Examining the Factors Influencing Applicants’ Placement on One General Surgery Program’s Rank Order List

Purpose Surgery residency applications include variables that determine an individual’s rank on a program’s match list. We performed this study to determine which residency application variables are the most impactful in creating our program’s rank order list. Methods We completed a retrospective examination of all interviewed applicants for the 2019 match. We recorded United States Medical Licensing Examinations (USMLE) step I and II scores, class quartile rank from the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE), Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership, geographic region, surgery clerkship grade, and grades on other clerkships. The MSPE and letters of recommendation were reviewed by two of the authors and assigned a score of 1 to 3, where 1 was weak and 3 was strong. The same two authors reviewed the assessments from each applicant’s interview and assigned a score from 1-5, where 1 was poor and 5 was excellent. Univariate analysis was performed, and the significant variables were used to construct an adjusted multivariate model with significance measured at P < .05. Results Univariate analysis for all 92 interviewed applicants demonstrated that USMLE step 2 scores ( P = .002), class quartile rank ( P = .004), AOA status ( P = .014), geographic location ( P < .001), letters of recommendation ( P < .001), and interview rating ( P < .001) were significant in predicting an applicant’s position on the rank list. On multivariate analysis only USMLE step 2 ( P = .018) and interview ( P < .001) remained significant. Conclusion USMLE step 2 and an excellent interview were the most important factors in constructing our rank order list. Applicants with a demonstrated strong clinical fund of knowledge that develop a rapport with our faculty and residents receive the highest level of consideration for our program.

The Relationship Between Applicant Gender and Internal Medicine Residency Interview Scores

ABSTRACT Background Gender inequity is widespread in academic medicine, including in the promotion, academic recognition, and compensation of female faculty. Objective To assess whether these inequities extend to the GME intern selection process, this study examines differences in the interview scores assigned to male and female applicants at one large internal medicine residency program. Methods Subjects include 1399 applicants who completed 3099 interviews for internship positions for the Brigham and Women's Hospital internal medicine residency in Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) cycles 2015–2016, 2017–2018, 2018–2019, and 2019–2020. Unadjusted and multivariable linear regressions were used to assess the simultaneous effect of applicant gender, interviewer gender, and applicant academic characteristics on pre-interview, post-interview, and change in interview scores. Results Our analysis included 3027 interviews (97.7%) of 1359 applicants (97.1%). There were no statistically significant differences in the interview scores assigned to female versus male applicants. This was true across pre-interview scores (difference = 0.03, P = .61), post-interview scores (difference = 0.00, P = .98), and change in interview scores (difference = 0.01, P = .24) as well as when adjusting for the baseline academic characteristics of both male and female applicants. This was also true when analyzing individual application years, individual residency tracks, and accounting for the gender of the faculty interviewers. Conclusions The findings do not support the presence of gender inequity in the interview scores assigned to male and female applicants included in this study.

Mission-Based Filters in the Electronic Residency Application Service: Saving Time and Promoting Diversity

ABSTRACT Background Holistic review promotes diversity, but widespread implementation remains limited. Objective We aimed to develop a practical approach to incorporate holistic review principles in screening applicants in the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and to assess the impact on diversity. Methods Three residency programs (internal medicine [IM], pediatrics, and surgery) at McGovern Medical School developed filters to identify applicants with experiences/attributes aligned with the institutional mission. These filters were retroactively applied to each program's 2019–2020 applicant pool using built-in ERAS capabilities to group applicants by user-defined features. We compared the demographics of applicants reviewed during the cycle with those identified retrospectively through experiences/attributes filters. Results The IM, pediatrics, and surgery programs received 3527, 1341, and 1313 applications, respectively, in 2019–2020. Retrospective use of experiences/attributes filters, without scores, narrowed the IM applicant pool for review to 1301 compared to 1323 applicants reviewed during actual recruitment, while the pediatrics filters identified 514 applicants compared to 384 at baseline. The surgery filters resulted in 582 applicants, but data were missing for baseline comparison. Compared to the baseline screening approach utilizing scores, mission-based filters increased the proportions of underrepresented in medicine applicants selected for review in IM (54.8% [95% CI 52.1–57.5] vs 22.7% [20.4–24.9], P &lt; .0001) and pediatrics (63.2% [95% CI 59.1–67.4] vs 25.3% [20.9–29.6], P &lt; .0001). Conclusions Program directors can leverage existing ERAS features to conduct application screening in alignment with holistic review principles. Widespread implementation could have important repercussions for enhancing physician workforce diversity.

Applying to residency: survey of neurosurgical residency applicants on virtual recruitment during COVID-19

OBJECTIVE The COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant disruption to residency recruitment, including a sudden, comprehensive transition to virtual interviews. The authors sought to characterize applicant experiences and perceptions concerning the change in the application, interview, and match process for neurological surgery residency during the 2020–2021 recruitment cycle. METHODS A national survey of neurosurgical residency applicants from the 2020–2021 application cycle was performed. This survey was developed in cooperation with the Society of Neurological Surgeons (SNS) and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Young Neurosurgeons Committee (YNC) and sent to all applicants (n = 280) who included academic video submissions to the SNS repository as part of their application package. These 280 applicants accounted for 69.6% of the total 402 neurosurgical applicants this year. RESULTS Nearly half of the applicants responded to the survey (44.3%, 124 of 280). Applicants favored additional reform of the interview scheduling process, including a centralized scheduling method, a set of standardized release dates for interview invitations, and interview caps for applicants. Less than 8% of students desired a virtual-only platform in the future, though the majority of applicants supported incorporating virtual interviews as part of the process to contain applicant costs and combining them with traditional in-person interview opportunities. Program culture and fit, as well as clinical and research opportunities in subspecialty areas, were the most important factors applicants used to rank programs. However, subjective program "fit" was deemed challenging to assess during virtual-only interviews. CONCLUSIONS Neurosurgery resident applicants identified standardized interview invitation release dates, centralized interview scheduling methods, caps on the number of interviews available to each candidate, and regulated opportunities for both virtual and in-person recruitment as measures that could significantly improve the applicant experience during and effectiveness of future neurosurgery residency application cycles. Applicants prioritized program culture and "fit" during recruitment, and a majority were open to incorporating virtual elements into future cycles to reduce costs while retaining in-person opportunities to gauge programs and their locations.

A Four-Week Otolaryngology Virtual Educational Curriculum for Prospective Applicants

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a suspension of visiting student rotations across the United States. For senior medical students applying into surgical subspecialties, such as otolaryngology, these away rotations serve a vital role in the residency application process. Prior to the pandemic, there was not a virtual alternative to in-person visiting student rotations for applicants. We developed a replicable and expandable program focused on helping prospective otolaryngology applicants (fourth-year medical students) gain exposure to the experiences typically offered via in-person rotations. The goal was to improve otolaryngology-specific knowledge and to help applicants demonstrate specific program interest, without the financial and logistical challenges associated with in-person away rotations.

Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study

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.

A National Survey Evaluating the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Students Pursuing Careers in Neurosurgery

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly disrupted medical education and the residency application process. Methods: We conducted a descriptive observational study in April 2020 of medical students and foreign medical graduates considering or pursuing careers in neurosurgery in the United States to examine the impact of the pandemic. Results: A total of 379 respondents from 67 medical schools completed the survey. Across all participants, 92% (n = 347) stopped in-person didactic education, and 43% (n = 161) experienced basic science and 44% (n = 167) clinical research delays. Sixty percent (n = 227) cited a negative impact on academic productivity. Among first year students, 18% (n = 17) were less likely to pursue a career in neurosurgery. Over half of second year and third year students were likely to delay taking the United States Medical Licensing Examination Steps I and II. Among third year students, 77% (n = 91) reported indefinite postponement of sub-internships, and 43% (n = 53) were unsatisfied with communication from external programs. Many fourth-year students (50%, n = 17) were graduating early to participate in COVID-19-related patient care. Top student-requested support activities included access to student-focused educational webinars and sessions at upcoming conferences. Conclusions: Medical students pursuing careers in neurosurgery faced unique academic, career, and personal challenges secondary to the pandemic. These challenges may become opportunities for new initiatives guided by professional organizations and residency programs.