Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32497472›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2020

Using virtual reality as a replacement for hospital tours during residency interviews.

Juan-Pablo Zertuche, Jeremy Connors, Aaron Scheinman, Neil Kothari, Kristin Wong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case for Virtual Residency Interviews.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Rank and Match Outcomes of In-person and Virtual Anesthesiology Residency Interviews.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM
    Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Juan-Pablo ZertucheDepartments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School , Newark, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7272-2745
Jeremy ConnorsDepartments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School , Newark, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2817-8890
Aaron ScheinmanDepartments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School , Newark, NJ, USA.
Neil KothariDesignated Institutional Official, and Associate Dean of Graduate Medical Education, Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School , Newark, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5040-0868
Kristin WongDepartments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School , Newark, NJ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1568-5757

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResidency programs invest a significant amount of time and resources on the recruitment process, and maintaining efficiency and cost-effectiveness are very important. Virtual Reality (VR) has become an adaptive substitute for 'real life' experiences and its use during the interview season could help save time and resources.

objectiveWith the intention to maximize the interview day and provide a cost-effective alternative to facility tours, a Med-Peds residency training program introduced a VR tour of their children's hospital during recruitment.

designThe Med-Peds program replaced an in-person facility tour of the children's hospital with a VR tour. Applicants were asked to complete an anonymous, voluntary survey on their VR experience at the end of the interview season, and rank features of the interview day in order of importance.

resultsThere were 33 respondents out of 54 interviewees. Approximately two thirds (63-66%) agreed that VR was non-inferior and superior to in-person facility tours, and that the use of VR had a favorable impact on their perception of the program. However, almost 50% of the applicants had some difficulty using VR technology.

conclusionUse of VR facility tours as an alternative to in-person tours of affiliate training facilities during a residency interview day is a viable and innovative option that can save time and money and favorably impact the applicant's impression of the program. More research is necessary to assess whether VR tours can replace in-person tours at the main teaching site, however, while social distancing measures are in place, VR tours may become necessary for programs moving forward. ABBREVIATIONS: Med-Peds: Internal Medicine-Pediatrics; VR: Virtual Reality; AAMC: Association of American Medical Colleges; IRB: Institutional Review Board.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelVirtual RealityConsumer BehaviorCost-Benefit AnalysisHospitals, PediatricHumansInternship and ResidencyInterviews as TopicSurveys and Questionnairesapplicant interview dayHospital toursmedical facility toursresidency trainingvirtual interviewsvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID32497472
PMCPMC7448838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.