Read more

April 19, 2023
1 min read
Save

‘Home program’ may be key to matching in ophthalmology residency

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Key takeaways:

  • More than 85% of successful applicants came from institutions with home ophthalmology programs.
  • The finding may be due to fewer applicants from institutions without a home program.

Applicants from medical schools without an affiliated residency program make up a minority of ophthalmology matches, according to research presented at Real World Ophthalmology.

Ruby Hollinger and colleagues wrote in a poster that these “home programs” may be a factor in the reduction in match rate over the last several years.

Practice management eye diagram
Applicants from medical schools without an affiliated residency program make up a minority of ophthalmology matches, according to research presented at Real World Ophthalmology.
Image: Adobe Stock

“Matching into ophthalmology has become increasingly competitive,” they wrote. “The 2022 match rate was 68%, down from 74% in 2021, despite the addition of 10 residency spots.”

Using publicly available information, Hollinger and colleagues analyzed data that included matched applicant home institution and degree to find the proportion of successfully matched ophthalmology applicants from institutions without an associated home residency program.

Out of all the medical schools in the United States, 44% do not have an affiliated ophthalmology residency program. Among 470 successful applicants, 85.3% came from institutions with home programs, and 27.4% of applicants matched with their home program.

Among applicants without a home program, 56.6% were from U.S. allopathic programs, 24.6% were from osteopathic programs and 18.8% were international medical graduates.

“This finding may be due to fewer applicants from these institutions, less competitive applications, bias favoring applicants from certain institutions or other factors,” the authors wrote. “Without data on the number of unsuccessful applicants from each institution, it is unknown whether those without a home program are matching at a disproportionate rate.”