Socioeconomic Disparities in Research Participation: Bias in Plastic Surgery Residency Match

Abstract

Background: Integrated plastic surgery residency applicants have increased at a rate disproportionate to available positions. Research productivity has become a surrogate marker for competitiveness, and many applicants pursue it to distinguish themselves. To date, no study has investigated socioeconomic disparities in extended research experience (ERE) participation. Methods: A 35-question cross-sectional survey was distributed to applicants to United States-based integrated plastic surgery residency programs during the 2019–2022 application cycles. Summary tables, student t test, and chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 161 responses (response rate: 20.9%) were recorded. Fifty-nine (40.7%) respondents participated in an ERE. The most common reason for ERE participation was strengthening one’s application. The most common reason against participation was avoiding delays in career progression. A greater percentage of respondents from Northeastern medical schools participated in EREs (P = 0.019). There were no significant differences in debt burden between those who did or did not participate in an ERE. A greater percentage of applicants whose parents had advanced degrees participated in EREs (P = 0.053). Conclusions: There may be geographic and socioeconomic biases present in access to ERE for students interested in plastic surgery. The growing popularity of EREs may have unintended consequences for applicant diversity. As most plastic surgeons ultimately practice in nonacademic settings, applicants and plastic surgeons may consider the financial hardships and possible socioeconomic disparities in research opportunities before participating in or recommending them.