Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34284010›Full record

ArticleUrology2021

Finding the Next Resident Physicians in the COVID-19 Global Pandemic: An Applicant Survey on the 2020 Virtual Urology Residency Match.

Evan Spencer, David Ambinder, Cindy Christiano, John Phillips, Muhammad Choudhury, Gerald Matthews, Sean Fullerton, Lori Dyer, Paul Zelkovic, Majid Eshghi and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Evan SpencerDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY. Electronic address: ems5648@gmail.com.
David AmbinderDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Cindy ChristianoDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
John PhillipsDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Muhammad ChoudhuryDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Gerald MatthewsDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Sean FullertonDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Lori DyerDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Paul ZelkovicDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Majid EshghiDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
Nathan C WongDepartment of Urology, New York Medical College, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, NY.
New York Medical College · USWestchester Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess interviewing applicant perceptions of a virtual urology residency interview in the setting of changes mandated by COVID-19 and to determine applicant preference for virtual or in person interviews. Applicant perceptions of multiple interview components were queried to identify program specific and interview modality specific strengths or weaknesses in the 2020 to 2021 Urology Match.

methodsA 12 question multiple choice and free text survey was emailed to 66 virtually interviewed applicants for open residency positions at a metropolitan training program after conclusion of interviews. Items of interest included interview type preference, overall interview impression, and recommendations for improvement.

resultsA total of 50 of 66 (76%) applicants completed the survey corresponding to approximately 11% of the 2020 national urology applicant pool. A total of 49 of 50 (96%) respondents assessed faculty interaction and the virtual platform positively. A total of 38 of 50 (76%) was satisfied with their resident interaction and 32 of 50 (64%) applicants stated they were able to satisfactorily evaluate the site and program. Ultimately, 39 of 50 (78%) respondents would have preferred an in person interview to our virtual interview. Respondents cited challenges in assessing program culture and program physical site virtually.

conclusionThe majority of survey respondents indicated a preference for in person interviews. A smaller proportion of applicants preferred virtual interviews citing their convenience and lower cost. Efforts to improve the virtual interview experience may focus on improving applicant-resident interaction and remote site assessment.

Indexed as

COVID-19Internship and ResidencyInterviews as TopicJob ApplicationOnline SystemsAdultFemaleHumansMaleUrology

Identifiers

PMID34284010
PMCPMC8971806
OpenAlexW3185939507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.