Showing your public face: does screening social media assess residency applicants' professionalism?

Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs in the United States conducted virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application season. As a result, programs and applicants may have relied more heavily on social media-based communication and dissemination of information.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine social media's impact on residency applicants during an entirely virtual application cycle.

METHODS

An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 465 eligible 2021 Match applicants at 4 University of California Schools of Medicine in the United States.

RESULTS

A total of 72 participants (15.5% of eligible respondents), applying to 16 specialties, responded. Of those who responded, 53% (n=38) reported following prospective residency accounts on social media, and 89% (n=34) of those respondents were positively or negatively influenced by these accounts. The top three digital methods by which applicants sought information about residency programs included the program website, digital conversations with residents and fellows of that program, and Instagram. Among respondents, 53% (n=38) attended virtual information sessions for prospective programs. A minority of applicants (n=19, 26%) adjusted the number of programs they applied to based on information found on social media, with most (n=14, 74%) increasing the number of programs to which they applied. Survey respondents ranked social media's effectiveness in allowing applicants to learn about programs at 6.7 (SD 2.1) on a visual analogue scale from 1-10. Most applicants (n=61, 86%) felt that programs should use social media in future application cycles even if they are nonvirtual.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media appears to be an important tool for resident recruitment. Future studies should seek more information on its effect on later parts of the application cycle and the Match.

To the Point: advising students applying to Obstetrics and Gynecology residency in 2020 and beyond

This article, from the "To the Point" series by the Undergraduate Medical Education Committee of the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics, is a guide for advising medical students applying to Obstetrics and Gynecology residency programs. The residency application process is changing rapidly in response to an increasingly complex and competitive atmosphere, with a wider recognition of the stress, expense, and difficulty of matching into graduate training programs. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and societal upheaval make this application cycle more challenging than ever before. Medical students need reliable, accurate, and honest advising from the faculty in their field of choice to apply successfully to residency. The authors outline a model for faculty career advisors, distinct from mentors or general academic advisors. The faculty career advisor has detailed knowledge about the field, an in-depth understanding of the application process, and what constitutes a strong application. The faculty career advisor provides accurate information regarding residency programs within the specialty, helping students to strategically apply to programs where the student is likely to match, decreasing anxiety, expense, and overapplication. Faculty career advisor teams advise students throughout the application process with periodic review of student portfolios and are available for support and advice throughout the process. The authors provide a guide for the faculty career advisor in Obstetrics and Gynecology, including faculty development and quality improvement.

Are We Witnessing a Paradigm Shift?: A Systematic Review of Social Media in Residency

As social media's applications continue to evolve, the pitfalls and dangers associated with misuse have been accentuated in the literature. Consequently, academic institutions across the nation have implemented social media policies. This study is aimed to evaluate the state of social media literature examining postgraduate trainees (residents/fellows).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed identifying peer-reviewed publications presenting original research. Studies published through December 8, 2018, focusing on social media use among postgraduate trainees were considered for inclusion.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies were categorized into 4 domains: (1) resident recruitment, (2) graduate medical education, (3) professional development, and (4) academic scholarship. Thirty-four (64.15%) investigated social media's impact on professional development, of which 16 (47.05%) highlighted the detrimental potential on trainee professionalism. The remaining 18 (52.94%) focused on promoting social media training during residency, and/or enhancing social media competency to benefit professional development. Fourteen (26.42%) rationalized social media use in augmenting graduate medical education. Ten (18.87%) assessed social media's influence on resident recruitment, of which 7 (70%) depicted use as a screening instrument for program directors on resident applicants. Two (3.77%) of the studies introduced social media as a platform for academic scholarship with indicators as altmetrics.

CONCLUSIONS

The well-established disadvantages of social media use by the postgraduate trainee continue to persist in the literature. However, there is recognition of social media as a valuable resource in influencing resident recruitment, graduate medical education, professional development, and academic scholarship, representing a paradigm shift-from cautiously avoidant to thoughtful capitalization on its immense potential.

Preventing incremental drift away from professionalism in graduate medical education

Professionalism is a core competency of graduate medical education programs, stipulated by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. We identify an underappreciated challenge to professionalism in residency training, the risk of incremental drift from professionalism, and a preventive ethics response, which can occur in residency programs in countries with oversight similar to that of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Two major, welcome changes in graduate medical education-required duty hours and increased attending supervision-create incentives for drift from professionalism. This article analyzes these incentives based on the ethical concept of medicine as a profession, introduced into the history of medical ethics in late 18th century Britain. This concept calls for physicians to make 3 commitments: to scientific and clinical competence; to the protection and promotion of the patient's health-related interests; and to keeping individual and group self-interest systematically secondary. Some responses of programs and residents to these incentives can undermine professionalism, creating a subtle and therefore hard-to-detect drift away from professionalism that in its worst form results in infantilization of residents. Program directors and educators should prevent this drift from professionalism by implementing practices that promote professionally responsible responses to the incentives created by required duty hours and increased attending supervision.

Guild interests: an insidious threat to professionalism in obstetrics and gynecology

Powerful incentives now exist that could subordinate professionalism to guild self-interest. How obstetrician-gynecologists respond to these insidious incentives will determine whether guild self-interests will define our specialty. We provide ethically justified, practical guidance to obstetrician-gynecologists to prevent this ethically unacceptable outcome. We describe and illustrate 2 major incentives to subordinating professionalism to guild self-interest: demands for productivity; and compliance and regulatory pressures. We then set out the professional responsibility model of ethics in obstetrics and gynecology to guide obstetrician-gynecologists in responding to these incentives so that they preserve professionalism. Obstetrician-gynecologists should identify guild interests affecting their group practices, set ethically justified limits on self-sacrifice, and prevent incremental drift toward dominance of guild self-interests over professionalism. Guild self-interests could succeed in undermining professionalism, but only if obstetrician-gynecologists allow this to happen. When guild self-interest becomes the deciding factor in patient care, professionalism withers and insidious incentives flourish.