UMass and BU offer a 5+1, UCSD has a mandatory 6-year with 1 year of research. Brown is a 6-year program, but not with a dedicated research year.

SLU also has a mandatory research year.

Union Memorial, Baltimore: Mandatory 6 months research/FDA gig, and 6 months Super Chief

Maimonides, Brooklyn: 1 of the 3 residents is selected for full research year after PGY2

Carolinas Medical Center has 1 of 5 residents per year selected to do the research year after PGY-1

Not comprehensive but from the list of programs I applied:

6 year for all residents:
UCSD
SLU
Brown (one year as a junior faculty, not research)

6 year for 1 or 2 of the residents per PGY class:
UCSF
UCLA
UC Davis
USC
UCONN
Boston U
UNC
Dartmouth
Rochester
Ohio State
U Penn
West Virginia

Updated from above:

6 year for all residents:
UCSD
SLU
Brown (one year as a junior faculty, not research)
Union Memorial (includes 6 month FDA externship)

6 year for 1 or 2 of the residents per PGY class:
UCSF
UCLA
UC Davis
USC
UCONN
Boston U
UNC
Dartmouth
Rochester
Ohio State
U Penn
West Virginia
Case Western

Updated from above:

6 year for all residents:
UCSD
SLU
Brown (one year as a junior faculty, not research)
Union Memorial (includes 6 month FDA externship)

6 year for 1 or 2 of the residents per PGY class:
UCSF
UCLA
UC Davis
USC
UCONN
Boston U
UNC
Dartmouth
Rochester
Ohio State
U Penn
West Virginia
Case Western
UMass

When including the schools that offer a research year to 1-2 students per year, is it random, or do those interested apply? And if selected, does it then become mandatory?

What if no one wants to do a research year from that class?

Pitt has a 6 year track for 4 of its 8 residents each year

Schools can do it in different ways, but many programs where the research year is not mandatory have separate ranks in the match and will have a certain number of spots for the 5-year and a certain number of spots for the 6-year program. This sorts by applicants who have no interest in the extra year, though many who really want to go to that school will rank the 5 and 6 year positions back to back.

I don't understand why people would want to do a 6 year program. Is it to make themselves more competitive for fellowships?

If it is, what if you already have 10 small pubs. Would an extra year help?

I would hope people would be wanting to do a 6-year program because they love research and want to pursue a career in academic ortho. That's why I want to do one.

If you're productive with your year of research, I can't see this type of a program hurting you for fellowship applications. If you were to get nothing to show for it (presentation, abstract, publication, grant support, etc.), I would assume it could hurt you. The same goes for taking a year off during med school for research, or completing a MD/PhD program.

So you're saying that anyone who wants to pursue academic ortho should take the 6-year track? I disagree with that

With medschool, residency, and fellowship, the process is long enough. Some people take time off before medschool and/or during medschool just to get into a competitive residency (ortho), why make it even longer??

You can 1. do research during medschool (which most do anyways) or 2. do research during residency. Leave the excessive research for the PhDs :P

Blaqmamba, I'm absolutely not saying that everyone wanting to do academics should do a 6-year program. I simply meant that wanting to pursue a career in academic ortho is a great reason to do a 6-year program (this was in response to Kirkland's question about why anyone would want to do this program).

Yes, there are plenty of people out there who think this is a waste of a year of your life, and this is likely a big reason why there are fewer orthopedists with large research grants out there compared to clinician scientists in other specialties. You can't just dabble in research and be good at it. A case report or retrospective study here and there may help you match into ortho or get into a better fellowship, but without protected and productive research time (which you relatively little of in medical school and even less of in residency) you just can't compete for decent grants (e.g. NIH K-series or R-series). I've heard this out of the mouth of the NIH Director, and you'll hear it from anyone who's done much research (including ortho faculty). Ortho is extremely time-intensive in and of itself, so it's not surprising that you don't get a lot of people wanting to do much serious research.

I would hope that someone has at least some experience in designing a formal study before finishing residency/fellowship, but I see your point, and it's a good one.

I guess it's more a personal uneasiness about a program with 6 spots only offering 3 to those who don't want to be forced to do research. Because, those who apply for the 6-yr track will get research done whether they get the 5 or 6yr track, so it's as if they have 6 spots available to them.

Makes more sense to just have 6 regular 5-yr track spots, and then allow 0-3 people to take a year off if they like.