We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Viewpoint |

Reforming the Match Process—Early Decision Plans and the Case for a Consortia Match

Brian J. F. Wong, MD, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Departments of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Biomedical Engineering, and Surgery, The Beckman Laser Institute, University of California, Irvine
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;142(8):727-728. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2016.1232.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


This Viewpoint discusses reforms to the National Resident Matching Program for otolaryngologists that would make the process more efficient without compromising the best placement for applicants.

Each year, on match day, about 300 prospective otolaryngological residents are very happy, but at the same time, many equally qualified applicants (about 70) are sad.1 Unlike most other disciplines, the otolaryngological applicant pool is already highly self-selected and competitive across the board (approximately 60% Alpha Omega Alpha members),2 with most of the matched and unmatched applicants being indistinguishable from one another in terms of accomplishments and perceived future performance.35 Hence, fear and anxiety caused by the harsh reality of the National Resident Matching Program1 statistics have led students to apply to more programs each year; now, conventional wisdom suggests that that magic number is 50, which also results in a proportionally excessive number of interviews. Everyone is now almost applying everywhere, which is already the case with peer specialties such as dermatology and plastic surgery.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Global surgery and the role of trainees. Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2016;77(4):202-3.

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
Clinical Scenario

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
Matching Content and Context: Evidence-Based Teaching Scripts