Mary E Arthur, Nidhi Aggarwal, Steven Lewis, Nadine Odo
{"title":"面对面和虚拟麻醉学住院医师访谈的排名和匹配结果。","authors":"Mary E Arthur, Nidhi Aggarwal, Steven Lewis, Nadine Odo","doi":"10.46374/volxxiii_issue3_arthur","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For the 2019-2020 interview season, the anesthesia residency program at Augusta University offered candidates a choice between in-person (IP) and video conference (VC) interviews to accommodate a greater number of qualified candidates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The same applicant selection criteria were used for both interview types. However, we modified the informal interactions with residents, campus tours, and interview formats for VC interviews. We sought to compare the 2 methods by analyzing the respective costs, benefits, and match results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 159 candidates interviewed, we ranked 127 and matched with 12. The IP (n = 135) and VC (n = 24) groups were similar in gender distribution but not by the type of medical school, with more international medical graduates interviewing by VC than IP. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 interview types for being ranked (81% of IP, 71% of VC) or matched (6% of IP, 17% of VC). US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores and type of medical school did not affect the likelihood of being ranked or matched. Program costs per candidate were higher for the IP group ($431 for IP, $294 for VC).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our single-center study indicates that the interview type did not affect the likelihood of a candidate being ranked by or matched to our program. Further, VC interviews were more cost-effective and time-effective than IP interviews. Our findings suggest that VC interviews are a viable alternative and should be an option for residency interviews.</p>","PeriodicalId":75067,"journal":{"name":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","volume":"23 3","pages":"E664"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8489258/pdf/i2333-0406-23-3-arthur.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rank and Match Outcomes of In-person and Virtual Anesthesiology Residency Interviews.\",\"authors\":\"Mary E Arthur, Nidhi Aggarwal, Steven Lewis, Nadine Odo\",\"doi\":\"10.46374/volxxiii_issue3_arthur\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For the 2019-2020 interview season, the anesthesia residency program at Augusta University offered candidates a choice between in-person (IP) and video conference (VC) interviews to accommodate a greater number of qualified candidates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The same applicant selection criteria were used for both interview types. However, we modified the informal interactions with residents, campus tours, and interview formats for VC interviews. We sought to compare the 2 methods by analyzing the respective costs, benefits, and match results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 159 candidates interviewed, we ranked 127 and matched with 12. The IP (n = 135) and VC (n = 24) groups were similar in gender distribution but not by the type of medical school, with more international medical graduates interviewing by VC than IP. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 interview types for being ranked (81% of IP, 71% of VC) or matched (6% of IP, 17% of VC). US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores and type of medical school did not affect the likelihood of being ranked or matched. Program costs per candidate were higher for the IP group ($431 for IP, $294 for VC).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our single-center study indicates that the interview type did not affect the likelihood of a candidate being ranked by or matched to our program. Further, VC interviews were more cost-effective and time-effective than IP interviews. Our findings suggest that VC interviews are a viable alternative and should be an option for residency interviews.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"E664\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8489258/pdf/i2333-0406-23-3-arthur.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiii_issue3_arthur\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiii_issue3_arthur","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Rank and Match Outcomes of In-person and Virtual Anesthesiology Residency Interviews.
Background: For the 2019-2020 interview season, the anesthesia residency program at Augusta University offered candidates a choice between in-person (IP) and video conference (VC) interviews to accommodate a greater number of qualified candidates.
Methods: The same applicant selection criteria were used for both interview types. However, we modified the informal interactions with residents, campus tours, and interview formats for VC interviews. We sought to compare the 2 methods by analyzing the respective costs, benefits, and match results.
Results: Of 159 candidates interviewed, we ranked 127 and matched with 12. The IP (n = 135) and VC (n = 24) groups were similar in gender distribution but not by the type of medical school, with more international medical graduates interviewing by VC than IP. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 interview types for being ranked (81% of IP, 71% of VC) or matched (6% of IP, 17% of VC). US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 scores and type of medical school did not affect the likelihood of being ranked or matched. Program costs per candidate were higher for the IP group ($431 for IP, $294 for VC).
Conclusion: Our single-center study indicates that the interview type did not affect the likelihood of a candidate being ranked by or matched to our program. Further, VC interviews were more cost-effective and time-effective than IP interviews. Our findings suggest that VC interviews are a viable alternative and should be an option for residency interviews.