Some Perceptions Differ, Match Outcomes Do Not: A Multisite Retrospective Cross-Sectional Comparison of Virtual vs. In-Person Recruitment.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of General Internal Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1007/s11606-024-08723-9
Anjali J Das, Anisha S Das, Scott D Rothenberger, Rachel A Bonnema, Kyle J Kent, Jennifer A Corbelli
{"title":"Some Perceptions Differ, Match Outcomes Do Not: A Multisite Retrospective Cross-Sectional Comparison of Virtual vs. In-Person Recruitment.","authors":"Anjali J Das, Anisha S Das, Scott D Rothenberger, Rachel A Bonnema, Kyle J Kent, Jennifer A Corbelli","doi":"10.1007/s11606-024-08723-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Virtual interviewing for residency provides considerable savings. Its impact on match outcomes remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evaluate the impact of virtual residency recruitment on program and applicant assessment and match outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey, September 2020-July 2021 PARTICIPANTS: Faculty interviewers and 2019 and 2020 PGY-1 classes at three academic internal medicine residencies.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Survey items rating effectiveness of interview format, preference for future interview format, and perceived impact on diversity.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>A total of 247/436 faculty (57%) interviewers responded. Faculty perceived that in-person interviews enhanced applicant assessment (3.23 ± 0.38, p < 0.01) and recruitment of the most qualified applicants (p < 0.01) but did not impact recruitment of a racially or gender diverse class (3.03 ± 0.99, p = 0.95 and 3.09 ± 0.76, p = 0.14 respectively). They also did not demonstrate a preference for future interview formats. A total of 259/364 matched applicants responded, corresponding to a 76% response rate in the in-person cohort and a 66% response rate for virtual. Trainees were equally likely to match at their top choice when interviewing virtually vs. in-person (p = 0.56), and racial/ethnic and gender composition of the incoming class also did not differ (p = 0.81 and p = 0.19 respectively). Trainees perceived many aspects of the institution were better assessed in-person, though the impact varied according to assessment domain. Trainees who interviewed in-person preferred in-person formats. Of those who interviewed virtually, 47% preferred virtual and 54% preferred in-person. There were no predictors of virtual preference for future interview formats.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Faculty and applicants who experienced virtual recruitment had no preference for future recruitment format. Virtual recruitment had no impact on the racial/gender diversity of matched classes or on applicants matching at their top-ranked institution. Institutions should consider the potential non-inferiority of virtual interviews with financial and other benefits when making decisions about future interview formats.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2910-2916"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11576668/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-08723-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Virtual interviewing for residency provides considerable savings. Its impact on match outcomes remains unclear.

Objective: Evaluate the impact of virtual residency recruitment on program and applicant assessment and match outcomes.

Design: Cross-sectional survey, September 2020-July 2021 PARTICIPANTS: Faculty interviewers and 2019 and 2020 PGY-1 classes at three academic internal medicine residencies.

Main measures: Survey items rating effectiveness of interview format, preference for future interview format, and perceived impact on diversity.

Key results: A total of 247/436 faculty (57%) interviewers responded. Faculty perceived that in-person interviews enhanced applicant assessment (3.23 ± 0.38, p < 0.01) and recruitment of the most qualified applicants (p < 0.01) but did not impact recruitment of a racially or gender diverse class (3.03 ± 0.99, p = 0.95 and 3.09 ± 0.76, p = 0.14 respectively). They also did not demonstrate a preference for future interview formats. A total of 259/364 matched applicants responded, corresponding to a 76% response rate in the in-person cohort and a 66% response rate for virtual. Trainees were equally likely to match at their top choice when interviewing virtually vs. in-person (p = 0.56), and racial/ethnic and gender composition of the incoming class also did not differ (p = 0.81 and p = 0.19 respectively). Trainees perceived many aspects of the institution were better assessed in-person, though the impact varied according to assessment domain. Trainees who interviewed in-person preferred in-person formats. Of those who interviewed virtually, 47% preferred virtual and 54% preferred in-person. There were no predictors of virtual preference for future interview formats.

Conclusions: Faculty and applicants who experienced virtual recruitment had no preference for future recruitment format. Virtual recruitment had no impact on the racial/gender diversity of matched classes or on applicants matching at their top-ranked institution. Institutions should consider the potential non-inferiority of virtual interviews with financial and other benefits when making decisions about future interview formats.

Abstract Image

观念不同,匹配结果却不同:虚拟招聘与亲自招聘的多站点回顾性横截面比较。
背景:住院医师虚拟面试可节省大量费用。其对匹配结果的影响仍不明确:评估虚拟住院医师招聘对项目和申请人评估以及匹配结果的影响:设计:横断面调查,2020 年 9 月至 2021 年 7 月:三个学术性内科住院医师培训机构的面试官和 2019 及 2020 年 PGY-1 班:主要测量指标: 对面试形式的有效性、对未来面试形式的偏好以及对多样性的影响进行评分的调查项目:共有 247/436 名教职员工(57%)对面试官做出了回应。教职员工认为,面对面面试加强了对申请人的评估(3.23 ± 0.38,p < 0.01)和对最合格申请人的招聘(p < 0.01),但并不影响种族或性别多元化班级的招聘(分别为 3.03 ± 0.99,p = 0.95 和 3.09 ± 0.76,p = 0.14)。他们也没有表现出对未来面试形式的偏好。共有 259/364 名匹配申请人做出了回复,其中面谈申请人的回复率为 76%,虚拟申请人的回复率为 66%。在虚拟面试与面对面面试中,受训者同样有可能匹配到自己的首选(p = 0.56),新生班级的种族/民族和性别构成也没有差异(p = 0.81 和 p = 0.19)。受训人员认为机构的许多方面在面谈时都能得到更好的评估,但不同的评估领域所产生的影响也不尽相同。参加面谈的学员更喜欢面谈形式。在虚拟面试的学员中,47%倾向于虚拟面试,54%倾向于面对面面试。对未来面试形式的虚拟偏好没有预测因素:结论:经历过虚拟招聘的教师和应聘者对未来的招聘形式没有偏好。虚拟招聘对匹配班级的种族/性别多样性没有影响,也不影响申请者与排名靠前的院校进行匹配。院校在决定未来的面试形式时,应考虑虚拟面试在经济和其他方面的潜在非劣势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Journal of General Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
749
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信