Icon Legend

This session is not in your schedule.

This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.

Presentation Icons

Additional registration fee required

Faculty have requested this content not be shared on social media

CME Credit Offered

Poster Icons

Foundation Awardee

No Social Media

Back

Q&A

Education/Simulation

Poster Session 1

(148) Trends in the MFM fellowship match: How should we counsel applicants?

Tuesday, February 13, 2024

10:30 AM – 12:00 PM

Location: Prince George's Exhibit Hall CDE, Lower Atrium Level

Primary & Presenting Author(s)

Sarah K. Dotters-Katz, MD

Associate Professor
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC, United States

Coauthor(s)

LT

Lorene Temming, MD, MSCR

Atrium
Charlotte, NC, United States
SE

Sarah Ellestad, MD

Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC, United States
MG

Matthew R. Grace, MD

Assistant Professor
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nashville, TN, United States
AS

Anthony L. Shanks, MD

Maternal Fetal Medicine Fellowship Director
Indiana University School of Medicine
Indianapolis, IN, United States

Objective: Maternal Fetal Medicine (MFM) Fellowship match process is complicated, Limited resources exist to guide applicants and fellowship program leadership regarding this trend. This study seeks to illuminate data aspects of the application and match in MFM.

Study Design:

After IRB exemption, publicly available data were obtained from the Electronic Residency Application Service(ERAS) website and from the National Residency Match Program(NRMP) website. Applicants registering for MFM fellowship in ERAS in 2018-22 included in application analysis. Applicants registering for MFM match with NRMP from 2015-22 included in match phase analysis. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to analyze data. Cochrane-Armitage test performed to assess for change over time.

Primary outcome was % of applicants matching and % matching at top choice. Secondary outcomes include % matching at top 3, % not matching, and total number of programs applied to overall, stratified by URM status. URM status match data not publicly available for NRMP data.

Results:

From 2018-22, 840 applicants applied for MFM fellowship in ERAS(average:168/yr). Applicants applied to an average 39 programs/yr. URM applicants applied to more programs than white applicants (average 9 apps/yr, SD:3 for Black applicants; 6/yr, SD:3 for LatinX applicants(Panel A).

In the past 8 yrs, 1,171 applicants entered the NRMP match, (avg 146/yr), with an increase in positions from 97137. The average MFM match rate is 76.7%(range 63.5-86.6, p-trend=0.07, Panel B), with an average of 37.3% matching at #1 choice annually(range 31.6,42.9). An average of 54.9% of applying applicants are matching in their top 3 annually(range 50,63.2,p-trend=0.38, Panel B)

Conclusion: The overall match rates for MFM fellowship is high, with over ½ applicants matching in their top 3. These data may be helpful for those counseling individuals applying for MFM fellowship.