Purpose Surgical education fellowships emerged to address the growing need for formal surgical education training. However, little is known about fellowship structure, curricula, and outcomes. This lack of transparency creates challenges for residents choosing programs, institutions developing new fellowships, and existing programs evaluating their outcomes.

Method Authors identified 28 United States-based surgical education fellowships and distributed a survey to representatives (directors or fellows) from each program evaluating program structure, educational opportunities, research infrastructure, teaching experiences, and mentorship. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results Nineteen fellowship programs (68% response rate) participated. The majority of programs offered full funding (84%). Program length varied from 1 to 2 years, most commonly with one fellow per year. Few (16%) required completion of an advanced degree during the fellowship. The majority mandated teaching (84%) and simulation (89%) responsibilities, though time commitments varied. Most programs (84%) required fellows to attend national conferences. Over half (53%) had an Education PhD advisor within the department, and 63% provided free access to statisticians. Leadership structures varied, with 74% having a single fellowship director. Among directors, 80% were surgical specialists, while all non-surgical directors held Education PhDs. Dedicated faculty time equivalents for directors varied widely.

Conclusions Our findings highlight significant heterogeneity across U.S. surgical education fellowships. Transparency about fellowship structures could improve prospective fellow decision-making and guide future program development. Further research should focus on the long-term outcomes of fellowship graduates and the impact of accreditation on fellowship success.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study did not receive any funding

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study was deemed exempt from full review by the Institutional Review Board at Columbia University, under Protocol #AAAV1242.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors