Shwetha Mudalegundi, Marisa Clifton, Scott Lifchez, Dawn LaPorte, Saras Ramanathan, Ahmed H Sabit, Fasika Woreta
{"title":"Perspectives on Application and Interview Capping in Residency Selection of Surgical Subspecialties.","authors":"Shwetha Mudalegundi, Marisa Clifton, Scott Lifchez, Dawn LaPorte, Saras Ramanathan, Ahmed H Sabit, Fasika Woreta","doi":"10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.04.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>With the advent of virtual interviews, the potential for interview hoarding by applicants became of greater concern due to lack of financial constraints associated with in-person interviewing. Simultaneously, the average number of applications submitted each year is rising. Currently there is no cap to the number of applications or interviews an applicant may complete when applying to residency, with the exception of ophthalmology with a cap of 15 interviews. No studies have assessed the applicants' perspectives on an application or interview cap. We assessed the attitudes of surgical subspecialty applicants towards capping, which may be useful when considering innovations in residency selection.</p><p><strong>Design/setting/participants: </strong>About 1841 applicants to the Johns Hopkins' ophthalmology, urology, plastic surgery, and orthopedic surgery residency programs from the 2022-2023 cycle were invited to respond to a 22-item questionnaire. Statistical analyses of aggregate data were conducted using R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 776/1841 (42%) responses, 288 (40%) were in support of an application cap, while 455 (63%) were in support of an interview cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), gender (p < 0.001), taking a gap year (p = 0.02), medical school region (p = 0.04), and number of interviews accepted off of a waitlist (p = 0.01) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an application cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), USMLE Step 1 score (p = 0.004), number of interviews (p < 0.001), and number of programs ranked (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an interview cap. Of those applicants who were in support of the respective caps they believed that on average a cap should consist of 48.1 (16.1) applications and 16.0 (8.0) interviews.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings highlight the desire for interview caps among the majority of applicants to surgical subspecialties and thus this innovation may be considered by other specialties in the era of virtual interviews.</p>","PeriodicalId":94109,"journal":{"name":"Journal of surgical education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of surgical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.04.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: With the advent of virtual interviews, the potential for interview hoarding by applicants became of greater concern due to lack of financial constraints associated with in-person interviewing. Simultaneously, the average number of applications submitted each year is rising. Currently there is no cap to the number of applications or interviews an applicant may complete when applying to residency, with the exception of ophthalmology with a cap of 15 interviews. No studies have assessed the applicants' perspectives on an application or interview cap. We assessed the attitudes of surgical subspecialty applicants towards capping, which may be useful when considering innovations in residency selection.
Design/setting/participants: About 1841 applicants to the Johns Hopkins' ophthalmology, urology, plastic surgery, and orthopedic surgery residency programs from the 2022-2023 cycle were invited to respond to a 22-item questionnaire. Statistical analyses of aggregate data were conducted using R.
Results: Of the 776/1841 (42%) responses, 288 (40%) were in support of an application cap, while 455 (63%) were in support of an interview cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), gender (p < 0.001), taking a gap year (p = 0.02), medical school region (p = 0.04), and number of interviews accepted off of a waitlist (p = 0.01) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an application cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), USMLE Step 1 score (p = 0.004), number of interviews (p < 0.001), and number of programs ranked (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an interview cap. Of those applicants who were in support of the respective caps they believed that on average a cap should consist of 48.1 (16.1) applications and 16.0 (8.0) interviews.
Conclusions: Our findings highlight the desire for interview caps among the majority of applicants to surgical subspecialties and thus this innovation may be considered by other specialties in the era of virtual interviews.