Osteopathic GME Match Report - Touro College
Osteopathic GMEMatch ReportFor the 2011 MatchPrepared by the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine,with participation by the American Osteopathic Associationand the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners,October 2012 Copyright 2012, AACOM.All rights reserved.Cover photo courtesy of ATSU-SOMA.
Table of ContentsIntroduction . 1Methodology . 1Confidentiality . 2Limitations . 2Format . 3Questions and Comments . 3Applicants, Positions and Matches in the 2011 OGME Match, by Specialty . 4Factors that May Influence Match Success . 6Research Experiences . 7Volunteer Experiences . 8Work Experiences . 9Publications.10Sigma Sigma Phi Membership .11Number of Contiguous Designations of First-Choice Specialty .12COMLEX-USA Data .14Summary Tables, by Specialty .20All Participants in OGME Match .21Anesthesiology.22Diagnostic Radiology .23Emergency Medicine .24Family Practice .25Family Practice/NMM .26Internal Medicine/Emergency Medicine .27Internal Medicine .28Neurology .29Neurological Surgery.30Neuromusculoskeletal Medicine/OMT .31Obstetrics/Gynecology .32Ophthalmology .33Orthopedic Surgery .34Otolaryngological and Facial Plastic Surgery .35Pediatrics .36Psychiatry .37Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOMEiThe Osteopathic GME Match Report, for the2011 Match
General Surgery.38Traditional Rotating Internship .39Urological Surgery.40Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOMEiiThe Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
IntroductionThe American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), in cooperation withthe American Osteopathic Association (AOA) and the National Board of Osteopathic MedicalExaminers, Inc. (NBOME), compiled The Osteopathic GME Match Report, for the 2011 Match tosupport osteopathic medical students in their specialty selection and participation in theosteopathic graduate medical education match program. The report may also provide usefuldata for the colleges of osteopathic medicine, osteopathic graduate medical education programsand others interested in osteopathic medical education’s programs, policies and processesrelated to graduate medical education and specialty choice. The report is descriptive only, andno inferences can be drawn from the data presented.This report was first produced for the 2009 match in response to a request from the Council ofOsteopathic Student Government Presidents (COSGP) for a report that would help guidestudents in their specialty selection and matching process for the osteopathic graduate medicaleducation match. Similar reports are produced for the National Residency Matching ProgramMain Residency Match.1The report is produced by AACOM, with participation by the AOA and the NBOME. Theprincipal author is AACOM Vice President for Research and Application Services ThomasLevitan, MEd. Data included in the report were provided by the AOA and the NBOME. TerriLischka of AOA and William Roberts, EdD, of NBOME compiled the data from their respectiveorganizations.MethodologyData for this report were provided by AOA and NBOME.Data used to develop the report:Data elementNumber of work experiences reportedNumber of publications reportedNumber of research experiences reportedNumber of volunteer experiences reportedMembership in Sigma Sigma PhiSpecialty of 1st choice matchContiguous ranks of 1st choice specialty (number of consecutive selections ofthe same 1st choice specialty before selecting a different specialty)Actual specialty matchedTotal number of different specialties rankedSourceAOAAOAAOAAOAAOAAOAAOAAOAAOA1National Residency Matching Program and Association of American Medical Colleges. (2011). Charting Outcomesin the Match: Characteristics of Applicants Who Matched to Their Preferred Specialty in the 2011 Main ResidencyMatch, 4th edition. Washington, DC: NRMP and AAMC.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME1The Osteopathic GME Match Report, for the2011 Match
Data elementFirst score attained for COMLEX-USA Level 1Number of attempts to attain pass on COMLEX-USA Level 1First score attained for COMLEX-USA Level 2-CENumber of attempts to attain pass on COMLEX-USA Level 2-CENumber of attempts to attain pass on COMLEX-USA Level 2-PESourceNBOMENBOMENBOMENBOMENBOMEStudent records from each data source were matched by a key unknown to the author to ensurestudent and school confidentiality.AACOM used the resulting data set to compile this report.ConfidentialityVarious measures were taken in the preparation of this report to ensure confidentiality and theprotection of individual data for both match participants and the osteopathic medical colleges. After the data provided by AOA and NBOME were matched, personal identifiers wereremoved. The data elements of the report are reported only when there are at least six cases;when there are fewer than six cases, no data are reported. For this report, individual school data are suppressed.LimitationsThe report has several significant limitations. First, the size of the osteopathic graduate medical education program limits the analysisthat can be conducted while maintaining confidentiality of match participants. With only2,553 available positions and 2,212 participants in the match, it is not possible toanalyze and report on every factor. (Only 2,208 participants in the match for whom dataare available are included in this analysis.) Second, the sample was limited to graduates of colleges of osteopathic medicine(COMs) who elected to continue osteopathic graduate medical education training inAOA-accredited residency training programs that are part of the AOA GME match. Thesample did not include those graduates who enrolled in ACGME-accredited residencytraining programs. Third, the report includes historical data only, which should be interpreted with cautionand not used for predictive purposes. Fourth, residency program directors consider many factors in the resident selectionprocess, and the factors addressed in this report are limited and not entirely reflective ofthe many decisions involved in the selection process. Inclusion of these factors in thisreport should in no way lead the reader to infer that it is the position of AACOM, theAOA, or the NBOME that these factors are the most important for residency programdirectors to consider in evaluating applicants for residency training positions.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME2The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
FormatThe tables and charts following include explanatory information about how the data werecompiled. Readers are encouraged to review the explanatory materials for each table andchart.Questions and CommentsQuestions and comments should be directed to the principal author, Thomas Levitan,tlevitan@aacom.org.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME3The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Applicants, Positions and Matches in the 2011 OGME Match, by SpecialtyFor each of the 22 specialties in the match process, Table 1 displays: The total number of positions available in the match process. The total number of match participants designating each specialty as a first choice. The number of first-choice applicants per available position. The number of matches that were first choice. The number of matches to the specialty that were other than first choice. The total number of matches.Table 1SpecialtyTotalpositionsavailableTotal1st choicenumber of applicants1st choiceperapplicantspositionNumber of matchesAnesthesiologyDiagnostic RadiologyEmergency MedicineFamily PracticeFamily PracticeEmergency MedicineIntegrated FamilyPractice-NMMInternal MedicineInternal MedicineEmergency MedicineInternal MedicinePediatricsNeurological ogyOphthalmologyOrthopedic SurgeryOtolaryngology andFacial Plastic SurgeryPediatricsPhysical Medicineand 6521536142.33415Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME4OthermatchesTotalmatches015152724214373The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
SpecialtyTotalpositionsavailablePsychiatrySurgery, GeneralTraditional RotatingInternshipUrological SurgeryTotalsTotal1st choicenumber of applicants1st choiceperapplicantspositionNumber of 640OthermatchesTotalmatches023Data sources: Summary of Positions Offered & Filled by Program Type for the 2011 right 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME5The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Factors that May Influence Match SuccessSeveral data elements that are collected in the OGME match application may impact thelikelihood of match to first-choice specialty. The following charts display these elements acrossall specialties for which enough data are available. Internal Medicine-Pediatrics, FamilyPractice-Emergency Medicine, and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, all with fewer than fivefirst-choice matches, are not included to maintain the confidentiality of the data of the individualswho matched in this specialty.Those specialties included in the charts are:All specialties in the osteopathic matchNeurological SurgeryAnesthesiologyObstetrics, GynecologyDiagnostic RadiologyOtolaryngology and Facial Plastic SurgeryEmergency MedicineOphthalmologyFamily PracticeOrthopedic SurgeryFamily Practice – NMMPediatricsInternal Medicine – Emergency MedicinePsychiatryInternal MedicineGeneral SurgeryNeurologyTraditional Rotating InternshipNeuromusculoskeletal Medicine/OMTUrological SurgeryData are not displayed for matches that are not first choice because there are not enough casesto provide meaningful information.As noted in the limitations section of this report, there are multiple factors that influencespecialty choice, both by the program director selecting applicants and by the applicantsseeking specialties. Evaluation of the quantitative factors reported here are only part of theselection process for specialty by the program directors and the applicants.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME6The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Research ExperiencesThe charts below display the mean number of research experiences and the percentagereporting research experiences for individuals matching to a first-choice specialty. Researchexperiences are self-reported. No distinctions are made as to the “quality,” duration or timing ofthe research experiences.Chart 1Mean number of research experiences by specialty 2.182.331.712.071.7821.5631.673.8341.80Mean number of experiences510Chart 2Percent reporting research experiences by specialty -- ent reporting experiences90%20%10%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME7The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Volunteer experiencesThe charts below display the mean number of volunteer experiences and the percentagereporting volunteer experiences for individuals matching to a first-choice specialty. Volunteerexperiences are self-reported. No distinctions are made as to the “quality,” duration, or timing ofthe volunteer experiences.Chart 3.7854.505.006.445.2965.686.376.32Mean number of experiences75.9787.387.56Mean number of volunteer experiences by specialty -- 20113210Chart 4Percent reporting volunteer experiences by specialty -- 30%70%95.65%80%100.00%Percent reporting experiences90%91.31%100%40%30%20%10%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME8The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Work ExperiencesThe charts below display the mean number of work experiences and the percentage reportingwork experiences for individuals matching to a first-choice specialty. Work experiences are selfreported. No distinctions are made as to the “quality,” duration or timing of the workexperiences.Chart 5Mean number of work experiences by specialty -- an number of experiences5210Chart 6Percent reporting work experiences by specialty -- %81.48%80%83.67%Percent reporting t 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME9The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
PublicationsThe charts below display the mean number of publications and the percentage reportingpublications for individuals matching to a first-choice specialty. Publications are self-reported.No distinctions are made as to the “quality,” duration or timing of the publications.Chart 2.672.831.9132.842.9243.32Mean number of experiences54.504.77Mean number of publications by specialty -- 201110Chart 8Percent reporting publications by specialty -- 8%Percent reporting experiences90%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME10The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Sigma Sigma Phi MembershipSigma Sigma Phi is an Honorary Osteopathic Service Fraternity. Its objectives and purposesare: to further the Science of Osteopathic Medicine and its standards of practice, to improve thescholastic standing and promote a higher degree of fellowship among its students, to bringabout a closer relationship and understanding between the student bodies and the officials andmembers of the faculties of our colleges, and to foster allegiance to the American OsteopathicAssociation and to perpetuate [osteopathic] principles and teachings through the maintenanceand development of this organization. (http://www.sigmasigmaphi.org/, accessed 08/14/2011)Membership requirements are: Must be a student at an osteopathic medical college. Must successfully complete one semester of classroom work. Must show a high degree of scholarship and service to college and/or profession. Must have a passing scholastic standing.Membership shall not exceed 25 percent of the total of the four classes at the medical school.(http://www.sigmasigmaphi.org/, accessed 10/2/2012)Sigma Sigma Phi membership is not charted because for some specialties the Ns are too small.When appropriate, data are displayed in the specialty tables.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME11The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Number of Contiguous Designations of First-Choice Specialty – All SpecialtiesThere is an assumption that a candidate’s likelihood of matching to her/his first-choice specialtyis increased by the number of contiguous designations of that first-choice specialty beforeselecting a different specialty. “Contiguous designations” refers to the number of times anapplicant designates a specific first-choice specialty (in multiple programs) before designating adifferent specialty.Data are reported on 2,208 DO graduates for whom data are available who participated in the2011 osteopathic graduate medical education match. In the osteopathic match, across allspecialties, the importance of selecting the same specialty multiple times does not appear to beas important a factor, as displayed in the following charts. This may be in part because of thelimited number of programs in the most competitive specialties and in osteopathic GME ingeneral.Charts 9 and 10 below display the number of contiguous designations of the first-choicespecialty for those who matched to her/his first choice, those who matched but not to her/hisfirst choice, and those who did not match. 412 (27 percent) of 1,531 participants who matched to their first-choice specialtydesignated it only once before designating a different specialty, and 274 (18 percent)designated the first-choice specialty more than five times before designating a differentspecialty.71 (65 percent) of 109 participants who matched, but not to their first-choice specialty,designated it only once before designating a different specialty.240 (42 percent) of 568 participants who did not match designated their first-choicespecialty only once before designating a different specialty.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME12The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Chart 9Matched to 1st choice -- 1531Matched, but not to 1st choice -- 109Did not match -- 11008010915026450412Number of continguous designations of 1st choice specialty all specialties - 20110Matched to 1st choiceMatched, but not 1st choice12345Did not matchmore than 5Chart 1065%Number of continguous designations of 1st choice specialty -- all specialties(percentages) - 201170%Matched to 1st choice -- 1531Matched, but not to 1st choice -- 109Did not match -- %17%15%30%27%40%0%12Matched to 1st choiceCopyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME345Matched, but not to 1st choice13more than 5Did not matchThe Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
COMLEX-USA DataScores and passing status on the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examinations(COMLEX-USA) Levels 1, 2-CE and 2-PE are reported by the National Board of OsteopathicMedical Examiners (NBOME) as part of the OGME match process. For this project, NBOMEmatched scores and passing status to other match data. NBOME reported standard scores onthe first attempt at the exam for COMLEX-USA Levels 1 and 2-CE, and the number of timeseach examination was taken to attain a passing score for all three exams. All data reported onthe following charts are for participants who matched to a first-choice specialty.Data presented in the report are:COMLEX-USA Levels 1 and 2-CE Highest and lowest scores and mean of scores – for participants who took the examsmore than one time to attain a passing score, all scores are calculated based on the firstattempt. Percentage of participants who passed the exams on their first attempt.COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE Percentage of participants who passed the exams on their first attempt. Standard scores are not reported for COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE.The intended purpose of COMLEX-USA is to assure the public that an osteopathic physicianhas the knowledge and clinical skills to practice osteopathic medicine. Each state is responsiblefor granting licenses for medical professionals to practice medicine. While each state licensingboard may set its own licensure criteria, passage of the COMLEX-USA is used for licensuredetermination.A secondary use of COMLEX-USA by residency program directors is in resident selection.Residency program directors use many criteria, of which COMLEX-USA is one, to evaluateresidency candidates. The top two criteria used by residency program directors are: 1) Thestudent rotated through the program director’s specialty, and 2) Personality match with theprogram. “The top two selection criteria indicate that personal relationships built when doingrotations are of great importance to the resident’s future success in obtaining a desiredresidency.”2 Having a candidate provide COMLEX-USA scores is the third most importantcriterion used by residency program directors, as reported in the cited document.2Teitelbaum, H.S. (2005). Osteopathic Medical Education in the United States. Washington, DC and Chicago, IL:AACOM and AOA, p. 147.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME14The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
COMLEX-USA Level 1Chart 700COMLEX-USA Level 1 High-Mean-Low scores by specialty - 2011608472362312Highest scoreLowest scoreMean The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match15Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME
Chart 12COMLEX-USA Level 1 - Percent passing on 1st attempt -- 2011100% 100%100%91%100%96%100%91% 90%Percent passing on 1st attempt83%100% 100% 100%89%94%97%92%92% 95%83%78%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME16The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
COMLEX-USA Level 2-CEChart 30Highest 456602775COMLEX-USA Level 2-CE High-Mean-Low scores by specialty -- 2011728460252Lowest scoreMean The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match17Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME
Chart 14COMLEX-USA Level 2-CE - Percent passing on 1st attempt -- 201196%100%100%100%95%96%90%86%Percent passing on 1st attempt100%76% 78%100% 98% 100%100%96%90%85%82%78%48%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME18The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
COMLEX-USA Level 2-PEChart 15COMLEX-USA Level 2-PE - Percent passing on 1st attempt -- 201196% 96%100% 99%96%100%100% 100% 100%89%94%97%100%96% 95%100%99%96%100%87%Percent passing on 1st attempt100%0%Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME19The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Summary Tables by SpecialtyThe following tables summarize all data for the specialties for which there are more than fivefirst-choice matches. For those specialties with more than five matches that were not firstchoice, data are included on those matches as well for comparison.The first table displays data for all participants in the osteopathic match – first-choice matches,other matches, and participants who were unsuccessful in the match.Note that in a few cases COMLEX scores could not be linked to the case; data are reportedbased on COMLEX scores that are linked.Note that in the following tables, NM refers to “Not Meaningful” data.Copyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME20The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Table 2 – All Participants in OGME MatchMatch measureNumber of participantsMean number of contiguous 1st choice designationsPercent designating 1st choice only oncePercent designating only one specialtyResearch experiencesMean number of research experiencesPercent with at least 1 research experienceVolunteer experiencesMean number of volunteer experiencesPercent with at least 1 volunteer experienceWork experiencesMean number of work experiencesPercent with at least 1 work experiencePublicationsMean number of publicationsPercent with at least 1 publicationPercent with membership in Sigma Sigma PhiCOMLEX-USA Level 1Mean scoreStandard deviationMedian scoreHigh scoreLow scorePercent passing on 1st attemptCOMLEX-USA Level 2-CEMean scoreStandard deviationMedian scoreHigh scoreLow scorePercent passing on 1st attemptCOMLEX-USA Level 2-PEPercent passing on 1st attemptCopyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME211st 12NMNMDid .18%The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Table 3 – AnesthesiologyThere are 12 osteopathic anesthesiology programs, with 27 available positions. Twenty-sevenof those positions were filled in the match.Match measureNumber of participantsMean number of contiguous 1st choice designationsPercent designating 1st choice only onceResearch experiencesMean number of research experiencesPercent with at least 1 research experienceVolunteer experiencesMean number of volunteer experiencesPercent with at least 1 volunteer experienceWork experiencesMean number of work experiencesPercent with at least 1 work experiencePublicationsMean number of publicationsPercent with at least 1 publicationPercent with membership in Sigma Sigma PhiCOMLEX-USA Level 1Mean scoreStandard deviationMedian scoreHigh scoreLow scorePercent passing on 1st attemptCOMLEX-USA Level 2-CEMean scoreStandard deviationMedian scoreHigh scoreLow scorePercent passing on 1st attemptCOMLEX-USA Level 2-PEPercent passing on 1st attemptCopyright 2012 AACOMProduced by AACOM with participationby AOA and NBOME221st choicematches272.7048.15%Other 5069539896.15%96.15%The Osteopathic GME Match Report,for the 2011 Match
Table 4 – Diagnostic RadiologyThere are 12 osteopathic diagnostic radiology programs, with 25 available positions. Twentyfour of those positions were filled in the match.Match measureNumber of participantsMean number of contiguous 1st choice designationsPercent designating 1st choice only onceResearch experiencesMean number of research experiencesPercent with at least 1 research experienceVolunteer exper
1 The Osteopathic GME Match Report, for the 2011 Match Introduction . The American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), in cooperation with the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) and the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, Inc. (NBOME), compiled The Osteopathic GME Matc
allison.bobick@touro.edu MelissaEarle,MSW,PhD,LCSW-R (212)463-0400x5137 melissa.earle@touro.edu NancyFeldman,MSW,PhD,LMSW (212)463-0400x5650 nancy.feldman@touro.edu NancyLeeGallina,MSW,PhD,LCSW (212)463-0400x5340 nancy.gallina@touro.edu StevenHuberman,PhD (212)463-0400x5278 steven.huberman@touro.edu JoannIvry,MSW,PhD,LMSW (212)463-0400x5338 .
The Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine (TouroCOM) is fully accredited by the Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA) of the American Osteopathic Association (AOA), 142 East Ontario Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611 (Tel: 888-626-9262). POLICY OF NON-DISCRIMINATION . Touro College is an equal opportunity employer.
Touro College Sexual Assault Prevention Policies 24 Student Complaint Policy 25 Student Complaint Procedure Phases 26 Touro College Campus Security Policies 27 . Director of Student Advancement allison.bobick@touro.edu Susan Brot, MSW, LMSW 212-463-0400 ext. 5798 Associate Director of Field Education & Academic Advisement susan.brot@touro.edu .
Touro College Los Angeles is a division of Touro University Worldwide, which is accredited by the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC): 985 Atlantic Ave. #100, Alameda, CA 94501-6444: Tel. 510-748-9001. Touro College Los Angeles is an Equal Opportunity Institution. Touro College Los Angeles opened in Fall 2005.
About Touro College Touro is a system of Jewishsponsored non- -profit institutions of higher and professional education. Touro College was chartered in 1970 primarily to enrich the Jewish heritage, and to serve the larger American community. Approximately 19,000 students are currently enrolled in its various schools and divisions. Touro
Touro College Los Angeles is a division of Touro University Worldwide, which is accredited by the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC): 985 Atlantic Ave. #100, Alameda, CA 94501-6444: Tel. 510-748-9001. Touro College Los Angeles is an Equal Opportunity Institution. Touro College Los Angeles opened in Fall 2005.
the role of the Osteopathic International Alliance 6 the World health Organization and osteopathic practice 7 structure of this report 7 Chapter 1: The concept, history and spread of 8 osteopathic healthcare What is osteopathic healthcare? 9 The range of manual techniques 10 the origins and dissemination of osteopathic practice 11
3 Lorsqu’un additif présent dans un arôme, un additif ou une enzyme alimentaire a une fonction technologique dans la denrée alimentaire à laquelle il est adjoint, il est considéré comme additif de cette denrée alimentaire, et non de l’arôme, de l’additif ou de l’enzyme alimentaire ajouté et doit dès lors remplir les conditions d’emploi définies pour la denrée en question .
