Dataset Information

Applicant Perspectives on the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process.

ABSTRACT: Importance:It has been nearly 25 years since medical students were queried regarding their perspectives on otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) residency selection. Understanding this viewpoint is critical to improving the current application process. Objective:To evaluate the perceptions of 2016 OHNS residency applicants regarding the application process and offer suggestions for reform. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this cross-sectional study of anonymous online survey data, a 14-question survey was designed based on resources obtained from a computerized PubMed, Ovid, and GoogleScholar database search of the English language from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2015, was conducted using the following search terms: (medical student OR applicant) AND (application OR match) AND otolaryngology. The survey was administered to 2016 OHNS residency applicants to examine 4 primary areas: current attitudes toward the match, effect of the new Otolaryngology Program Directors Organization personal statement mandate, sources of advice and information, and suggestions for improvement. In January 2016, an email was sent to 100 program directors asking them to distribute the survey to current OHNS applicants at their institution. One follow-up reminder email was sent in February 2016. A link to the survey was posted on the Otomatch.com homepage on January 28, 2016, with the last response received on March 28, 2016. Main Outcome and Measures:Survey responses regarding the residency application process. Results:A total of 150 of 370 residency applicants (40.5%) responded to the survey. Of these, 125 respondents (90.6%) noted applying to programs in which they had no specific interest simply to improve their chances of matching. Applicants intended to apply to more programs than they actually did (63.6 vs 60.8; r?=?0.19; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.40). Program directors advised fewer applications than other sources; however, 58 respondents (38.7%) did not receive advice from a program director. A total of 121 respondents (80.7%) found online program information to be insufficient. Finally, 90 of 140 respondents (64.3%) noted that they would agree to a hard cap on applications, among other suggestions for improvement. Conclusions and Relevance:Several main themes emerged from the data, providing a foundation for process improvement opportunities: careful consideration to applicant mentorship, including peers; uniform set of criteria for residency program websites; and investigating alternative match platforms, which may allow hard caps, flagging programs of higher interest, or wave application cycles. Overall, the otolaryngology applicant provides a unique perspective regarding the current state of the match and potential opportunities for system-wide improvement.

SUBMITTER: Ward M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5710552 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Applicant Perspectives on the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process.

Ward Matthew M Pingree Christian C Laury Adrienne M AM Bowe Sarah N SN

JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery 20170801 8

<h4>Importance</h4>It has been nearly 25 years since medical students were queried regarding their perspectives on otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) residency selection. Understanding this viewpoint is critical to improving the current application process.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the perceptions of 2016 OHNS residency applicants regarding the application process and offer suggestions for reform.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>In this cross-sectional study of anonymous on ...[more]

PMID: 28542682

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeUsing 2020 match applicants, the purpose of this study was to identify baseline applicant perspectives on the match process surveying (1) away rotations, (2) interview/postinterview communications, and (3) factors influencing applicant rank order lists.Methods and materialsApplicants in the 2020 match cycle at a large radiation oncology (RO) residency program received a questionnaire covering demographics and the match process: away rotations, interview/postinterview communications, and ranking. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with completing fewer away rotations.ResultsOf 141 surveys sent, 76 were completed, for a response rate of 54%. Most applicants were White, male, and matched into RO. One in 3 applicants did not have a home RO program. Most applicants completed 2 RO rotations (ie, a home rotation and an additional away rotation; range, 0-4 total rotations); RO rotations influenced the applicant rank order lists and the ultimate match result for 94% and 79% of applicants, respectively. Forty-seven percent of applicants reported being asked inappropriate questions during the interview (eg, parental or marital status). Applicants did not perceive a consistent message regarding postinterview communications from program directors. Most applicants were contacted postinterview. Interviews cost most applicants more than $5000. Thirty-seven percent of respondents reported submitting a letter of interest after the interview, hoping to improve their rank. When applying to programs, general reputation and location were the most common influential factors mentioned. When ranking programs, informal conversations with residents and program culture observations were the most common influential factors mentioned. Based on multivariable analysis, applicants who completed fewer RO rotations (including away rotations) had greater odds of matching to their home program (odds ratio [OR], 12.05; 95% CI, 1.27-206.69), lower odds of program location influencing where to apply (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.003-0.37), and lower odds of the program's general reputation affecting their rank list (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.001-0.47).ConclusionsThe results suggest that medical students perceive away rotations as an important influencer of their match process. Although applicants and program directors both participate in postinterview communications, interactions with residents influence rank order lists. These data may serve as an up-to-date baseline to evaluate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the RO match process.

Project description:Purpose This article evaluates the relevance of social media to ophthalmology residency applicants in the setting of virtual interviews, the types of information sought by applicants, and the impact of rebranding of an institutional and departmental social media account. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants Ophthalmology residency applicants from the 2020 to 2021 cycle. Methods A voluntary survey was emailed to 481 applicants to the University of Louisville Department of Ophthalmology residency during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle to gauge the impact of social media on their perspectives of residency programs, especially with regards to a new departmental social media account. Main Outcome Measures Applicants' use of social media platforms and specific components of departmental social media accounts found most useful. Results The 13-question survey was completed by 84/481 applicants (17.5% response rate). Social media was used by 93% of respondents. Of those respondents reporting social media use, the most common platforms utilized included Instagram (85%), Facebook (83%), Twitter (41%), and LinkedIn (29%). Sixty-nine percent of respondents specifically used Instagram to learn more about residency programs. With regards to the rebranded Instagram account at the University of Louisville, 58% of respondents reported being influenced, with all asserting that the account positively encouraged them to apply to the program. The most informative elements of the account related to current resident profiles, resident life, and living in Louisville. Conclusion A majority of responding ophthalmology residency applicants utilized social media to search for program information. A newly developed social media profile at a single institution positively influenced applicant impressions of the program, with the most importance assigned to information provided about current residents and typical resident life. These findings suggest key areas where programs should continue to dedicate online resources with targeted information to better recruit applicants.

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the cancellation of away rotations and other experiences fundamental to orthopaedic surgery residency application. Limited information is available on the experiences of applicants and program directors (PDs) during the COVID-19 pandemic residency application cycle. This study aimed to evaluate the current perspectives of applicants and PDs regarding the orthopaedic surgery residency application process. This was a cross-sectional study using 2 independent but similar surveys that addressed multiple aspects of the application process during the COVID-19 pandemic, including perceived effect of virtual experiences. Between February and March 2021, the surveys were distributed to orthopaedic surgery applicants and orthopaedic residency PDs. In total, 113 applicants (20.1%) and 29 PDs (19.6%) completed the survey. Applicants applied to 97.6 programs and received 13.3 interviews. They participated in 2.4 virtual away rotations. In total, 79.3% of programs reported offering some form of virtual opportunity, including virtual away rotations (24.0%), virtual happy hours (64.0%), and virtual conferences (64.0%). Programs offering virtual away rotations hosted 46.8 rotators and only invited back 54.5% for an interview. Applicants were most concerned about the lack of away rotations, the interview, and networking during this cycle, and 51% reported less confidence in matching. The most important factors for influencing applicant rank lists were perceived happiness of residents, resident camaraderie, and geographic location. However, residency program social events were not well replicated in a virtual setting. The COVID-19 pandemic presented new challenges for applicants and PDs. Applicants had less clinical exposure and received less interview invites after virtual away rotations. Despite applying to more programs, applicants received fewer interviews than in previous years. The virtual experiences adopted in this cycle did not adequately replicate the social factors that applicants found most important when ranking a program. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, PDs most highly valued away rotation performance, clinical rotation performance, and board examination scores when offering interviews.

Project description:ImportanceThe ophthalmology residency application process is critical for applicants and residency programs, and knowledge about the preferences of applicants would assist both groups in improving the process.ObjectiveTo evaluate the experiences and preferences of ophthalmology residency applicants.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional, nonvalidated survey was conducted online. All applicants to the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute ophthalmology residency program during the 2018-2019 application cycle were invited to complete the survey. Data collection occurred from April 1, 2019, to April 30, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresApplicant demographics, application submissions, interview experiences, financial considerations, match results, and suggestions for improvement of the application process.ResultsResponses were received from 185 applicants (36.4%), including 77 women (41.6%). A successful match into an ophthalmology residency was achieved by 172 respondents (93.0%). There was a mean (SD) US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score of 245.8 (13.3) points. Respondents applied to a mean (SD) of 76.4 (23.5) ophthalmology residency programs, received 14.0 (9.0) invitations to interview, and attended 10.3 (4.4) interviews. Choices regarding applications and interviews were based mostly on program reputation, location, and advisor recommendation. A usual lead time of at least 3 weeks between the invitation and interview was reported by 126 respondents (69.2%), which was reduced to 14 respondents (15.1%) when a wait-list was involved. The ophthalmology residency application process cost a mean (SD) of $5704 ($2831) per applicant. Respondents reported that they were most able to reduce costs through housing choices (hotel stays or similar arrangements) and least able to reduce costs by limiting the number of programs to which they applied or at which they interviewed.Conclusions and relevanceThe ophthalmology residency application process is complex and poses substantial challenges to applicants and residency programs. These findings suggest that many current applicants have difficulty selecting programs to apply to, and most respondents desired changes to the current system of interview invitations and scheduling.

Project description:ProblemIn the 2021 residency application cycle, the average otolaryngology applicant applied to more than half of programs. Increasing application numbers make it difficult for applicants to stand out to programs of interest and for programs to identify applicants with sincere interest.ApproachAs part of the 2021 Match, otolaryngology applicants could participate in a preference signaling process, signaling up to 5 programs of particular interest at the time of application submission. Programs received a list of applicants who submitted signals to consider during interview offer deliberations. Applicants and program directors completed surveys to evaluate the signaling process and assess the impact of signals on interview offers.OutcomesAll otolaryngology residency programs participated in the signaling process. In total, 611 students submitted applications for otolaryngology residency programs, 559 applicants submitted a Match list including an otolaryngology program, and 558 applicants participated in the signaling process. The survey response rate was 42% for applicants (n = 233) and 52% for program directors (n = 62). The rate of receiving an interview offer was significantly higher from signaled programs (58%) than from both nonsignaled programs (14%; P < .001) and the comparative nonsignal program (23%; P < .001) (i.e., the program an applicant would have signaled given a sixth signal). This impact was consistent across the spectrum of applicant competitiveness. Applicants (178, 77%) and program directors (53, 91%) strongly favored continuing the program.Next stepsMany specialties face high residency application numbers. Programs have difficulty identifying applicants with sincere interest, and applicants face limited opportunities to identify programs of particular interest. Applicants to these specialties may benefit from a preference signaling process like that in otolaryngology. Additional evaluation is needed to determine the impact of signals across racial and demographic lines and to validate these early outcomes.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the process of applying to orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships from the applicant's perspective, with a focus on number of program applications, interviews, interview day importance, and financial burden.MethodsAn anonymous electronic survey was distributed to all orthopaedic surgery residents who applied to orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships in the United States in 2016 and 2017. The survey contained 26 questions, with 10 pertaining to applicant demographics, accolades, and examination scores. A follow up e-mail was distributed at 2 and 4 weeks to increase participation.ResultsThe survey was distributed to 453 sports medicine fellowship applicants; 148 (34.1%) completed the survey. Of the respondents, 130 (87.8%) were male and 18 (12.2%) were female. When analyzing United States Medical Licensing Examination scores, respondents who scored above a 251 on Step 2 CK were more likely to receive more than 20 interviews compared with those who scored lower (P = .013). Previous collegiate or professional athlete status did not influence the number of interviews received. In total, 94 of 147 (64.0%) respondents applied to more than 20 programs, and 73 respondents (49.7%) attended between 11 and 15 interviews. The majority of respondents spent between $4001 and $6000 (49; 33.1%) throughout the application process. Interaction with faculty and case volume/complexity were the most important factors in ranking programs.ConclusionsThe majority of orthopaedic surgery residents pursue at least 1 year of fellowship training following residency, with sports medicine being one of the most popular specialties. The application process for sports medicine fellowships is complex, competitive, and a financial burden for applicants. Most applicants apply to more than 20 programs, spend between $4000 and $6,000 over the course of the application process, and value faculty interaction and case volume/complexity over other factors associated with a program.Clinical relevanceAs other surgical fellowships have detailed their application process from the applicant's perspective, there remains a need for increased transparency of the sports medicine fellowship application in order to offer additional insight and guidance for future applicants.

Project description:IntroductionThe persistent lack of racial and ethnic diversity within the field of otolaryngology calls for an analysis of potential bias within the residency application system. Letters of recommendation (LORs) and personal statements (PSs) are the most important subjective application constituents. This subjectivity predisposes these components to implicit bias. In applications to various surgical subspecialties, prior linguistic studies assessing bias in reviews of LOR show race-based differences. Thus far, racial and ethnic linguistic differences in LORs for otolaryngology applicants have not been analyzed in the literature.MethodsLORs and PSs were abstracted from otolaryngology - head and neck surgery applications in the Electronic Residency Application Service for the 2019-20 and 2020-21 application cycles. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count 2015 was used for quantitative analysis of emotional, cognitive, and structural components of written text.ResultsRace-pair analysis of the 2019-2021 application cycles revealed higher mean "teaching" scores for LORs for Asian, black, Hispanic, and white applicants when compared to applicants who self-identified as Other. White applicants had lower scores for the terms "research" and "analytic" when compared to Asian and black applicants, respectively. Analysis of PSs revealed greater scores for an "authentic" writing style for white versus Asian applicants. White applicants were found to have higher scores for "tone" compared to black applicants.ConclusionMinor racial and ethnic language differences exist in both LORs and PSs. A statistically significant difference was observed among LORs, with the "teaching" term used more frequently for Asian, black, Hispanic, and white applicants compared to self-identified Other individuals. For PSs, statistically significant differences were observed among white applicants, who wrote about themselves using more "authentic" language when compared with Asian applicants and who also had higher scores for "tone" compared to black applicants. Although these differences were statistically significant, the practical impact of the variances is likely small.

Dataset Information

Applicant Perspectives on the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process.

Publications

Applicant Perspectives on the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets