ArticleCureus2022
An Assessment of Pediatric Residency Applicant Perceptions of "Fit" During the Virtual Interview Era.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Video Interviews and Surgical Applicants' Ability to Assess Fit to Residency Programs.The Journal of surgical research · 2023Article
- Assessing the Use of Twitter to Share Canadian Residency Match Information During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeResidency recruitment events and interviews are widely considered an integral component of the residency match experience. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency recruitment and interviewing throughout the 2020-2021 academic year were performed virtually, which created challenges for applicants' ability to discern "fit" to a program. Given this change, it is reasonable to suspect that applicants would be less able to discern program fit. Therefore, this study evaluated how virtual interviews impacted pediatric residency applicants' ability to assess factors contributing to fit and subsequently how applicants assessed their self-perceived fit to their top-ranked programs.
methodsAn online, anonymous survey was distributed to all residency applicants who applied to any specialty at our large academic institution. The survey utilized a 5-point Likert-type scale to evaluate qualities of fit as well as the applicants' self-perceived ability to assess these qualities through a virtual platform.
results1,840 surveys were distributed, of which 473 residency applicants responded (25.7% response rate). Among these responses, 81 were pediatric applicants (27.6%). Factors deemed most important in determining fit included how well the residents get along with one another (98.8%), how much the program appeared to care about its trainees (97.5%), and how satisfied residents were with their program (97.5%). Qualities deemed most difficult for applicants to discern included the quality of facilities (18.6%), patient diversity (29.4%), and how well the residents got along with one another (30.2%). When compared to all other residency applicants, pediatric applicants placed more value on whether a program was family-friendly (p = 0.015), the quality of the facilities (p = 0.009), and the on-call system (p = 0.038).
conclusionThis study highlights factors that influence pediatric applicants' perception of fit into a program. Unfortunately, many factors deemed most important for pediatric applicants were also among the most difficult to assess virtually. These include resident camaraderie, whether a program cares about its residents, and overall resident satisfaction. Taken together, these findings and the recommendations presented should be considered by all residency program leaders to ensure the successful recruitment of a pediatric residency class.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.