Patterns and Perceptions of "Away" Rotations Among Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants

A Comprehensive Survey of 2024 Funding for Radiation Oncology Visiting Medical Student Electives

Visiting electives provide an opportunity for medical students to engage with radiation oncology (RO) programs, likely influencing residency match outcomes. However, some student's out-of-pocket costs may be prohibitive, and in attempts to offset the financial burden of visiting electives, particularly for students underrepresented in medicine (URiM), some institutions offer scholarships. Here, we characterized the current domestic landscape of funded RO electives. Visiting electives were identified through the FREIDA and VSLO databases in April 2024. Funded elective availability and departmental characteristics were identified via internet search by two independent reviewers. Fisher's exact test was used to determine whether there was a difference in the distribution of scholarships across the US due to the small sample size. Ninety-two visiting electives were identified, with 40 programs offering URiM elective scholarships (43.5%). Twelve (30%) were funded specifically by RO departments, and 28 (70%) were part of broader institutional URiM scholarship initiatives. The median stipend provided was $2000 (IQR $500), range $1000-$5000. Analysis of scholarships by US census division and metro area revealed unequal distribution. Electives in New England, Mountain, and East North Central divisions had higher funding proportion compared to electives in the East South Central, West South Central, and Middle Atlantic divisions. Only 1/9 electives in New York City were funded compared with 4/6 in Los Angeles. Departments with funded electives had more faculty physicians and medical residents. In our review of the 2024 landscape, over 40% of RO electives offer financial support. However, we identified geographical disparities in the distribution of scholarships, highlighting the need for interventions to address unequal access to a wide array of training programs. Our study represents a valuable resource for students interested in RO and highlights the continued need to positively contribute to increasing diversity in the field. Future work exploring the impact of funded electives is needed.

The Utility of a Virtual Emergency Medicine Elective for Visiting Medical Students

Background Away rotations allow emergency medicine (EM)-bound fourth-year medical students to experience a residency program's educational culture and influence the ranking of residency programs. The financial cost and geographic distance have limited student participation in away electives. In recent years, COVID-19 pandemic-related restrictions on away rotations resulted in the creation of multiple virtual courses. Despite the lifting of restrictions, these courses may still have utility in helping students circumvent barriers to away rotations. Limitations of previously described courses include insufficient student-faculty interaction, which influences students' understanding of the educational environment. We sought to develop and evaluate a virtual EM elective for fourth-year medical students, focused on student-faculty interaction including precepted patient contact. Methodology We developed a two-week virtual EM elective for fourth-year medical students incorporating teaching sessions designed to optimize student-faculty interactions and attending-supervised telemedicine visits. After completion of the course, students completed an anonymous course evaluation. Results Course evaluations showed that the course improved students' understanding of our residency's educational environment by providing students with access to our residency program. The most frequently cited factors preventing participation in a traditional away elective were financial cost, limit in the allowed number of away rotations, and challenges in finding housing. Conclusions We believe this course may be an effective way of improving visiting students' understanding of the educational culture of our EM residency program. Thus, although pandemic-related restrictions have been lifted, this course may serve as a valuable adjunct to the traditional away EM rotation.

Implementation and Assessment of an Informal Virtual Elective for Medical Student Radiation Oncology Exploration During the COVID19 Pandemic: a Brief Report

Subspecialty exposure during medical school can be limited. Moreover, the COVID19 pandemic prevented most onsite elective medical student (MS) rotations during 2020. Therefore, we sought to create and assess the efficacy of an informal virtual elective (IVE) for MSs to explore radiation oncology (RO) at our institution. We created IVE activities including invitations to resident didactics, a faculty lecture series, and interactive virtual events with residents and faculty. MSs were offered RO resident and faculty mentors and the opportunity to deliver a lecture. Pre- and post-IVE evaluation surveys were sent to 27 4th year MSs. Surveys utilized importance ordering (1=most important; reported as median (interquartile range), free response, and Likert-type questions (5 = extremely, 1=not at all). Our IVE, held from July to October 2020, had a median of 11 students (range 7-18) attend each activity. Pre- and post-IVE surveys were completed by 22/27 (81%) and 20/27 (74%) MSs, respectively. In pre-IVE, MSs reported participating in the IVE for faculty/resident interaction (1.5 [1, 2]), networking (3 [2, 3]), and learning (4 [3-5]). In post-IVE, MSs reported benefit from faculty mentors (5 [4, 5]), delivering a presentation (5 [3-5]), and faculty lectures (4.5 [4, 5]). In post-IVE, MSs preferred a full onsite away elective (16, 80%) over an official virtual elective (1, 5%) or IVE (3, 15%). Overall, MSs reported that the IVE provided an adequate introduction to RO at our institution (4 [4, 5]). Alternative virtual elective experiences allow MSs to informally evaluate medical subspecialties and could be offered even if formal elective opportunities are available.

Characteristics of Integrated Thoracic Surgery Residency Matriculants: A Survey of Program Directors

BACKGROUND

The 6-year Integrated Thoracic Surgery (I-6) residency programs have evolved over the past decade. Despite the rising number of programs, there are minimal data published about the criteria utilized by program directors to select candidates. We analyze the characteristics and qualities of successful matriculants using the American Association of Medical College's (AAMC) data reports and survey responses from program directors.

METHODS

Using a survey administered through the RedCap service, program directors were asked to rate the importance of a variety of factors in their evaluations of candidates. The AAMC data reports from 2018 to 2020 provided information on the mean matriculant research productivity, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 scores, and step 2 clinical knowledge (CK) scores.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 19 of 33 I-6 programs (58%). Program directors consistently rated interview performance as a very important factor in their evaluation of applicants. Matching into the specialty is becoming more competitive, with mean USMLE step 1, step 2 CK, and research productivity increasing over the past few years; matriculants had mean step 1 and step 2 CK scores of 247.3 and 254.2, respectively, in the 2020 match.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic surgery program directors place high value on applicant interview performance, letters of recommendation, and professionalism. Program directors agree that a forthcoming pass/fail USMLE step 1 score report will lead to closer scrutiny of other factors during the decision-making process and may cause future evaluation of applicants to be heavily reliant on letters of recommendation and medical school pedigree.

Linguistic Biases in Letters of Recommendation for Radiation Oncology Residency Applicants from 2015 to 2019

We aimed to investigate whether implicit linguistic biases exist in letters of recommendation (LORs) for applicants to radiation oncology (RO) residency. LORs (n = 487) written for applicants (n = 125) invited to interview at a single RO residency program from the 2015 to 2019 application cycles were included for analysis. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software was used to evaluate LORs for length and a dictionary of predetermined themes. Language was evaluated for gender bias using a publicly available gender bias calculator. Non-parametric tests were used to compare linguistic domain scores. The median number of the LORs per applicant was 4 (range 3-5). No significant differences by applicant gender were detected in LIWC score domains or gender bias calculator (P > 0.05). However, LORs for applicants from racial/ethnic backgrounds underrepresented in medicine were less likely to include standout descriptors (P = 0.008). Male writers were less likely to describe applicant characteristics related to patient care (P < 0.0001) and agentic personality (P = 0.006). LORs written by RO were shorter (P < 0.0001) and included fewer standout descriptors (P = 0.014) but were also more likely to include statements regarding applicant desirability (P = 0.045) and research (P = 0.008). While language was globally male-biased, assistant professors were less likely than associate professors (P = 0.0064) and full professors (P = 0.023) to use male-biased language. Significant linguistic differences were observed in RO residency LORs, suggesting that implicit biases related to both applicants and letter writers may exist. Recognition, and ideally eradication, of such biases are crucial for fair and equitable evaluation of a diverse applicant pool of RO residency candidates.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Radiation Oncology Residency Applicant Away Rotations, Interviews, and Rank Lists: A Comparison Between the 2020 Match and 2021 Match

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic modified the Residency Match process for fourth-year medical students. In-person away rotations were discouraged, interviews were virtual, and traditional factors used to rank programs were absent. Here, we compare survey results administered to both the 2020 and 2021 Match applicants to assess the influence of the pandemic on the radiation oncology (RO) Match process.

Methods

An institutional review board-approved prospective cross-sectional study was conducted. The 2020 and 2021 RO Match applicants at a large RO program were invited to participate. Descriptive summary statistics were assessed.

Results

The 2020 and 2021 Matches each had 76 applicants complete the survey with response rates of 54% and 57%, respectively. The 2 groups were predominantly white, cisgender male, single, and without children. Whereas 11% of 2020 applicants did not complete away rotations, 45% of 2021 applicants did not. For 2021 Match applicants, 65% of away rotations were performed virtually, whereas 51% were not for medical school credit. Of the applicants, 84% were satisfied with virtual interviews and 72% felt cost savings were worth not having in-person interviews. Whereas 49% of Match 2020 applicants spent >$5000 in interview costs, 0% of the Match 2021 applicants did so, with 45% spending <$100. Postinterview communications from programs increased during the pandemic from 36% to 42% in 2020 Match and 2021 Match, respectively. Although program culture was the most common factor influencing 2021 Match applicants program rankings, half of applicants did not gain a sense of program culture during virtual interviews.

Conclusions

We found 2021 Match applicants completed fewer away rotations, were satisfied with virtual interviews/reduced costs, and did not gain a sense of program culture through virtual rotations/interviews despite it being the most important ranking factor reported. This study supports further exploration of virtual away rotations and virtual interviews moving forward beyond the pandemic.

Radiation Oncology Virtual Education Rotation (ROVER) for Medical Students

PURPOSE

We describe the implementation of a novel virtual educational program for medical students, Radiation Oncology Virtual Education Rotation (ROVER), and its effect on student interest and knowledge in radiation oncology.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

ROVER comprised a series of virtual educational panels with case-based discussions across disease sites tailored to medical students. The panels were moderated by radiation oncology residents and included faculty panelists from academic radiation oncology programs across the country. Student pre- and postsession surveys were collected. Paired t tests were used to compare the pre- and postsession assessment results.

RESULTS

Six ROVER sessions were held from June 4, 2020, to August 20, 2020, with a total of 427 medical students registering for at least 1 session. Of these, 231 students attended at least 1 session, with 140 completing at least 1 postsession survey (60.6% response rate). Fourth-year medical students were the largest group represented among attendees (32.0%). Most attendees had exposure to radiation oncology (78.8%) before the sessions. The majority of students signed up for these sessions for education (90.6%). Some students signed up for the sessions to help with specialty selection (30.9%) and to network (30.4%). Medical students' understanding of the role of radiation oncology in each disease site (breast, sarcoma, central nervous system, pediatrics, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecologic, lymphoma, lung, and head and neck) was improved by attending each session (pre- vs postsession; P < .0001 for all disease sites). Over three-quarters of respondents stated they were considering applying or were likely to apply to radiation oncology both before and after the sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

ROVER improved medical student perceived knowledge of radiation oncology across all disease sites covered. ROVER fulfills a need for a national medical student education platform for radiation oncology. Future work is warranted to augment virtual and open educational platforms to improve access to radiation oncology education.

Away Rotations, Interviews, and Rank Lists: Radiation Oncology Residency Applicant Perspectives on the 2020 Match Process

Purpose

Using 2020 match applicants, the purpose of this study was to identify baseline applicant perspectives on the match process surveying (1) away rotations, (2) interview/postinterview communications, and (3) factors influencing applicant rank order lists.

Methods and Materials

Applicants in the 2020 match cycle at a large radiation oncology (RO) residency program received a questionnaire covering demographics and the match process: away rotations, interview/postinterview communications, and ranking. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with completing fewer away rotations.

Results

Of 141 surveys sent, 76 were completed, for a response rate of 54%. Most applicants were White, male, and matched into RO. One in 3 applicants did not have a home RO program. Most applicants completed 2 RO rotations (ie, a home rotation and an additional away rotation; range, 0-4 total rotations); RO rotations influenced the applicant rank order lists and the ultimate match result for 94% and 79% of applicants, respectively. Forty-seven percent of applicants reported being asked inappropriate questions during the interview (eg, parental or marital status). Applicants did not perceive a consistent message regarding postinterview communications from program directors. Most applicants were contacted postinterview. Interviews cost most applicants more than $5000. Thirty-seven percent of respondents reported submitting a letter of interest after the interview, hoping to improve their rank. When applying to programs, general reputation and location were the most common influential factors mentioned. When ranking programs, informal conversations with residents and program culture observations were the most common influential factors mentioned. Based on multivariable analysis, applicants who completed fewer RO rotations (including away rotations) had greater odds of matching to their home program (odds ratio [OR], 12.05; 95% CI, 1.27-206.69), lower odds of program location influencing where to apply (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.003-0.37), and lower odds of the program's general reputation affecting their rank list (OR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.001-0.47).

Conclusions

The results suggest that medical students perceive away rotations as an important influencer of their match process. Although applicants and program directors both participate in postinterview communications, interactions with residents influence rank order lists. These data may serve as an up-to-date baseline to evaluate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the RO match process.

Networking and Applying to Radiation Oncology During A Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey of Medical Student Concerns

Purpose

We assessed the effectiveness of a virtual networking session tailored for third- and fourth-year medical students interested in radiation oncology, and report students’ concerns about applying to radiation oncology during the pandemic.

Methods and Materials

A multi-institutional networking session was hosted on Zoom and included medical students, faculty, and residents from across the country. The breakout room feature was used to divide participants into smaller groups. Participants were randomly shuffled into new groups every 10 to 15 minutes. Students completed pre- and post-session surveys.

Results

Among the 134 students who registered, 69 students participated in the session, and 53 students completed a post-session survey. Most students reported the session was valuable or very valuable (79%), and it was easy or very easy to network through the virtual format (66%). After the session, 18 (33.9%) students reported their interest in radiation oncology increased, and 34 (64.2%) reported their interest remained the same. Most students believed COVID-19 (55%) and virtual interviews and platforms (55%) negatively or somewhat negatively affected their ability to select a residency program. Most students (62%) were concerned they will be inaccurately evaluated as an interviewee on a virtual platform. Although 30% agreed or strongly agreed the cost-savings and convenience of virtual interviews outweigh potential downsides, 66% of students were planning to visit cities of interest in person before rank list submission.

Conclusions

Medical students reported significant concerns with their ability to be accurately evaluated and to choose among residency programs on a virtual platform. Students found the networking session to be a valuable resource for most students, and programs could continue similar efforts during the residency application cycle to better represent their program while maintaining certain financial and geographic advantages of a virtual environment.

Geographic Distribution of Away Rotations Impacts the Urology Match Process in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the geographic impact of away rotations on regional interview invitations and matching.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Urology applicants who participated in the 2019-2020 cycle were invited to complete a survey postmatch. Questions covered demographics, scholastic achievements, number and region of away rotations, number and locations of interview invitations, and matching results. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t tests were used for continuous variables. Chi-square and fisher exact tests were used for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Of 349 applicants, 88 (25.2%) completed the survey. Geographic location was a top consideration for away rotation selection; 86% placed it in their top 3 with 40% selecting it as number 1. Furthermore, 36.4% "agreed" and 37.5% "strongly agreed" that geographic distribution of home and away rotations impacted their interview invitations. On ANOVA analysis, the ratio of regional to total interview invitations was higher among applicants completing a rotation (either home or away) in a specific AUA section (P < .01). However, completing more away rotations (≥3 vs 0-2) did not increase the ratio of interview invitations to total applications (P = .49), and rotation location was not associated with matching in that region (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Geography is a key driver in away rotation selection among applicants and may increase the proportion of regional interview invitations. However, match results were not associated with geography of away rotations. With unprecedented changes coming to the urology residency match cycle, these findings suggest that loss of away rotations may have limited impact on interview invitations or match result.

Improving Diversity and Inclusion in the Post-Coronavirus Disease 2019 Era Through a Radiation Oncology Intensive Shadowing Experience (RISE)

Purpose

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, current Association of American Medical Colleges guidelines discourage away rotations, posing significant challenges for attracting students to radiation oncology (RO). This is particularly concerning for medical students underrepresented in medicine (UIM) due to the potential of widening existing disparities in applicant and workforce composition. To proactively address this, we created a Radiation Oncology Intensive Shadowing Experience (RISE) to expose UIM students to the field of RO.

Methods and Materials

Key stakeholders within the residency program, including both UIM faculty and residents with experience in health disparities and medical education, designed a 1-week virtual RISE intended for fourth year UIM students recruited through established national organizations serving UIM medical students. A 1-week disease-specific curriculum was developed using 4 components: (1) foundational exposure to RO, (2) didactic teaching, (3) mentorship opportunities, and (4) a capstone experience. Mentorship was continuously weaved through the experience by attendings, peer resident mentors, and a UIM resident panel to optimize exposure.

Results

RISE was successfully initiated at 2 academic medical centers with 12 UIM students enrolled through August. Anonymized pre- and postclerkship surveys were developed for students, residents, and faculty involved in RISE to evaluate participants’ satisfaction, resident and attending time burden, and perceptions of program effectiveness.

Conclusions

We created a unique virtual RO shadowing experience for UIM students to address a critical gap in exposure to RO, heightened by the corona virus disease 2019 pandemic, with the goal of improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field.

Virtual Radiation Oncology Clerkship During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Purpose

We evaluated the impact of a virtual radiation oncology clerkship.

Methods and Materials

We developed a 2-week virtual radiation oncology clerkship that launched on April 27, 2020. Clerkship components included a virtual clinic with radiation oncology faculty and residents, didactic lectures, student talks, and supplemental sessions such as tumor boards and chart rounds. Medical students completed pre- and post-clerkship self-assessments. Faculty and resident participants also completed surveys on their experience with virtual lectures and clinics. Pre- and post-clerkship results were compared using a 2-sided paired t test. An analysis of variance model was used to analyze the clerkship components.

Results

Twenty-six medical students, including 4 visiting students, enrolled over 2 clerkship periods (4 weeks). All students completed the pre- and post-clerkship self-assessments and agreed that the clerkship improved their understanding of radiation oncology. Compared with 3 (11.5%) students who agreed that they understood the daily responsibilities of a radiation oncologist before the clerkship, 22 (84.6%) students agreed and 3 (11.5%) strongly agreed that they understood the daily responsibilities of a radiation oncologist after the clerkship (P < .0001). Although 15 students (57.7%) reported an increased interest in radiation oncology because of the clerkship, the mean level of interest in radiation oncology as a career remained the same, with pre- and post-clerkship scores of 3.0 (±0.9) and 3.0 (±1.1) on a 5-point scale, respectively (P = .7). Students found virtual clinic and didactic lectures to be the most valuable components of the clerkship. Most respondents agreed (30.8%) or strongly agreed (65.4%) to recommend the clerkship to their classmates.

Conclusions

Our virtual clerkship was effective in increasing medical student interest in and knowledge about radiation oncology. These data will help optimize a new paradigm of virtual radiation oncology education for medical students during COVID-19 and beyond.

Increasing Medical Student Engagement Through Virtual Rotations in Radiation Oncology

Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) affected medical student clerkships and education around the country. A virtual medical student clerkship was created to integrate didactic education with disease specific lectures for medical students, contouring, and hands on learning with telehealth. Twelve medical students in their 3rd and 4th year were enrolled in this 2 week elective from April 27, 2020 to June 5, 2020. There was significant improvement of overall knowledge about the field of radiation oncology from pre elective to post elective (P < .001). Feedback included enjoying direct exposure to contouring, telehealth, and time with residents. Overall this 2 week rotation was successful in integrating radiation oncology virtually for medical students. This is now being expanded to multiple institutions as an educational resource and future rotations for medical students.

Continuing Medical Student Education During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: Development of a Virtual Radiation Oncology Clerkship

Purpose

Our institution cancelled all in-person clerkships owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In response, we designed a virtual radiation oncology medical student clerkship.

Methods and Materials

We convened an advisory panel to design a virtual clerkship curriculum. We implemented clerkship activities using a cloud-based learning management system, video web conferencing systems, and a telemedicine portal. Students completed assessments pre- and postclerkship to provide data to improve future versions of the clerkship.

Results

The virtual clerkship spans 2 weeks and is graded pass or fail. Students attend interactive didactic sessions during the first week and participate in virtual clinic and give talks to the department during the second week. Didactic sessions include lectures, case-based discussions, treatment planning seminars, and material adapted from the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group curriculum. Students also attend virtual departmental quality assurance rounds, cancer center seminars, and multidisciplinary tumor boards. The enrollment cap was met during the first virtual clerkship period (April 27 through May 8, 2020), with a total of 12 students enrolling.

Conclusions

Our virtual clerkship can increase student exposure and engagement in radiation oncology. Data on clerkship outcomes are forthcoming.