探讨同行推荐信在外科住院医师申请整体审查中的价值:一项质性研究。

Caitlin Silvestri, Viemma Nwigwe, Subhash Krishnamoorthy, Cary B Aarons
{"title":"探讨同行推荐信在外科住院医师申请整体审查中的价值:一项质性研究。","authors":"Caitlin Silvestri, Viemma Nwigwe, Subhash Krishnamoorthy, Cary B Aarons","doi":"10.1016/j.jsurg.2025.103580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Residency applications rely on traditional letters of recommendation (tLORs) from faculty or mentors to evaluate applicants. However, interpretation of tLORs can be limited by potential biases, overuse of hyperbolic language, and a lack of longitudinal contact. We aimed to assess whether incorporating peer letters of recommendation (pLORs) would add a complementary perspective to the holistic review of an applicant's attributes and potential.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>All applicants to a single, university-based general surgery residency program were invited to submit an optional pLOR in the 2023 to 2024 recruitment cycle. Thematic analysis of applicants' pLORs and tLORs was performed to identify patterns and sentiments.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large general surgery residency program at a single, tertiary academic center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Applicants selected for an interview for a general surgery residency program who submitted a pLOR in addition to their tLORs (n = 95).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-five applicants (78%) selected for interview submitted a pLOR along with their standard application to the categorical (n = 77) and preliminary (n = 18) tracks. Peer letter writers knew applicants for an average of 6.14 years (SD 4.7). Thematic analysis identified notable differences in pLORs: (1) peer letter writers more often evaluated applicants across diverse settings (professional and personal) over longer time periods, (2) pLORs placed greater emphasis on the applicants' impact on others (peers, individuals, patients), and (3) provided more specific, tangible examples of each positive attribute. Lastly, pLORs summative assessments often included personal language while tLORs tended to stratify applicants using percentiles or coded language.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peer letters of recommendation offer a unique, complementary perspective in the holistic residency application review process. Compared with traditional letters, pLORs provide a richer context of an applicant's impact in a community of their peers, more often providing tangible examples. This perspective is crucial for evaluating applicants as we build diverse and collaborative learning communities each year.</p>","PeriodicalId":94109,"journal":{"name":"Journal of surgical education","volume":" ","pages":"103580"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Value of Peer Letters of Recommendation in the Holistic Review of Surgery Residency Applications: A Qualitative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin Silvestri, Viemma Nwigwe, Subhash Krishnamoorthy, Cary B Aarons\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jsurg.2025.103580\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Residency applications rely on traditional letters of recommendation (tLORs) from faculty or mentors to evaluate applicants. However, interpretation of tLORs can be limited by potential biases, overuse of hyperbolic language, and a lack of longitudinal contact. We aimed to assess whether incorporating peer letters of recommendation (pLORs) would add a complementary perspective to the holistic review of an applicant's attributes and potential.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>All applicants to a single, university-based general surgery residency program were invited to submit an optional pLOR in the 2023 to 2024 recruitment cycle. Thematic analysis of applicants' pLORs and tLORs was performed to identify patterns and sentiments.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large general surgery residency program at a single, tertiary academic center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Applicants selected for an interview for a general surgery residency program who submitted a pLOR in addition to their tLORs (n = 95).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-five applicants (78%) selected for interview submitted a pLOR along with their standard application to the categorical (n = 77) and preliminary (n = 18) tracks. Peer letter writers knew applicants for an average of 6.14 years (SD 4.7). Thematic analysis identified notable differences in pLORs: (1) peer letter writers more often evaluated applicants across diverse settings (professional and personal) over longer time periods, (2) pLORs placed greater emphasis on the applicants' impact on others (peers, individuals, patients), and (3) provided more specific, tangible examples of each positive attribute. Lastly, pLORs summative assessments often included personal language while tLORs tended to stratify applicants using percentiles or coded language.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Peer letters of recommendation offer a unique, complementary perspective in the holistic residency application review process. Compared with traditional letters, pLORs provide a richer context of an applicant's impact in a community of their peers, more often providing tangible examples. This perspective is crucial for evaluating applicants as we build diverse and collaborative learning communities each year.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of surgical education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"103580\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-16\",\"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.2025.103580\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of surgical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2025.103580","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:住院医师申请依靠传统的教师或导师的推荐信(tlor)来评估申请人。然而,对tlor的解释可能受到潜在偏见、过度使用夸张语言和缺乏纵向接触的限制。我们的目的是评估纳入同行推荐信(plor)是否会为全面评估申请人的属性和潜力增加一个补充的视角。设计:所有申请单一大学普外科住院医师项目的申请人都被邀请在2023年至2024年的招聘周期中提交一份可选的pLOR。对申请人的plor和tlor进行专题分析,以确定模式和情绪。环境:大型普通外科住院医师计划在一个单一的,三级学术中心。参与者:被选中参加普外科住院医师项目面试的申请人,他们在tlor之外提交了pLOR (n = 95)。结果:95名被选中参加面试的申请人(78%)将pLOR连同他们的标准申请一起提交到分类(n = 77)和初步(n = 18)轨道。同行写信者认识申请人的平均时间为6.14年(标准差为4.7)。专题分析发现了plor的显著差异:(1)同行信函作者更经常在不同的环境(专业和个人)中评估申请人,时间更长;(2)plor更强调申请人对他人(同行,个人,患者)的影响;(3)提供更具体,有形的例子来说明每个积极属性。最后,plor总结性评估通常包括个人语言,而tlor倾向于使用百分位数或编码语言对申请人进行分层。结论:同行推荐信在整体住院医师申请审查过程中提供了一个独特的,互补的视角。与传统信件相比,plor提供了申请人在同龄人社区中影响的更丰富的背景,更经常提供切实的例子。这种观点对于评估申请人至关重要,因为我们每年都会建立多元化和协作学习社区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring the Value of Peer Letters of Recommendation in the Holistic Review of Surgery Residency Applications: A Qualitative Study.

Objective: Residency applications rely on traditional letters of recommendation (tLORs) from faculty or mentors to evaluate applicants. However, interpretation of tLORs can be limited by potential biases, overuse of hyperbolic language, and a lack of longitudinal contact. We aimed to assess whether incorporating peer letters of recommendation (pLORs) would add a complementary perspective to the holistic review of an applicant's attributes and potential.

Design: All applicants to a single, university-based general surgery residency program were invited to submit an optional pLOR in the 2023 to 2024 recruitment cycle. Thematic analysis of applicants' pLORs and tLORs was performed to identify patterns and sentiments.

Setting: Large general surgery residency program at a single, tertiary academic center.

Participants: Applicants selected for an interview for a general surgery residency program who submitted a pLOR in addition to their tLORs (n = 95).

Results: Ninety-five applicants (78%) selected for interview submitted a pLOR along with their standard application to the categorical (n = 77) and preliminary (n = 18) tracks. Peer letter writers knew applicants for an average of 6.14 years (SD 4.7). Thematic analysis identified notable differences in pLORs: (1) peer letter writers more often evaluated applicants across diverse settings (professional and personal) over longer time periods, (2) pLORs placed greater emphasis on the applicants' impact on others (peers, individuals, patients), and (3) provided more specific, tangible examples of each positive attribute. Lastly, pLORs summative assessments often included personal language while tLORs tended to stratify applicants using percentiles or coded language.

Conclusion: Peer letters of recommendation offer a unique, complementary perspective in the holistic residency application review process. Compared with traditional letters, pLORs provide a richer context of an applicant's impact in a community of their peers, more often providing tangible examples. This perspective is crucial for evaluating applicants as we build diverse and collaborative learning communities each year.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信