Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs in the United States conducted virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application season. As a result, programs and applicants may have relied more heavily on social media-based communication and dissemination of information.Objective
We sought to determine social media's impact on residency applicants during an entirely virtual application cycle.Methods
An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 465 eligible 2021 Match applicants at 4 University of California Schools of Medicine in the United States.Results
A total of 72 participants (15.5% of eligible respondents), applying to 16 specialties, responded. Of those who responded, 53% (n=38) reported following prospective residency accounts on social media, and 89% (n=34) of those respondents were positively or negatively influenced by these accounts. The top three digital methods by which applicants sought information about residency programs included the program website, digital conversations with residents and fellows of that program, and Instagram. Among respondents, 53% (n=38) attended virtual information sessions for prospective programs. A minority of applicants (n=19, 26%) adjusted the number of programs they applied to based on information found on social media, with most (n=14, 74%) increasing the number of programs to which they applied. Survey respondents ranked social media's effectiveness in allowing applicants to learn about programs at 6.7 (SD 2.1) on a visual analogue scale from 1-10. Most applicants (n=61, 86%) felt that programs should use social media in future application cycles even if they are nonvirtual.Conclusions
Social media appears to be an important tool for resident recruitment. Future studies should seek more information on its effect on later parts of the application cycle and the Match.
SUBMITTER: Naaseh A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8527380 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Owing to the coronavirus 2019 pandemic limiting both applicants and residency programs in their ability to connect in-person, it is likely that a shift toward virtual connections was made. We aimed to query applicants regarding their perspectives of orthopaedic residency program social media use. Furthermore, we aimed to quantify the number of orthopaedic surgery residency programs with active social media accounts. All applicants to a single orthopaedic surgery residency were surveyed regarding their perceptions of social media use by orthopaedic surgery residency programs. After this, we evaluated social media use by orthopaedic surgery residency programs. Of total, 54.3% of applicants indicated that an orthopaedic surgery residency program they followed on social media posted content that increased their interest in the program. Furthermore, 77.8% of the applicants believed that orthopaedic surgery residency programs should have social media accounts, specifically Instagram. Of the orthopaedic surgery residencies identified, 113 (58.9%) had Instagram, 84 (43.8%) had Twitter, and 21 (10.9%) had Facebook accounts. Applicants largely feel that orthopaedic surgery residencies should have social media accounts. Orthopaedic surgery residencies saw the value in connecting with students virtually, as shown by nearly 90% of the programs, with social media starting their accounts this year.
| S-EPMC8691490 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9927977 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7068667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGeneral surgery residency training programs adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic by going online instead of in-person, through virtual interviews, social media engagement, and virtual open houses. The impact of these virtual interactions is unknown. We sought to understand their effectiveness as per residency program directors and assistant program directors.Materials and methodsAn institutional review board approval was obtained to conduct this anonymous survey. A Qualtrics XM survey containing multiple-choice and short-answer questions was distributed to 590 residency program and assistant program directors through the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) listserv on July 6, July 13, and July 20.ResultsWe observed a response rate of approximately 11% across the 590 surgeons contacted. Nearly all (90%) respondents offered virtual preinterview interactions, primarily virtual open houses, virtual facility tours, and virtual question and answer (Q&A) sessions with residents and faculty; 48% of respondents were unsure of the utility of virtual interactions and the majority (54%) felt that virtual interaction limits a program's ability to evaluate applicants. Virtual Q&As were ranked to be the most effective interaction (7.6/10); 80% of respondents felt that visiting rotations were "somewhat important" to "very important," the two highest options available. In addition, 74% felt that applicants missed out on fully experiencing the program by forgoing these rotations. Most respondents (78%) noted that evaluation of applicants' preinterview did not change as a result of virtual interactions. Nearly half (48%) of the respondents offered more interview days due to the virtual format. A fifth (21%) of respondents stated that virtual interactions resulted in a change in the rank position of an applicant. Respondents ranked Twitter and Instagram higher in applicant engagement than Facebook. Factors that impacted interview or rank order list the most were late/absent step two CK scores (33%) and a lack of away rotations (31%), both being limitations largely due to the pandemic. With respect to future application cycles, most (71%) raised concerns regarding disparities between applicants applying in-person and virtually if both or either are offered.ConclusionsOur study suggests that program directors and associate program directors have reservations about the use of virtual interactions with applicants. Interestingly, these data suggest that visiting subinternships are useful for programs in evaluating applicants. This may encourage students to pursue rotations at other institutions at the expense of already-limited resources. It remains unclear whether virtual interactions will be used in the future, but respondents largely agreed that the virtual means of interacting with and disseminating information to the applicants of the 2020-2021 general surgery Match were a success.
| S-EPMC9749614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDue to the COVID-19 pandemic, most pharmacy residency programs changed to an all-virtual format for recruitment and interviews for the 2020-2021 application cycle. There are no data evaluating the experiences and perceptions of these changes from the perspective of pharmacy residency programs and applicants.MethodsAn electronic cross-sectional survey was distributed via email to post-graduate year 1 (PGY1) and post-graduate year 2 (PGY2) pharmacy residency programs and applicants across the Southeastern United States. Results have been reported according to the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research [EQUATOR] Network).Results142 residency applicants and 104 residency programs responded to the survey. Most respondents participated in virtual recruitment and interviews. In 2020-2021, less residency programs participated in local/regional showcases and personal placement services, but social media engagement increased. Of the applicants who responded, over half felt the need to apply to more programs during this application cycle, and a corresponding increase in applications were seen by residency programs. Residency interviews appeared shorter than previous years, and less programs offered an informal time to get to know the applicants. Overall, applicants and residency programs preferred on-site interviews, but both parties reported feeling confident creating rank lists after virtual interviews.ConclusionThese results highlight the impact of COVID-19 on residency recruitment and the interview process. Residency programs should implement feedback for improving the virtual experience, as able. The ongoing pandemic may affect the 2022-2023 application cycle, and pharmacy leadership organizations should consider developing guidance for applicants and residency programs on navigating another year of virtual events.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
| S-EPMC9350250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic modified the Residency Match process for fourth-year medical students. In-person away rotations were discouraged, interviews were virtual, and traditional factors used to rank programs were absent. Here, we compare survey results administered to both the 2020 and 2021 Match applicants to assess the influence of the pandemic on the radiation oncology (RO) Match process.MethodsAn institutional review board-approved prospective cross-sectional study was conducted. The 2020 and 2021 RO Match applicants at a large RO program were invited to participate. Descriptive summary statistics were assessed.ResultsThe 2020 and 2021 Matches each had 76 applicants complete the survey with response rates of 54% and 57%, respectively. The 2 groups were predominantly white, cisgender male, single, and without children. Whereas 11% of 2020 applicants did not complete away rotations, 45% of 2021 applicants did not. For 2021 Match applicants, 65% of away rotations were performed virtually, whereas 51% were not for medical school credit. Of the applicants, 84% were satisfied with virtual interviews and 72% felt cost savings were worth not having in-person interviews. Whereas 49% of Match 2020 applicants spent >$5000 in interview costs, 0% of the Match 2021 applicants did so, with 45% spending <$100. Postinterview communications from programs increased during the pandemic from 36% to 42% in 2020 Match and 2021 Match, respectively. Although program culture was the most common factor influencing 2021 Match applicants program rankings, half of applicants did not gain a sense of program culture during virtual interviews.ConclusionsWe found 2021 Match applicants completed fewer away rotations, were satisfied with virtual interviews/reduced costs, and did not gain a sense of program culture through virtual rotations/interviews despite it being the most important ranking factor reported. This study supports further exploration of virtual away rotations and virtual interviews moving forward beyond the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8555343 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC8170351 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLetters of recommendation (LORs) are historically an important, though subjective, component of the neurosurgery residency application process. Standardized LORs (SLORs) were introduced during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. The intent of SLORs is to allow objective comparison of applicants and to reduce bias.ObjectiveTo examine the utility of SLORs during this application cycle. We hypothesized that "grade inflation" and poor inter-rater reliability, as described by other specialties using SLORs, would limit the utility of SLORs in their current form.MethodsThis cross-sectional study analyzed all SLORs submitted to a single neurosurgery residency program over the 2020 to 2021 cycle. Data from 7 competency domains and the overall rating were recorded and stratified by academic category of letter writer. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using Krippendorff's alpha.ResultsOne or more SLORs was submitted as part of 298 of 393 applications (76%). Approximately 58.3% of letters written by neurosurgery chairpersons rated a given applicant as being within the top 5% across all competencies. Approximately 44.4% of program director letters similarly rated applicants as amongst the top 5%, while 73.2% and 81.4% of letters by other neurosurgeons and general surgery evaluators, respectively, rated applicants in the top 5%. Inter-rater reliability was poor (<0.33) in all rating categories, including overall (α = 0.18).ConclusionThe utility of the first iteration of SLORs in neurosurgery applications is undermined by significant "grade inflation" and poor inter-rater reliability. Improvements are necessary for SLORs if they are to provide meaningful information in future application cycles.
| S-EPMC8600167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Negative outcomes in emergency medicine (EM) programs use a disproportionate amount of educational resources to the detriment of other residents. We sought to determine if any applicant characteristics identifiable during the selection process are associated with negative outcomes during residency.Primary analysis consisted of looking at the association of each of the descriptors including resident characteristics and events during residency with a composite measure of negative outcomes. Components of the negative outcome composite were any formal remediation, failure to complete residency, or extension of residency.From a dataset of 260 residents who completed their residency over a 19-year period, 26 (10%) were osteopaths and 33 (13%) were international medical school graduates A leave of absence during medical school (p <.001), failure to send a thank-you note (p=.008), a failing score on United States Medical Licensing Examination Step I (p=.002), and a prior career in health (p=.034) were factors associated with greater likelihood of a negative outcome. All four residents with a "red flag" during their medicine clerkships experienced a negative outcome (p <.001)."Red flags" during EM clerkships, a leave of absence during medical school for any reason and failure to send post-interview thank-you notes may be associated with negative outcomes during an EM residency.
| S-EPMC5785175 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC5710552 | biostudies-literature