Dataset Information

The Case for Capping Residency Interviews.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To determine 2020 residency cycle application practices and to model potential consequences in the 2021 cycle if (1) applicants scheduled an uncapped number of interviews; (2) applicants were capped to schedule 12 interviews; (3) residency programs kept their number of interview offers unchanged; and (4) programs increased their interview offers by 20%. DESIGN AND SETTING:The authors sent an anonymous survey to all obstetrics and gynecology applicants registered through the Electronic Residency Application Service in February 2020 asking respondents to share demographics and number of interview offers received and completed. Based on prior estimates that 12 interviews are needed to match in obstetrics and gynecology, respondents were divided into Group 12+ (those receiving ?12 interview offers) and Group <12 (those receiving <12 offers). Model assumptions were (1) applicants can complete all interviews they are offered because they are virtual; (2) interview offers that applicants in Group 12+ decline are subsequently offered to applicants in Group <12; (3) the proportions of interviews offered to Group 12+ and Group <12 will remain the same if programs chose to increase their total number of interview spots. PARTICIPANTS:Among 2508 applicants, 750 (30%) provided the number of interview offers received and completed: 417 (56%) in Group 12+ and 333 (44%) in Group <12. RESULTS:In models where applicants are uncapped in the number of interviews, Group <12 applicants receive <1 interview offer, even if programs increase the number of interviews offered and performed. If applicants are capped at 12 interviews, Group <12 applicants will receive 9 interview offers on average and will reach 12 if programs increase the number of interviews offered by 20%. CONCLUSIONS:This work highlights how current inefficiencies may lead to negative consequences with virtual interviews. Interview caps and preference signaling systems need to be urgently considered.

SUBMITTER: Morgan HK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7489264 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Case for Capping Residency Interviews.

Morgan Helen Kang HK Winkel Abigail F AF Standiford Taylor T Muñoz Rodrigo R Strand Eric A EA Marzano David A DA Ogburn Tony T Major Carol A CA Cox Susan S Hammoud Maya M MM

Journal of surgical education 20200914 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine 2020 residency cycle application practices and to model potential consequences in the 2021 cycle if (1) applicants scheduled an uncapped number of interviews; (2) applicants were capped to schedule 12 interviews; (3) residency programs kept their number of interview offers unchanged; and (4) programs increased their interview offers by 20%.<h4>Design and setting</h4>The authors sent an anonymous survey to all obstetrics and gynecology applicants registered through ...[more]

PMID: 32943370

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMedical training programs candidate's interview is an integral part of the residency matching process. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, conducting these interviews was challenging due to infection prevention restrains (social distancing, namely) and travel restrictions. E-interviews were implemented by the Saudi Commission for Healthcare Specialties (SCFHS) since the matching cycle of March 2020 to hold the interviews in a safer virtual environment while maintaining the same matching quality and standards.AimThis study was conducted to assess the medical training residency program applicants' satisfaction, stress, and other perspectives for the (SCFHS) March 2020 Matching-cycle conducted through an urgently implemented E-interviews process.MethodA cross-sectional, nationwide survey (Additional file 1) was sent to 4153 residency-nominated applicants to the (SCFHS) March 2020 cycle.ResultsAmong the 510 candidates who responded, 62.2% applied for medical specialties, 20.2% applied for surgical specialties, and 17.6% applied for critical care and emergency specialties. Most respondents (61.2%) never had previous experience with web-based video conferences. Most respondents (80.2%) used the Zoom application to conduct the current E-interviews, whereas only 15.9% used the FaceTime application. 63.3% of the respondents preferred E-interviews over in-person interviews, and 60.6% rated their experience as very good or excellent. 75.7% of the respondents agreed that all their residency program queries were adequately addressed during the E-interviews. At the same time, 52.2% of them agreed that E-interviews allowed them to represent themselves accurately. 28.2% felt no stress at all with their E-interviews experience, while 41.2% felt little stressed and only 8.2% felt highly stressed. The factors that were independently and inversely associated with applicants' level of stress with E-interviews experience were their ability to represent themselves during the interviews (p = 0.001), cost-savings (p < 0.001), their overall rating of the E-interviews quality (p = 0.007) and the speed of the internet connection (p < 0.006).ConclusionVideoconferencing was implemented on an urgent basis during the COVID-19 pandemic in the medical residency application process in Saudi Arabia. It was perceived as an adequate and promising tool to replace in-person interviews in the future. Applicants' satisfaction was mainly driven by good organization, cost-saving, and their ability to present themselves. Future studies to enhance this experience are warranted.

Dataset Information

The Case for Capping Residency Interviews.

Publications

The Case for Capping Residency Interviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets