Key criteria for selection of radiology residents: results of a national survey

Correlation Between Medical School Performance and Receiving Awards in General Surgery Residency

IMPORTANCE

It is uncertain whether current measures of achievement during medical school predict exceptional performance during surgical residency. One surrogate of excellence during residency may be awards, especially those given for teaching and annual overall accomplishment.

OBJECTIVE

Determine whether markers of superior performance during medical school documented in the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application and student record correlated with receiving awards during residency.

DESIGN

Data was analyzed from ERAS and student applications of 296 residency graduates. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated.

PARTICIPANTS

296 residency graduates from 14 US general surgery residency programs.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASUREMENTS

The relationship between each residency and preresidency variable and the outcome of receiving any qualifying award. Secondary analysis included the correlation with winning a teaching or annual overall award.

RESULTS

Although 140 (48%) residents received an award during residency, only 69 (23.3%) received a teaching award, while 50 (17.6%) received one for annual overall performance. Membership in Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) and honors in pediatrics rotation correlated with receiving any award. USMLE step 1 score and AOA membership reached statistically significant positively correlation with receiving a teaching award, while completing a sub-internship at that institution was negatively associated. For annual overall awards, only completing a sub-internship at the same institution reached statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the traditional metrics in the ERAS or global student record consistently correlated with receiving an award during residency. Our findings suggest that preresidency factors available on the global application, including grades, test scores, and honor society membership, poorly correlate with exceptional general surgery residency performance as measured by receiving awards. Residency programs should shift away from using traditional ERAS metrics as the primary criteria for selection, but rather as 1 component of holistic applicant review.

Resident Selection Criteria in Veterinary Medicine

With the continued rise of interest and need for veterinary specialists, information regarding optimal selection criteria for successful residency candidates has been lacking in veterinary medicine. A 28-question online survey was developed to determine prioritized resident selection criteria, the importance of formal interviews, and residency supervisor satisfaction with the current selection process. This survey was sent to all programs listed by the Veterinary Internship and Residency Matching Program (VIRMP) for the 2019-2020 program year. Overall, the most important aspects of the residency application process were (a) letters of recommendation, (b) performance during the interview, (c) personal contact/recommendation from a colleague, (d) personal statement, and (e) demonstrated interest in the residency specialty. While measures of academic performance including GPA and veterinary class rank may play a role in sorting of candidates in more competitive specialties, this does not necessarily exclude them from the ranking process. This information should be helpful to candidates and program directors alike in understanding the success of the current residency candidate selection process.

The Influence of Extracurricular Activities on Radiology Resident Selection Decisions

PURPOSE

Extracurricular activities (EAs) listed on radiology residency applications can signal traits and characteristics desired in holistic reviews. The authors conducted an objective analysis to determine the influence of EAs on resident selection decisions.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment was designed to model radiology resident selection and determine the relative weights of EAs among academic and demographic application factors. Faculty members involved in resident selection at 30 US radiology programs chose between hypothetical pairs of applicant profiles between October 2021 and February 2022. Each applicant profile included one of 22 EAs chosen for study. A conditional logistic regression model assessed the relative weights of the attributes and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-four participants completed the exercise. Community-service EAs were ranked most highly by participants. LGBTQ Pride Alliance (OR, 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.15; P = .006) and Young Republicans (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.82; P = .001) significantly influenced decisions. The highest ranked EAs were significantly preferred over the lowest ranked EAs (OR, 1.916; 95% CI, 1.671-2.197; P < .001). Participants preferred EAs that reflected active over passive engagement (OR, 1.154; 95% CI, 1.022-1.304; P = .021) and progressive over conservative ideology (OR, 1.280; 95% CI, 1.133-1.447; P < .001). Participants who ranked progressive EAs more highly preferred applicants with progressive EAs (P < .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of EAs on resident selection decisions is significant and likely to gain importance in resident selection as medical student performance metrics are further eliminated. Applicants and selection committees should consider this influence and the bias that EAs can bring to resident selection decisions.

A "global village": promoting research and careers in the pediatric radiology community through diversity

There is a severe shortage of pediatric radiologists in the USA and across the globe due to multiple factors. These severe shortages, along with increased clinical demand, growing research costs and limited funding sources place pediatric radiologists, particularly those in academic departments, under increasing time pressure, affecting their ability to maintain research productivity. In this paper, we model a new concept that should help boost the research efforts within the pediatric radiology community, while diversifying the academic workforce through the involvement of international medical graduates (IMGs). We describe the mutual advantages this concept could have on academic pediatric radiology departments and IMGs alike, as well as pose some of the unique challenges that could impact this concept and effective strategies to ensure success.

Medical school grades may predict future clinical competence

BACKGROUND

In real-world medical education, there is a lack of reliable predictors of future clinical competencies. Hence, we aim to identify the factors associated with clinical competencies and construct a prediction model to identify "improvement required" trainees.

METHODS

We analyzed data from medical students who graduated from National Yang-Ming University with clerkship training and participated in the postgraduate year (PGY) interview at Taipei Veterans General Hospital. Clinical competencies were evaluated using grades of national objective structured clinical examination (OSCEs). This study used data from medical students who graduated in July 2018 as the derivation cohort (N = 50) and those who graduated in July 2020 (n = 56) for validation.

RESULTS

Medical school grades were associated with the performance of national OSCEs (Pearson r = 0.34, p = 0.017), but the grades of the structured PGY interviews were marginally associated with the national OSCE (Pearson r = 0.268, p = 0.06). A prediction model was constructed to identify "improvement required" trainees, defined: trainees with the lowest 25% of scores in the national OSCEs. According to this model, trainees with the lowest 25% medical school grades predicted a higher risk of the "improvement required" clinical performance (Q1-Q3 vs Q4 = 15% vs 60%, odds ratio = 8.5 [95% confidence interval = 1.8-39.4], p = 0.029). In the validation cohort, our prediction model could accurately classify 76.7% "improvement required" and "nonimprovement required" students.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that interventions for students with unsatisfactory medical school grades are warranted to improve their clinical competencies.

Potential Impact of a Pass or Fail United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 Scoring System on Radiology Residency Applications

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the anticipated impact of the change in United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scoring from numerical to pass or fail on the future selection of radiology residents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An anonymous electronic 14-item survey was distributed to 308 members of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology and included questions regarding the anticipated importance of various application metrics when Step 1 becomes pass or fail. Secondary analyses compared responses based on the current use of a Step 1 scoring screen.

RESULTS

Eighty eight respondents (28.6% [88/308]) completed the survey. Most (64% [56/88]) noted that the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score will likely be one of the top three most important factors in assessing applicants, followed by class ranking or quartile (51% [45/88]) and the Medical Student Performance Evaluation/Dean's Letter (42% [37/88]). Over 90% (82/88) of respondents anticipate potentially or definitively requiring Step 2 CK scores before application review, and 50% (44/88) of respondents anticipate extending interview invites at a later date to receive Step 2 CK scores. These results did not significantly differ between programs who currently use a Step 1 scoring screen and those who do not.

CONCLUSION

As Step 1 transitions from a numerical score to pass or fail, radiology residency program directors will likely rely on Step 2 CK scores as an objective and standardized metric to screen applicants. Further investigation is needed to identify other objective metrics to evaluate applicants before Step 1 becomes pass or fail.

Beyond the Scalpel: Attracting and Nurturing Surgeon-Scientists in Plastic Surgery

SUMMARY

With plastic surgery being at the forefront of innovation and discovery in multiple research disciplines, plastic surgery is poised for M.D./Ph.D. and research-focused M.D. trainees to be attracted to this field. Surprisingly, recent reports have shown that the number of surgeon-scientists pursuing research is on the decline, with these declines being even more pronounced within plastic surgery. It is essential that plastic surgery remains a leader in translational research by cultivating a group of individuals who have been trained in basic research and are thereby competitive to obtain extramural grant funding. To address this need, the authors review data elucidating why the research-oriented trainee may forego pursuing a career in plastic surgery. Although much of the existing literature is speculative, the authors identified the current number of M.D./Ph.D.s in plastic surgery using data obtained from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and investigated number of grants in plastic surgery compared to other medical and surgical fields using the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results. The authors hypothesize that economic constraints and difficulty securing protected research time may be contributing to fewer trainees pursuing plastic surgery. The purpose of this article is (1) to discuss potential reasons deterring research-oriented trainees from pursuing careers as surgeon-scientists within plastic surgery; (2) to propose solutions that may attract more trainees interested in careers as surgeon-scientists to the field of plastic surgery; (3) to highlight the lack of quantitative data regarding surgeon-scientist training in plastic surgery; and (4) to propose and encourage future research avenues to help attract and nurture surgeon-scientists in plastic surgery.

Radiology resident selection factors predict resident performance

PURPOSE

To determine selection factors that predict radiology resident performance.

METHODS

59 consecutive radiology residents from 2002 to 2015 were ranked on performance during residency. Correlations and multiple regression analyses were performed to predict resident performance from the following selection factors: United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 score, medical school rank, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership, honors in clinical rotations, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE), and interview score. Results were compared against predictions from Match rank position.

RESULTS

Five selection factors showed significant or marginally significant correlations with resident performance (r = 0.2 to 0.3). The interview score was not significantly correlated. A multiple regression model comprised of the USMLE Step 1 score, medical school rank, AOA membership, and interview score predicted resident performance, with an adjusted R² of 0.19. The interview score was included in the model but did not achieve statistical significance. Match rank did not predict resident performance, with an R² of 0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

A multiple regression model comprised of the USMLE Step 1 score, medical school rank, and AOA membership predicted radiology resident performance and may assist with resident selection.

Selection of New Psychiatry Residents Within a National Program: a Qualitative Study of Faculty Perspectives on Competencies and Attributes

OBJECTIVE

Admission committees use multiple sources of information to select residents. However, the way in which faculty members use each data source remains unclear and highly context-specific. The present study seeks to understand how faculty members use various sources of information about candidates to make admission decisions to a National Psychiatry Residency Program.

METHODS

The theory of core competencies was used as a foundation for this qualitative study. Framework analysis was used to structure the project and data presentation. Twenty key informants from the faculty were purposefully sampled in accordance with the initial theory. Open-ended semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain their views about the essential competencies of psychiatrists and the ways in which these competencies could be reliably gauged.

RESULTS

Participants described numerous competencies that they believed were essential to becoming competent psychiatrists. These competencies fell within the six core competencies of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education framework. However, several non-competency attributes (such as perseverance, empathy, and compassion) were also relevant in the selection process. To reduce the impact of self-presentation bias, to which these attributes were vulnerable, the faculty relied heavily on sources of information obtained from third parties, such as feedback from co-workers with first-hand experience of the candidate during their clinical placements.

CONCLUSION

Faculty members place importance on informal informant-derived information about a candidate's non-competency attributes in addition to core competencies when deciding whether or not to select a candidate for admission into a residency training program.

Video Interviewing: A Review and Recommendations for Implementation in the Era of COVID-19 and Beyond

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is very likely that many radiology residency and fellowship programs will adopt interactive videoconference interviewing for the 2020-2021 residency match cycle. Although video interviewing has become a common part of the hiring process for business, experience with video interviewing for resident and fellow selection has been limited. Advantages of video interviews over traditional on-site interviews include cost-savings to both applicants and residency programs, less disruption to an applicant's educational activities, and potential for training programs to access a wider pool of candidates. The loss of the casual interactions that occur during an on-site interview and the inability of candidates to evaluate training facilities and their surrounding environments in-person are among the obstacles posed by video interviews, but training programs can mitigate these challenges with enhanced website content and creative media solutions. Through a review of the existing literature and internet resources, this article recommends specific measures medical schools, applicants, and radiology residency and fellowship programs can take to optimize the virtual interview experience for all involved parties.

Interview Techniques Utilized in Radiology Resident Selection-A Survey of the APDR

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate interview techniques currently used in the selection of diagnostic radiology resident candidates and to identify factors influencing the use of alternative interview techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An anonymous 25 question e-mail survey was provided to 319 active members of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology. The survey included questions on residency demographics, organization of resident applicant interviews, types of interview techniques utilized, scoring and ranking of applicants, and facets of the interview/application felt most important to the selection process. Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the use of alternative interview techniques.

RESULTS

93.7% of responding programs use traditional interview techniques, with 92% using unblinded, unstructured interviews, 8% blinded, unstructured interviews. Structured interview questions were incorporated in 22%. Few programs used alternative techniques like the multiple mini-interview. None of the programs used written prompts during the interview, 3% used casual visual cognitive testing, 10% used panel interview techniques, and none used formal personality testing. For ranking candidates in the match, the most important facets considered were USMLE Step scores, performance on the interview, clinical course grades, and letters of reference. Factors associated with use of alternative techniques were domains associated with program size and number of faculty.

CONCLUSION

The majority of radiology training programs still rely upon the traditional unblinded interview technique. There is an opportunity for training programs to examine alternative techniques that reduce bias and may provide better insight into other aspects of the candidate that may not be as readily highlighted with the traditional, unblinded interview.

The 2017 Integrated IR Residency Match: Results of a National Survey of Applicants and Program Directors

PURPOSE

To characterize and compare the experiences of matched applicants and program directors (PDs) participating in the first large-scale integrated interventional radiology (IR) residency match.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Survey questionnaires were distributed nationally to integrated IR applicants who matched in the 2017 Match cycle and PDs. Both groups were questioned regarding their experiences with the application, interview, rank, and match processes as well as applicant-specific and PD-specific information. Summary and descriptive statistics were applied to responses, and comparison of Likert scale responses was performed by two-sample t test.

RESULTS

Sixty-one matched applicants (51.3%) and 34 PDs (55.7%) responded to the survey. Regarding the match process, applicants believed United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 score (P = .002) and connection to a program's geographic location (P = .006) were significantly more important than PDs did, whereas PDs ranked grades (P = .049), class rank (P = .011), academic awards (P = .003), additional degrees (P < .001), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills score (P < .001) as significantly more important factors than applicants did. Additional information regarding demographic data, medical school experiences in IR, application strategies, interview experiences, rank lists, the intern year, and match results are reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The completion of the first large-scale integrated IR match represents a paradigm shift in the way in which IR practitioners are recruited and trained. This study provides valuable benchmark data and analysis that can be used to improve efforts to match the best-fitting applicants into the integrated IR residency and improve future match cycles for applicants and PDs alike.

Use of the Interview in Resident Candidate Selection: A Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Although the resident candidate interview is costly and time-consuming for both applicants and programs, it is considered critically important for resident selection. Noncognitive attributes, including communication skills and professionalism, can be assessed by the personal interview.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a review of the literature on the residency interview to identify the interview characteristics used for resident selection and to ascertain to what extent the interview yields information that predicts future performance.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Scopus using the following search terms: residency, internship, interview, selection, and performance. We extracted information on characteristics of the interview process, including type of interview format, measures taken to minimize bias by interviewers, and testing of other clinical/surgical skills.

RESULTS

We identified 104 studies that pertained to the resident selection interview, with highly varied interview formats and assessment tools. A positive correlation was demonstrated between a medical school academic record and the interview, especially for unblinded interview formats. A total of 34 studies attempted to correlate interview score with performance in residency, with mixed results. We also identified a number of studies that included personality testing, clinical skills testing, or surgical skills testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review identified a wide variety of approaches to the selection interview and a range of factors that have been studied to assess its effectiveness. More research needs to be done not only to address and ascertain appropriate interview formats that predict positive performance in residency, but also to determine interview factors that can predict both residents' "success" and program attrition.

Radiology resident recruitment: A study of the impact of web-based information and interview day activities

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Residency recruitment is a critical and expensive process. A program's Web site may improve recruitment, but little is known about how applicants use program sites or what constitutes optimal content. The importance of an interview day and interactions with a program's residents has been described, but candidate preferences for various activities and schedules have not been widely reported. We investigated contemporary use and perceived utility of information provided on radiology program Web sites, as well as preferences for the interview day experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using an anonymous cross-sectional survey, we studied 111 candidates who were interviewed between November 1, 2012 and January 19, 2013 for a diagnostic radiology residency position at our institution. Participation in this institutional review board-approved study was entirely voluntary, and no identifying information was collected. Responses were sealed and not analyzed until after the match.

RESULTS

A total of 70 candidates returned a completed survey (63% response rate). Optimal content considered necessary for a "complete" Web site was identified. The most important factor in deciding where to apply was geographical connection to a program. "AuntMinnie" was the most popular source of program information on social media. Candidates overwhelmingly preferred one-on-one faculty interviews but had no preference between a Saturday and weekday schedule. The ideal interview experience should include a "meet and greet" with residents off campus and a personal interview with the program director. The overall "feel" or "personality" of the program was critical to a candidate's rank order decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings offer insight into what factors make programs appealing to radiology applicants. This information will be useful to medical educators engaged in career counseling and recruitment.

Predictors of an academic career on radiology residency applications

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate radiology residency applications to determine if any variables are predictive of a future academic radiology career.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Application materials from 336 radiology residency graduates between 1993 and 2010 from the Department of Radiology, Duke University and between 1990 and 2010 from the Department of Radiology, Stanford University were retrospectively reviewed. The institutional review boards approved this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study with a waiver of informed consent. Biographical (gender, age at application, advanced degrees, prior career), undergraduate school (school, degree, research experience, publications), and medical school (school, research experience, manuscript publications, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, clerkship grades, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and 2 scores, personal statement and letter of recommendation reference to academics, couples match status) data were recorded. Listing in the Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Online Directory and postgraduation publications were used to determine academic status.

RESULTS

There were 72 (21%) radiologists in an academic career and 264 (79%) in a nonacademic career. Variables associated with an academic career were elite undergraduate school (P = .003), undergraduate school publications (P = .018), additional advanced degrees (P = .027), elite medical school (P = .006), a research year in medical school (P < .001), and medical school publications (P < .001). A multivariate cross-validation analysis showed that these variables are jointly predictive of an academic career (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Undergraduate and medical school rankings and publications, as well as a medical school research year and an additional advanced degree, are associated with an academic career. Radiology residency selection committees should consider these factors in the context of the residency application if they wish to recruit future academic radiologists.

Radiology research and medical students

Fostering radiology research among medical students can enhance a student's interest and understanding of radiology and research. It increases the academic productivity of the mentor and the department. Radiology faculty and departments should actively seek to recruit and engage students in research. Once involved, students benefit greatly from being given clear responsibility, close supervision, timely feedback, and a degree of autonomy. At the heart of the student research process is the crucial mentor-mentee relationship, and mentors should be cognizant of their vital role and methods of encouraging and enhancing this relationship. Ultimately, the advancement of the field of radiology depends on constant innovation and improvement. Radiology research by medical students fuels both innovation and the development of future academic radiologists and physician-scientists, helping to secure future growth for our field.

Selection criteria of residents for residency programs in Kuwait

BACKGROUND

In Kuwait, 21 residency training programs were offered in the year 2011; however, no data is available regarding the criteria of selecting residents for these programs. This study aims to provide information about the importance of these criteria.

METHODS

A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from members (e.g. chairmen, directors, assistants …etc.) of residency programs in Kuwait. A total of 108 members were invited to participate. They were asked to rate the importance level (scale from 1 to 5) of criteria that may affect the acceptance of an applicant to their residency programs. Average scores were calculated for each criterion.

RESULTS

Of the 108 members invited to participate, only 12 (11.1%) declined to participate. Interview performance was ranked as the most important criteria for selecting residents (average score: 4.63/5.00), followed by grade point average (average score: 3.78/5.00) and honors during medical school (average score: 3.67/5.00). On the other hand, receiving disciplinary action during medical school and failure in a required clerkship were considered as the most concerning among other criteria used to reject applicants (average scores: 3.83/5.00 and 3.54/5.00 respectively). Minor differences regarding the importance level of each criterion were noted across different programs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided general information about the criteria that are used to accept/reject applicants to residency programs in Kuwait. Future studies should be conducted to investigate each criterion individually, and to assess if these criteria are related to residents' success during their training.

Residency selection: do the perceptions of US programme directors and applicants match?

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the practices and perceptions of US residency programme directors (PDs) and residency applicants with reference to the use of social media and Internet resources in the resident doctor selection process.

METHODS

A survey was distributed via e-mail (SurveyMonkey®) to 2592 PDs of programmes in 22 specialties accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. A separate survey was distributed to all residency candidates applying for postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) positions at the Saint Barnabas Medical Center, Livingston, New Jersey.

RESULTS

A total of 1200 (46.3%) PDs completed the survey. Overall, 16.3% (n=196) of respondents reported visiting Internet resources to gain more information about applicants, 38.1% (74 of 194) of whom had ranked an applicant lower as a result. American medical graduates (AMGs), US international medical graduates (USIMGs) and non-USIMGs all felt that performance on Step 1 of the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) was a critical aspect of a residency application. More AMGs than USIMGs and non-USIMGs believed that PDs made use of social media resources when evaluating applicants and that their online profiles might influence their rankings.

CONCLUSIONS

Residency candidates universally understand the importance of USMLE Step 1 scores in maintaining a competitive application. However, significant differences exist among AMGs, USIMGs and non-USIMGs in their perceptions of the value of other applicant criteria, which may place some applicants at a disadvantage. A small but growing number of PDs currently use Internet resources to learn more about applicants and base their recruitment decisions in part on the information they encounter. At present, applicants are generally unaware of the implications their online activity may have on their selection for residency. Content guideline programmes that raise awareness of the possible impact of social media on the residency recruitment process are needed and should be delivered early in medical education.

Impact of pass/fail grading on medical students' well-being and academic outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Many medical schools are currently undergoing curriculum reform. When considering the means by which students will be evaluated in a revised curriculum, the need to reduce the prevalences of depression and anxiety associated with academic stress must be weighed against the importance of academic outcomes. Pass/fail evaluation, as compared with tiered grading, is commonly presented as a means to adequately assess student performance while minimising stress and anxiety. The purpose of this literature review was to determine the impact of pass/fail grading on medical student well-being and academic outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of the available literature published between January 1980 and August 2010, using the PubMed, Ovid Medline, Ovid PsycINFO and ERIC databases. Eligible papers assessed the impact of pass/fail grading on medical student well-being, academic outcomes or both. Academic outcomes included but were not limited to objective measures, such as performance on the US Medical Licensing Examination, and subjective measures, such as student desirability by residency programmes. Reference lists in identified papers were searched and all identified papers were run through a citation index.

RESULTS

Four papers met the inclusion criteria for both well-being and academic outcomes. An additional five papers met the inclusion criteria for academic outcomes only. The four papers that focused on well-being reported improvement in specified areas. No significant difference was identified in any of the five papers examining objective academic outcomes or in those papers that examined the quality of residency programmes attained. Results from two studies suggested that some programme directors believe pass/fail grading creates disadvantages for students in attaining a residency, whereas a third study yielded mixed results about its impact on residency attainment.

CONCLUSIONS

Student well-being is enhanced and objective academic performance is not adversely affected by a pass/fail evaluation system, but students' ability to obtain a desired residency programme may be hindered by individual programme directors' preferences for tiered grading systems. There is an overall paucity of literature on this topic and additional study is needed.

Rocking the match II: more lessons on applying and getting into residency

Everyone can think of someone who was just plain smart and who did really well in school without even studying. On the other hand, we all know that most good students work at it, even if they are very bright. In the same vein, there are some students who don't have to prepare for the application process. They may be good applicants for residency training based solely on their academic record, the support they will receive from faculty, and on interpersonal skills that will allow them to shine during an interview. However, there aren't a lot of people like that. The major message to medical students reading this article is that becoming a good applicant for residency training, and indeed for other things in life, is a learnable skill. The responses of the medical students to the 10 trigger questions in this article demonstrate that. We all hope that the tips we provide here will help many students achieve the level of success they deserve.

Selection criteria for residency: results of a national program directors survey

PURPOSE

To assess the relative importance of criteria used for residency selection in 21 medical specialties given current available data and competitiveness of specialties.

METHOD

In 2006, questionnaires were distributed to 2,528 program directors in university hospital or university-affiliated community hospital residency programs across 21 medical specialties. Responses were recorded using a five-point Likert scale of importance. Mean values for each item were calculated within and across all specialties. Mean scores for item responses were used to create rank orders of selection criteria within the specialties. To facilitate comparisons, specialties were grouped according to the percentages of positions filled with U.S. medical school graduates.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 49%. With the data from all specialties pooled, the top five selection criteria were (1) grades in required clerkships, (2) United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 score, (3) grades in senior electives in specialty, (4) number of honors grades, and (5) USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score.

CONCLUSIONS

The top academic selection criteria are based on clinical performance, with the exception of USMLE Step 1 score. Indicators that reflect excellence in clinical performance are valued across the specialties by residency program directors regardless of competitiveness within the specialty. USMLE Step 2 CK ranks higher in the less competitive specialties, whereas research experience is more prominent in the most competitive specialties. The Medical Student Performance Evaluation was ranked lowest of all criteria by the program directors.

The importance of basic science and clinical research as a selection criterion for general surgery residency programs

OBJECTIVE

The selection criteria for surgical residents applying for residency differ among programs nationwide. Factors influencing this selection process have not been well defined, and research in particular has not been evaluated fully. This study aimed to evaluate the relative importance of basic science and clinical research in the selection criteria used by program directors (PDs).

DESIGN

A web-based survey consisting of 11 questions was sent to PDs using the list server of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Respondents were asked to rank selection factors using a 1-to-5 scoring system, with 5 as most important. Their responses were recorded and tabulated.

SETTING

University-based teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The survey went to 251 accredited general surgery residency programs in the United States.

RESULTS

Overall, 134 (53.3%) of the surveys were returned, representing 61 university-based programs, 57 community-based programs with university affiliation, and 16 community-based programs without university affiliation. In total, 120 PDs (89.5%) considered basic or clinical research almost always or all the time when evaluating applicants to their general surgery program. Another 73 PDs (54.5%) gave basic science and clinical research equal importance. Another 40 PDs (29.9%) rarely or never credited research unless it had been published as an abstract or paper. In ranking research, 11 (8.2%) respondents gave it the 5 score. Most respondents (n = 93; 69.4%) gave it the 3 score. An applicant's interview and interest in surgery were the factors considered most important by 93 (69.4%) and 78 (58.2%), respectively, of the PDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Basic science and clinical research constituted an important but secondary criterion for resident selection by PDs into general surgery residency programs. PDs perceived the primary factors for residency selection to be the interview, demonstrated interest in surgery, AOA membership, letters of recommendation, and USMLE Step I scores.