PubMed ID: 34455134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Making a match: trends in the application, interview, and ranking process for the neurological surgery residency programs.
Yaeger KA; Schupper AJ; Gilligan JT; Germano IM
J Neurosurg; 2021 May; 135(6):1882-1888. PubMed ID: 34049279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Fellowship Match Outcomes in the U.S. From 2010 to 2017: Analysis of San Francisco Match.
Zafar S; Bressler NM; Golnik KC; Srikumaran D; Ghous Z; Ip S; Chen X; Woreta FA
Am J Ophthalmol; 2020 Oct; 218():261-267. PubMed ID: 32574772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Trends in Cornea Fellowship Applications and Applicant Characteristics: A San Francisco Match Analysis.
Tsou BC; Aguwa UT; Arsiwala LT; Burton E; Mishra K; Zafar S; Woreta F
J Acad Ophthalmol (2017); 2022 Jul; 14(2):e216-e223. PubMed ID: 37388181
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The effects of the change in the NRMP matching algorithm. National Resident Matching Program.
Roth AE; Peranson E
JAMA; 1997 Sep; 278(9):729-32. PubMed ID: 9286832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Insights from San Francisco match rank lists, part II: are programs doing it wrong?
Nagarkar PA; Malafa M; Janis JE
Ann Plast Surg; 2014 Oct; 73(4):422-6. PubMed ID: 25222925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Increasing lengths of rank order lists of applicants and programs of US medical residencies.
Newsome K; Sen-Crowe B; Fanfan D; McKenny M; Elkbuli A
Am Surg; 2023 Apr; 89(4):952-960. PubMed ID: 34734532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Residency Program Reputation Influences the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Match Results.
Krueger CA; Chisari E; Israel H; Cannada LK
J Arthroplasty; 2020 Sep; 35(9):2676-2681. PubMed ID: 32444232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Where Do Orthopaedic Surgery Applicants Match on Their Rank Lists? A Survey of Incoming Residents.
Imbergamo C; Sequeira S; Pizzo D; Wright M; Boucher H
JB JS Open Access; 2023; 8(1):. PubMed ID: 36605355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An Analysis of Medical Student PubMed-Indexed Research Productivity and Factors Associated With Matching at Top-Ranked Ophthalmology Residency Programs.
Rasendran C; Murali S; Kanagasegar N; Kapadia M; Lass J; Ohsie-Bajor L
Cureus; 2024 Jan; 16(1):e52824. PubMed ID: 38406078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Trends in the Orthopaedic Surgery Subspecialty Fellowship Match: Assessment of 2010 to 2017 Applicant and Program Data.
Ruddell JH; Eltorai AEM; DePasse JM; Kuris EO; Gil JA; Cho DK; Paxton ES; Green A; Daniels AH
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2018 Nov; 100(21):e139. PubMed ID: 30399086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is orthopedics more competitive today than when my attending matched? An analysis of National Resident Matching Program data for orthopedic PGY1 applicants from 1984 to 2011.
Karnes JM; Mayerson JL; Scharschmidt TJ
J Surg Educ; 2014; 71(4):530-42. PubMed ID: 24836166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Trends in the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Match: Analysis of NRMP Data from 2007 to 2018.
Claus D; Anderson D; Staley V; Forster J; Meron A
PM R; 2021 Sep; 13(9):986-993. PubMed ID: 33237637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Utilization of a New Customizable Scoring Tool to Recruit and Select Pulmonary/Critical Care Fellows.
Ie SR; Ratcliffe JL; Rubio C; Zhang KS; Shaver K; Musick DW
Cureus; 2021 Jun; 13(6):e15396. PubMed ID: 34249546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
