Changes to the most commonly used residency-application platform are slated to take effect during the 2027 residency-selection cycle. Those changes may increase the weight that residency programs place on research, particularly peer-reviewed publications.
In October, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) announced that beginning with the 2027 residency-application cycle, the “publications” field in the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) experiences section will be renamed “scholarly works.” According to an AAMC webinar, the change is intended to encourage applicants to emphasize the quality of their research rather than the quantity.
What could the new focus on “scholarly works” mean in practical terms for residency applicants in future cycles? Experts on the resident Match process offered insight into that question.
What’s changing?
In the current iteration of the ERAS application, publications is one of eight experience types applicants can highlight. The aim of the experiences section is to give residency applicants the opportunity to show their values, the challenges they have taken on and the moments that have shaped their journey in medicine. When done right, each highlighted experience should add weight to an application.
In the new section, applicants will be instructed to report only work products that have been submitted to peer-reviewed entities—journal articles, book chapters and journal abstracts—as well as oral presentations and poster presentations.
The scholarly works section will allow residency applicants to put a star next to as many as three articles or research projects. Applicants will also be able to designate themselves as the first author for any research project or scholarly output where applicable.
From the residency program side, these changes shed more light on a medical student’s journey in research.
Residency “programs have reported that it's difficult to understand applicant interest in research if they have numerous publications, but no clear dedicated focus for their research in their experiences or an explanation of that focus in their career goals,” said Blythe Jonas, PhD, the AAMC’s director of ERAS engagement during the webinar highlighting the change. She added that “the quality of the content, the amount of time or contribution to a project, the depth of their understanding of a project are often more important, according to program directors.”
The weight of research
Across all physician specialties, applicants from U.S. MD-granting medical schools who matched in their preferred specialty reported an average of 10 abstracts, presentations and publications, according to 2024 data. The figure was about half as high—with an average of 4.3 abstracts, presentations and publications—for DO applicants.
The emphasis on research, however, tends to grow significantly in physician specialties considered to be among the most competitive. For instance, in 2024, the average number of abstracts, presentations and publications for matched applicants in some specialties was as high as 37.4 (in neurological surgery).
Recently adopted AMA policy highlights that narrowing the definition of what is considered a publication may further de-emphasize medical student efforts in arenas such as advocacy. In ERAS’ new scholarly works section, neither op-eds nor policy resolutions, such as those submitted by members of the AMA Medical Student Section (AMA-MSS), would qualify as work products that could be highlighted.
AMA member Sneha Kapil is a fourth-year medical student currently going through the Match process. In her role as the Section Alternate Delegate for the AMA-MSS she advocated for a resolution that the AMA House of Delegates adopted in response to the changes to the ERAs publications section.
Adopted at the 2025 AMA Interim Meeting, the policy calls for equitable consideration of research, advocacy, service, teaching, mentorship and other nonresearch domains in medical school and residency or fellowship selection.
“Research is a really important and rich medical student experience,” Kapil said. At the same time, she added, “participating in things like the American Medical Association and being involved in policymaking, in advocacy, in lobbying, those are all equally important experiences and interests that medical students have, and we don't want to see that be deprioritized in comparison to research.”
Narrowing the definition of scholarly work doesn't preclude the inclusion of other forms of writing as part of a residency application. Authoring a resolution that becomes AMA policy, for instance, could be highlighted in the portion of the application reserved for experiences related to volunteer work, advocacy and public service.
The AAMC webinar emphasized that applicants should consult with their medical school advisers to determine where their experiences best fit within the application. Regardless of the section, applicants can highlight their three most meaningful experiences and provide further details about them.
Still concerns exist that moving other types of publications to another field in the application may make it harder for them to stand out to program directors.
“Narrowing what publications can be explicitly reported in residency applications may re-emphasize a focus on research and minimize opportunities for students to pursue other interests which equally contribute to becoming a physician,” Kapil said. “Many medical students write op-eds that discuss pressing issues in medicine, publish poetry on meaningful clinical experiences, and even contribute to governmental reports on public health.
Valuing nonresearch experiences
For years, there has been emphasis on a more holistic approach to residency selection. That change in evaluation spearheaded a move to pass-fail scoring on the first exams in the United States Medical Licensing Examination and Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing exam series.
In light of the loss of a key metric, performance on USMLE Step 2 and COMLEX-Level 2 exams and research production have grown as influential factors residency program directors lean on when evaluating applicants.
John Andrews, MD, is the AMA’s vice president for Graduate Medical Education Innovations. A former pediatrics residency program director, Dr. Andrews said that placing emphasis on one experience type doesn’t align with a comprehensive approach to evaluating residency candidates nor does it benefit medical students looking to grow a well-rounded skill set.
“The pitfalls of placing too much emphasis on anything are that students are adept at studying to the test, so they will engage in whatever activity gets measured in their candidacy for residency,” Dr. Andrews said. “If someone tells them that the more research papers you have, the better your chances of securing a residency position are, students will become single-mindedly focused on how they can gather research experience, whether they're interested in it or not.”
There’s limited evidence that medical student research experiences are associated with clinical performance in residency.
“There are just plenty of valuable skills that contribute to being a physician,” Dr. Andrews said. Research experience is no substitute for communication skills, for example, and nor is it a substitute for community-based activities that help you better understand the needs of patients and populations. So I don't think you can single one individual thing out as critical for success in residency. It's just not that simple.”
