My opinion

By Dr. Deepak Gupta , Dr. Sarwan Kumar
Corresponding Author Dr. Deepak Gupta
Wayne State University, - United States of America 48201
Submitting Author Dr. Deepak Gupta
Other Authors Dr. Sarwan Kumar
Wayne State University, Internal Medicine, - United States of America


Progress Bar; ERAS; GME; Fees

Gupta D, Kumar S. Progress Bar On ERAS Portal. WebmedCentral MEDICAL EDUCATION 2018;9(5):WMC005463

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License(CC-BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Submitted on: 12 May 2018 01:44:15 PM GMT
Published on: 15 May 2018 07:40:52 AM GMT


The variable application fees' model of Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) might be expecting that the fees per application becoming higher with increasing number of applications per specialty may deter the number of applications per applicant from soaring. However, this ploy to control the number of applications to manageable proportions for graduate medical education (GME) programs' appropriate and fair review may NOT have been adequately effective, considering that the number of total applications during ERAS season runs into millions. Herein we suggest that the incorporation of two progress bars into ERAS portal may be an additional provision to make applications' numbers manageable.

In the first progress bar at the time of finalizing each application's submission, the applicant must be able to see the total number of applications which have already been submitted to the chosen GME program. This may help the applicant in real-time to consider "less popular" GME programs wherein the manageable numbers of submitted applications will be more likely to be duly reviewed. As corresponding to the total number of interviewees planned by each GME program, the disclosed manageable applications' numbers may further enhance the efficacy of first progress bar in preventing applicants being overwhelmed to apply for numerous GME programs and GME programs being flooded with innumerable applications.

In the second progress bar at the time of finalizing an applicant for interview call, the GME program must be able to see the total number of interview calls which have already been confirmed by the chosen applicant. This may help the GME program in real-time to consider "less popular" applicants who all, because of manageable number of interview invites received, will be more likely to confirm the interview calls. As corresponding to physical feasibility for attending multiple interviews based on joblessness status of each applicant, the deciphered manageable interviews' numbers may further enhance the efficacy of second progress bar in preventing GME programs' interview calls being rejected by the overwhelmingly invited applicants and the innumerable applicants being potentially overlooked for interview calls.

Summarily, these two progress bars can be worthwhile enhancements to ERAS portal.


  1. Association of American Medical Colleges. Fees for ERAS Residency Applications. 2018. Available at: Accessed 2018 May 12.
  2. Deepak Gupta and Sarwan Kumar (2016) ERAS: Can It Be Revamped? One Point of View. Journal of Graduate Medical Education: July 2016, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 467-467.

Source(s) of Funding


Competing Interests


0 reviews posted so far

0 comments posted so far

Please use this functionality to flag objectionable, inappropriate, inaccurate, and offensive content to WebmedCentral Team and the authors.


Author Comments
0 comments posted so far


WebmedCentral Article: Progress Bar On ERAS Portal

What is article Popularity?

Article popularity is calculated by considering the scores: age of the article
Popularity = (P - 1) / (T + 2)^1.5
P : points is the sum of individual scores, which includes article Views, Downloads, Reviews, Comments and their weightage

Scores   Weightage
Views Points X 1
Download Points X 2
Comment Points X 5
Review Points X 10
Points= sum(Views Points + Download Points + Comment Points + Review Points)
T : time since submission in hours.
P is subtracted by 1 to negate submitter's vote.
Age factor is (time since submission in hours plus two) to the power of 1.5.factor.

How Article Quality Works?

For each article Authors/Readers, Reviewers and WMC Editors can review/rate the articles. These ratings are used to determine Feedback Scores.

In most cases, article receive ratings in the range of 0 to 10. We calculate average of all the ratings and consider it as article quality.

Quality=Average(Authors/Readers Ratings + Reviewers Ratings + WMC Editor Ratings)