0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
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 ......
Resident Physician Forum |

Recent Changes to the National Residency Matching Program FREE

Robert Phillips, MD
[+] Author Affiliations

Prepared by Ashish Bajaj, Department of Resident and Fellow Services, American Medical Association.


JAMA. 2000;283(22):2997. doi:10.1001/jama.283.22.2997.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

For nearly half a century, the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) has operated as an impartial and confidential venue for matching applicants' and residency programs' preferences for each other. In the past few years, the NRMP has instituted several changes to improve the residency match process for applicants and residency programs.

The NRMP is sponsored by 5 organizations: the American Medical Association, the American Board of Medical Specialties, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the American Hospital Association, and the Council of Medical Specialty Societies. Its board of directors also includes student representatives from 4 different organizations. Although the NRMP is not the only organization to conduct a match, it is the largest. In the 2000 Match, the NRMP served 3769 residency programs, offered 22,722 positions, and processed 33,528 applicants.

The NRMP has a single cardinal rule for both programs and applicants: neither must ask the other to make a prior commitment as to how each will rank the other. This rule is intended to ensure a fair process by which applicants and programs can rank one another after fully weighing their options, and thus avoid pressure to accept one another on the spot. For the Match to work optimally requires broad participation by programs and applicants, who must act in good faith and promise to abide by the Match results.

The NRMP has actively worked to improve its services. Two years ago, the Match algorithm was changed to favor the preferences of applicants over those of programs. Although the new algorithm only changed the results for 16 applicants in the first year it was tested, the change was probably significant to those individuals. This past year, the NRMP successfully converted the Match to an Internet-based process for both applicants and programs. This year also marked the first time that programs were asked to list their final Match quotas prior to the close of the rank-order list process so that students and the NRMP could monitor the availability of positions in the Match.

Because the Match process requires broad participation to work well for everyone involved, the NRMP will be working closely with specialty societies to ensure adequate participation by programs in the Specialty Match. Beginning this year, if a specialty cannot commit at least 75% of programs and 75% of positions to the Match, it will not be able to fill its positions through the NRMP. The NRMP is exploring other mechanisms to enhance participation and professional behavior in the main Match. These include building more effective communication with program director organizations and developing a common professional ethics language with accreditation and board certification organizations. The NRMP is also actively exploring collaboration with the Association of American Medical Colleges' Electronic Residency Application Services to assist unfilled programs and unmatched applicants in finding one another.

It has been encouraging to see how well the sponsoring organizations work together to improve this important service. More substantial improvements will likely require better monitoring and inducement to participate. The NRMP is hopeful that increased cooperation from specialty and program director organizations as well as accreditation and board certification bodies will make this possible.

Figures

Tables

References

CME
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.

Multimedia

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

Related Content

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

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles