The COVID-19 pandemic has had a multitude of effects on daily life. Aesthetic and cosmetic surgery practices have been significantly reduced in their working capacity or closed during this time. We used Google Trends to gauge the public's interest in facial plastic surgery during this pandemic, and how it has changed over the preceding months. As local shelter-in-place orders are being lifted, interest in facial plastic surgery is increasing even in the context of an ongoing national pandemic. Level of evidence V Letter to the Editor.

Otolaryngology is a competitive specialty, with 398 US seniors applying to an offered 328 positions in 2019. Recent changes to US Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 scoring raise many questions for both medical student applicants and program directors. Otolaryngologists are known to be collegial and thoughtful physicians. Focusing on other nonstandardized testing scores may help the specialty “reboot” and refocus on recruiting the best people, not just applicants with a high Step 1 score and Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status.

Objectives: Matching to an otolaryngology residency program is a competitive process for medical students, and research performed by students is considered as a factor for granting interviews by program directors. Because abstracts, presentations and publications are all reported in combination by the National Resident Matching Program’s “Charting Outcomes in the Match” (ChOM) and may be weighted differently by PDs, we specifically investigated the number of publications by past applicants accepted to top otolaryngology residency programs. Methods: The top 25 otolaryngology residency programs were identified using Doximity, sorting by reputation. Current residents were determined from the programs’ websites. Using PubMed, each resident’s number of publications, authorship status, and journal type were recorded. Results: A total of 24 programs were included in the final analysis and the average number of manuscripts was 2.76 ± 4.01. The mean number of publications in otolaryngology journals was 1.03 ± 1.91. Conclusions: The difference between the investigated average number of publications (2.76) and those published by ChOM (10.4) represent a discrepancy due to the lack of delineation between abstracts, presentations and publications. The reported numbers for research may lead medical students to pursue alternate measures to increase their own research. Some options, such as adding a research year are not universally accessible. A clearer and more detailed approach to reporting research statistics would be beneficial to both applicants and PDs for otolaryngology programs.

Key Points GPT‐4 is an AI language model that can answer basic questions about rhinologic disease. Vetting is needed before AI models can be safely integrated into otolarygologic patient care.

ObjectivesWith widespread vaccination against COVID‐19, concerns regarding side effects have been raised. We aim to assess the frequency of otolaryngologic adverse events (AEs) following COVID‐19 vaccination as compared with other vaccines in a national database.Study DesignRetrospective analysis of national registry.MethodsThe Food and Drug Administration's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database was queried from December 2020 to May 2021 for all COVID‐19 vaccination AEs. Complaints were categorized as otolaryngologic and sub stratified into different anatomic components. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) and proportional reporting ratios (PRR) were determined for AEs of clinical significance.ResultsThe total number of AEs reported from vaccination with the Moderna, Pfizer‐BioNTech, and Janssen vaccines equaled 1,280,950. Of these, 62,660 (4.9%) were otolaryngologic in nature, with 32.6% associated with the oropharynx/larynx, 18.3% with the nasal cavity/sinuses, 17.1% with the ears/vestibular system, 10.0% with the oral cavity, and 21.9% miscellaneous. Signal ratios reached significance levels for dysgeusia (n = 2124, PRR: 17.33, ROR: 16.36), ageusia (n = 1376, PRR: 2.81, ROR: 2.81), anosmia (n = 983, PRR: 4.01, ROR: 4.01), rhinorrhea (n = 2203, PRR: 2.99, ROR: 3.00), throat tightness (n = 3666, PRR: 4.99, ROR: 5.00), throat irritation (n = 3313, PRR: 4.51, ROR: 4.52), dysphagia (n = 2538, PRR: 2.07, ROR: 2.07), tinnitus (n = 4377, PRR: 3.97, ROR: 3.98), and vertigo (n = 2887, PRR: 3.93, ROR: 3.93). Signal ratios were not significant for facial paralysis, Bell's palsy, anaphylaxis, sinusitis, hearing disability, and ear pain.ConclusionsAlthough several otolaryngologic symptoms were reported, few were found to be clinically significant. Of note, facial paralysis, Bell's palsy, and anaphylaxis did not meet signal thresholds to be determined significant.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, 2023