Planning for Virtual Interviews: Residency Recruitment During a Pandemic

Examining the Aftermath of Virtual Interviewing on Surgical Residency Matches

INTRODUCTION

Residency interviews have traditionally been conducted in person; however, COVID-19 forced programs to shift to virtual interviewing. This study delineated the nationwide trends observed after virtual interviewing across multiple application cycles on both surgical residency applicant competitiveness and program workload.

METHODS

Publicly available National Residency Matching Program applicant and program data were retrospectively reviewed. Applicant competitiveness was assessed using a validated competitive index (# positions ranked/match rate). Interview types included in-person (2010-2020) or virtual (2021-2023), and programs were classified as general surgery (GS), surgical subspecialty (SS) - orthopedics, otolaryngology and neurosurgery, and integrated specialty (IS) - plastic, thoracic, and vascular surgery.

RESULTS

When comparing in-person to virtual cohorts, the competitive index has increased in GS (0.97 ± 0.00 to 1.05 ± 0.01, P < 0.001), SS (0.97 ± 0.02 to 1.06 ± 0.01 P < 0.001), and IS (0.93 ± 0.06 to 1.12 ± 0.03, P = 0.001). United Sates Medical Licensing Examination Step scores and research experiences increased over time in GS and SS (P < 0.05). Program workload, represented by number of applications received per program increased in GS, IS, and SS (P < 0.05), as well as the number of interviews conducted in GS and SS (P < 0.05). Importantly, match rate remained stable in GS and IS, with a decrease in SS (0.69 ± 0.03 to 0.63 ± 0.02, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The residency application process has been irrevocably changed due to COVID-19. The rise in applicant volume and competitiveness places unique strains on applicants and programs. Additional modifications such as signaling and ACGME guidance are needed to help alleviate strain and ensure that residents and programs alike find their best fit.

Comparing Perceptions of Virtual and In-Person Interviews: Results From a National Survey of Internal Medicine Residents

Background Since 2020, virtual interviews have become the typical way in which applicants assess residency programs. It is unknown whether the change from in-person to virtual interviews has been associated with changes in perceptions of the quality of information gathered by prospective applicants. Objective To ascertain perspectives on the satisfaction with, quality of, and accuracy of information gathered by internal medicine (IM) residency applicants from virtual and in-person interviews. Methods Twenty-nine thousand, seven hundred and seventy-six residents from US and Puerto Rico residency programs sitting for the 2022 American College of Physicians Internal Medicine In-Training Examination (IM-ITE) were surveyed. An optional, 5-question survey was administered at the end of the examination. Responses were analyzed based on interview format-virtual (postgraduate year [PGY]-1-2) or in-person (PGY-3)-and PGY. Results Of 29 776, 23 161 residents responded to the survey (77.8% response rate). Regardless of PGY, respondents reported a high degree of satisfaction with the quality of information gathered from their interview day, though there was a statistically significant difference between virtual and in-person [somewhat/very satisfied: In-person 5938 of 7410 (80.1%); 95% CI [79.2, 81.0] vs virtual 12 070 of 15 751 (76.6%); 95% CI [76.0, 77.3]:P<.001]. Residents in all PGYs reported sessions with residents and one-on-one interviews as the most important factors when creating their rank lists. Conclusions We found differences in satisfaction and perceptions of the quality of information gathered between IM residents who participated in virtual and in-person interviews. However, regardless of format, most respondents reported satisfaction with their interview experience.

Langhan ML. Virtual Interviews and the Pediatric Emergency Medicine Match Geography: A National Survey

Introduction

Virtual interviews (VI) are now a permanent part of pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) recruitment, especially given the cost and equity advantages. Yet inability to visit programs in person can impact decision-making, leading applicants to apply to more programs. Moreover, the cost advantages of VI may encourage applicants to apply to programs farther away than they might otherwise have been willing or able to travel. This could create unnecessary strain on programs. We conducted this study to determine whether PEM fellowship applicants would apply to a larger number of programs and in different geographic patterns with VI (2020 and 2021) as compared to in-person interviews (2018 and 2019).

Methods

We conducted an anonymous national survey of all PEM fellows comparing two cohorts: current fellows who interviewed inperson (applied in 2018/2019) and fellows who underwent VIs in 2020/2021 (current fellows and those recently matched in 2021). The study took place in March-April 2022. Questions focused on geographic considerations during interviews and the match. We used descriptive statistics, chi-square and t-tests for analysis.

Results

Overall response rate was 42% (231/550); 32% (n = 74) interviewed in person and 68% (n = 157) virtually. Fellows applied to a median of 4/6 geographic regions (interquartile range 2, 5). Most applied for fellowship both in the same region as residency (216, 93%) and outside (192, 83%). Only the Pacific region saw a statistically significant increase in applicants during VI (59.9% vs 43.2%, P = 0.02). There was no statistical difference in the number of programs applied to during in-person vs VI (mean difference (95% confidence interval 0.72, -2.8 - 4.2). A majority matched in their preferred state both during VI (60.4%) and in-person interviews (65.7%). The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.45).

Conclusion

While more PEM fellowship applicants applied outside the geographic area where their residency was and to the Pacific region, there was no overall increase in the number of programs or geographic areas PEM applicants applied to during VI as compared to in-person interview seasons. As this was the first two years of VI, ongoing data collection will further identify trends and the impactof VI.

The more things change the more they stay the same: Factors influencing emergency medicine residency selection in the virtual era

Background

Interviews for emergency medicine (EM) residency positions largely transitioned to a virtual-only format in 2020-2021. The impact of virtual interview factors on applicants' rank of programs is unknown.

Objective

We sought to assess the impact of modifiable factors in virtual interviews on applicants' rank of EM residency programs.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional mixed-methods survey of students applying to at least one of seven study authors' EM residency programs in the United States during the 2020-2021 application cycle. The survey was developed using an interactive Delphi process and piloted prior to implementation. The survey was administered from May to June 2021 with up to four email reminders. Quantitative analysis included descriptive statistics. Three authors performed a thematic qualitative analysis of free-text responses.

Results

A total of 664 of 2281 (29.1%) students completed the survey, including 335 (50.5%) male, 316 (47.7%) female, and six (0.9%) nonbinary. A total of 143 (21.6%) respondents identified as underrepresented in medicine and 84 (12.7%) identified as LGBTQIA+. Respondents participated in a median of 14 interviews and ranked a median of 14 programs. Most respondents (335, 50.6%) preferred a choice of in-person or virtual, while 183 (27.6%) preferred all in-person, and 144 (21.8%) preferred all virtual. The program website and interview social were the most important factors influencing respondent ranking. Qualitative analysis revealed several positive aspects of virtual interviews including logistical ease and comfort. Negative aspects include technical issues, perceived interview hoarding, and barriers to applicant assessment and performance. Demonstrated effort by the program, effective information delivery, communication of resident culture, and a well-implemented interview day positively influenced respondents' rank of programs.

Conclusions

This study identified characteristics of the virtual interview format that impact applicants' rank of programs. These results can inform future recruitment practices.

Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Impact the Caliber of Trainees Taken During Match 2021? A Survey of General Surgery Residency Program Directors

BACKGROUND

The cancellation of clinical rotations (CRs) and implementation of virtual interviews (VIs) profoundly affected the residency selection process leading up to the 2021 NRMP Match. The authors investigated how these changes influenced the caliber of applicants taken by general surgery (GS) residency programs from the perspectives of program directors (PDs).

METHODS

A 14 question, web-based electronic survey was emailed to PDs of ACGME-accredited GS residency programs. Questions sought program characteristics and PDs' perspectives regarding potential differences in subjective characteristics and clinical skills demonstrated by their 2021 Match class relative to previous resident classes.

RESULTS

A total of 75 PDs (27.2%) responded to our survey. Most respondents observed no changes in residents' fit with their program (72.0%), communication skills (68.0%), responsiveness to clinical instruction and feedback (73.3%), work ethic (73.3%), and rotation evaluations (68.0%). Only 21.3% of PDs believed that VIs negatively impacted their ability to accurately assess applicant intangibles. Conversely, 56.0% of PDs reported that the cancellation of CRs in 2020 negatively affected residents' clinical competency at the start of residency. At 1-year following the 2021 NRMP Match, 30.7% of PDs reported that the clinical skills exhibited by their 2021 Match class were poorer than previous resident classes.

DISCUSSION

Our findings suggest that VIs limited selection committees' ability to accurately assess applicant's subjective characteristics to a lesser degree than previously described in the literature. Canceled CRs adversely affected the 2021 Match Class's clinical skills at the start of residency and at 1 year following the 2021 NRMP Match.

Prospective Physician Assistant Student Perspectives on an In-Person vs. Virtual Admissions Interview Process

PURPOSE

The pandemic strained many usual methods of communication and training, forcing changes to selection processes for health professions programs. The purpose of this study was to determine, through interviewee feedback, the effectiveness of a virtual interview process when compared with a previous in-person interview process at one physician assistant (PA) program.

METHODS

During the pandemic, the PA program adapted to a virtual holistic interview process to include interaction with current students and faculty. The effectiveness of the virtual platform was measured comparatively using the program's existing interviewee evaluation format for previous in-person experiences.

RESULTS

Prepandemic data showed high ratings from interviewees regarding the interview process. Intrapandemic data suggest an interview process can be duplicated in a virtual format without compromising experience and goals of the program.

CONCLUSIONS

Through virtual interviews during a pandemic, the PA program mirrored the effectiveness of their previous in-person experience.

A novel use of an artificially intelligent Chatbot and a live, synchronous virtual question-and answer session for fellowship recruitment

INTRODUCTION

Academic departments universally communicate information about their programs using static websites. In addition to websites, some programs have even ventured out into social media (SM). These bidirectional forms of SM interaction show great promise; even hosting a live Question and Answer (Q&A) session has the potential for program branding. Artificial Intelligence (AI) usage in the form of a chatbot has expanded on websites and in SM. The potential use of chatbots, for the purposes of trainee recruitment, is novel and underutilized. With this pilot study, we aimed to answer the question; can the use of an Artificially Intelligent Chatbot and a Virtual Question-and-Answer Session aid in recruitment in a Post-COVID-19 era?

METHODS

We held three structured Question-and-Answer Sessions over a period of 2 weeks. This preliminary study was performed after completion of the three Q&A sessions, in March-May, 2021. All 258 applicants to the pain fellowship program were invited via email to participate in the survey after attending one of the Q&A sessions. A 16-item survey assessing participants' perception of the chatbot was administered.

RESULTS

Forty-eight pain fellowship applicants completed the survey, for an average response rate of 18.6%. In all, 35 (73%) of survey respondents had used the website chatbot, and 84% indicated that it had found them the information they were seeking.

CONCLUSION

We employed an artificially intelligent chatbot on the department website to engage in a bidirectional exchange with users to adapt to changes brought on by the pandemic. SM engagement via chatbot and Q&A sessions can leave a favorable impression and improve the perception of a program.

General Surgery Residency Virtual Recruitment During the Pandemic: An Analysis of Applicant Surveys

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic forced a sudden change from in-person to virtual interviews for the general surgery residency match. General surgery programs and applicants adopted multiple strategies to best mimic in-person recruitment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate applicant opinions of the virtual recruitment format.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Postinterview survey responses for applicants interviewing at a single general surgery residency program in the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 cycles were evaluated. All interviewed applicants were sent an anonymous survey assessing the virtual interview structure, their impression of the program, and their opinions on recruitment in the future.

RESULTS

The response rate was 31.2% (n = 60). Most (88.4%) respondents reported a more favorable view of the program after a virtual interview. Factors that were most likely to create a favorable impression were residents (89.6%) and culture (81.0%). 50.8% of applicants favored virtual-only interviews. The majority of applicants (60.3%), however, preferred the virtual interview remain a component of the application process, 34.4% recommended that virtual interviews be used as an initial screen before in-person invites, while 19.0% suggested applicants should interview in-person or virtually without penalty. 62.1% favored capping the number of interviews offered by programs and accepted by applicants.

CONCLUSIONS

The virtual interview format for general surgery residency allows applicants to effectively evaluate a residency program. Applicants are in favor of a combination of virtual and in-person interviews in the future. Innovation in the recruitment process, including limiting the number of applications and incorporating virtual events, is supported by applicants.

Virtual Interviews: A Cross-Sectional Quality Improvement Project Aimed to Improve the Interview Process in an Internal Medicine Residency Program

BACKGROUND

The residency interview is a crucial step that helps the program identify potential new trainees while the trainees find out more about the program. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it became essential to hold interviews virtually.

OBJECTIVE

Here, we conducted a questionnaire-based study to identify areas of improvement in the virtual interview process in our program.

METHODS

The study was conducted among the residency interview applicants of the 2022 match cycle. A questionnaire was sent via email to all applicants who were invited to our residency program for an interview. Out of the 600 applicants who were interviewed in our program, 230 applicants answered the survey, an 11-point questionnaire pertaining to the various aspects of the interview process.

RESULTS

 A virtual interview with an option of in-person is the most favored answer among the different groups, i.e., American Medical Graduates (AMGs), International Medical Graduates (IMGs) without need for a visa, and IMGs with a need for a visa, respectively, were, 37.5%, 42.8%, and 38.65%, respectively. An updated website with all required information was a top resource used by 95%, 84.5%, and 89.6% of the different groups of candidates. American medical graduates (32.50%) place high importance on resident interaction, while international medical graduates want the programs to focus on their website and provide more information about all aspects of the program during the virtual interview.

CONCLUSIONS

In the post-COVID-19 era, Internal Medicine programs will need to improve several aspects of virtual interviews while assessing what is important to candidates.

Virtual Interviews: Assessing How Expectations Meet Reality

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the post-matriculation perceptions of interns and faculty who participated in the 2020-2021 virtual interview process and how their expectations of the program and the applicants, respectively, aligned with reality.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Published surveys on virtual interviewing were reviewed and modified to design two surveys, for interns and for faculty who interviewed. Interns and faculty members from the Departments of Surgery and Medicine at one institution who participated in the 2020-2021 virtual interview process completed the surveys four to six months after the start of the academic year. Following survey completion, surgical interns from the same application cycle participated in one in-person focus group nine months after the start of the academic year to clarify points raised in the surveys.

RESULTS

Forty-six interns and faculty members responded to the survey (subgroup response rates ranging from 13-30%) and ten interns participated in the focus group (participation rate 100%). Most faculty and intern participants found that expectations formed during virtual interviews were accurate. However, our respondents noted limitations to virtual interviews that reduced their usefulness, including challenges with unnatural social interactions, understanding city fit, and getting a sense of resident and program culture. Participants provided possible solutions to address these challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this mixed-methods study at a single institution found that perceptions from virtual interviews were generally accurate but with some limitations. We describe several opportunities to improve the virtual interview process and optimize the application experience.

Expectations versus reality: Understanding the accuracy of impressions made during virtual interviews of pediatric pulmonary fellowship programs

RATIONALE

As a result of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, all pediatric pulmonary fellowship programs conducted virtual interviews for the first time in the Fall of 2020. This study aimed to understand the accuracy of virtual-interview derived-impressions of fellowship programs, as well as applicant preference for future fellowship interview cycles.

METHODS

A group of pediatric pulmonary fellows and Program Directors designed a REDCap survey. The survey was distributed to all first-year pediatric pulmonary fellows who participated in the 2020-2021 virtual interview season.

RESULTS

23/52 (44%) of first-year pediatric pulmonary fellows completed the survey. 96% were able to form general impressions about fellowship programs during their virtual interviews. 96% reported that generally their fellowship experience matched their virtual-interview derived-impressions. 17 of the 19 factors applicants use to rank programs had no statistically significant change (p > 0.05) in impression from virtual interview to fellowship experience. The two factors with a statistically significant (p < 0.05) change in impression were patient care related-volume of "bread and butter" pediatric pulmonary patients and volume of tertiary care pediatric pulmonary patients. 87% prefer some form of in-person interview option in future application cycles. A tiered interview format in which applicants are first invited to a virtual interview day followed by an optional in-person second look day was the most popular preference for future interview cycles (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual interviews may provide accurate representations of pediatric pulmonary fellowship programs and applicants prefer some type of in-person interview option in future application cycles.

Virtual Interviewing for Radiology Residency: Pluses, Minuses, and A Review of the Literature

This article reviews current medical literature to assess the benefits and drawbacks of virtual interviews for radiology residencies as well as the downstream effects of these changes, best practices, and potential future recruitment methods. Topics covered include the effects of remote recruitment in promoting accessibility and applicant diversity and equality as well as fiscal, environmental, and time savings in combination with technical challenges, the complications of over application, challenges in assessment of program culture and location, impact on morale, and hidden financial and emotional costs. Learnings from other medical specialties are highlighted in addition to the process of signaling, guidelines for conducting and participating in virtual interviews, and matters for future consideration.

Virtual Residency Interviews during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Applicant's Perspective

In light of the continuing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, virtual interviews will continue in the upcoming 2022 Electronic Residency Application Services cycle. As such, it is essential to recognize and learn from the experiences of the previous application cycle. The authors’ study collected comprehensive data regarding the virtual residency interview process through a combined quantitative and qualitative approach. They provide principles and recommendations to both programs and applicants for the upcoming interview season.

Objectives

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on medical education at all levels, particularly on applicants applying to residency programs. The objective of the study was to gain a comprehensive understanding of applicants’ perspectives on virtual interviews in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We conducted a quantitative survey and a qualitative study between March and April 2021. The link to an anonymous online survey was emailed to fourth-year medical students from one allopathic medical school. The survey link also was posted on the social media page of one allopathic medical school and one osteopathic medical school. Participants were then invited to participate in a follow-up 15- to 45-minute qualitative virtual interview.

Results

A total of 46 participants completed the survey, with a response rate of approximately 29.1%. The most beneficial aspect of the virtual interview was saving money on travel (31, 78.39%). In contrast, the least beneficial aspect of the virtual interview was the inability to personally explore the culture of the program (16, 34.78%), followed by the inability to explore the city and surrounding area (11, 23.91%). Thematic saturation was reached after interviewing 14 participants over Zoom. Four major themes of the virtual residency interview experience were discussed: virtual interviews offered many advantages, virtual interviews posed unique challenges, residency programs need more organizational improvements, and virtual specific preparations are needed.

Conclusions

Despite the challenges associated with the virtual interview process, applicants rated the overall virtual interview experience positively. Given the continued impact of COVID-19 on medical education, the majority of residency programs will elect to continue virtual interviews for the 2022 Electronic Residency Application Services cycle. We hope that our findings may provide insight into the applicant’s perspective on the virtual interview experience and help optimize virtual interviews for future cycles.

Evaluation of virtual accreditation of medical specialist training sites for ophthalmology in Australia and New Zealand during the COVID-19 pandemic

ObjectiveTo evaluate the suitability and acceptability of virtual training post accreditation visits conducted online for medical specialist training in ophthalmology in Australia and New Zealand.MethodsA two-phase study (pilot and implementation) was conducted. In the pilot phase, an open-ended observation proforma was used by the authors to independently record their observations, which were later compared and discussed until consensus was achieved. All participants were asked to complete an online survey. A document analysis of accreditation documents was conducted. Observation data were broken down into themes and triangulated with online survey and document analysis results. In the implementation phase, the inspections were observed by one of the authors (SK) and the observation notes were discussed with other authors to obtain a contextual and consensual view. A document analysis of all accreditation-related documentation was undertaken. The documents included in the document analysis were planning and scheduling records, interview and inspection notes, training post inspection fact and document notices and accreditation reports. Finally, a post-inspection focus group of all inspectors was conducted.ResultsThe accreditation interviews adequately addressed all relevant issues with high levels of robustness and reliability. Participants found it more difficult to discuss complex issues virtually compared with onsite visits. The virtual accreditation reports were not any different to what would be expected if a face-to-face accreditation visit had been conducted; however, it was not possible using the virtual inspection to determine the appropriateness of facilities and clinic layout to support and facilitate trainee learning and supervision.ConclusionsVirtual accreditation of training posts in medical specialist training is viable in limited circumstances where there are no known complex training post-related issues and the site has not made substantial changes to clinic and theatre layout, equipment and facilities since the previous accreditation.

Virtual Interviewing for Pediatric Emergency Medicine Fellowship-A National Survey

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate both applicant and interviewer satisfaction with the virtual interviewing process for pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) fellowship in hopes to improve the fellowship interviewing process. It was proposed that fellowship programs and applicants would prefer virtual interviews over traditional interviews.

METHODS

A survey developed in collaboration with UT Southwestern PEM fellowship leaders and national PEM leaders was sent to all PEM fellowship applicants and programs at the conclusion of the 2020 interview season and rank list submission. The applicant survey obtained information on ease of virtual interviews and whether applicants felt that they obtained adequate information from virtual interviews to make informed program selections. Program director surveys collected data on thoughts and feelings about virtual interviews and obstacles encountered during the recruitment season. Both surveys asked about costs for interviews and interview type preference.

RESULTS

A response rate of 49% from applicants and 47% from programs was obtained. Virtual interview days were similar in the amount of time and staff hours used compared with traditional days. Applicants spent less on virtual interviews compared with those who underwent traditional interviews (average $725 vs $4312). Programs received more applications than the prior year and spent less money during the virtual cycle. The majority of the applicants (90%) were comfortable with the virtual interview platform, and most (66%) agreed that virtual interviews provided adequate information to determine program rank. Geography was the number 1 rank determining factor. Programs and applicants preferred a form of in-person interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual interviews provide cost savings for both applicants and programs. Despite this, both parties prefer a form of in-person interviews.

Educational Factors and Financial Implications of Medical Students Choosing and Matching Into Orthopedic Surgery

Background

Mentorship and research have been shown to be important decision factors influencing medical students to pursue a particular specialty. The cost of applying to orthopedic surgery residency is at an all-time high. The purpose of this study is to identify the factors which increase the likelihood of medical students matching into orthopedic surgery, identify the timing and strength of impact these factors have on medical students' career choices, determine how many students have chosen orthopedic surgery prior to beginning medical school, and compare the financial impact of applying to orthopedics.

Methods

608 medical students were surveyed 5 times during medical school (at the start of M1, M2, M3, M4 year and after the match process) to identify ongoing factors that influence their career choice and ultimately matching in orthopedic surgery. Unadjusted odds ratios and cost analysis were used to determine the factors influencing specialty choice. Level of evidence: III.

Results

Students who matched into orthopedic surgery were more likely to be mentored by an orthopedic surgeon at all 5 survey points (M1 OR=30.93, M2 OR=12.38, M3 OR=17.96, M4 OR=65.2, Match OR=215.45) and involved in orthopedic surgery research at the last 4 survey points (M2 OR=20.05, M3 OR=14.00, M4 OR=12.00, Match OR=1566.60) compared to students who did not match into orthopedic surgery. 10 out of 19 students (52.6%) who matched into orthopedic surgery listed the specialty as their preference in the M1 survey. Students who matched into orthopedic surgery spent $8,838.80 on applications and interviews, while students applied to and matched into other specialties spent an average of $6,173.4 (p-value=0.007).

Conclusion

Many students have a predetermined plan to enter orthopedic surgery prior to medical school. Mentorship and research are important factors increasing students' interest in orthopedic surgery and ultimately leading to a successful match process. Going through the orthopedic surgery match process is significantly more expensive than other specialties. Level of Evidence: IV.

Virtual Gastroenterology Fellowship Recruitment During COVID-19 and Its Implications for the Future

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, medical education organizations endorsed a virtual recruitment format, representing a stark change from traditional in-person interviews. We aimed to identify the attitudes and perceptions of Gastroenterology Fellowship Program Directors (PDs) and applicants regarding the virtual interview experience and the role of virtual interviews (VI) in the future.

METHODS

We designed separate surveys targeting PDs and applicants using the Qualtrics software. At the end of the interview season, we e-mailed both survey links to all PDs and requested that they forward the applicant survey to their interviewed candidates. Surveys were voluntary and anonymous. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data with results presented as percentages.

RESULTS

A total of 29.7% of PDs completed the survey. Compared to traditional interviews, VI were viewed by 46.5% of PDs to be very suboptimal or suboptimal. Yet, 69.1% envisioned a role for VI in the future. A total of 14.2% of applicants completed the survey. Compared to traditional interviews, VI were viewed by 42.3% of applicants to be very suboptimal or suboptimal. However, 61.8% saw a future role for VI. While both applicants and PDs reported that establishing an interpersonal connection was a disadvantage with VI, applicants placed more emphasis on this need for connection (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Overall, PDs and applicants report mixed views with regard to VI but anticipate that it may continue to have a future role. VI may augment future recruitment cycles with care taken to not disadvantage applicants, who rely heavily on the interview process to create personal connections with programs.

Virtual interviewing in the COVID‐19 era: A survey of graduate program directors

Purpose/Objective

Due to the coronavirus pandemic, virtual interviews became a mainstay of graduate dental and medical education selection processes. To gain a handle on how to navigate lingering uncertainties about how interviews should be conducted in the future, this study examined the benefits and pitfalls of the virtual interview process (VIP) and assessed program plans to implement in the next interview cycle.

Methods

An anonymous online survey, for completion by one program representative (director or associate director), was sent to graduate medical education (GME) and advanced dental education programs at West Virginia University (N = 74).

Results

Fifty‐two (52) of the programs (70%) completed the survey. Zoom was the most frequently used interview platform (78.8%). Approximately two thirds (65.4%) of the interviewers thought VIP allowed the program to promote the university, the school, and their program and also reported experiencing video‐conferencing fatigue. About six in 10 perceive VIP can introduce bias in selecting applicants (59.6%) and potentially disadvantage some applicants (67.3%). Compared to the previous in‐person cycle, 67.4% of programs invited more applicants, and 73.1% interviewed more applicants. Regarding the 2021–2022 interview cycle, 55.8% of programs plan to offer either an in‐person or VIP, while 7.7% plan to keep their process completely virtual.

Conclusion

Graduate programs in this study demonstrated the indispensability of technology in transitioning from in‐person to virtual interviews during COVID‐19 pandemic. VIP has several advantages and disadvantages; this style of interview is forecasted to have a presence in applicant selection in the future.

Faculty Members’ Perspective on Virtual Interviews for Medical Residency Matching during the COVID-19 Crisis: A National Survey

During the COVID-19 pandemic, conducting face-to-face medical residency interviews was challenging due to infection prevention precautions, social distancing, and travel restrictions. Virtual interviews were implemented by the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) as an alternative process for residency matching while striving to maintain the same quality standards. This national survey was conducted to assess the satisfaction and perceptions of faculty members’ virtual interview performance in the assessment for the medical training residency programs. Among the participating 173 faculty members, 34.1% did not have previous experience with video-conferencing. The Zoom application was the most commonly used platform (65.9%). Most (89.6%) of the faculty perceived virtual interviews as “adequate” platforms on which the candidates could express themselves, while almost half of the faculty (53.8%) agreed that virtual interviews allowed them to accurately reach an impression about the candidates. Overall, 73.4% of faculty felt comfortable ranking the virtually interviewed candidates. We conclude that the acceptance of participating faculty members in the first Saudi medical residency training matching cycle virtual interviewing event was well-perceived. This study provides evidence for future application and research of virtual interviews in residency candidates’ assessment, especially after the pandemic crisis resolves.

Psychological Benefits and Challenges of Ph.D. Entrance Exam Virtual Interviews During COVID-19 Pandemic: Does Gender Play a Role?

This study aimed to investigate the reflections of Iranian students on Ph.D. entrance exam interviews held virtually nationwide during the Pandemic. Two hundred thirty-one Ph.D. applicants were invited to fill out an anonymous online survey designed in Google Forms, 36 out of whom volunteered to participate in follow-up semi-structured interviews. Two ANOVA measures were used to investigate the possible influences of gender and prior virtual interview experience on the applicants’ perceptions. Thematic analysis was also adopted to explore the participants’ attitudes and perceptions toward virtual interviews (VI). Quantitative findings showed that Iranian Ph.D. applicants perceived VI as a flexible and helpful procedure that provided them with satisfactory interpersonal treatment. Still, they did not favor the procedure’s perceived behavioral control and ability to communicate information to perform procedural justice. Moreover, neither their gender nor their prior experience of the virtual interview was a predictor of their perspectives’ discrepancies. The thematic analysis of the qualitative data revealed that despite having some cognitive, personal, and financial benefits, VI posed some technical, communicative, and personal challenges. This study provides implications for universities and applicants who will use VI for different purposes in higher education.

Perceptions of a Virtual Interview Exercise for Ophthalmology Residency Applicants

Importance In-person interviews have traditionally been considered a crucial component of the residency application process. Virtual interviews (VIs) became the standard format for the 2020 to 2021 application cycle due to the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. VIs offer a new perspective and challenge to this process which warrants unique considerations and further understanding of effects on applicants.

Objective This study aimed to assess the perceived efficacy of a VI preparedness exercise for ophthalmology residency applicants in the 2021 residency application cycle.

Design, Setting, and Participants A cross-sectional survey was distributed online. All participants in a mock VI exercise conducted via video-telecommunication technology were invited to complete the survey. Data collection occurred from October 12, 2020, to November 2, 2020. A follow-up survey after a match results released was distributed to all participants and data collection occurred from February 18, 2021, to February 25, 2021.

Main Outcome and Measures Applicant demographics, comfort, and attitudes toward VIs and VI practice were the primary measurements of this study.

Results Responses to the initial survey were received from all 35 participants (100%) in the VI mock interviews. There was a statistically significant difference between the pre- and postinterview responses for “How prepared do you feel for virtual interviews with residency programs?” (p = 0.0003) and “How likely are you to practice virtual interviews with someone you know?” (p = 0.0023). Participants reported feeling more prepared for VIs with residency programs after the mock interview (p = 0.002). A greater proportion of participants responded with “Very Likely” after the mock interview in comparison to before the interview to the questions “How likely are you to practice interviews with someone you know?” (p = 0.039) and “How likely are you to practice virtual interviews in the same room/area as you will during the official interview season?” (p = 0.021). Of the 35 original participants, 20 completed the follow-up survey. There were an equal number of participants who responded either “Helped Somewhat” (n = 9) or “Helped Greatly” (n = 9) to “How much did the VI mock exercise help you for the actual interview season?” in the follow-up survey. The majority of follow-up survey respondents (17/20) reported that they had additional practice in the virtual environment for interviews after the VI mock exercise. There was no significant difference in perceived helpfulness of the VI mock exercise during the actual interview season between matched and unmatched participants.

Conclusion and Relevance As residency applicants prepare for future VIs, practice and adequate preparation will be essential. In this study, implementation of a VI preparedness exercise had a positive impact on applicants' perception of their preparedness and intention to practice the format in the future.

Virtual Recruitment in Surgical Residency Programs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The Covid-19 pandemic forced residency programs to drastically change their interview processes and adopt virtual interviewing for the 2020-2021 match cycle.

RECENT FINDINGS

While virtual interviewing decreased cost and increased convenience for applicants and programs involved in the match, it also introduced several potential disadvantages. Maximizing technological capabilities was an area of utmost concern at the start of the interview cycle, and multiple medical education organizations quickly recommended ways to move to virtual process, and to prevent and troubleshoot technical problems. However, other issues were less straightforward, such as how to address new sources of bias introduced by virtual interviewing, and how to ensure that programs and applicants could make informed decisions about their rank lists after only limited virtual interactions. Additionally, the increased convenience of interviewing raised concerns that students would accept more interviews, disrupting the established calculus programs used to determine how many interviews to offer per spot available.

SUMMARY

In this review, we examine the benefits and disadvantages of virtual interviewing, review recommendations from the current literature on how to improve the process, and discuss what we learned from our own experience at an academic general surgery residency program over the course of this unprecedented interview season.

The experiences of new graduate nurses and midwives going through a virtual interview recruitment process during the COVID-19 crisis: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The annual recruitment of new graduate nurses and midwives is key to recruiting large numbers of staff with the right attitude, skills and knowledge who are the best fit for the organisation. Virtual interviews were undertaken in 2020 due to the surge worldwide in the COVID-19 crisis. This study evaluates those virtual interviews and explores the sustainability of the model.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted at a large health organisation in New South Wales, Australia. Data were collected over 3 weeks using two online surveys, one for interviewees (n = 512) and the other for interviewers (n = 68). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and frequency distributions, and additional free-text comments were analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Response rates were 55% (n = 280) interviewees and 54% (n = 37) for interviewers. The majority of interviewees (58%, n = 184) and interviewers (78%, n = 29) stated the interview was seamless or very seamless and 55% (n = 156) of interviewees and 73% (n = 27) of interviewers agreed interviewees conveyed themselves well during interviews. Over half of interviewees (65%, n = 182) and interviewers (51%, n = 18) agreed the virtual interview was fair or very fair for interviewee performance, regardless of age, race, or socio-economic status. However, many expressed a need for better internet access, equipment, and support, and a longer interview time to personally connect. Both new graduate interviewees (60%) and interviewers (75%) agreed virtual interviews are a suitable model for future use. However, some respondents indicated they preferred face-to-face interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of virtual interviews to select new graduates is considered acceptable, cost-effective and sustainable, as well as fair by the majority of participants. Study findings inform policy development, future planning, support the use of flexible selection practices and provide other health care professionals with a virtual recruitment model to consider when developing strategies to grow their future health workforce.

Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case for Virtual Residency Interviews

This perspective from a variety of stakeholders including aspiring surgeons, a current department chair for education, and a current chair of surgery advocates for making virtual residency interviews a permanent part of the match process. We delineate how a shift to virtual residency interviews can save applicants time and money, enhance equity in the match, and ultimately strengthen a program's ability to assess applicants.

Perceptions of the Virtual Neurosurgery Application Cycle During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Program Director Survey

OBJECTIVE

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a shift to virtual residency interviews for the 2020-2021 neurosurgery match, with unknown implications for stakeholders. This study seeks to analyze the perceptions of residency program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) regarding the current virtual format used for residency selection and interviews.

METHODS

An anonymous, 30-question survey was constructed and sent to 115 neurosurgery PDs and 26 APDs to assess respondent demographics, factors used to review applicants, perceptions of applicants and applicant engagement, perceptions of standardized letters and interview questions, the effect of the virtual interview format on various stakeholders, and the future outlook for the virtual residency interview format.

RESULTS

A total of 38 PDs and APDs completed this survey, constituting a response rate of 27.0%. Survey respondents received significantly more Electronic Residency Application Service applications in the 2020-2021 cycle compared with the 2019-2020 cycle (P = 0.0029). Subinternship performance by home-rotators, (26.3%), letters of recommendation (23.7%), and Step 1 score (18.4%) were ranked as the most important factors for evaluating candidates during the current virtual application cycle.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights that applicants applied to a greater number of residency programs compared with years prior, that the criteria used by PDs/APDs to evaluate applicants remained largely consistent compared to previous years, and that the virtual residency interview format may disproportionately disadvantage Doctor of Osteopathic medicine and international medical graduate applicants. Further exploring attitudes toward signaling mechanisms and standardized letters may serve to inform changes to future neurosurgery match cycles.

Virtual Recruitment Is Here to Stay: A Survey of ID Fellowship Program Directors and Matched Applicants Regarding Their 2020 Virtual Recruitment Experiences

Background

Graduate Medical Education training programs transitioned to all-virtual recruitment in 2020. Limited data have been published regarding the consequences of this transition. We aimed to understand (1) infectious diseases (ID) fellowship programs’ recruitment efforts and the effect of virtual recruitment on application and interview numbers and (2) the number of programs to which matched applicants applied and interviewed and applicants’ perspectives on virtual recruitment.

Methods

In 2020–2021, we surveyed all US ID fellowship program directors (PDs) and matched applicants. Descriptive data analysis was performed on quantitative survey items. Free-text responses were analyzed through a quantitative content analysis approach.

Results

The PD response rate was 68/158 (43%); the applicant response rate was at least 23% (85/365). PDs reported a 27% increase in mean number of applications received and a 45% increase in mean number of applicants interviewed compared with the previous year. Applicants especially valued the online program structure information, PD program overview videos, didactic and curriculum content, and fellow testimonials and profiles. Most applicants preferred interviews lasting no more than 40 minutes and interview days lasting no more than 5 hours. Nearly all (60/64, 94%) PDs adequately learned about candidates; most (48/64, 75%) felt unable to showcase their program as well as when in-person. Most PDs (54/64, 84%) and applicants (56/73, 77%) want an option for virtual recruitment.

Conclusions

Virtual recruitment enabled programs to accommodate more applicants and highlighted applicants’ preferences for programs’ augmented online presences and time-limited interview days. Most programs and applicants want an option for virtual interviews.