As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread across the world, it is also adversely affecting medical student education. In addition, COVID-19 poses several challenges to medical students’ physical and mental health and their professional identity formation. Medical students are experiencing increasing anxiety due to the COVID-19 disruption. Medical students show higher rates of depression, suicidal ideation, and stigmatization around depression and are less likely to seek support. It is therefore important to safeguard their mental health and implement effective strategies to support their educational, physical, mental, and professional well-being.

Purpose Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has forced upon all academic institutions to conduct virtual interviewing (VI) instead of face-to-face interviewing (FTFI) this interviewing cycle. The purpose of this systematic review was to understand the process of VI, its effectiveness as an alternative to FTFI, and the experiences of applicants and institutions with VI. We also share best practice strategies for applicants and institutions in VI preparation. Method PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus and CINAHL databases were searched through May 2020. Articles in English evaluating the effectiveness of VI were included, without applying any date limits. Two reviewers selected articles and extracted data. Results Of the 934 articles screened, 22 articles underwent full-text article analysis to include 15 studies. There were 4 studies that reported the use of VI as a screening tool. 11 studies completely replaced FTFI with VI. Most applicants could appropriately convey themselves through VI. Most applicants and interviewing programs expressed reservations about VI’s use as an alternative to FTFI. Conclusion There is dearth of evidence supporting the efficacy of VI. There is an opportunity for potential research at multi-institutional level to gain better understanding of the efficacy of VI. The knowledge obtained from this systematic review has the potential of helping applicants and institutions in preparing for VI process. Additionally, authors propose supportive strategies to help prepare applicants and institutions for VI.

Medical student education has not been immune to life altering changes of the global Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Pre-pandemic anxiety and mental health concerns were already a significant problem in the world of medical student education. Educators are reformulating strategies to address the increased demand for mental health services and wellness during COVID-19. Adaptations include increased and varied internal and student focused communication, as well as new support structures built around student connection and coaching, mental illness, and general wellness. Additional alterations to student support include expanded mental health counseling and also incorporating novel wellness events in an effort to support thriving during COVID-19.

We report herein on the first case of celiac crisis presenting with status epilepticus and encephalopathy in the absence of profound GI symptoms. Our case suggests that celiac crisis should be considered in the differential of seizures and encephalopathy in children.

Summary Donor ethnicity is a prognosticator in organ transplant. However, the impact of donor/recipient race‐matching is unclear. We hypothesized that there would be increased survival in donor–recipient race‐matched organ recipients because of genetic and physiologic similarities. The UNOS database from 1999 to 2018 was queried for all solid organ transplantations including heart, lung, liver, kidney, and pancreas transplants. Data were sorted by donor and recipient race into matched and unmatched categories for Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic transplant recipients. After controlling for potential confounders via inverse propensity of treatment weighting, post‐transplant patient and graft survival were compared between race‐matched and ‐unmatched donor groups for each organ. Race‐matched Caucasian recipients experienced 1–3% improvement in mortality across most time points in lung, liver, and pancreas transplants, while Hispanics did not benefit. Matched African American recipients experienced 4–6% improvement in patient and graft survival in liver transplant but had 7–9% worse survival rates at 5 years in lung and pancreas transplants. Race‐matching does not influence patient outcomes enough to factor into organ transplant offers. African American liver transplant recipients benefited the most. Matching was detrimental to African American lung and pancreas transplant recipients indicating there may be other factors influencing the outcomes of these transplants.