Dataset Information

Council of emergency medicine residency directors standardized letter of recommendation writers' questionnaire.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) Standardized Letter of Recommendation (SLOR) has become the primary tool used by emergency medicine (EM) faculty to evaluate residency candidates. A survey was created to describe the training, beliefs, and usage patterns of SLOR writers. METHODS: The SLOR Task Force created the survey, which was circulated to the CORD listserv in 2012. RESULTS: Forty-six percent of CORD members (320 of 695) completed the survey. Of the respondents, 39% (125 of 320) had fewer than 5 years of experience writing SLOR letters. Most were aware of published guidelines, and most reported they learned how to write a SLOR on their own (67.4%, 182 of 270). Sixty-eight percent (176 of 258) admitted to not following the instructions for certain questions. Self-reported grade inflation occurred "rarely" 36% (97 of 269) of the time and not at all 40% (107 of 269) of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The CORD SLOR has become the primary tool used by EM faculty to evaluate candidates applying for residency in EM. The SLOR has been in use in the EM community for 16 years. However, our study has identified some problems with its use. Those issues may be overcome with a revised format for the SLOR and with faculty training in the writing and use of this document.

SUBMITTER: Hegarty CB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4054731 | biostudies-other | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHistorically, there have been no systematic programs for teaching peer review, leaving trainees to learn by trial and error. Recently, a number of publications have advocated for programs where experienced reviewers mentor trainees to more efficiently acquire this knowledge.ObjectiveOur goal was to develop an introductory learning experience that intentionally fosters peer-review skills.MethodsThe Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD) offered education fellowship directors the opportunity to mentor their fellows by reviewing submitted manuscript(s) supplemented by educational material provided by their journal. Reviews were collaboratively created. The decision letter that was sent to manuscript authors was also sent to the mentees; it included all reviewers' and editor's comments, as feedback. In 2022, fellows received a post-experience survey regarding prior experiences and their perspectives of the mentored peer-review experience.ResultsFrom 2020-2022, participation grew from 14 to 30 education fellowships, providing 76 manuscript peer reviews. The 2022 survey-response rate of 87% (20/23) revealed that fellows were inexperienced in education scholarship prior to participation: 30% had authored an education paper, and 10% had performed peer review of an education manuscript. Overall, participants were enthusiastic about the program and anxious to participate the following year. In addition, participants identified a number of benefits of the mentored experience including improved understanding of the scholarship process; informing fellows' scholarly pursuits; improved conceptualization of concepts learned elsewhere in training; and learning through exposure to scholarship.ConclusionThis program's early findings suggest that collaboration between academic societies and interested graduate medical education faculty has the potential to formalize the process of learning peer review, benefitting all involved stakeholders.

Project description:ObjectivesThe standardized letter of evaluation (SLOE) in emergency medicine (EM) is a widely used metric for determining interview invitations and ranking of candidates. Previous research has questioned the validity of certain sections of the SLOE. However, there remains a paucity of literature on the qualifications for EM section, which evaluates seven attributes of applicants. The aim of this study was to determine the correlation between the qualifications questions and grades, global assessment, and anticipated rank list position for EM applicants.MethodsA multi-institutional cross-sectional study was performed using SLOEs from applicants to three geographically distinct U.S. EM residency programs during the 2019-2020 application cycle. We abstracted EM rotation grade, qualifications scores, global assessment, and anticipated rank list position from the SLOEs. A Spearman correlation was calculated between each of the qualifications scores and the applicant's grades, global assessment, and anticipated rank list position in a pairwise fashion.ResultsIn total, 2,106 unique applicants (4,939 SLOEs) were included. Of the seven qualifications for EM questions, three were moderately to strongly correlated with global assessment and anticipated rank list position: "ability to develop and justify an appropriate differential and a cohesive treatment plan" (ρ = 0.65 and ρ = 0.63, respectively; p < 0.001), "how much guidance do you predict this applicant will need during residency?" (ρ = 0.68 and ρ = 0.68, respectively; p < 0.001), and "what is your prediction of success for the applicant?" (ρ = 0.69 and ρ = 0.69, respectively; p < 0.001). There was no strong correlation between the seven qualifications and grades.ConclusionsThere was a moderate to strong correlation between three of seven qualifications for EM questions (ability to develop and justify a differential and develop a cohesive plan, anticipated need for the amount of guidance, and prediction of success) with both global assessment and anticipated rank list position, suggesting that these qualifications may provide the most useful data to residency selection while some of the other factors may not be needed.

Dataset Information

Council of emergency medicine residency directors standardized letter of recommendation writers' questionnaire.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets