Priorities in the Neurotology Fellowship Match: A Survey Study of Program Directors and Fellows

2018 ◽  
Vol 127 (9) ◽  
pp. 625-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Judge ◽  
Sameer A. Alvi ◽  
Kareem O. Tawfik
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Case Load ◽  
Surgical Exposure ◽  
Match Process ◽  
Operative Case ◽  
Letters Of Recommendation

Objectives: To ascertain motivations and priorities for neurotology fellowship applicants and program directors during the match process. Methods: Anonymous online survey distributed to 20 fellowship program directors and 40 current and incoming neurotology fellows. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the priorities of fellowship applicants and program directors in the match process. Results: Twenty-four of 40 (60%) current or incoming fellows and 14 of 20 (65%) program directors responded to the survey. Fellows rated surgical exposure and volume as their highest priorities. In addition to neurotology case load, fellows highly valued exposure to otologic surgery. Salary, call, and work/life balance were among the lowest rated factors among fellows. Program directors attached the highest priority to the applicant interview performance, followed by strength of letters of recommendation and quality of prior research. Ethnicity, sex, and likelihood of an applicant ranking a program highly were the lowest rated factors among program directors. Conclusion: Among neurotology fellows, operative case load and breadth of surgical exposure are highly valued components of accredited fellowship training. Among neurotology fellowship program directors, candidates’ performance during the fellowship interview appears to be highly valued, more so than the strength of applicants’ letters of recommendation or prior research credentials.

Molecular and Cytogenetic Education in Hematopathology Fellowship

2019 ◽  
Vol 152 (4) ◽  
pp. 438-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorinda A Soma ◽  
Alexandra E Kovach ◽  
Alexa J Siddon ◽  
Rose Beck ◽  
Sarah E Gibson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Raw Data ◽  
Education Committee ◽  
Cytogenetic Testing

Abstract Objectives Given the increased complexity of molecular and cytogenetic testing (MOL-CG), the Society for Hematopathology Education Committee (SH-EC) was interested in determining what the current expectations are for MOL-CG education in hematopathology (HP) fellowship training. Methods The SH-EC sent a questionnaire to HP fellowship program directors (HP-PDs) covering MOL-CG training curricula, test menus, faculty background, teaching, and sign-out roles. These findings were explored via a panel-based discussion at the 2018 SH-EC meeting for HP-PDs. Results HP fellows are expected to understand basic principles, nomenclature, and indications for and limitations of testing. Interpretation of common assays is within that scope, but not necessarily proficiency in technical troubleshooting of testing or analysis of complex raw data. Conclusions The consensus was that HP fellows should understand the components of MOL-CG testing necessary to incorporate those results into an accurate, clinically relevant, and integrated HP report.

scholarly journals Perceptions on Diversity in Cardiology: A Survey of Cardiology Fellowship Training Program Directors

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (17) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Lisa Crowley ◽  
Julie Damp ◽  
Melanie S. Sulistio ◽  
Kathryn Berlacher ◽  
Donna M. Polk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Training Program ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Rank List ◽  
Fellowship Training Program ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Diversity Enhancement

Background The lack of diversity in the cardiovascular physician workforce is thought to be an important driver of racial and sex disparities in cardiac care. Cardiology fellowship program directors play a critical role in shaping the cardiology workforce. Methods and Results To assess program directors’ perceptions about diversity and barriers to enhancing diversity, the authors conducted a survey of 513 fellowship program directors or associate directors from 193 unique adult cardiology fellowship training programs. The response rate was 21% of all individuals (110/513) representing 57% of US general adult cardiology training programs (110/193). While 69% of respondents endorsed the belief that diversity is a driver of excellence in health care, only 26% could quote 1 to 2 references to support this statement. Sixty‐three percent of respondents agreed that “our program is diverse already so diversity does not need to be increased.” Only 6% of respondents listed diversity as a top 3 priority when creating the cardiovascular fellowship rank list. Conclusions These findings suggest that while program directors generally believe that diversity enhances quality, they are less familiar with the literature that supports that contention and they may not share a unified definition of "diversity." This may result in diversity enhancement having a low priority. The authors propose several strategies to engage fellowship training program directors in efforts to diversify cardiology fellowship training programs.

scholarly journals The Impact of COVID-19 on Orthopedic Surgery Fellowship Training: A Survey of Fellowship Program Directors

2021 ◽  
pp. 155633162110120
Author(s):  
Braiden M. Heaps ◽  
Jeffrey R. Dugas ◽  
Orr Limpisvasti
Keyword(s):  
Patient Care ◽  
Orthopedic Surgery ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeons ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Impact

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a wide-reaching impact. Graduate medical education of orthopedic surgeons was not spared from the jarring changes. Purpose: We sought to survey fellowship program directors in the field of orthopedic surgery about how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the education of the 2019 to 2020 and 2020 to 2021 fellowship classes and the future of their programs. Methods: In October 2020, an 18-item survey was distributed by an official of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) to the specialty societies that govern fellowship training. Each specialty society then distributed the survey to its respective program directors. A reminder email was sent during the enrollment period. Each respondent was able to complete the survey once. Survey questions were grouped into 3 sections: general information about the fellowship training programs, the impact of COVID-19 on the 2019 to 2020 fellowship class, and the future impact of COVID-19 on the fellowship training programs. Results: Of the 564 accredited orthopedic surgery fellowship programs in the United States, 190 directors responded. Of these, 73.59% reported COVID-19 had a negative impact on the 2019 to 2020 fellowship class. A normal distribution of responses was found regarding didactic and academic learning, research, and mentorship opportunities. A majority of respondents said they believe that there will be no negative impact on patient care the fellows provide in the years to come. Conclusion: Orthopedic surgery fellowship program directors acknowledged that while there were negative effects to training in the pandemic, they did not think these would negatively affect patient care provided by 2019 to 2020 fellows in the short and medium term. They also reported positive outcomes from the experience of the pandemic, including new ways to educate fellows.

scholarly journals Optimizing the Implementation of Practice Improvement Modules in Training: Lessons from Educators

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Bernabeo ◽  
Sarah Hood ◽  
William Iobst ◽  
Eric Holmboe ◽  
Kelly Caverzagie
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Leadership Roles ◽  
Practice Improvement ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Sustainable Improvement ◽  
Common Activity ◽  
Fellowship Training Program

Abstract Background The American Board of Internal Medicine approved the use of Practice Improvement Modules (PIMs) to help training programs teach and assess practice-based learning and improvement (PBLI) and systems-based practice (SBP). Methods We surveyed individuals who ordered a PIM in a residency or fellowship training program between June 2006 and August 2009. The 43 programs that volunteered to participate completed a 30-minute anonymous online survey. Results Program directors or associate program directors led the PIM process in 30 programs (70%). Trainees' degrees of involvement in PIMs were highly variable between programs, and several respondents felt that trainees were either not sufficiently engaged or not engaged with enough consistency. The most common activity for trainee involvement was data collection through patient surveys or chart review, although only 17 programs (40%) provided protected time for this activity. Few trainees participated in higher level activities such as data analysis or identification for areas of improvement or were given leadership roles; yet most respondents reported that completing the PIM helped trainees learn basic principles of QI and develop competence in PBLI and SBP and that PIM completion improved the program's ability to develop QI initiatives and resulted in program or institutional improvements, including sustainable improvement in patient care. Most respondents reported that the outcome warranted the effort to complete PIMs. Conclusions PIMs may be a valuable but underused educational experience for trainees as well as training programs. Focusing on particular themes and facets of PIMs may facilitate implementation.

Fellowship Program Directors Perspectives on Fellowship Training

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 133 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. S64-S69 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. L. Freed ◽  
K. M. Dunham ◽  
L. M. Moran ◽  
L. Spera ◽  
G. A. McGuinness ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Program Directors ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Fellowship Program

scholarly journals Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Single-Board Hematology Training in the United States: A Program Director Survey

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3392-3392
Author(s):  
Rakhi P. Naik ◽  
Manuela Plazas Montana ◽  
Leslie S. Kersun ◽  
Srikanth Nagalla ◽  
Alfred I Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Program Director ◽  
Perceived Barriers ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Academic Settings ◽  
Fellowship Programs

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) offers separate board examinations for adult hematology and medical oncology, yet the vast majority of fellowship training programs in the United States are structured as combined hematology/oncology programs. Single-board hematology tracks or programs may help increase recruitment and retention in non-malignant hematology; however, the barriers and attitudes toward hematology-only fellowship programs are unknown. We administered a survey to ACGME-accredited hematology/oncology program directors to explore their perceptions toward training in non-malignant hematology and their attitudes toward single-board hematology training. METHODS: In collaboration with the ASH Medical Educators Institute, we developed an anonymous online survey with 30 multiple-choice and open-ended questions to characterize attitudes toward specialization in non-malignant hematology and to assess program director interest and perceived barriers toward single-board hematology training. The survey was electronically administered to program directors of active hematology/oncology fellowship programs in the United States (n=139) in March/April 2019 using Qualtrics software. RESULTS: Of the 139 program directors who received the survey, 90 (65% response rate) completed the survey. The majority of program directors characterized their institutions as academic (87%), with only 9 (10%) describing their programs as community-based. Seventy-eight (87%) program directors believed that there is a shortage of exclusive non-malignant hematologists in the United States, and 59% felt that training more fellows to practice exclusive non-malignant hematology could help address the shortage (Table 1). Jobs for for exclusive non-malignant hematologists were perceived to exist only in academic settings by 47 (52%) respondents. In terms of fellowship training, program directors reported that an average of 5% of fellows per program pursued a career largely or exclusively focused on non-malignant hematology. In addition, 39 (43%) program directors felt that fellows were dissuaded from pursuing a career exclusively in non-malignant hematology. Regarding single-board hematology training, 73% of program directors believe that hematology-only training is both necessary and sufficient for fellows specializing in non-malignant hematology. The most commonly perceived barriers to single-board hematology fellowship programs were: 1) concerns for job availability for single-board hematology trainees, 2) concerns about limiting the training option to hematology only, and 3) lack of interested applicants to the program (Table 2). If barriers were addressed, 37% of programs directors reported that they would be interested in implementing a single-board hematology track at their institution. CONCLUSIONS: Combined hematology/oncology fellowship training is nearly exclusive to the United States. Our survey demonstrates that the percentage of fellows specializing in non-malignant hematology is significantly low (5%), a number that remains unchanged compared to a prior ASH program director survey in 2003. Our results also suggest that programs directors are interested in training fellows in non-malignant hematology and that single-board hematology training is generally acceptable among program directors. It will be important to address perceived barriers to hematology-only programs in order to promote implementation. Disclosures Naik: Elsevier: Other: Content Editor. Nagalla:Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Post-Interview Communication in the Ophthalmology Match and Its Impact on Program Directors' Ranking of Applicants

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. e74-e78
Author(s):  
David Cui ◽  
Nicholas L. Behunin ◽  
Ingrid U. Scott ◽  
Heidi Luise Wingert
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Member ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Faculty Mentor ◽  
Match Process ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Faculty Mentors ◽  
Residency Match

Abstract Objective The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of post-interview communication (PIC) during the ophthalmology residency match process and its impact on program directors' (PD's) ranking of applicants. Design Prospective cross-sectional survey. Methods An anonymous, online survey was emailed to the PD of each ophthalmology residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Results Fifty-four percent (63/116) of PDs completed the survey. Eighty-five percent (54/63) of PDs received PIC from applicants or applicants' faculty mentors during the 2018 to 2019 application cycle; 62% (39/63) received PIC regarding >25% of applicants interviewed. Although 41% (26/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor known to the PD, only 3% (2/63) believed that applicants who did not have a faculty mentor conduct PIC on their behalf were disadvantaged. Fourteen percent (9/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor unknown to the PD, and 3% (2/63) reported they would likely rank an applicant higher as a result of PIC from the applicant. Conclusion There is a high prevalence of PIC during the ophthalmology residency match process. The potential impact of PIC on PDs' ranking of applicants varies according to whether the PIC is from a faculty member known to the PD, a faculty member unknown to the PD, or the applicant. This may disadvantage applicants without faculty mentors known to PDs.

scholarly journals A Survey of Training for Temporary Hemodialysis Catheter Insertion During Nephrology Fellowship in Canada: An Update

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 205435811987598
Author(s):  
Richard Hae ◽  
Daniel Samaha ◽  
Pierre-Antoine Brown ◽  
Rory McQuillan ◽  
Swapnil Hiremath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Fellowship Training ◽  
Catheter Insertion ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Hemodialysis Catheter ◽  
The Past ◽  
Mandatory Requirement ◽  
Simulation Based ◽  
Chi Squared

Background: Controversy exists as to whether the insertion of temporary hemodialysis catheters (THDCs) should remain a mandatory requirement of nephrology fellowship training in Canada. A survey conducted by our group in 2012 showed that many nephrology trainees reported inadequate training to achieve procedural competence. Objective: To determine the current practices and training of the insertion of THDCs in nephrology fellowship programs in Canada and how this has evolved since 2012. Design: A survey study was designed comprising the following sections: demographics, details regarding the number and types of THDCs inserted within the past 6 months of fellowship training, adherence to sterile techniques, the use of ultrasound guidance during THDC insertion, training for THDC insertion received before and during nephrology fellowship, and self-perceived adequacy of training and competence in THDC insertion. Setting: The survey was distributed by e-mail in May 2018 either directly or through Canadian nephrology training programs. Participants: Current trainees of Canadian adult nephrology training programs. Measurements: Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the summarized data. The means and interquartile ranges (IQRs) were used to summarize the number of THDC insertions performed, and the categorical data, including data on training and self-perceived competency, were reported using frequencies and percentages. A chi-squared test was used to evaluate the relationship between those who received simulation-based training and self-perceived confidence in either internal jugular or femoral catheter insertion. Methods: An online survey, available in both English and French, was distributed to all adult nephrology trainees in Canada in May 2018 either directly or through their respective programs. Results: Completed surveys were received from 46 of 136 nephrology trainees across Canada (34%). Of those who responded, the median (IQR) number of combined femoral and/or internal jugular THDCs inserted in the past 6 months of fellowship training was 3 (1-6). Eight respondents (17%) indicated that they had not inserted a THDC in the past 6 months. However, only 7 of 42 respondents (17%) indicated that they did not feel competent or adequately trained to perform either femoral or internal jugular THDC insertion. Limitations: Limitations of the study include participation of trainees at different stages of their training. Many trainees indicated that it was not a requirement to keep a formal log of their procedures performed and likely had recall bias when reporting their procedure details. Conclusions: Nephrology fellows in Canada are performing fewer THDC insertions compared to 2012 but report higher levels of self-perceived competence and better training. This may be as a result of significantly more simulation-based training. Our data suggest that training to procedural mastery using simulation-based techniques may be a path to ensuring adequate training for THDC insertion despite fewer procedures being performed during training.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document