Trends in Academic Misrepresentation in Neurological Surgery Residency Applicants: A 2-Year Analysis.

Abstract Background Academic misrepresentation is not an unknown phenomenon with recent reports in neurosurgery detecting a 45% misrepresentation rate in prospective neurosurgical residents. Objective The purpose of this study was to determine current rates of academic misrepresentation by prospective neurosurgical residents at a single institution across two distinct application cycles. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) applications to one institution’s neurosurgical residency program in the 2015 (n = 320) and 2020 (n = 355) application cycles. Reported academic works were verified through an extensive web search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and the individual journal websites. Misrepresentation was defined in our study as listing work that does not exist, self-promotion to primary authorship, self-promotion (excluding primary authorship), incorrectly listing online-only publications, and listing non-peer-reviewed work as peer-reviewed. Results In 2015, 253 (79.1%) applicants reported a total of 2097 citations and 305 (85.9%) applicants reported a total of 3018 citations in 2020 (p Conclusion Misrepresentation rates within neurosurgical residency candidates have significantly decreased despite an increase in reported citations. A variety of steps including education, modifying reporting methods, and increased screening may help even further decrease misrepresentation.