Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T03:31:05.772Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Justice in Residency Placement: Is the Match System an Offense to the Values of Medicine?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2003

TIMOTHY F. MURPHY
Affiliation:
University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago During the 2002–2003 academic year, Dr. Murphy is Senior Visiting Scholar at the Ethics Institute of the American Medical Association

Extract

Medical residency—specialty training after the completion of medical school—is an essential component of medical education and is required in order to be a licensed, independent medical practitioner in most jurisdictions. As things currently stand in the United States, the match between medical school graduates and residency programs is governed by a match between rank-order lists prepared by candidates and residencies alike. An applicant picks a number of residency programs and ranks them according to order of interest. The residency program prepares a similar list, ranking the candidates it most wants in its program. A computer program compares the rankings and makes assignments according to a certain algorithm. Using these lists, the match system assigns approximately 24,000 applicants to approximately 21,000 training positions in pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, internal medicine, and the rest. These assignments are then announced to all parties on specific days. The system has been in place since 1952 and is overseen by the National Residency Match Program (NRMP), a nonprofit organization. This system has several advantages. First of all, it standardizes the timetable for decisions, and applicants are in no position to tie up offers while waiting to hear from other institutions. Institutions are not held captive, either, in making assignments while waiting to hear from particular parties.

Type
SPECIAL SECTION: PRAXIS: ETHICAL ISSUES IN MEDICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)