Usage Information
Abstract
Dual-degree medical students pursue additional training to prepare for careers in research, public health, and administration, but how these experiences influence residency application behaviors and outcomes are poorly understood. We analyzed 36,298 residency applicants from the Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency (TexasSTAR) database spanning 2017–2023 to compare application, interview, and match patterns among single-degree MD applicants and those with MD-PhD, MD-MPH, MD-MBA, or MD-MSc degrees. Despite differences in academic metrics, application strategies, and interview rates, match rates were similar across degree groups. MD-PhD students applied to fewer programs but had the highest interview offer–to–application rate and matched at more prestigious programs based on Doximity rankings. Beyond traditional application metrics such as board scores, research productivity, grades, and honor society membership, strategies including away rotations, geographic preferencing, and program signaling were associated with increased interview offers and match success among all applicants but were less influential for dual-degree applicants. These findings suggest dual-degree applicants require specialized advising and evaluation.
Authors
Daniel C. Brock, Deborah D. Rupert, Toni Darville, Caroline S. Jansen, Elias M. Wisdom, Cynthia Y. Tang
Usage data is cumulative from February 2026 through July 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 2,479 | 0 |
| 739 | 0 | |
| Figure | 625 | 0 |
| Table | 283 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 603 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 305 | 0 |
| Totals | 5,034 | 0 |
| Total Views | 5,034 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
