↓ Skip to main content

Current State of Colorectal Surgery Training

Overview of attention for article published in Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Current State of Colorectal Surgery Training
Published in
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, February 2016
DOI 10.1097/dcr.0000000000000525
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew B. Bailey, Peter E. Miller, Stephanie E. Pawlak, Michael S. Thomas, David E. Beck, H. David Vargas, Charles B. Whitlow, David A. Margolin

Abstract

Colorectal residency has become one of the more competitive postgraduate training opportunities; however, little information is available to guide potential applicants in gauging their competitiveness. The aim of this study was to identify the current trends colorectal residency training and to identify what factors are considered most important in ranking a candidate highly. We hypothesized that there was a difference in what program directors, current and recently matched colorectal residents, and recent graduates consider most important in making a candidate competitive for a colorectal residency position. Three 10-question anonymous surveys were sent to 59 program directors, 87 current and recently matched colorectal residents, and 119 recent graduates in March 2015. The study was conducted as an anonymous internet survey. Current trends in applying for a colorectal residency, competitiveness of recent colorectal residents, factors considered most important in ranking a candidate highly, and what future colorectal surgeons can expect after finishing their training were measured. The study had an overall response rate of 43%, with 28 (47%) of 59 program directors, 46 (53%) of 87 current and recently matched colorectal residents, and 39 (33%) of 119 recent graduates responding. The majority of program directors felt that a candidate's performance during the interview process was the most important factor in making a candidate competitive, followed by contact from a colleague, letters of recommendation, American Board of Surgery In-Training Exam scores, and number of publications/presentations. The majority of current and recently matched colorectal residents felt that a recommendation/telephone call from a colleague was the most important factor, whereas the majority of recent graduates favored letters of recommendation as the most important factor in ranking a candidate highly. Limitations to the study include its small sample size, selection bias, responder bias, and misclassification bias. There are differences in what program directors and current/recent residents consider most important in making an applicant competitive for colorectal residency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Other 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 12%
Other 4 24%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 65%
Unspecified 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
#4,151
of 4,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,610
of 406,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
#47
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 406,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.