An evaluation of physical medicine and rehabilitation accredited sports medicine fellowship websites

Pm & R Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1002/pmrj.13151
Michael Khalil, Elver S. Ho, Sophia Zweig, Sanjeev Agarwal
{"title":"An evaluation of physical medicine and rehabilitation accredited sports medicine fellowship websites","authors":"Michael Khalil, Elver S. Ho, Sophia Zweig, Sanjeev Agarwal","doi":"10.1002/pmrj.13151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundDue to the virtual format of fellowship applications, prospective physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) sports medicine fellowship applicants commonly rely upon fellowship website content to make decisions about applications. Studies have shown that information available to fellowship applicants on program websites is inadequate, and there is no standard for important components of sports medicine fellowship websites.ObjectiveTo determine what sports medicine fellowship program features PM&R residents, fellows, and attending physicians consider the most important to be listed on fellowship websites, as well as to assess the scope of information available on fellowship websites.DesignWe developed a 30‐item list of criteria that fell into categories of general information, fellowship education, recruitment, experience, and academic research. Survey participants were asked to rank the importance of those various items. We then assessed the 21 PM&R accredited sports medicine fellowship websites for the presence of these criteria.ParticipantsNinety‐six survey respondents composed of PM&R residents, current sports medicine fellows, and attendings.InterventionsNot applicable.Main Outcome Measure(s)Not applicable.ResultsItems ranked as most important were those in the categories of general information, fellowship experience, and fellowship recruitment. The most valued items were program location, program coordinator contact information, program length, specific requirements for applying, number of positions, types of procedures taught, and specific sites covered. Academic research items were ranked as least important.ConclusionsSurvey respondents identified many fellowship website items as important factors when applying to programs. Many of these items were not listed on fellowship websites, suggesting that adding these criteria to fellowship sites might benefit applicants. Our findings can be used to develop standardized criteria for important components of sports medicine fellowship websites to improve the application and recruitment process.","PeriodicalId":20287,"journal":{"name":"Pm & R","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pm & R","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundDue to the virtual format of fellowship applications, prospective physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) sports medicine fellowship applicants commonly rely upon fellowship website content to make decisions about applications. Studies have shown that information available to fellowship applicants on program websites is inadequate, and there is no standard for important components of sports medicine fellowship websites.ObjectiveTo determine what sports medicine fellowship program features PM&R residents, fellows, and attending physicians consider the most important to be listed on fellowship websites, as well as to assess the scope of information available on fellowship websites.DesignWe developed a 30‐item list of criteria that fell into categories of general information, fellowship education, recruitment, experience, and academic research. Survey participants were asked to rank the importance of those various items. We then assessed the 21 PM&R accredited sports medicine fellowship websites for the presence of these criteria.ParticipantsNinety‐six survey respondents composed of PM&R residents, current sports medicine fellows, and attendings.InterventionsNot applicable.Main Outcome Measure(s)Not applicable.ResultsItems ranked as most important were those in the categories of general information, fellowship experience, and fellowship recruitment. The most valued items were program location, program coordinator contact information, program length, specific requirements for applying, number of positions, types of procedures taught, and specific sites covered. Academic research items were ranked as least important.ConclusionsSurvey respondents identified many fellowship website items as important factors when applying to programs. Many of these items were not listed on fellowship websites, suggesting that adding these criteria to fellowship sites might benefit applicants. Our findings can be used to develop standardized criteria for important components of sports medicine fellowship websites to improve the application and recruitment process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
物理医学与康复认证运动医学研究金网站评估
背景由于研究金申请的虚拟形式,未来的物理医学与康复(PM&R)运动医学研究金申请者通常依赖研究金网站的内容来决定是否申请。研究表明,项目网站上提供给研究金申请者的信息并不充分,而且对于运动医学研究金网站的重要组成部分也没有标准。目的 确定PM&R住院医师、研究员和主治医师认为在研究金网站上列出运动医学研究金项目的哪些特征最为重要,并评估研究金网站上提供的信息范围。调查参与者被要求对这些项目的重要性进行排序。然后,我们对 21 个经 PM&R 认证的运动医学研究员网站进行了评估,以确定是否存在这些标准。最受重视的项目是项目地点、项目协调人联系信息、项目长度、申请的具体要求、职位数量、教授的程序类型以及涵盖的具体地点。结论调查对象认为许多奖学金网站项目是申请项目时的重要因素。其中许多项目并未在奖学金网站上列出,这表明在奖学金网站上增加这些标准可能会对申请者有利。我们的研究结果可用于制定运动医学研究金网站重要组成部分的标准化标准,以改进申请和招聘流程。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Academy News – September 2024 PM&R Spanish Translated Abstracts Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinical experiences: A narrative review of curricula and educational interventions Can blood‐flow restriction resistance training enhance remote strength transfer? A systematic review with meta‐analysis Creating and confirming observable professional activities (OPAs): A pilot study evaluating the feasibility of OPAs on a residency inpatient spinal cord injury rotation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1