Introduction: Academic conferences offer medical students valuable opportunities for networking, specialty exploration, and strengthening applications. High cost of registration may pose financial barriers, disadvantaging students from lower-income backgrounds. This study examines the affordability of conference attendance across specialties and compares those to available funding at U. S. medical schools Methods: A cross-sectional study analyzing the publicly advertised student registration fees for 26 NRMP core specialty and 27 subspecialty conferences. In parallel, we reviewed US accredited Medical schools’ websites to identify funding available to students. For each school–specialty pair, we calculated an Affordability Ratio (AF) by dividing the school’s award by the median conference registration fee Results: Of the 66 NRMP core specialty/subspecialty society conferences, 52 had published registration fees. Of the 207 medical schools, 86 publicly listed their funding. The median baseline school award was US 500 and did not differ by public versus private or by degree type (DO vs MD). State-level medians varied ten-fold, from US 150 in Mississippi to US 1, 500 in New Mexico. For core specialties, the median non-member student registration fee was US 273 (IQR, US 104–594). When each school’s award was paired with the median fee for every specialty, 1, 616 of 2, 150 possible combinations (75. 1 %) achieved an AF ≥ 1. 0. Coverage exceeded 9% for Anesthesiology, Family Medicine, and Child Neurology but fell below 30% for Plastic Surgery, Pathology, Surgery, Neurology, and Radiology Subspecialty meetings were more expensive. The median fee across subspecialties was 570 (IQR 253–823). Only 58. 3% of school–subspecialty pairs met AF of >1. 0. Ten subspecialties exhibited coverage 800. In contrast, 11 subspecialties—largely pediatric with fees ≤ 150— were fully covered Conclusions: While three-quarters of U. S. medical schools’ standard travel awards cover registration for most specialty conferences, a gap persists risking inequitable access to career-shaping opportunities. Societies should be mindful of funding provided by schools and price their registration fees to allow more access
Pierce et al. (Sun,) studied this question.