关于外科亚专科住院医师遴选中申请和面试上限的观点。

Journal of surgical education Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-16 DOI:10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.04.007
Shwetha Mudalegundi, Marisa Clifton, Scott Lifchez, Dawn LaPorte, Saras Ramanathan, Ahmed H Sabit, Fasika Woreta
{"title":"关于外科亚专科住院医师遴选中申请和面试上限的观点。","authors":"Shwetha Mudalegundi, Marisa Clifton, Scott Lifchez, Dawn LaPorte, Saras Ramanathan, Ahmed H Sabit, Fasika Woreta","doi":"10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.04.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>With the advent of virtual interviews, the potential for interview hoarding by applicants became of greater concern due to lack of financial constraints associated with in-person interviewing. Simultaneously, the average number of applications submitted each year is rising. Currently there is no cap to the number of applications or interviews an applicant may complete when applying to residency, with the exception of ophthalmology with a cap of 15 interviews. No studies have assessed the applicants' perspectives on an application or interview cap. We assessed the attitudes of surgical subspecialty applicants towards capping, which may be useful when considering innovations in residency selection.</p><p><strong>Design/setting/participants: </strong>About 1841 applicants to the Johns Hopkins' ophthalmology, urology, plastic surgery, and orthopedic surgery residency programs from the 2022-2023 cycle were invited to respond to a 22-item questionnaire. Statistical analyses of aggregate data were conducted using R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 776/1841 (42%) responses, 288 (40%) were in support of an application cap, while 455 (63%) were in support of an interview cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), gender (p < 0.001), taking a gap year (p = 0.02), medical school region (p = 0.04), and number of interviews accepted off of a waitlist (p = 0.01) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an application cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), USMLE Step 1 score (p = 0.004), number of interviews (p < 0.001), and number of programs ranked (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an interview cap. Of those applicants who were in support of the respective caps they believed that on average a cap should consist of 48.1 (16.1) applications and 16.0 (8.0) interviews.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings highlight the desire for interview caps among the majority of applicants to surgical subspecialties and thus this innovation may be considered by other specialties in the era of virtual interviews.</p>","PeriodicalId":94109,"journal":{"name":"Journal of surgical education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspectives on Application and Interview Capping in Residency Selection of Surgical Subspecialties.\",\"authors\":\"Shwetha Mudalegundi, Marisa Clifton, Scott Lifchez, Dawn LaPorte, Saras Ramanathan, Ahmed H Sabit, Fasika Woreta\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.04.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>With the advent of virtual interviews, the potential for interview hoarding by applicants became of greater concern due to lack of financial constraints associated with in-person interviewing. Simultaneously, the average number of applications submitted each year is rising. Currently there is no cap to the number of applications or interviews an applicant may complete when applying to residency, with the exception of ophthalmology with a cap of 15 interviews. No studies have assessed the applicants' perspectives on an application or interview cap. We assessed the attitudes of surgical subspecialty applicants towards capping, which may be useful when considering innovations in residency selection.</p><p><strong>Design/setting/participants: </strong>About 1841 applicants to the Johns Hopkins' ophthalmology, urology, plastic surgery, and orthopedic surgery residency programs from the 2022-2023 cycle were invited to respond to a 22-item questionnaire. Statistical analyses of aggregate data were conducted using R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 776/1841 (42%) responses, 288 (40%) were in support of an application cap, while 455 (63%) were in support of an interview cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), gender (p < 0.001), taking a gap year (p = 0.02), medical school region (p = 0.04), and number of interviews accepted off of a waitlist (p = 0.01) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an application cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), USMLE Step 1 score (p = 0.004), number of interviews (p < 0.001), and number of programs ranked (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an interview cap. Of those applicants who were in support of the respective caps they believed that on average a cap should consist of 48.1 (16.1) applications and 16.0 (8.0) interviews.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings highlight the desire for interview caps among the majority of applicants to surgical subspecialties and thus this innovation may be considered by other specialties in the era of virtual interviews.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94109,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of surgical education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"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.2024.04.007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"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.2024.04.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:随着虚拟面试的出现,由于缺乏与面对面面试相关的财务限制,申请人囤积面试资料的可能性变得更加令人担忧。与此同时,每年提交的平均申请数量也在增加。目前,除了眼科的面试上限为 15 次外,申请住院医师培训时,申请人可完成的申请或面试次数没有上限。目前还没有研究对申请者对申请或面试上限的看法进行评估。我们评估了外科亚专科申请者对上限的态度,这可能有助于考虑住院医师遴选的创新:约翰霍普金斯大学眼科、泌尿科、整形外科和骨科住院医师培训项目2022-2023年周期的约1841名申请人受邀回答了一份包含22个项目的调查问卷。使用R.R.对汇总数据进行了统计分析:在776/1841(42%)份回复中,288(40%)份支持申请上限,455(63%)份支持面试上限。专业(p < 0.001)、性别(p < 0.001)、休学一年(p = 0.02)、医学院所在地区(p = 0.04)和从候补名单中接受面试的次数(p = 0.01)都与申请上限的意见差异有显著关联。专业 (p < 0.001)、USMLE 第 1 步分数 (p = 0.004)、面试次数 (p < 0.001) 和排名靠前的专业数量 (p < 0.001) 都与对面试上限的意见差异有显著关联。在支持相应上限的申请人中,他们认为平均上限应包括 48.1 (16.1) 份申请和 16.0 (8.0) 次面试:我们的研究结果表明,大多数外科亚专科的申请人都希望设置面试上限,因此在虚拟面试时代,其他专科也可以考虑这一创新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Perspectives on Application and Interview Capping in Residency Selection of Surgical Subspecialties.

Objective: With the advent of virtual interviews, the potential for interview hoarding by applicants became of greater concern due to lack of financial constraints associated with in-person interviewing. Simultaneously, the average number of applications submitted each year is rising. Currently there is no cap to the number of applications or interviews an applicant may complete when applying to residency, with the exception of ophthalmology with a cap of 15 interviews. No studies have assessed the applicants' perspectives on an application or interview cap. We assessed the attitudes of surgical subspecialty applicants towards capping, which may be useful when considering innovations in residency selection.

Design/setting/participants: About 1841 applicants to the Johns Hopkins' ophthalmology, urology, plastic surgery, and orthopedic surgery residency programs from the 2022-2023 cycle were invited to respond to a 22-item questionnaire. Statistical analyses of aggregate data were conducted using R.

Results: Of the 776/1841 (42%) responses, 288 (40%) were in support of an application cap, while 455 (63%) were in support of an interview cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), gender (p < 0.001), taking a gap year (p = 0.02), medical school region (p = 0.04), and number of interviews accepted off of a waitlist (p = 0.01) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an application cap. Specialty (p < 0.001), USMLE Step 1 score (p = 0.004), number of interviews (p < 0.001), and number of programs ranked (p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with a difference in opinion regarding an interview cap. Of those applicants who were in support of the respective caps they believed that on average a cap should consist of 48.1 (16.1) applications and 16.0 (8.0) interviews.

Conclusions: Our findings highlight the desire for interview caps among the majority of applicants to surgical subspecialties and thus this innovation may be considered by other specialties in the era of virtual interviews.

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
期刊最新文献
Perspectives on Application and Interview Capping in Residency Selection of Surgical Subspecialties. EHR-Driven Delivery of EPA Assessments Significantly Improves Participation. Kar Seva. Exploring Medical Students' Perceptions of Peer-to-Peer Interactions Related to Applying to a Surgical Residency. Development of a Competency Framework Defining Effective Surgical Educators.
×
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