To the Editor: In their Research Letter, Drs
Niederle and Roth1 reported that fellowship
markets without a match offered similar salaries as those that do. Although
the authors acknowledged that "the market for fellowships is not the same
as the market for residencies," they nonetheless concluded that "eliminating
the resident match would not necessarily increase residents' wages." Their
underlying comparison between fellowship and residency, however, is misleading:
an applicant for nephrology fellowship, for instance, in which there is no
match, is not in the same market as an applicant for pulmonary/critical care,
in which there is. The correct comparison from which one could draw conclusions
about the effect of a match on fellowship salary would be between the salaries
paid to fellows who obtain positions through the match and the salaries paid
to fellows who are offered positions in the same fellowship program outside
the match. I suspect that the salaries would be found to be identical in this
circumstance. The very existence of a residency match allows all programs
to pay lower salaries because the participating programs can operate as a
cartel.