Search

Objectives: Prospective first-year house staff and residency program leaders spend substantial time, effort, and expense preparing a rank order list for the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP). Previous studies have mostly shown minimal or no relation between rank order and subsequent resident performance, raising questions about the value of this process. Furthermore, no previous studies have been done with Internal Medicine residencies. As such, the purpose of this study was to compare NRMP rank order to multiple objective outcomes of an Internal Medicine residency., Methods: A retrospective cohort of Internal Medicine residents from five consecutive graduating classes, trained between July 1, 2013 and July 31, 2020, were evaluated for five objective outcomes: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones, faculty rankings of quality, National In-Training Examination scores, chief resident attainment, and fellowship attainment. Outcomes were analyzed in relation to eight potential predictors: NRMP rank, medical school type and grades, immigration status, added qualifications, sex, age and US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, using univariate and multivariate analyses., Results: From a cohort of 61 residents, 56 were eligible. All eligible residents' data were included, for a participation rate of 100% (56 of 56). There were no statistically significant univariate or multivariate predictors for the endpoint of fellowship attainment. Higher USMLE scores were predictive of chief resident status in univariate analysis only. NRMP rank was significantly correlated with ACGME milestones in the univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis revealed that higher USMLE score was statistically significantly predictive of more favorable milestones, faculty ranking, and National In-Training Examination score., Conclusions: Higher USMLE score was statistically significantly associated with multiple favorable objective residency outcomes in an Internal Medicine residency. A better NRMP rank was correlated with favorable ACGME milestones in univariate analysis, but USMLE score emerged as the strongest predictor in multivariate analysis.

Background: We explored correlations between the new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society classification, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status, and prognosis., Methods: Data from 293 patients with lung adenocarcinoma were classified according to the new classification. Fisher's exact, χ 2 , and log-rank tests and Cox regression analysis were used to analyze correlations between EGFR mutation status, lung cancer prognosis, and the new histologic subtype. Disease-free survival and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Lepidic and non-solid adenocarcinomas showed significantly elevated EGFR mutation rates (79.0% and 65.8%, respectively; P < 0.05). EGFR mutation status was only associated with gender (P < 0.001). EGFR mutation-positive patients who received targeted therapy had better median PFS than those who received chemotherapy as first-line treatment (P < 0.001). The median PFS of patients with exon 19 and exon 21 mutations who received first-line targeted therapy were 12.5 and 9.5 months, respectively (P = 0.970). Patients with micropapillary predominant adenocarcinomas had the shortest disease-free survival (<18 months) and PFS. Histologic subtype (P = 0.036), treatment type (P = 0.031), and EGFR mutation status (P = 0.019) might be good prognostic factors for lung adenocarcinoma., Conclusion: Patients with exon 19 mutations obtained greater benefits from targeted therapy. In the new classification, EGFR mutation rates are higher in lepidic cases and in cases without the solid subtype. The micropapillary subtype of adenocarcinoma has the worst prognosis, while the lepidic subtype has the best., (© 2017 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Based on Markus and Kitayama's (1991) theory, this study was conducted to examine whether the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony would be moderated by cultural group (i.e., Chinese and European Americans) and an Asian cultural value (i.e., emotional self-control). A total of 451 college students (205 Chinese and 246 European Americans) participated in this study. As expected, results indicated that the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony was significantly positive for Chinese but not significant for European Americans. Similarly, when emotional self-control was examined as a moderator, the results still confirmed our hypotheses. That is, the association between emotional suppression and interpersonal harmony was significantly positive for those with stronger endorsement of emotional self-control but not for those with weaker endorsement of emotional self-control. Furthermore, we examined whether the above results could be replicated when forbearance (a construct similar to suppression) and distress disclosure (a construct opposite to suppression) were examined. The results showed the same pattern for forbearance and distress disclosure when cultural group or emotional self-control served as the moderator. The convergence of findings increased the robustness of our results. Finally, our data suggest that individuals from Eastern, interdependent cultures (e.g., Chinese) tend to value emotional suppression to preserve interpersonal harmony; individuals from Western, independent cultures may or may not necessarily suppress their emotions for this purpose. A comprehensive understanding of the different meanings of a specific strategy (i.e., emotional suppression) in different cultural contexts is important to promote effective cross-cultural counseling.