Attrition rates between residents in obstetrics and gynecology and other clinical specialties, 2000-2009.
Open accessAbstract
Background: As resident attrition disrupts educational and workload balance and reduces the number of graduating physicians to care for patients, an ongoing goal of graduate medical education programs is to retain residents. Objective: We compared annual rates of resident attrition in obstetrics and gynecology (Ob-Gyn) with other clinical specialties of similar or larger size during a recent 10-year period, and explored the reasons for resident attrition. Methods: In this observational study, we analyzed annual data from the American Medical Association Graduate Medical Education Census between academic years 2000 and 2009 for residents who entered Ob-Gyn and other core clinical specialties. Our primary outcome was the trend in averaged annual attrition rates. Results: The average annual attrition was 196 ± 12 (SD) residents, representing 4.2% ± 0.5% of all Ob-Gyn residents. Rates of attrition were consistently higher among men (5.3%) and international medical school graduates (7.6%). The annual rate of attrition was similar to that for other clinical specialties (mean: 4.0%; range: from 1.5% in emergency medicine to 7.9% in psychiatry). The attrition rates for Ob-Gyn residents were relatively stable for the 10-year period (range: 3.6% in 2008 to 5.1% in 2006). Common reasons for attrition were transition to another specialty (30.0%), withdrawal/dismissal (28.2%), transfer to another Ob-Gyn program (25.4%), and leave of absence (2.2%). These proportions remained fairly constant during this 10-year period. Conclusions: The average annual attrition rate of residents in Ob-Gyn was 4.2%, comparable to most other core clinical specialties.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 overall attrition rate for all American residents was 1.8% three decades ago and increased to around 4% in 2000-2009.
“Baldwin et al. put the overall attrition rate for all American residents at 1.8% three decades ago32 but has since increased to around 4% in 2000-2009.9”
From Attrition in the Training Programs of the University of the Philippines-Philippine General Hospital (UP-PGH): A 5-year Review of Trends and Reasons from 2018-2022 (2025) · cites this paper as [9]
The Results report 4.0% annual attrition for the clinical specialties compared in 2000–2009, supporting the figure attached to this citation. The Methods specify that the comparison covered selected clinical specialties, not all American residents. The earlier 1.8% figure is attached to a different citation in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Residency attrition rate in obstetrics and gynecology: Are we losing more postgraduates today?
Gilpin, M. M. (2005) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2005.07.083 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- [1]Bienstock JL, Laube DW. The recruitment phoenix: strategies for attracting medical students into obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:1125–1127. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000162532.62399.99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [2]Lostumbo L. National Resident Matching Program results and data 2001 match: report of the National Resident Matching Program. Washington, DC: National Resident Matching Program; 2001. http://www.nrmp.org/data/datatables2012.pdf. Accessed May 29, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- [3]Moschos E, Beyer MJ. Resident attrition: is gender a factor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:387–391. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.04.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [5]McAlister R, Andriole DA, Brotherton SE, Jeffe DB. Attrition in residents entering US obstetrics and gynecology residencies: analysis of National GME Census data. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:574.e1–574.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.06.081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [6]Brotherton SE, Etzel SI. Graduate medical education, 2010–2011. JAMA. 2011;306(9):1015–1030. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [7]Seltzer VL, Messer RH, Nehra RD. Resident attrition in obstetrics and gynecology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1315–1317. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91595-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- [8]Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Report of the ACGME Work Group. Chicago, IL: ACGME; 2007. http://www.acgme.org/acgmeweb/Portals/0/PFAssets/PublicationsBooks/2007_2008_ANA_ANA_Current_ACGME_DataBook.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- [9]Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME Program Requirements for graduate medical education in obstetrics and gynecology. http://www.acgme.org/acgmeweb/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/220obstetricsandgynecology01012008.pdf. Accessed February 5, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- [10]Schulman S, Salsberg E. Projections of future medical school enrollment. Analysis Brief. 2009;9(3):1–2. [Google Scholar]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schwed, A. C., Lee, S. L., Salcedo, E. S., Reeves, M. E., Inaba, K., Sidwell, R. A., Amersi, F., Are, C., Arnell, T. D., Damewood, R. B., et al. (2017) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.2656 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Thoughts of Quitting General Surgery Residency: Factors in Canada.
Ginther, D. N., Dattani, S., Miller, S., & Hayes, P. (2016) · Journal of Surgical Education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.11.008 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Brockberg, M., Mittelman, A., Dugas, J., McCabe, K., Spector, J., Liu, J., & Sheng, A. Y. (2019) · Journal of Graduate Medical Education · doi:10.4300/jgme-d-19-00248.1 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Tabuñar, S. M. S., & Parreño Sacdalan, M. D. (2025) · PubMed · doi:10.47895/amp.vi0.9376 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kennedy, K. A., Brennan, M. C., Rayburn, W. F., & Brotherton, S. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Graduate Medical Education
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 267-271
- ISSN
- 1949-8349 (ISSN-L)
- 1949-8357
- PMC
- PMC3693692
- OpenAlex
- W2006456905
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 5.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Journal of Graduate Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- resident attrition, obstetrics and gynecology residency, graduate medical education, resident retention, international medical graduates, leave of absence
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