↓ Skip to main content

The Gastroenterology Fellowship Match: A Decade Later

Overview of attention for article published in Digestive Diseases and Sciences, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
The Gastroenterology Fellowship Match: A Decade Later
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10620-017-4593-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert J. Huang, George Triadafilopoulos, David Limsui

Abstract

Following a period of uncertainty and disorganization, the gastroenterology (GI) national leadership decided to reinstitute the fellowship match (the Match) under the auspices of the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) in 2006. Although it has now been a decade since the rebirth of the Match, there have been limited data published regarding progress made. In this piece, we discuss reasons for the original collapse of the GI Match, including most notably a perceived oversupply of GI physicians and a poor job market. We discuss the negative impacts the absence of the Match had on programs and on applicants, as well as the impetus to reorganize the Match under the NRMP. We then utilize data published annually by the NRMP to demonstrate that in the decade since its rebirth, the GI Match has been remarkably successful in terms of attracting the participation of applicants and programs. We show that previous misguided concerns of an oversupply of GI physicians were not realized, and that GI fellowship positions remain highly competitive for internal medicine applicants. Finally, we discuss possible implications of recent changes in the healthcare landscape on the GI Match.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 43%
Librarian 1 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 14%
Engineering 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2017.
All research outputs
#3,494,737
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#445
of 4,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,359
of 313,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#8
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.