ArticleJournal of breast imaging2022
Virtual Interviews for Breast Imaging Fellowship During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives of Program Directors and Applicants.
Article in Journal of breast imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the Outcomes of the Initial Virtual Breast Imaging Fellowship Interview Season.Journal of breast imaging · 2025Article
- Analysis of the 2024 Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship Match: Survey of Applicants' and Program Directors' Preferences Regarding In-Person Versus Virtual Interviews.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Virtual Interviews Are Not Adequate Replacements for In-Person Interviews for Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Fellowship Program Directors and Applicants.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Breast Imaging Fellowship Virtual Interviews: The Program Director's Perspective.Journal of breast imaging · 2024Article
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
objectiveTo compare in-person and virtual breast fellowship interview experiences from the perspective of fellowship program directors (PDs) and applicants.
methodsThree separate voluntary, anonymous, e-mail delivered surveys were developed for PDs, in-person interview applicants in 2019-2020, and virtual interview applicants in 2020-2021. PD and applicant survey responses regarding the two interview cycles were compared.
resultsThe response rate was 56% (53/95) for PDs, 19% (23/123) for in-person applicants, and 38% (49/129) for virtual applicants. PDs reported significantly lower cost for virtual compared to in-person interviews (P < 0.001). They reported no significant difference in number of applications received, number of applicants interviewed, applicant pool geographic regions, number of interview days offered, or format of interviews. Most PDs (31/53, 58%) felt the virtual format still allowed them to get to know the applicants well. Cost was significantly higher for in-person compared to virtual applicants (P < 0.001). More in-person applicants (11/23, 48%) listed cost as a barrier compared to virtual applicants (7/49, 14%) (P = 0.002). Virtual and in-person applicants reported a similar number of program applications, but virtual applicants completed more interviews (P = 0.012). Both groups preferred scheduled time to speak with the current fellows and a one-on-one interview format with two to four faculty members. Most applicants (36/49, 73%) felt the virtual format still allowed them to get to know each program well.
conclusionVirtual interviews provide a reasonable alternative to in-person interviews for breast imaging fellowship applicants, with decreased cost being the main advantage.
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.