What the research profiles of this year's 5 incoming residents actually look like, by specialty relevance, presentations, and notable activity, not just publication count.
Source: CaRMS program descriptions
Selection weights*
File review
Interview
* Segments are equal width for display only. The program lists these components but does not state their weights.
What the program says it looks for
- An excellent academic record and proven interest in urology
- A high level of professionalism and ethical practice, with honesty and integrity
- A collegial personality, initiative, self direction and the ability to perform within a team
- Engagement in lifelong and self directed learning
- The ability to take part in academic endeavours such as research and teaching, for learning and to contribute to the urologic community
Where research appears
File review scores research and publications as participation in academic research, not necessarily urology specific, and the CV component also covers research experience, while the interview includes a specific question on previous research or education experience.
0 to 50
applicants per year
51 to 75%
interview invite rate
Inference, not the program's wording
Research has no separate weight. It appears at file review and at interview, so it can matter at both stages, and file review evidence can affect reaching an interview, but the program publishes no weights and no research share can be assigned.
Gaps: Figures are the same for the CMG and IMG streams, the IMG quota is 1 and CaRMS lists quotas as approximate, the CMG quota is not stated in the program data, and the program does not state an interview count or rank list size.
Schools are shown as a set only and are not matched to the individual research profiles below, since with a cohort this small that pairing would make individuals identifiable.
* Includes one paper published after match day, most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking against this profile.
0
adjacent specialty research
One charted publication, a third-authored clinical prostate cancer outcomes study in The Journal of Urology that is the asterisked paper above. A separate pre-medical basic science paper in molecular neuroscience is not charted since it falls outside medicine.
Notable: co-authored several conference abstracts spanning medical education technology, surgical training assessment, and andrology, and contributed to open educational resources before medical school.
* Includes one paper published after match day, most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking against this profile.
6
adjacent specialty research
Half of the record is nephrology, the adjacent field here, including a first-authored retrospective cohort in Kidney International Reports and a first-authored case report with literature review in Clinical Nephrology. The rest spans health services, epidemiology, and neuroscience, including a systematic review in JAMA Network Open. No urology-focused journal articles are charted, and the asterisked paper is a 2026 systematic review and meta-analysis in PLoS One.
Notable: co-authored and presented conference work that bridges nephrology and urology, including adrenal disease research and a patient decision aid project.
0
adjacent specialty research
One confirmed publication, a second-authored retrospective national claims data study in andrology, published in the Journal of Surgery. No other research was found in public sources, so this count reflects what could be found rather than a guarantee of what exists.
Notable: no presentations or other activity were found in public sources.
* Includes one paper published after match day, most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking against this profile.
0
adjacent specialty research
One confirmed publication, a fourth-authored scoping review on clinician and patient perceptions of artificial intelligence in surgery, published in Surgery and marked with the asterisk above. No urology-specific research was found in public sources.
Notable: no presentations or other activity were found in public sources.
0
adjacent specialty research
Highest urology output in the cohort, led by first-authored systematic reviews and meta-analyses on ureteroscopy, shockwave lithotripsy, and perioperative anticoagulation in journals including World Journal of Urology, Urolithiasis, and the Arab Journal of Urology. Also a middle-authored paper in The Journal of Urology. The other medical work covers ENT, spine, and cardiac surgery evidence reviews, and the body of work leans toward synthesis of existing evidence.
Notable: presented a systematic review at a urology meeting and co-authored several further abstracts, including work in more than one language.
Reading this data
Output is sharply uneven. PGY1-B and PGY1-E account for 24 of the cohort's 27 confirmed papers, while the other three each have a single paper found in public sources. PGY1-E's work is concentrated in urology and is mostly systematic review and meta-analysis, whereas PGY1-B has no charted urology journal articles at all.
Where the research sits varies as much as how much there is. PGY1-B's output is anchored in nephrology, the adjacent field here, while PGY1-A, PGY1-C, and PGY1-D each have one paper, in urology or surgery more broadly. Program weightings may change from year to year.
All data on this page was gathered from publicly available sources and verified to a high but not absolute degree of confidence. This profile is intended to give prospective applicants a general sense of what previously matched residents looked like, not to serve as a definitive or exhaustive record.
