Videoconference Interviewing: Tips for Success

Virtual Interviews in the Post-COVID-19 Emergency Era: Insights from the Gastroenterology Fellowship Applicants and Programs

BACKGROUND

Virtual interviews are still recommended for fellowship applications, 3 years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Improving equity by reducing the cost for the applicants has been the most important reason for continuing virtual interviews. However, some argue that important information may be missed in a virtual setting. Our objective was to assess the perspective of Gastroenterology (GI) fellowship interviewers and applicants toward virtual interviews.

METHODS

We designed two different anonymous surveys directed at GI programs and GI applicants who were interviewed for GI fellowship programs from 2020 to 2022 and matched to a GI program. Survey links were emailed to the Program Directors (PDs) and Program Coordinators via the AGA listserv starting in January 2023. A descriptive analysis was performed using Excel, and Fisher's exact tests were performed using R version 4.3.1.

RESULTS

Sixty-one applicants and 79 interviewers responded to our survey. More than 80% of applicants strongly agreed (n = 36; 59%) and agreed (n = 14; 23%) that they would prefer in-person interviews if money was not an issue. When applicants were asked about the interview format in order of their preference, "in-person, hybrid, virtual" was the most popular answer (n = 16; 26.2%). Most interviewers (n = 47; 59.5%) do not prefer virtual interviews over in-person interviews. Furthermore, some interviewers were rarely able to judge the applicants' interpersonal (n = 17; 21.5%) and ethical skills (n = 16; 20.3%). These results differed according to the type of interviewer (p = 0.013 and 0.018, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Based on our survey, most programs still prefer in-person interviews. Despite the several advantages of virtual interviews, the majority of applicants would prefer an in-person setting if the financial burden was not a factor. Nonetheless, many applicants think that the cost savings outweigh all the disadvantages associated with virtual interviews. The lack of empathy, personal connections, and engagement may impact the ability of interviewers to judge and ultimately rank a candidate. The virtual interview is here to stay, and we need input from the applicants and the interviewers to make the process more productive.

Running a successful STEMM summer program: A week-by-week guide

While some established undergraduate summer programs are effective across many institutions, these programs may only be available to some principal investigators or may not fully address the diverse needs of incoming undergraduates. This article outlines a 10-week science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) education program designed to prepare undergraduate students for graduate school through a unique model incorporating mentoring dyads and triads, cultural exchanges, and diverse activities while emphasizing critical thinking, research skills, and cultural sensitivity. Specifically, we offer a straightforward and adaptable guide that we have used for mentoring undergraduate students in a laboratory focused on mitochondria and microscopy, but which may be customized for other disciplines. Key components include self-guided projects, journal clubs, various weekly activities such as mindfulness training and laboratory techniques, and a focus on individual and cultural expression. Beyond this unique format, this 10-week program also seeks to offer an intensive research program that emulates graduate-level experiences, offering an immersive environment for personal and professional development, which has led to numerous achievements for past students, including publications and award-winning posters.

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.

Remote interviews in nurse practitioner programs: Addressing bias

A diverse nursing workforce is key to addressing health disparities and moving the United States towards health equity. Building and sustaining a diverse nursing work force requires close attention to admissions, including interviews. Bias in nursing school interviews has been documented, particularly impacting applicants from historically excluded groups (especially racial and ethnic minorities). With the pivot to remote interviews due to Covid 19, faculty and schools now need to consider bias in remote interviews. This article describes the implementation and outcomes of a faculty training to identify and mitigate bias in remote interviews.

Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance.

RESULTS

One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Effect of teleconferencing variables on faculty impression of mock residency applicants

Purpose

The objective of this study was to assess how teleconferencing variables influence faculty impressions of mock residency applicants.

Methods

In October 2020, we conducted an online experiment studying five teleconferencing variables: background, lighting, eye contact, internet connectivity, and audio quality. We created interview videos of three mock residency applicants and systematically modified variables in control and intervention conditions. Faculty viewed the videos and rated their immediate impression on a 1-10 scale. The effect of each variable was measured as the mean difference between the intervention and control impression ratings. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to assess whether ratings varied across applicants. Paired-samples Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were conducted to assess the significance of the effect of each variable.

Results

Of 711 faculty members who were emailed a link to the experiment, 97 participated (13.6%). The mean ratings for control videos were 8.1, 7.2, and 7.6 (P < .01). Videos with backlighting, off-center eye contact, choppy internet connectivity, or muffled audio quality had lower ratings when compared with control videos (P < .01). There was no rating difference between home and conference room backgrounds (P = .77). Many faculty participants reported that their immediate impressions were very much or extremely influenced by audio quality (60%), eye contact (57%), and internet connectivity (49%).

Conclusions

Teleconferencing variables may serve as a source of assessment bias during residency interviews. Mock residency applicants received significantly lower ratings when they had off-center eye contact, muffled audio, or choppy internet connectivity, compared to optimal teleconferencing conditions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44186-022-00053-w.

Applicant Perspectives of Virtual General Surgery Residency Interviews

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted drastic changes to residency recruitment. The majority of general surgery residency interviews for the 2020-2021 interview cycle were restructured into a virtual format. The goal of this study is to evaluate general surgery residency applicants' perception of virtual interviews.

METHODS

A secure, anonymous, web-based survey was developed, tested, and distributed via email to all candidates who applied to the University of California Irvine general surgery residency program for Match 2021.

RESULTS

1239 general surgery applicants were invited after Match Day 2021 to take the survey, and 167 (13.5%) completed the survey and were included in the final analysis. Applicants received and accepted a median of 10 (Interquartile range [IQR], 5-18) and 9 (IQR, 5-15) interviews. Using a Likert scale, candidates revealed they were most satisfied with introduction and program overview (72.5%) and interactions with faculty (70.6%). Applicants were dissatisfied with pre-interview socials (66.9%) and hospital tours (66.2%). When evaluating programs, they had the most difficulty discerning program culture and resident autonomy. Most applicants (54%) were satisfied with the virtual format and 52% believed that virtual format should continue.

DISCUSSION

The majority of applicants were satisfied with virtual interviews and could foresee the format continuing in the future.

Video-based interviewing in medicine: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The Coronavirus 2019 pandemic necessitated a rapid uptake of video-based interviewing within the personnel selection process in healthcare. While video-based interviews have been evaluated previously, we identified a gap in the literature on the implementation of video-based interviews and how they compare to their face-to-face counterparts.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to consolidate the available literature on the benefits and limitations of video-based interviews and to understand the perceived barriers associated with transitioning away from face-to-face interviews. A search strategy, developed in concert with an academic health sciences librarian, was run on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Central. The search was performed on March 31, 2020, and updated on February 21, 2021. Studies that implemented and evaluated the impact of video-based interviewing in healthcare were included in our study. Review articles and editorials were excluded.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were included in our scoping review, of which 17 were conference abstracts and 26 were peer-reviewed manuscripts. The risk of bias was moderate or high in most studies, with only four studies having a low risk of bias. Both financial costs and opportunity costs associated with the selection process were reported to be improved with video-based interviewing, while no studies explored the impact on environmental costs. Technical limitations, which were not prevalent, were easily managed during the interview process. Overall, video-based interviews were well received by both applicants and interviewers, although most participants still reported a preference for face-to-face interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

While video-based interviewing has become necessary during the Coronavirus 2019 era, there are benefits from a financial, opportunistic, and environmental point of view that argue for its continued use even after the pandemic. Despite its successful implementation with minimal technical issues, a preference still remains for face-to-face interviews. Reasons for this preference are not clear from the available literature. Future studies on the role of nonverbal communication during the video-based interview process are important to better understand how video-based interviewing can be optimized.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

This scoping review was registered with Open Science Framework.

Virtual Residency Interviews: Applicant Perceptions Regarding Virtual Interview Effectiveness, Advantages, and Barriers

BACKGROUND

Studies of the virtual interview format are needed to inform medical residency program leaders as they plan for future virtual interview seasons.

OBJECTIVE

In the current study, completed in 2021, we sought to assess applicant perspectives of virtual interview effectiveness, advantages, and barriers, including factors that might impact equity and inclusion.

METHODS

Interviewees applying to 7 residency programs and 2 clinical psychology programs at an academic medical center in the Pacific Northwest completed a post-interview survey.

RESULTS

A total of 565 of 1429 interviewees (40%) completed the survey. A vast majority (83%-96%) agreed virtual interviews were effective in each measured domain, except for learning institutional culture (352 of 565, 62%). Many also found information regarding social/living environments inadequate. Participants selected advantages to virtual interviews more frequently than disadvantages. Commonly selected advantages included cost savings, time efficiency, reduced burden of travel, and reduced carbon footprint. Disadvantages included time zone differences, access to an appropriate interview setting, and reliable access to internet. The majority of interviewees (84%, 456 of 542) desired to keep a component of virtual interviews in the future. There were no significant disparities in results based on gender, rural/suburban/urban location, race, or underrepresented minority status.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual interviews were perceived as effective, more advantageous than burdensome, and widely acceptable, with no disparities in these findings by included demographic characteristics.

Reviving the medical lecture: practical tips for delivering effective lectures

Large group lectures, which are widely used in continuing medical education, are susceptible to pitfalls that can negatively impact their effectiveness. In this article, we describe evidence-based best practices from the educational literature that can revive the medical lecture as an effective educational tool. We provide practical tips for both developing and delivering lectures, emphasizing the key role that learning objectives can and should have in the development of lectures, the importance of organization, effective use of visuals and application of restraint in slide design. Pause techniques to authentically engage the audience are described. We also provide practical tips for promoting attention in virtual presentations.

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.

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.

Applicant perception of virtual interviews in cardiothoracic surgery: A Thoracic Education Cooperative Group Study

OBJECTIVES

Cardiothoracic programs used virtual interviews exclusively this year. As programs consider using virtual interviews permanently, our goal was to evaluate the experience of applicants with virtual interviews.

METHODS

All 2020-2021 traditional cardiothoracic fellowship applicants received an anonymous electronic survey after the Match process ended. The survey assessed the number of interviews, strengths, and inadequacies of virtual interviews and factors that affected rank decision.

RESULTS

Forty-three percent of applicants responded (60/139). The average number of interviews was 16.0. Eighty percent (48/60) of respondents successfully matched. Eighty-seven percent (52/60) of respondents had a favorable experience with virtual interviews, and 97% (58/60) found them to be convenient. However, only 50% (30/60) were able to evaluate a program fully. Respondents who matched were more likely to have a favorable experience (P = .02), but not more likely to be able to evaluate a program fully (P = .35). The most valued aspect was the informal meet and greet session with fellows (4.2 of 5). The least valued aspect was the program's social media site (2.0 of 5). The factors most frequently used to decide ranking were case numbers by 92% (55/60) and culture/personality by 82% (49/60).

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual interviews were perceived more favorably compared with last year, but half of applicants were still unable to evaluate a program fully. Fellow interactions were the most popular aspect of virtual interviews. As programs consider using virtual interviews permanently, more exposure to current trainees and a more robust social media/online presence will improve favorability.

Ophthalmology Residency Virtual Interviews in the Setting of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives of Applicants, Selection Committee Members, and Current Residents

Background In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs implemented videoconferencing “virtual” interviews for the 2020 to 2021 match cycle. There is limited published information on virtual ophthalmology residency interviews.

Objective The study aimed (1) to assess applicant, selection committee member, and resident opinions of technical quality, communication quality, and ability to assess applicant or program “fit” during virtual interviews; (2) to determine which interview format—in-person or virtual—each party would prefer in the future; and (3) to survey which residency resources applicants found helpful.

Design Surveys were sent to applicants, selection committee members, and residents to assess the above objectives for the 2020 to 2021 match cycle virtual interviews at the Moran Eye Center, University of Utah.

Setting This study was conducted in a single residency program interview season from 2020 to 2021.

Participants Forty applicants, eight committee members, and seven residents who participated in the virtual interview process were surveyed.

Intervention or Exposure Prior to interviews, various avenues were implemented to connect with applicants. A videoconferencing software was utilized for interviews. Applicants and selection committee members met in one-on-one or small group interviews. Residents communicated with applicants in a large group setting between interviews.

Main Outcome and Measure The study aims to survey the participants as stated in the objectives. There was no planned outcome for this quality improvement study.

Results Survey response rate was 98.2% (54/55). All parties rated the technical components as good or very good. Applicants and selection committee members rated communication as overall good or very good, although residents thought communication was very poor. A total of 92.3% applicants, 75% selection committee members, and 0% residents were reported that they were able to appropriately assess fit of the program with the applicant. However, 46.3% respondents preferred in-person interviews in the future. Popular applicant resources were resident-produced videos (82.1%), conversations with residents (46.2%), and a gift bag (43.6%).

Conclusion and Relevance Overall, the technical components of the interview were successful. Small, structured group interactions led to better communication and assessment of fit. There were variable opinions regarding future interview format preference between in-person, virtual, or choice. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, connecting with applicants via various means can optimize the match process.

Virtual Ophthalmology Fellowship Interviews: Perceptions of U.S. Ophthalmology Fellowship Applicants in 2020

Objective This study aimed to evaluate the experiences and preferences of ophthalmology fellowship applicants utilizing a virtual interview format.

Design Present study is a cross-sectional study.

Subjects All fellowship applicants to Wills Eye Hospital during 2020 to 2021 application cycle were included.

Methods A nonvalidated, online survey was conducted, and surveys were distributed at the conclusion of the interview process after rank list submission.

Main Outcome Measures Applicant demographics, application submissions, interview experiences, financial considerations, and suggestions for improvement of the virtual interview process were the primary outcomes of this cross-sectional study.

Results Survey responses were received from 68 fellowship applicants (34% response rate). Thirty (44%) applicants preferred in-person interviews, 25 (36%) preferred virtual interviews, and 13 (19%) would like to prefer the option to choose either. Fifty-five of 68 (80%) applicants attended the same range of interviews for which they received interview invitations. Reduced costs were reported as the highest ranked strength of virtual interviews in 44 (65%) applicants, with a majority of respondents (68%) spending less than U.S. $250 throughout the entire process. The highest ranked limitation for virtual interviews was limited exposure to the culture/environment of the program in 20 (29%) respondents. On a scale of 0 to 100, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) satisfaction level with the fellowship application process was 74.6 (18.3) and mean (SD) perceived effectiveness levels of virtual interviews was 67.4 (20.4).

Conclusion Respondents were generally satisfied with virtual interviews and noted reduced costs and increased ability to attend more fellowship interviews as the strengths of the virtual interview format. Limited exposure to the culture/environment of the program was cited as the most important limitation.

Virtual Interviews During COVID-19: Perspectives of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Program Directors

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Objective

The aim of the study was to evaluate female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) fellowship program directors’ opinions regarding the effectiveness of virtual interviews for selecting fellows and their future interview mode preferences.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional online survey of all FPMRS program directors in the United States conducted from April 29, 2020, to May 30, 2020. At the time of this study, there were 73 program directors and 69 obstetrics and gynecology and urology–accredited FPMRS programs nationwide. The primary outcome was to subjectively assess the effectiveness of virtual interviews as compared with in-person interviews for evaluating applicants.

Results

Fifty seven (82.6%) of the program directors completed the survey. A total of 80.7% (46/57) of the respondents had participated in interviews for the active match cycle. Of the programs that participated in the interview process, almost all conducted interviews using virtual platforms (97.8%, 45/46). Program directors who conducted interviews virtually found them effective in evaluating applicants (88.9%, 40/45) and were satisfied with the virtual interview process (86.7%, 39/45). A total of 31.1% of respondents (14/45) preferred a virtual platform to an in-person setting for future interviews, and 60% (27/45) reported that they will likely perform future interviews virtually.

Conclusions

Although the pandemic resulted in a sudden reformatting of FPMRS fellowship interviews, most program directors nationally were satisfied with the process and found virtual interviews effective for assessing applicants. More than 50% of FPMRS program directors are likely to consider the virtual format for future interviews.

Virtual Interviews at Graduate Medical Education Training Programs: Determining Evidence-Based Best Practices

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the nation's health care system, including on graduate medical education (GME) training programs. Traditionally, residency and fellowship training program applications involve in-person interviews conducted on-site, with only a minority of programs offering interviews remotely via a virtual platform. However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is anticipated that most interviews will be conducted virtually for the 2021 application cycle and possibly beyond. Therefore, GME training programs need to prepare for the transition to virtual interviews using evidence-based practices. At the University of California, San Francisco, a multidisciplinary task force was convened to review existing literature about virtual interviews and determine best practices. This article summarizes these findings, first discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the virtual interview format and then providing evidence-based best practices for GME training programs. Specifically, the authors make the following recommendations: develop a detailed plan for the interview process, consider using standardized interview questions, recognize and respond to potential biases that may be amplified with the virtual interview format, prepare your own trainees for virtual interviews, develop electronic materials and virtual social events to approximate the interview day, and collect data about virtual interviews at your own institution. With adequate preparation, the virtual interview experience can be high yield, positive, and equitable for both applicants and GME training programs.

Reducing Over-Interviewing in the Anesthesiology Residency Match

Background The U.S. residency recruitment process is expensive and time-consuming because of application inflation and over-invitation. Objective Using interview and match data, we quantify the predicted effects if anesthesiology residency programs excluded interviews for applicants who are very unlikely to match. Methods We previously published the validity and accuracy of the logistic regression model based on data from interview scheduling software used by 32 U.S. anesthesiology residency programs and 1300 applicants from 2015-18. Data used were program region, applicant address, numbers of interviews of the interviewee, medical school US News and World Report (USNWR) rank, the difference between United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 and 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores, and the historical average of USMLE scores of program residents. In the current study completed in 2020, the predicted probabilities and their variances were summed among interviewees for 30 deidentified programs. Results For anesthesiology, the median residency program could reduce their interviews by 16.9% (97.5% confidence interval 8.5%-24.1%) supposing they would not invite applicants if the 99% upper prediction limit for the probability of matching was less than 10.0%. The corresponding median savings would be 0.80 interviews per matched spot (0.34-1.33). In doing so, the median program would sustain a risk of 5.3% (97.5% confidence interval 2.3%-7.9%) of having at least one interviewee removed from their final rank-to-match list. Conclusion Using novel interview data and analyses, we demonstrate that residency programs can substantively reduce interviews with less effect on rank-to-match lists. The data-driven approach to manage marginal interviews allows program leadership to better weigh costs and benefits when composing their annual list of interviewees.

Maximizing Career Advancement During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Recommendations for Postgraduate Training Programs

The ongoing novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created many threats as well as opportunities for the career development of physicians-in-training. Institutional responses to the demand for patient care reduced the time many residents have to pursue clinical electives, scholarship projects, and other experiences meant to clarify and advance their personal and professional goals. Moreover, many academic medical centers experienced profound fiscal losses that require thoughtful revisions to budgets and curricula. In this article, the authors recommend strategies for residency programs to mitigate these losses and capitalize on growth in virtual education, scholarship opportunities, and relationships arising from the pandemic. Drawing from career development guidelines from the National Career Development Association and existing literature about factors associated with positive career outcomes, the authors suggest leadership roles, curricula, and events that training programs can quickly and inexpensively implement to help residents grow as professionals, achieve personal training goals, produce scholarship, and attain future employment. To help trainees manage their careers, the authors recommend structured mentorship and education in career pathways and the preparation of job application materials. To foster attainment of specific knowledge and cultivate lifelong learning, the authors recommend leveraging existing resources to provide time, funding, academic coaching, and skills training for scholarship projects. To promote development of effective work relationships and community, the authors recommend appointment of a faculty champion for career advancement, scholarship showcases, attendance at virtual journal clubs, and networking through social media outlets. These recommendations for supporting career advancement may apply to early career faculty development as well as undergraduate and postgraduate medical education beyond the pandemic era. Outcomes studies will be needed to evaluate the impact of these recommendations.

Preparing students for residency interviews in the age of COVID: Lessons learned from a standardized video interview preparation program

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the widescale adoption of video-based interviewing for residency applications. Video interviews have previously been used in the residency application process through the pilot program of the American Association of Medical Colleges standardized video interview (SVI). We conducted an SVI preparation program with our students over 3 years that consisted of an instructional lecture, deliberate practice in video interviewing, and targeted feedback by emergency medicine faculty. The aim of this investigation was to summarize the feedback students received on their practice SVIs to provide the guidance they need for preparing for the video interviews that will replace in-person interviews with residency programs.

METHODS

A retrospective thematic analysis was conducted on faculty feedback provided to students who had completed SVI practice videos in preparation for their application to an EM residency between June 2017 and July 2019. Categorized comments were also sorted by type of faculty feedback: positive reinforcement, constructive criticism, or both.

RESULTS

Forty-six medical students received 334 feedback elements from three faculty. Feedback was balanced between positive reinforcement statements and constructive criticism. Students performed well on appearance and attire, creating a proper recording environment, and response content. They needed the most guidance with the delivery of content and the technical quality of the video.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a need for formal instruction in how to communicate effectively through the video medium. Medical educators will need to formally prepare students for tele-interviews with residency programs, with an emphasis on communication skills and techniques for improving the quality of their video presentation, including lighting and camera placement.

Virtual Residency Interviews: What Variables Can Applicants Control?

Due to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, almost all residency programs have adopted virtual interviewing for the National Residency Matching Program® (NRMP) or The Match® 2021. Hence, applicants have had to adapt quickly to this process, since the interviewers and the applicants were mostly inexperienced regarding this process. To date, program directors have had a successful experience on this new modality, and since the pandemic continues to limit in-person meetings and given the benefits that virtual interviews provide in terms of transportation, booking, and cost, there is a high chance that interviews for The Match 2022 will also be conducted in the same, virtual way. In light of this, we performed a review of the literature by using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and other online resources to analyze certain critical aspects and offer recommendations for residency and fellowship applicants to improve their performance in virtual interviews. Despite the current surge of virtual interviewing in today’s technology-driven era, virtual interviewing programs for residency and fellowship candidates selection are still in their infancy. We have learned that applicants can control certain aspects such as technology, settings, dress code, and behavior so that they can tailor their experience to make it more favorable and fulfilling. Ensuring proper preparation in terms of the variables that can influence the virtual experience is key for a successful interview.

Interviewing in the Wake of COVID-19: How Orthopaedic Residencies, Fellowships, and Applicants Should Prepare for Virtual Interviews

On May 7, 2020, the Coalition for Physician Accountability's released "Medical Students in the Class of 2021: Moving Across Institutions for Post Graduate Training," which comprises official recommendations on keeping programs and medical students safe during the upcoming match cycle with the challenges posed by COVID-19. In these recommendations, away rotations are discouraged, and all programs are compelled to commit to virtual interviews. Unlike employers and applicants in other industries, orthopaedic residency/fellowship programs and candidates seeking those positions have not routinely conducted virtual interviews. Without in-person interviews, applicants may perceive a limited ability to demonstrate their qualifications, judge program culture, and gauge ultimate program compatibility. Likewise, programs may perceive the inability to evaluate a candidate in real time, physically show program strengths, and ultimately judge applicant compatibility. Careful preparation and execution of a virtual interview can overcome these perceived limitations, whereas benefits, such as decreased cost for both programs and applicants, can make virtual interviews appealing. The purpose of this review was to help define a virtual interview, illustrate the benefits, and offer tips to both programs and applicants on how to prepare and perform optimally on an interview day.

Challenging the status quo of scientific presentations

Scientific presentations, usually given with slide presentation software such as PowerPoint™, are the most common method for disseminating knowledge to students and peers. Unfortunately, many are boring, text-heavy, and bullet point-riddled data dumps, with animations or cartoons that obscure or distract rather than clarify the message. These presentations, which we have all sat through and/or delivered, are often so dull that they are referred to as "death by PowerPoint™." In this paper, the authors intend to impart basic techniques for organizing and communicating information in the most effective, engaging, and actionable ways possible. We focus on three processes: generating ideas and outlining a talk, creating visually appealing uncluttered slides, and delivering an inspiring, practice-changing presentation. We also discuss considerations for a virtual presentation. We believe that even experienced speakers could benefit from reflecting on these recommendations and editing their slide presentations for clarity and simplicity.

Rescuing medical education in times of COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused widespread disruptions in various sectors of medicine, including medical education. Although the necessary focus has been on patient care and public safety and the long-lasting impact of COVID-19 remains to be determined, the impact on medical education warrants further attention and action. While it seems minuscule compared with the toll the global pandemic has caused worldwide, the impact on medical education, including graduate medical education, carries the potential to alter career progression and outcomes. We have assessed the effects of COVID-19 on dermatology clinics, residency education, and medical education, exploring recommendations and actions taken by governing bodies and offering additional suggestions of our own.

Planning for Virtual Interviews: Residency Recruitment During a Pandemic

Recent directives from The Coalition for Physician Accountability, Association of Pediatric Program Directors, Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics, and Association of Medical School Pediatric Department Chairs recommend virtual recruitment for graduate medical education (GME) programs this year. Driven by concerns for safety, equity and financial pressures, virtual interviewing will require a thoughtful approach to achieve the desired goals of recruitment. Drawing on the fields of communication and human resources management, we examine the potential effects of web-based interviews on communication through the lens of several communication theories: media richness, media naturalness, and signaling. We then review the literature on virtual interviews in GME training programs. Finally, we will provide best practices compiled from the literature.

Preparing for the interviewing process during Coronavirus disease-19 pandemic: Virtual interviewing experiences of applicants and interviewers, a systematic review

Purpose

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has forced upon all academic institutions to conduct virtual interviewing (VI) instead of face-to-face interviewing (FTFI) this interviewing cycle. The purpose of this systematic review was to understand the process of VI, its effectiveness as an alternative to FTFI, and the experiences of applicants and institutions with VI. We also share best practice strategies for applicants and institutions in VI preparation.

Method

PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus and CINAHL databases were searched through May 2020. Articles in English evaluating the effectiveness of VI were included, without applying any date limits. Two reviewers selected articles and extracted data.

Results

Of the 934 articles screened, 22 articles underwent full-text article analysis to include 15 studies. There were 4 studies that reported the use of VI as a screening tool. 11 studies completely replaced FTFI with VI. Most applicants could appropriately convey themselves through VI. Most applicants and interviewing programs expressed reservations about VI’s use as an alternative to FTFI.

Conclusion

There is dearth of evidence supporting the efficacy of VI. There is an opportunity for potential research at multi-institutional level to gain better understanding of the efficacy of VI. The knowledge obtained from this systematic review has the potential of helping applicants and institutions in preparing for VI process. Additionally, authors propose supportive strategies to help prepare applicants and institutions for VI.

Direct Comparison of In-Person Versus Virtual Interviews for Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship in the COVID-19 Era

BACKGROUND

In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship programs implemented virtual interviews (VI) during the 2020 interview season. At our institution, we had the unique opportunity to conduct an in-person interview (IPI) prior to the pandemic-related travel restrictions, and a VI after the restrictions were in place.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to understand how the VI model compares with the traditional IPI approach.

METHODS

Online surveys were distributed to both groups, collecting feedback on their interview experience. Responses were evaluated using a two-sample t test assuming equal variances.

RESULTS

Twenty-three of 26 (88%) applicants completed the survey. Most applicants reported that the interview gave them a satisfactory understanding of the CGSO fellowship (100% IPI, 92% VI) and the majority in both groups felt that the interview experience allowed them to accurately represent themselves (92% and 82%, respectively). All participants in the IPI group felt they were able to get an adequate understanding of the culture of the program, while only 64% in the VI group agreed with that statement (p = 0.02). IPI applicants were more likely to agree that the interview experience was sufficient to allow them to make a ranking decision (92% vs. 54%; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

While the VI modality offers several advantages over the IPI, it still falls short in conveying some of the more subjective aspects of the programs, including program culture. Strategies to provide applicants with better insight into these areas during the VI will be important moving forward.

Society of Gynecologic Oncology recommendations for fellowship education during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: Innovating programs to optimize trainee success

In approximately ten months' time, the novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has infected over 34 million people and caused over one million deaths worldwide. The impact of this virus on our health, relationships, and careers is difficult to overstate. As the economic realities for academic medical centers come into focus, we must recommit to our core missions of patient care, education, and research. Fellowship education programs in gynecologic oncology have quickly adapted to the “new normal” of social distancing using video conferencing platforms to continue clinical and didactic teaching. United in a time of crisis, we have embraced systemic change by developing and delivering collaborative educational content, overcoming the limitations imposed by institutional silos. Additional innovations are needed in order to overcome the losses in program surgical volume and research opportunities. With the end of the viral pandemic nowhere in sight, program directors can rethink how education is best delivered and potentially overhaul aspects of fellowship curriculum and content. Similarly, restrictions on travel and the need for social distancing has transformed the 2020 fellowship interview season from an in-person to a virtual experience. During this time of unprecedented and rapid change, program directors should be particularly mindful of the needs and health of their trainees and consider tailoring their educational experiences accordingly.

•

The novel coronavirus pandemic has disrupted medical education at all levels.

•

Fellowship programs must adapt to the realities of social distancing, workforce redeployments, and laboratory closures.

•

The integration of teleconferencing into clinical practice and learning provides both challenges and growth opportunities.

•

Program directors should be aware of new stressors our fellows, particularly underrepresented minorities, are facing.

•

Programs should take advantage of the opportunity to rethink fellowship education and the needs of our recent graduates.

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.

How Has COVID-19 Affected the Costs of the Surgical Fellowship Interview Process?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on the costs of the surgical fellowship interview process.

DESIGN

A literature review of the historical costs of surgical fellowship interviews and a summary of how the shift to virtual interviews has unintended positive and negative effects on costs for applicants and training programs.

RESULTS

Transitioning fellowship interviews to virtual platforms affects expenditures of finances and time. Each fellowship candidate saves close to $6,000 in interview travel expenses. Applicants require less time off from their residency programs during this critical time of need for frontline healthcare workers. However, applicants miss some of the live aspects of interviewing, and training programs invest more effort upfront altering their interviews to virtual formats.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 public health crisis has had a significant impact on surgical education, including how selection is conducted. Virtual recruitment has the potential for cost savings but should continue to be refined. This is an opportune time to innovate and rethink how to recruit prospective surgical residency and fellowship candidates during the current and forthcoming interview seasons.

Perception of medical students and residents about virtual interviews for residency applications in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Residency applications via virtual-interview could potentially mitigate the extensive cost and time required for customary in-person interviews. We outline the perception of medical students and residents on the use of virtual-interview for residency applications in lieu of in-person interviews.

METHODS

We obtained 1824 responses from medical students and residents through an online questionnaire between March2019-Feb2020 in Texas-United States. The survey had 11 statements (five in favor of in-person interviews and 6 in favor of virtual interviews) that respondents could rank on a 5-point Likert scale. All statements' scores were summed based on the response given by each participant to create a total score between 11 and 55. The perception of the two groups was analyzed using an independent sample T-test and ANOVA.

RESULTS

We received a total of 1711 responses from medical students and 113 from medical residents. Respondents were more female (82.2% of medical students and 47.8% of residents), with a mean age of 22.87±3.42 years old for medical students and 28.72±4.35 years old for residents. Both groups preferred in-person interviews; however, the residents were significantly more in favor (P = 0.03). Both groups agree that virtual-interviews should be as an option, though this was considerably higher in the medical students (P = 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, "travel distance" and "type of medical school" had a significant impact on choosing the virtual-interviews in both groups (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In-person interviews are favored by both medical students and residents compared to virtual-interview services in normal circumstances. However, both groups agree that programs should offer the option of having virtual-interviews as an available choice. Distance to an interview location and the type of medical school were the factors that had a significant impact on perception of using virtual-interviews. Knowing about the applicants' attitude toward residency interviews and the national circumstances are essential when preparing the interview guides. Our findings are limited by the small sample size and the low response rate. Further extensive studies are warranted to better understand the perception of residency applicants toward virtual-interviews to improve the interview process in the United States.

Feasibility and Usability of Tele-interview for Medical Residency Interview

Every year in the United States, medical students and residency programs dedicate millions of dollars to the residency matching process. On-site interviews for training positions involve tremendous financial investment, and time spent detracts from educational pursuits and clinical responsibilities. Students are usually required to fund their own travel and accommodations, adding additional financial burdens to an already costly medical education. Similarly, residency programs allocate considerable funds to interview-day meals, tours, staffing, and social events. With the rapid onslaught of innovations and advancements in the field of telecommunication, technology has become ubiquitous in the practice of medicine. Internet applications have aided our ability to deliver appropriate, evidence-based care at speeds previously unimagined. Wearable medical tech allows physicians to monitor patients from afar, and telemedicine has emerged as an economical means by which to provide care to all corners of the world. It is against this backdrop that we consider the integration of technology into the residency application process. This article aims to assess the implementation of technology in the form of web-based interviewing as a viable means by which to reduce the costs and productivity losses associated with traditional in-person interview days.