CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9Game Theory and Voting SystemsMedical Education and AdmissionsDiversity and Career in Medicine

An analysis of the resident match

Williams, Kevin Jon, Werth, Victoria P., Wolff, Jon A.·1981·New England Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1056/nejm198105073041910
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) was founded to bring fairness and order to a previously chaotic application process for internships. However, the current computer algorithm that generates the matches treats students and programs differently, in a way that favors programs whenever desires conflict. No statement from the NRMP makes this point clear, and workable alternatives to this biased algorithm have not been considered in public debate.A Controlled ExperimentA controlled way to demonstrate the favored role of programs is to switch the positions of students and programs in the algorithm and then compare the results of matching. Under . . .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm198105073041910

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The NRMP Admissions Algorithm systematically favors hospital programs over medical students in cases of conflict.

    “One charges that the Admissions Algorithm systematically favors hospital programs over medical students in cases of conflict [Graettinger and Peranson 1981b;Roth 1984;Sudarshan and Zisook 1981;Williams et al. 1981].”

    From Bias in computer systems (1996) · cites this paper as Williams et al. 1981

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Williams, K. J., Werth, V. P., & Wolff, J. A.
ORCID
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Published
1981-05-07
Volume
304
Issue
19
Pages
1165-1166
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
DOI
10.1056/nejm198105073041910
OpenAlex
W2031232003
Cited by
9
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
Keywords
National Resident Matching Program, algorithmic fairness, internships, controlled experiments
MeSH terms
Workforce, Career Choice, Computers, Hospitals, Teaching, Internship and Residency, Logic, Personnel Selection, United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review