Abstract
Objective
To determine the outcomes and eventual career paths for unmatched applicants by evaluating
a historical cohort of unmatched applicants in the Urology Match.
Methods
The 2008-2014 AUA Match lists were obtained from the Society of Academic Urologists
and 730 unique applicants were identified with at least one unmatched result. Additional
information such as preliminary training and eventual specialty choice were obtained
from publicly available sources. Comparative analysis with univariable and multivariable
analysis was performed between eventual urologists and those who chose alternative
career paths.
Results
Overall, 43.5% (318/730) of unmatched urology applicants subsequently continued their
interest in Urology and 77.4% (246/317) of initially unsuccessful applicants eventually
became urologists. Males (80.9%, P = .01), Doctor of Osteopathy (DO) degree (62.5%, P = <.001), and those undergoing a research year compared to a preliminary surgery
year (85.2% vs 72.0% respectively, P = .047) had an increased likelihood of successfully becoming a urologist. The most
common alternative specialty choices were Internal Medicine (13.8%), General Surgery
(12.9%) and Anesthesiology (11.9%).
Conclusion
Urology is a competitive surgical sub-specialty. Surprisingly, approximately 3 in
4 unmatched urology applicants who continue their interest in urology will eventually
obtain a residency position. However, only 33.7% of initially unmatched students ultimately
became urologists. Unmatched applicants have several viable pathways to obtain a urological
residency position. Male gender, a DO degree, and a research year are associated with
successfully obtaining a urology residency position.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to UrologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- The fate of unmatched orthopaedic applicants: risk factors and outcomes.JB JS Open Access. 2020; 5 (Epub 20200624PubMed PMID: 32832827; PMCID: PMC7418921)https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00043
Urology residency match statistics. 2022. [cited 2022 February 2]. Available from: https://www.auanet.org/education/auauniversity/for-residents/urology-and-specialty-matches/urology-match-results.
- Analysis of unmatched orthopaedic residency applicants: options after the match.J Grad Med Educ. 2016; 8 (PubMed PMID: 26913110; PMCID: PMC4763390): 91-95https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-15-00176.1
- Outcomes of reapplication to otolaryngology residency: a prospective cohort study.Ear Nose Throat J. 2018; 97 (PubMed PMID: 30273432): 324-328https://doi.org/10.1177/014556131809700922
- Unmatched integrated cardiothoracic surgery program applicants: Where do they end up?.Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 106 (Epub 20180422PubMed PMID: 29689239): 1556-1560https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.046
- National trends and characteristics of success in the urology match process.Urol Pract. 2018; 5https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urpr.2017.04.005
- Gender differences in the urology residency match—does it make a difference?.Urology. 2018; 111: 39-43https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2017.07.061
- Familiarity trends of successful urology residency match applicants.Urol Pract. 2021; 8: 298-302https://doi.org/10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000192
- The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners.J Biomed Inform. 2019; 95 (Epub 20190509PubMed PMID: 31078660; PMCID: PMC7254481)103208https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208
- Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.J Biomed Inform. 2009; 42 (Epub 20080930PubMed PMID: 18929686; PMCID: PMC2700030): 377-381https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
Bhatnagar V, Diaz S, Bucur PA. The need for more mentorship in medical school2020. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7984.
- COVID-19 and the urology match: perspectives and a call to action.J Urol. 2020; 204 (Epub 20200331PubMed PMID: 32228332; PMCID: PMC7273862): 17-19https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000001037
- Program directors' criteria for selection into urology residency.Urology. 2015; 85https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.12.041
- Research Years for Urology Applicants: Considerations Amid COVID 19.American Urological Association, 2021 (AUANews, American Urological Association Linthicum Maryland)
- Economic impact of training and career decisions in urologic surgery.J Urol. 2013; : 191https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.09.060
- Assessing the female and underrepresented minority medical student experience in the urology match: Where do we fall short?.Urology. 2021; 147 (Epub 20201013PubMed PMID: 33065172): 57-63https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.076
- Formal mentorship as an opportunity to expand the urology pipeline: under represented trainees entering residency (UReTER) program evaluation 2020-2021.Urology. 2021; (Epub 20210908PubMed PMID: 34506807)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.06.052
- The R Frank Jones Urology Interest Group: an intentional and strategic pipeline program to increase diversity in urology.Urology. 2021; (Epub 20211016PubMed PMID: 34666122)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.08.047
- Urologists for equity: a collective approach toward diversity, equity, and inclusion in urology.Urology. 2021; (Epub 20210729PubMed PMID: 34333037)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.07.017
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 02, 2022
Accepted:
September 13,
2022
Received:
May 5,
2022
Footnotes
Financial Disclosure: None. Authors have no conflicts of interest and did not receive any financial support for the authorship or publication of this paper.
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
