Publishing under Pressure: Ophthalmology Research Productivity after adoption of Step 1 Pass/Fail

Background The transition of the USMLE Step 1 exam to pass/fail scoring has increased the emphasis on research productivity in competitive specialties such as urology and neurosurgery, yet its impact on ophthalmology bears further investigation. Additionally, the San Francisco Match provides no publicly available data on the research output of matched ophthalmology residency applicants, highlighting a critical gap in understanding the academic profiles of these candidates. Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between the USMLE Step 1 transition and pre-residency research productivity of matched ophthalmology residents and assess the potential role of medical school NIH funding level on publication metrics. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the research output of 485 ophthalmology residents from the classes of 2026 (pre-Step 1 transition) and 2028 (post-Step 1transition). Residents with MD/PhDs or gap years were excluded. PubMed-indexed publications were sourced by count, authorship, specialty relevance, citation rate, and type for each resident. Using Mann-Whitney U tests, group differences were compared, with total publications serving as the primary outcome. Results: Compared to the pre-transition cohort, residents in the post-Step 1 transition cohort produced more total publications (mean ± SD, 2.50 ± 4.01 vs. 3.06 ± 4.38 [p = 0.011]), first-authorships (1.02 ± 2.10 vs 1.30 ± 2.44 [p = 0.006]), and in-specialty publications (1.09 ± 1.74 vs. 1.73 ± 2.53 [p < 0.001]). Logistic regression analysis revealed that post-transition status (OR = 1.88; 95% CI, 1.25-2.82) and high NIH funding (OR = 2.70; 95% CI, 1.79-4.08) were significant predictors of having at least one publication. Conclusion: The Step 1 transition coincided with an increase in the overall number of PubMed indexed publications produced by residents in the class of 2028 prior to starting residency. This trend is consistent with previously reported patterns of medical student research productivity prior to the Step 1 transition. Differences in research productivity were observed across medical schools with varying levels of NIH funding, with students from top-funded institutions producing more publications on average than their peers from less-resourced schools. In the absence of a scored Step 1, these findings highlight the need for residency programs to contextualize research productivity within the opportunities available to students.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Academic Ophthalmology
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.62199/2475-4757.1332
Primary Topic
Diversity and Career in Medicine
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Publishing under Pressure: Ophthalmology Research Productivity after adoption of Step 1 Pass/Fail

Arjun Bhatt, Steven E. Brooks, Saurabh C. Wakade, Jack McClain et al.
Journal of Academic Ophthalmology
Diversity and Career in Medicine
article

Publishing under Pressure: Ophthalmology Research Productivity after adoption of Step 1 Pass/Fail

Arjun Bhatt, Steven E. Brooks, Saurabh C. Wakade, Jack McClain, Ali Abolhassani, Asim Ahmed, Shivam Patel, Joanne Thomas
article en

Abstract

Background The transition of the USMLE Step 1 exam to pass/fail scoring has increased the emphasis on research productivity in competitive specialties such as urology and neurosurgery, yet its impact on ophthalmology bears further investigation. Additionally, the San Francisco Match provides no publicly available data on the research output of matched ophthalmology residency applicants, highlighting a critical gap in understanding the academic profiles of these candidates. Purpose: To evaluate the relationship between the USMLE Step 1 transition and pre-residency research productivity of matched ophthalmology residents and assess the potential role of medical school NIH funding level on publication metrics. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the research output of 485 ophthalmology residents from the classes of 2026 (pre-Step 1 transition) and 2028 (post-Step 1transition). Residents with MD/PhDs or gap years were excluded. PubMed-indexed publications were sourced by count, authorship, specialty relevance, citation rate, and type for each resident. Using Mann-Whitney U tests, group differences were compared, with total publications serving as the primary outcome. Results: Compared to the pre-transition cohort, residents in the post-Step 1 transition cohort produced more total publications (mean ± SD, 2.50 ± 4.01 vs. 3.06 ± 4.38 [p = 0.011]), first-authorships (1.02 ± 2.10 vs 1.30 ± 2.44 [p = 0.006]), and in-specialty publications (1.09 ± 1.74 vs. 1.73 ± 2.53 [p < 0.001]). Logistic regression analysis revealed that post-transition status (OR = 1.88; 95% CI, 1.25-2.82) and high NIH funding (OR = 2.70; 95% CI, 1.79-4.08) were significant predictors of having at least one publication. Conclusion: The Step 1 transition coincided with an increase in the overall number of PubMed indexed publications produced by residents in the class of 2028 prior to starting residency. This trend is consistent with previously reported patterns of medical student research productivity prior to the Step 1 transition. Differences in research productivity were observed across medical schools with varying levels of NIH funding, with students from top-funded institutions producing more publications on average than their peers from less-resourced schools. In the absence of a scored Step 1, these findings highlight the need for residency programs to contextualize research productivity within the opportunities available to students.

Journal of Academic OphthalmologyVol. 18(1)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Diversity and Career in Medicine
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.