The 2025 Urology Match: Results From the Society of Academic Urologists Program Director Survey.

IF 2 3区医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY

Urology Pub Date : 2025-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2025.09.043

Srinath-Reddi Pingle, Michael Creswell, Sarah Faris, Kirsten Greene, Christopher Keel, Lee Richstone, Mathew Sorensen, Simone Thavaseelan, Erica Traxel, Moben Mirza, Gina M Badalato

{"title":"The 2025 Urology Match: Results From the Society of Academic Urologists Program Director Survey.","authors":"Srinath-Reddi Pingle, Michael Creswell, Sarah Faris, Kirsten Greene, Christopher Keel, Lee Richstone, Mathew Sorensen, Simone Thavaseelan, Erica Traxel, Moben Mirza, Gina M Badalato","doi":"10.1016/j.urology.2025.09.043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To provide a comprehensive overview of the 2025 SAU program directors (PD) survey and their perspectives on key aspects of the SAU Urology Match.Methods: A survey consisting of 43 questions designed and distributed by the SAU was sent to all PDs in the 2025 SAU Urology Match. Descriptive analyses were performed on the responses, and qualitative themes were extracted from free-text answers.Results: 104 (61%) of PDs completed at least one survey question. In terms of interview modality, 43% offered virtual-only, 23% hybrid, and 34% in person-only. Cost was a key reason among those programs offering virtual/ hybrid formats, and applicant assessment was a main factor for programs offering the in-person option. A quarter of programs hosting in-person interviews provided hotel accommodations to mitigate applicant costs. Programs cited a lack of funding or institutional policies as factors in not providing financial incentives. Preference signals were used as a screening tool before application review by 76% of PDs, and 46% incorporated signals into the initial application review.Conclusion: The results provide a comprehensive overview of program directors' views on recent changes to the SAU Urology Match. The findings reveal variations in interview formats and the use of preference signaling, along with growing concerns about the financial burden linked to in-person interviews. These insights are valuable for informing future improvements to the SAU Urology Match.","PeriodicalId":23415,"journal":{"name":"Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2025.09.043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To provide a comprehensive overview of the 2025 SAU program directors (PD) survey and their perspectives on key aspects of the SAU Urology Match.

Methods: A survey consisting of 43 questions designed and distributed by the SAU was sent to all PDs in the 2025 SAU Urology Match. Descriptive analyses were performed on the responses, and qualitative themes were extracted from free-text answers.

Results: 104 (61%) of PDs completed at least one survey question. In terms of interview modality, 43% offered virtual-only, 23% hybrid, and 34% in person-only. Cost was a key reason among those programs offering virtual/ hybrid formats, and applicant assessment was a main factor for programs offering the in-person option. A quarter of programs hosting in-person interviews provided hotel accommodations to mitigate applicant costs. Programs cited a lack of funding or institutional policies as factors in not providing financial incentives. Preference signals were used as a screening tool before application review by 76% of PDs, and 46% incorporated signals into the initial application review.

Conclusion: The results provide a comprehensive overview of program directors' views on recent changes to the SAU Urology Match. The findings reveal variations in interview formats and the use of preference signaling, along with growing concerns about the financial burden linked to in-person interviews. These insights are valuable for informing future improvements to the SAU Urology Match.

查看原文本刊更多论文

2025泌尿科匹配：来自学术泌尿科医师协会项目主任调查的结果。

目的：提供2025年SAU项目主任（PD）调查的全面概述及其对SAU泌尿外科匹配关键方面的看法。方法：向2025年SAU泌尿外科比赛的所有pd发送由SAU设计和分发的43个问题的调查问卷。对回答进行描述性分析，并从自由文本回答中提取定性主题。结果：104名pd（61%）完成了至少一个调查问题。在面试方式方面，43%的人只提供虚拟面试，23%的人提供混合面试，34%的人只提供面对面面试。在那些提供虚拟/混合形式的项目中，成本是一个关键原因，而申请人评估是提供面对面选择的项目的主要因素。举办面对面面试的项目中，有四分之一提供酒店住宿，以降低申请人的费用。一些项目将缺乏资金或制度性政策列为没有提供财政激励的因素。76%的pd将偏好信号作为申请审查前的筛选工具，46%的pd将偏好信号纳入初始申请审查。结论：结果提供了项目主管对最近SAU泌尿外科匹配变化的看法的全面概述。调查结果揭示了面试形式的变化和偏好信号的使用，以及对与面对面面试相关的经济负担的日益担忧。这些见解对进一步改进SAU泌尿外科匹配具有重要意义。

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

Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

9.50%

发文量

716

审稿时长

59 days

期刊介绍： Urology is a monthly, peer–reviewed journal primarily for urologists, residents, interns, nephrologists, and other specialists interested in urology The mission of Urology®, the "Gold Journal," is to provide practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science information to physicians and researchers practicing the art of urology worldwide. Urology® publishes original articles relating to adult and pediatric clinical urology as well as to clinical and basic science research. Topics in Urology® include pediatrics, surgical oncology, radiology, pathology, erectile dysfunction, infertility, incontinence, transplantation, endourology, andrology, female urology, reconstructive surgery, and medical oncology, as well as relevant basic science issues. Special features include rapid communication of important timely issues, surgeon''s workshops, interesting case reports, surgical techniques, clinical and basic science review articles, guest editorials, letters to the editor, book reviews, and historical articles in urology.