scholarly journals A Narrative Review of the Evidence Supporting Factors Used by Residency Program Directors to Select Applicants for Interviews

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 268-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas D. Hartman ◽  
Cedric W. Lefebvre ◽  
David E. Manthey
Keyword(s):  
Residency Program ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Unprofessional Behavior ◽  
Predicting Success ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Residency Program Directors

ABSTRACT Background Residency applicants feel increasing pressure to maximize their chances of successfully matching into the program of their choice, and are applying to more programs than ever before. Objective In this narrative review, we examined the most common and highly rated factors used to select applicants for interviews. We also examined the literature surrounding those factors to illuminate the advantages and disadvantages of using them as differentiating elements in interviewee selection. Methods Using the 2018 NRMP Program Director Survey as a framework, we examined the last 10 years of literature to ascertain how residency directors are using these common factors to grant residency interviews, and whether these factors are predictive of success in residency. Results Residency program directors identified 12 factors that contribute substantially to the decision to invite applicants for interviews. Although United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 is often used as a comparative factor, most studies do not demonstrate its predictive value for resident performance, except in the case of test failure. We also found that structured letters of recommendation from within a specialty carry increased benefit when compared with generic letters. Failing USMLE Step 1 or 2 and unprofessional behavior predicted lower performance in residency. Conclusions We found that the evidence basis for the factors most commonly used by residency directors is decidedly mixed in terms of predicting success in residency and beyond. Given these limitations, program directors should be skeptical of making summative decisions based on any one factor.

scholarly journals Teaching Ethics and Professionalism: A National Survey of Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. e88-e94
Author(s):  
Alyssa M. Kretz ◽  
Jennifer E. deSante-Bertkau ◽  
Michael V. Boland ◽  
Xinxing Guo ◽  
Megan E. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Residency Program ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Optimal Strategies ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Global Evaluation ◽  
Teaching Ethics ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Unprofessional Behavior ◽  
Residency Program Directors ◽  
Trainee Competence

Abstract Background While ethics and professionalism are important components of graduate medical education, there is limited data about how ethics and professionalism curricula are taught or assessed in ophthalmology residency programs. Objective This study aimed to determine how U.S. ophthalmology residency programs teach and assess ethics and professionalism and explore trainee preparedness in these areas. Methods Directors from accredited U.S. ophthalmology residency programs completed an online survey about components of programs' ethics and professionalism teaching curricula, strategies for assessing competence, and trainee preparedness in these areas. Results Directors from 55 of 116 programs (46%) responded. The most common ethics and professionalism topics taught were informed consent (38/49, 78%) and risk management and litigation (38/49, 78%), respectively; most programs assessed trainee competence via 360-degree global evaluation (36/48, 75%). While most (46/48, 95%) respondents reported that their trainees were well or very well prepared at the time of graduation, 15 of 48 (31%) had prohibited a trainee from graduating or required remediation prior to graduation due to unethical or unprofessional conduct. Nearly every program (37/48, 98%) thought that it was very important to dedicate curricular time to teaching ethics and professionalism. Overall, 16 of 48 respondents (33%) felt that the time spent teaching these topics was too little. Conclusion Ophthalmology residency program directors recognized the importance of an ethics and professionalism curriculum. However, there was marked variation in teaching and assessment methods. Additional work is necessary to identify optimal strategies for teaching and assessing competence in these areas. In addition, a substantial number of trainees were prohibited from graduating or required remediation due to ethics and professionalism issues, suggesting an impact of unethical and unprofessional behavior on resident attrition.

Survey of residency program directors’ perceptions of nontraditional pharmacy residency applicants

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (21) ◽  
pp. 1788-1793
Author(s):  
Amanda J Khalil ◽  
Krutika N Mediwala ◽  
Meera Mehta ◽  
Amy J Yanicak ◽  
Jared S Ham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residency Program ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Pharmacy Practice ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Qualitative Assessment ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Residency Program Directors

Abstract Purpose The attitudes and expectations of residency program directors (RPDs) regarding nontraditional residency applicants (NTAs) were evaluated. Methods This was a cross-sectional, survey-based study targeting RPDs of American Society of Health-System Pharmacists–accredited residency programs. A 14-question survey requesting information related to demographics, perceptions of NTAs compared with traditional applicants, advantages and disadvantages of NTAs, and advice for NTAs was administered electronically to RPDs. The primary outcome of this study was to determine RPDs’ perceptions of NTAs as suitable residency candidates. The secondary outcome evaluated the rate of NTA acceptance into residency programs and a qualitative assessment of RPDs’ advice for NTAs. Results Of the 1,414 RPDs contacted to participate, 328 (23%) completed the survey. RPDs were primarily affiliated with postgraduate year 1 pharmacy practice (52%) or postgraduate year 2 specialty residencies (30%), and 35% reported having an NTA in their program. Most respondents (87%) reported that NTAs are given equal consideration relative to traditional residency applicants. RPDs rated work experience as the most important quality of an NTA, followed closely by the ability to work with others and teachability. Most (277 [85%]) RPDs agreed that NTAs should possess experiences beyond work experience, such as research, leadership, and community service. The biggest concern regarding NTAs was significant time since graduation prior to application. Conclusion The majority of RPDs did not perceive NTAs differently from traditional applicants in the selection process of prospective candidates.

Implications of Change to USMLE Step 1 Scoring for Otolaryngology Residency Programs

2020 ◽  
Vol 163 (5) ◽  
pp. 855-856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyne Kalyoussef ◽  
Aatin K. Dhanda ◽  
Boris Paskhover
Keyword(s):  
Medical Student ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Alpha Omega ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step

Otolaryngology is a competitive specialty, with 398 US seniors applying to an offered 328 positions in 2019. Recent changes to US Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 scoring raise many questions for both medical student applicants and program directors. Otolaryngologists are known to be collegial and thoughtful physicians. Focusing on other nonstandardized testing scores may help the specialty “reboot” and refocus on recruiting the best people, not just applicants with a high Step 1 score and Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status.

scholarly journals A comparison of orthopaedic surgery and internal medicine perceptions of USMLE Step 1 pass/fail scoring

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick Mun ◽  
Alyssa R. Scott ◽  
David Cui ◽  
Erik B. Lehman ◽  
Seong Ho Jeong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Extracurricular Activities ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Medical Schools ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Program Director ◽  
Personal Knowledge ◽  
Clinical Knowledge ◽  
Alpha Omega ◽  
Residency Program Directors

Abstract Background United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 will transition from numeric grading to pass/fail, sometime after January 2022. The aim of this study was to compare how program directors in orthopaedics and internal medicine perceive a pass/fail Step 1 will impact the residency application process. Methods A 27-item survey was distributed through REDCap to 161 U.S. orthopaedic residency program directors and 548 U.S. internal medicine residency program directors. Program director emails were obtained from the American Medical Association’s Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database. Results We received 58 (36.0%) orthopaedic and 125 (22.8%) internal medicine program director responses. The majority of both groups disagree with the change to pass/fail, and felt that the decision was not transparent. Both groups believe that the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exam and clerkship grades will take on more importance. Compared to internal medicine PDs, orthopaedic PDs were significantly more likely to emphasize research, letters of recommendation from known faculty, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, audition elective rotations, and personal knowledge of the applicant. Both groups believe that allopathic students from less prestigious medical schools, osteopathic students, and international medical graduates will be disadvantaged. Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors agree that medical schools should adopt a graded pre-clinical curriculum, and that there should be a cap on the number of residency applications a student can submit. Conclusion Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors disagree with the change of Step 1 to pass/fail. They also believe that this transition will make the match process more difficult, and disadvantage students from less highly-regarded medical schools. Both groups will rely more heavily on the Step 2 clinical knowledge exam score, but orthopaedics will place more importance on research, letters of recommendation, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, personal knowledge of the applicant, and audition electives.

scholarly journals Engage me: Will residency program directors listen?

2021 ◽  
pp. 102549
Author(s):  
Sruthi Selvakumar ◽  
Mark McKenney ◽  
Adel Elkbuli
Keyword(s):  
Residency Program ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Residency Program Directors

scholarly journals Non-cognitive factors predicting success in orthopedic surgery residency

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Valley ◽  
Christopher Camp ◽  
Brian Grawe
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Orthopedic Surgery ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Cognitive Factors ◽  
Class Rank ◽  
Surgical Residency ◽  
Predicting Success ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination

Admissions to orthopedic surgery is a highly competitive process. Traditionally measures such as United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, class rank, AOA status have been major determinants in the ranking process. However, these traditional objective measures show mixed correlation to clinical success in orthopedic surgery residency. There have been several studies on the cognitive factors and their correlation with success in residency. However, it is clear that residency requires more than objective cognition, emphasizing complex social interactions that are influenced by non-cognitive variables including personality, work ethic, etc. This review aims to summarize the current understanding of non-cognitive factors influencing performance in orthopaedic surgical residency.

scholarly journals Exploring Residency Program Directors, Preceptors, and Residents' Intentions to Participate in Multicenter Pediatric Pharmacy Resident Research Projects

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (7) ◽  
pp. 708-717
Author(s):  
Peter N. Johnson ◽  
Brittany Powers Shaddix ◽  
Brandi M. Weller ◽  
Alexandra Oschman ◽  
David George ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Groups ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Subjective Norms ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Resident Research ◽  
Salient Beliefs ◽  
Residency Program Directors

OBJECTIVE The purpose was to explore preceptors, residency program directors (RPDs), and residents' beliefs and intentions in participating in multicenter pediatric resident research projects (PRRPs). METHODS This exploratory qualitative study used the theory of planned behavior to explore beliefs, attitudes, and intentions toward participation in a multicenter PRRP. Two focus groups were formed: RPDs/preceptors and pharmacy residents. The primary objective was to identify attitudes/salient beliefs, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral controls regarding participation in multicenter PRRPs. The secondary objectives included identifying potential barriers and mitigation strategies for multicenter PRRPs. Descriptive statistics and a thematic analysis were performed. RESULTS The 2 focus groups included 24 participants: RPDs/preceptors (n = 16) and pharmacy residents (n = 8). The RPD/preceptor group had a mean of 7.4 ± 5.4 years of research experience; all residents had prior research experience as students. Participants shared and contrasted their salient beliefs, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control beliefs about logistical challenges, networking, mentoring, sample size, collaboration, workload, shared responsibilities for data collection and the institutional review board application, and resources associated with participation in multicenter PRRPs. Other items that participants felt were important were discussion of authorship order and dedicated research time for residents. CONCLUSIONS Participants provided favorable comments toward multicenter PRRPs but acknowledged some barriers. The resident, preceptor, and RPD intention to participate in multi-center PRRPs is very likely if they perceive this as an opportunity for increased networking and mentorship, increased likelihood of publication, enhanced research skill experience, and shared resources and responsibilities.

scholarly journals National survey of Canadian residents and program directors regarding parental leave during residency

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Willoughby ◽  
Marie Julien ◽  
Benjamin Rich Zendel ◽  
Vernon Curran
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Parental Leave ◽  
Average Duration ◽  
Program Directors ◽  
Work Hours ◽  
Medical Resident ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Residency Program Directors

Background: Despite the advantages of having a child as a medical resident, the transition back to residency after parental leave can be challenging. This study is the first to investigate this issue using a nation-wide Canadian sample of both residents and program directors. Method: A questionnaire was developed and made available online. Respondents included 437 female residents, 33 male residents, and 172 residency program directors. The mean length of parental leave was nine months for female residents and six weeks for male residents. Almost all female residents (97.5%) breastfed with an average duration of 12 months. The top challenges reported by residents were feeling guilty for being away from their family, long and unpredictable work hours, sleep deprivation, and finding time to study. When female residents and program directors were matched to both school and program (N = 99 pairs), there was no difference in the total number of challenges reported, but program directors reported offering significantly more accommodations than female residents reported being offered, t(196) = 13.06, p < .001. Results: Our data indicate there is a need for better communication between resident parents and program directors, as well as clear program-specific parental leave policies, particularly for supporting breastfeeding mothers as they return to work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document