William Alexander Dalrymple, Robin Ulep, Jeffrey B Ratliff, Joseph Carrera, Alan Wang, James T Patrie, Andrew M Southerland
{"title":"Education Research: Has Video Killed the Interview Star?: A Survey of Current Neurology Residents on In-Person vs Virtual Residency Interviews.","authors":"William Alexander Dalrymple, Robin Ulep, Jeffrey B Ratliff, Joseph Carrera, Alan Wang, James T Patrie, Andrew M Southerland","doi":"10.1212/NE9.0000000000200161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The residency application process relies on interviews, which allow programs and applicants to assess one another. Historically, interviews were conducted in person at each program. With the advent of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, residency interviews shifted to a virtual format. Now, many specialties are choosing to return to in-person interviews. The objective of this study was to evaluate the resident perspective of virtual and in-person interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created a survey about various aspects of the residency interview process and distributed it to neurology residents in all years of training from 5 institutions across the United States. Because of the timing of survey distribution, some residents interviewed in-person while others interviewed virtually. We focused the survey on a few themes: number of applications, cost, and overall quality. Survey response data were analyzed using generalized linear models and by nonparametric methods for categorical data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 164 total residents among the 5 programs, 60 completed the survey; 25 (41.7%) interviewed in-person while 35 (58.3%) interviewed virtually. Applicants who interviewed virtually applied to more programs (38.2 ± 26.6 vs 20.7 ± 7.4, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and attended more interviews (15.4 ± 8.3 vs 11.6 ± 3.3) but received a lower percentage of interview offers (54.3% ± 23.0% vs 74.4% ± 19.8%). Applicants who interviewed in-person spent significantly more money (95% CI $2,000-3,500 vs $15-100) but were also more confident in their assessment of a program's culture (76.9% vs 17.1%) and location (56.0% vs 8.6%). When asked which method they would prefer, respondents chose the method that they were familiar with-96% of people who interviewed in-person would prefer in-person interviews while 68.6% of those who interviewed virtually would prefer virtual interviews (<i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There are multiple factors to consider when deciding on in-person or virtual residency interviews. In-person interviews are significantly more expensive and thus raise issues of equity but also provide better insight into the culture, location, and \"fit\" of programs and can help to reduce application burden. All these factors need to be considered before moving forward with a decision on residency interview formats for the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":520085,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Education","volume":"3 4","pages":"e200161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11694785/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/NE9.0000000000200161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: The residency application process relies on interviews, which allow programs and applicants to assess one another. Historically, interviews were conducted in person at each program. With the advent of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, residency interviews shifted to a virtual format. Now, many specialties are choosing to return to in-person interviews. The objective of this study was to evaluate the resident perspective of virtual and in-person interviews.
Methods: We created a survey about various aspects of the residency interview process and distributed it to neurology residents in all years of training from 5 institutions across the United States. Because of the timing of survey distribution, some residents interviewed in-person while others interviewed virtually. We focused the survey on a few themes: number of applications, cost, and overall quality. Survey response data were analyzed using generalized linear models and by nonparametric methods for categorical data.
Results: Of the 164 total residents among the 5 programs, 60 completed the survey; 25 (41.7%) interviewed in-person while 35 (58.3%) interviewed virtually. Applicants who interviewed virtually applied to more programs (38.2 ± 26.6 vs 20.7 ± 7.4, p < 0.001) and attended more interviews (15.4 ± 8.3 vs 11.6 ± 3.3) but received a lower percentage of interview offers (54.3% ± 23.0% vs 74.4% ± 19.8%). Applicants who interviewed in-person spent significantly more money (95% CI $2,000-3,500 vs $15-100) but were also more confident in their assessment of a program's culture (76.9% vs 17.1%) and location (56.0% vs 8.6%). When asked which method they would prefer, respondents chose the method that they were familiar with-96% of people who interviewed in-person would prefer in-person interviews while 68.6% of those who interviewed virtually would prefer virtual interviews (p < 0.001).
Discussion: There are multiple factors to consider when deciding on in-person or virtual residency interviews. In-person interviews are significantly more expensive and thus raise issues of equity but also provide better insight into the culture, location, and "fit" of programs and can help to reduce application burden. All these factors need to be considered before moving forward with a decision on residency interview formats for the future.
背景和目的:住院医师申请过程依赖于面试,这允许项目和申请人相互评估。从历史上看,每个项目的面试都是亲自进行的。随着2019年冠状病毒病大流行的到来,住院医师访谈转向了虚拟形式。现在,许多专业都选择了面对面面试。本研究的目的是评估住院医师对虚拟访谈和面对面访谈的看法。方法:我们对住院医师面试过程的各个方面进行了调查,并将其分发给来自美国5家机构的所有培训年的神经病学住院医师。由于调查分发时间的原因,一些居民进行了面对面访谈,而另一些居民进行了虚拟访谈。我们将调查重点放在几个主题上:应用程序的数量、成本和总体质量。调查响应数据采用广义线性模型和非参数方法对分类数据进行分析。结果:在5个项目的164名居民中,有60人完成了调查;25人(41.7%)接受了面谈,35人(58.3%)接受了虚拟面谈。虚拟面试的申请者申请了更多的项目(38.2±26.6 vs 20.7±7.4,p < 0.001),参加了更多的面试(15.4±8.3 vs 11.6±3.3),但获得面试机会的比例较低(54.3%±23.0% vs 74.4%±19.8%)。亲自面试的申请人花费的钱明显更多(95%置信区间为2000 - 3500美元对15-100美元),但他们对项目文化(76.9%对17.1%)和地点(56.0%对8.6%)的评估也更有信心。当被问及他们更喜欢哪种方法时,受访者选择了他们熟悉的方法——96%的面对面访谈的人更喜欢面对面访谈,而68.6%的虚拟访谈的人更喜欢虚拟访谈(p < 0.001)。讨论:在决定是亲自面试还是虚拟面试时,有很多因素需要考虑。面对面面试的成本要高得多,因此会引起公平问题,但也能让你更好地了解项目的文化、地点和“适合”程度,并有助于减轻申请负担。在决定未来住院医师面试的形式之前,所有这些因素都需要考虑。