Impact of increased transparency in anaesthesia fellowship selection interviews: A comparative study.

Abstract

Fellowship selection interviews evaluate candidates' suitability for specialised anaesthesia training. Applicants are not commonly provided with specific details of questions or topics although these are often sourced from previous applicants. This study explored whether increased transparency in the interview process, by providing a list of discussion topics beforehand, impacts applicant performance and experience. Data from 91 applicant interviews over four years (2021-2024) were analysed. The traditional interview format was employed in 2021 and 2022. A novel format was introduced in 2023, in which applicants were provided with a list of 14 discussion topics 3 weeks before the interview. 2024 interviews reverted to the traditional format. Applicant performance was compared across the study period, with feedback collected from the 2023 cohort. No significant difference in mean interview scores or variance ratios was found between the novel and traditional formats, nor between local and non-local applicants. A total of 58.3% of applicants preferred the novel format, citing reduced anxiety and improved preparation. One-third preferred the traditional format, arguing that transparency might disadvantage those who typically prepare for interviews independently. Interviewer feedback indicated no perceived disadvantages from increased transparency, and probing questions effectively elicited detailed responses without making answers seem rehearsed. Providing applicants with interview topics in advance did not impact overall ratings but positively affected their experience by reducing anxiety and improving perceptions of the interview process. The findings support the implementation of transparency in selection interviews to enhance fairness and candidate experience without compromising the validity of the selection process.