Evaluation of the Current Perspectives on Letters of Recommendation for Residency Applicants among Plastic Surgery Program Directors.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shultz K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3335712 | biostudies-literature | 2012
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: This survey aims to identify the relative value and the critical components of anesthesiology letters of recommendation(LORs) from the perspective of Program Directors (PDs) and Associate/Assistant Program Directors (APDs). Knowledge and insights originating from this survey might add to the understanding of the anesthesiology residency selection process and mitigate unintended linguistic biases.Methodology: Anonymous online surveys were sent to anesthesiology PDs/APDs from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited anesthesiology residency Programs in the USA (US), as listed on the ACGME website and the American Medical Association Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (AMA FREIDA) Residency Program Database. The survey authors were blinded to the identity of the respondents.Results: 62 out of 183 (33.8%) invited anesthesiology PDs/APDs completed the survey anonymously. In our survey, LORs are reported as more important in granting an interview than in making the rank list. 64% of respondents prefer narrative LORs. 77.4% of respondents look for specific keywords in LORs. Keywords such as 'top % of students' and 'we are recruiting this candidate' indicate a strong letter of recommendation while keywords such as 'I recommend to your program' or non-superlative descriptions indicate a weak letter of recommendation. Other key components of LORs include the specialty of the letter-writer, according to 84% of respondents, with anesthesiology as the most valuable specialty. Although narrative LORs are preferred, 55.1% of respondents are not satisfied with the content of narrative LORs.Conclusion: LORs containing specific keywords play an important role in the application to anesthesiology residency, particularly when submitted by an anesthesiologist. While narrative LORs are still the preferred format, most of our respondents feel they need improvements. The authors suggest specific LOR improvements including creating formalized LOR training, adding a style guide, and applying comparative scales, with standardized vocabulary in the narrative LOR.
| S-EPMC8118394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to investigate whether implicit linguistic biases exist in letters of recommendation (LORs) for applicants to radiation oncology (RO) residency. LORs (n = 487) written for applicants (n = 125) invited to interview at a single RO residency program from the 2015 to 2019 application cycles were included for analysis. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software was used to evaluate LORs for length and a dictionary of predetermined themes. Language was evaluated for gender bias using a publicly available gender bias calculator. Non-parametric tests were used to compare linguistic domain scores. The median number of the LORs per applicant was 4 (range 3-5). No significant differences by applicant gender were detected in LIWC score domains or gender bias calculator (P > 0.05). However, LORs for applicants from racial/ethnic backgrounds underrepresented in medicine were less likely to include standout descriptors (P = 0.008). Male writers were less likely to describe applicant characteristics related to patient care (P < 0.0001) and agentic personality (P = 0.006). LORs written by RO were shorter (P < 0.0001) and included fewer standout descriptors (P = 0.014) but were also more likely to include statements regarding applicant desirability (P = 0.045) and research (P = 0.008). While language was globally male-biased, assistant professors were less likely than associate professors (P = 0.0064) and full professors (P = 0.023) to use male-biased language. Significant linguistic differences were observed in RO residency LORs, suggesting that implicit biases related to both applicants and letter writers may exist. Recognition, and ideally eradication, of such biases are crucial for fair and equitable evaluation of a diverse applicant pool of RO residency candidates.
| S-EPMC7591242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Postgraduate physician-scientist training programs (PSTPs) enhance the experiences of physician-scientist trainees following medical school graduation. PSTPs usually span residency and fellowship training, but this varies widely by institution. Applicant competitiveness for these programs would be enhanced, and unnecessary trainee anxiety relieved, by a clear understanding of what factors define a successful PSTP matriculant. Such information would also be invaluable to PSTP directors and would allow benchmarking of their admissions processes with peer programs. We conducted a survey of PSTP directors across the US to understand the importance they placed on components of PSTP applications. Of 41 survey respondents, most were from internal medicine and pediatrics residency programs. Of all components in the application, two elements were considered very important by a majority of PSTP directors: (a) having one or more first-author publications and (b) the thesis advisor's letter. Less weight was consistently placed on factors often considered more relevant for non-physician-scientist postgraduate applicants - such as US Medical Licensing Examination scores, awards, and leadership activities. The data presented here highlight important metrics for PSTP applicants and directors and suggest that indicators of scientific productivity and commitment to research outweigh traditional quantitative measures of medical school performance.
| S-EPMC8986063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLetters of recommendation are considered one of the most important factors for whether an applicant is selected for an interview for orthopaedic surgery residency programs. Language differences in letters describing men versus women candidates may create differential perceptions by gender. Given the gender imbalance in orthopaedic surgery, we sought to determine whether there are differences in the language of letters of recommendation by applicant gender.Questions/purposes(1) Are there differences in word count and word categories in letters of recommendation describing women and men applicants, regardless of author gender? (2) Is author gender associated with word category differences in letters of recommendation? (3) Do authors of different academic rank use different words to describe women versus men applicants?MethodsUsing a linguistic analysis in a retrospective study, we analyzed all letters of recommendation (2834 letters) written for all 738 applicants with completed Electronic Residency Application Service applications submitted to the Johns Hopkins Orthopaedic Surgery Residency program during the 2018 to 2019 cycle to determine differences in word category use among applicants by gender, authors by gender, and authors by academic rank. Thirty nine validated word categories from the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count dictionary along with seven additional word categories from previous publications were used in this analysis. The occurrence of words in each word category was divided by the number of words in the letter to obtain a word frequency for each letter. We calculated the mean word category frequency across all letters and analyzed means using non-parametric tests. For comparison of two groups, a p value threshold of 0.05 was used. For comparison of multiple groups, the Bonferroni correction was used to calculate an adjusted p value (p = 0.00058).ResultsLetters of recommendation for women applicants were slightly longer compared with those for men applicants (366 ± 188 versus 339 ± 199 words; p = 0.003). When comparing word category differences by applicant gender, letters for women applicants had slightly more "achieve" words (0.036 ± 0.015 versus 0.035 ± 0.018; p < 0.0001). Letters for men had more use of their first name (0.016 ± 0.013 versus 0.014 ± 0.009; p < 0.0001), and more "young" words (0.001 ± 0.003 versus 0.000 ± 0.001; p < 0.0001) than letters for women applicants. These differences were very small as each 0.001 difference in mean word frequency was equivalent to one more additional word from the word category appearing when comparing three letters for women to three letters for men. For differences in letters by author gender, there were no word category differences between men and women authors. Finally, when looking at author academic rank, letters for men applicants written by professors had slightly more "research" terms (0.011 ± 0.010) than letters written by associate professors (0.010 ± 0.010) or faculty of other rank (0.009 ± 0.011; p < 0.0001), a finding not observed in letters written for women.ConclusionsAlthough there were some minor differences favoring women, language in letters of recommendation to an academic orthopaedic surgery residency program were overall similar between men and women applicants.Clinical relevanceGiven the similarity in language between men and women applicants, increasing women applicants may be a more important factor in addressing the gender gap in orthopaedics.
| S-EPMC7310286 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe evolving landscape of application processes for obstetrics and gynecology residency applicants poses many challenges for applicants and advisors. The lack of data coordination among national groups creates crucial gaps in information for stakeholder groups.ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify the current state of the advising milieu for obstetrics and gynecology residency applicants and their career advisors, the annual Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics survey focused on US clerkship directors' experiences advising students through these processes.Study designA 23-item anonymous survey was developed that asked respondents about demographics and outcomes for the students that they advised through the 2021 application process and their experiences with dual applicants and students not matching. The survey was sent electronically to all obstetrics and gynecology clerkship directors with active Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics memberships in April 2021.ResultsOf 224 total clerkship directors, 143 (63.8%) responded to the survey, Of the 143 respondents, almost all (136 [95.1%]) served as career advisors, and 50 (35.0%) were aware of students dual applying. Furthermore, obstetrics and gynecology was rarely the backup to a more competitive specialty. For the 2021 application cycle, 79 of 143 respondents (55.2%) reported having students not successfully match into obstetrics and gynecology, with "academic concerns" followed by "poor communication skills" as the primary reasons cited for students not matching.ConclusionThis snapshot of clerkship directors' experiences advising students in the residency application process reveals notably high rates of dual applicants and students not matching into obstetrics and gynecology. This work fills key gaps in our knowledge of current processes and highlights the importance of career advising at multiple points during the application process.
| S-EPMC10585629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Plastic Surgery Common Application (PSCA) was introduced as a free and specialty-specific application for plastic surgery applicants in the 2020-2021 cycle. Now in its second year, the PSCA is being piloted by all integrated residency programs with future plans to replace Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) in the 2022-2023 cycle. This study aimed to explore applicant perspectives related to the PSCA and ERAS applications.MethodsAn anonymous survey was distributed to integrated plastic surgery residency applicants from the 2021-2022 application cycle. Participants were asked to provide basic demographic information, their perspectives of the PSCA, and overall application preference.ResultsOne hundred forty (43.1%) applicants completed the survey. Nearly, 63% of applicants responded "slightly well" or "not well at all" regarding their ability to highlight at least one aspect of their application. Forty-one percent of applicants believed ERAS best highlighted the strengths of their application compared with 27% who believed their strengths were better highlighted by the PSCA. Seventy-nine percent reported the cost savings associated with the PSCA were "very" or "extremely important." Overall, 63% of respondents reported a preference to apply with the PSCA alone.ConclusionsThis is the first study to provide insight on applicants' perspectives of the PSCA. Although the majority preferred applying with the PSCA, there may be challenges with transitioning to this application solely. Future iterations of the PSCA may aim to ameliorate functionality concerns, optimize application content, and incorporate plastic surgery-specific information that may be important to selection committees.
| S-EPMC9839255 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRobotic surgery continues to expand in minimally invasive surgery; however, the literature is insufficient to understand the current training process for general surgery residents. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to identify the current approach to and perspectives on robotic surgery training.MethodsAn electronic survey was distributed to general surgery program directors identified by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Multiple choice and open-ended questions regarding current practices and opinions on robotic surgery training in general surgery residency programs were used.Results20 program directors were surveyed, a majority being from medium-sized programs (4-7 graduating residents per year). Most respondents (73.68%) had a formal robotic surgery curriculum at their institution, with 63.16% incorporating simulation training. Approximately half of the respondents believe that more time should be dedicated to robotic surgery training (52.63%), with simulation training prior to console use (84.21%). About two-thirds of the respondents (63.16%) believe that a formal robotic surgery curriculum should be established as a part of general surgery residency, with more than half believing that exposure should occur in postgraduate year one (55%).ConclusionA formal robotics curriculum with simulation training and early surgical exposure for general surgery residents should be given consideration in surgical residency training.
| S-EPMC5964613 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background?Letters of recommendation (LORs) are an important part of applications for residency and fellowship programs. Despite anecdotal use of a "code" in LORs, research on program director (PD) perceptions of the value of these documents is sparse.Objective?We analyzed PD interpretations of LOR components and discriminated between perceived levels of applicant recommendations.Methods?We conducted a cross-sectional, descriptive study of pediatrics residency and fellowship PDs. We developed a survey asking PDs to rate 3 aspects of LORs: 13 letter features, 10 applicant abilities, and 11 commonly used phrases, using a 5-point Likert scale. The 11 phrases were grouped using principal component analysis. Mean scores of components were analyzed with repeated-measures analysis of variance. Median Likert score differences between groups were analyzed with Mann-Whitney U tests.Results?Our survey had a 43% response rate (468 of 1079). "I give my highest recommendation" was rated the most positive phrase, while "showed improvement" was rated the most negative. Principal component analysis generated 3 groups of phrases with moderate to strong correlation with each other. The mean Likert score for each group from the PD rating was calculated. Positive phrases had a mean (SD) of 4.4 (0.4), neutral phrases 3.4 (0.5), and negative phrases 2.6 (0.6). There was a significant difference among all 3 pairs of mean scores (all P < .001).Conclusions?Commonly used phrases in LORs were interpreted consistently by PDs and influenced their impressions of candidates. Key elements of LORs include distinct phrases depicting different degrees of endorsement.
| S-EPMC6008019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Securing a plastic surgery position is a demanding task for students. Although many papers have been published internationally discussing the traits and features deemed important from the point of view of plastic surgery program directors, a gap exists in the literature where this aspect is not covered in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study was to fill this gap.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, a survey was developed targeting all current and former Saudi plastic surgery training program directors. SPSS was used to calculate frequencies and present percentages; independent t-test was done to look for mean differences. Ethical approval was obtained from a local institution.ResultsAll current and former Saudi plastic surgery program directors participated (n = 17), including the 8 (47.1%) current directors. When asked to rank 7 items on a scale of importance, they scored a mean of 6.2, 5.8, 5.4, 4.88, 4.82, 4.6, and 3.7 for good impression on interviews, prior experience, research experience, the grade point average (GPA), oral or poster presentations on events, the Saudi Medical Licensing Examination (SMLE), and attaining a post-graduate degree, respectively. The majority [n = 7 (41%)] considers the mode of communication, such as phone calls, as the most important aspect in recommendations. They prefer candidates who took electives/rotations at their department [n = 12 (71%)] and give more value to high-quality publications [n = 9 (47%)]. Applicant's gender was not important.ConclusionWith early planning, this article could serve as a guide for medical students interested in plastic surgery to build their assets toward a successful interview.
| S-EPMC7928541 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A shift in gender dominance from man to woman in the medical field has occurred from time to time globally, including in Indonesia's plastic surgery community. This shift may alter the education and clinical settings of plastic surgery. This study aimed to explore the effect of the phenomenon of women's dominance in plastic surgery residency programs in Indonesia.MethodsThis qualitative study was conducted using a phenomenological approach on three plastic surgery residency programs in Indonesia. Academic report review, focus group discussions, and in-depth interviews of residents, lecturers, residency program managers, and alumni user groups were selected using the maximum variation sampling method. Data obtained were analyzed and processed thematically.ResultsThree themes emerged based on the educational process timeline: pre-education, intra-education, and post-education. Each timeline had several themes that mutually influenced the educational process. In the pre-educational process, residents' personal characters were affected by societies' positive and negative perceptions. The working environment, impact of women's dominance, and cultural dimension affected the intra-educational process. When entering the career life, residents expected an ideal working environment and had particular workplace preferences to achieve their well-being.ConclusionsThe impact of women's dominance during the educational program affected residents' daily dynamics. However, this dominance did not affect the quality of education and workloads.
| S-EPMC8373561 | biostudies-literature