Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38149283›Full record

ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2023

Impact of Virtual Recruitment on Costs, Time Spent, and Applicant Perspectives Within a Family Medicine Residency Program.

Kara A Frame, Katherine T Fortenberry, Susan Cochella, Osman Sanyer, Eliza Taylor, Dominik Ose, Kirsten Stoesser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Virtual Interviews: Concerns for Rural Residency Programs.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Kara A FrameDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Katherine T FortenberryDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Susan CochellaDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Osman SanyerDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Eliza TaylorDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Dominik OseDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Kirsten StoesserDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Virtual recruitment for all residency programs was endorsed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) for the 2021 and 2022 recruitment seasons. This study assesses the impact of virtual recruitment on cost and outcome in a family medicine residency program. Methods: We assessed program recruitment costs and interview-day time with applicants in one program for the 2019 to 2022 recruitment seasons, and we sent an anonymous survey to interviewed applicants (n=98) for the 2022 match year. In-person interviews were conducted in 2019 and 2020. Virtual interviews were conducted in 2021 and 2022. Results: Program recruitment costs decreased from over $70,000 annually for in-person interview seasons to between $10,000 and $20,000 annually for the virtual interview years. Applicant time with the program on interview days decreased from 515 minutes when held in-person, to 345 minutes when virtual. Applicants expressed that they were generally satisfied with the virtual interview format though their preference for the virtual format was only slightly greater than for in-person interviews (38.6% and 35.1%, respectively); 26.3% of the responding applicants had no preference for either format. During virtual interview years, applicants interviewed at an average of 16.6 programs with 80% indicating that virtual interviews allowed for consideration of more programs. Conclusion: The virtual interview format was associated with decreased interview-day costs for programs and interviewees, and decreased time on interview days for both groups. It allowed applicants to consider more programs.

Identifiers

PMID38149283
PMCPMC10751097

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.