ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
Virtual Versus In-Person Interviews: The Impact of Perceived Success on the Applicant Experience.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Virtual Versus In-Person Interviews: The Impact of Perceived Success on the Applicant Experience.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To comparatively assess otolaryngology residency applicant perspectives on virtual versus in-person interviews and identify associations between perceived application success and interview preferences during the 2023-2024 application cycle using a cross-sectional survey-based study from nationwide otolaryngology residency applicants to a single institution. Methods: Applicants to an otolaryngology residency program completed a 36-item survey comparing their experience participating in virtual and in-person interviews. Demographics, medical school performance, and application cycle progress data were collected and analyzed for associations between application success and interview preferences. Participants' overall opinion of virtual interviews was calculated by summing their Likert-scale responses, with higher scores (maximum 30) indicating a greater preference for the virtual interview. Results: A total of 81 applicants, 30% of those invited, completed the survey. An average of 41.1% (SD 18.6%) of respondents' total interviews were in-person. Opinions on the virtual interview were mixed (mean total score of 15.2 (SD 5.2)). Despite only 25.6% preferring virtual interviews, 62.9% supported their continued availability. Those with a higher interview yield were more likely to have a more positive opinion of virtual interviews (OR 1.05, Conclusion: While applicants had mixed sentiments regarding the virtual interview, most indicated that the option for virtual interviews should continue to be available for otolaryngology programs. Participants with a higher interview yield preferred the virtual interview, suggesting applicants' preferences are partly informed by their overall feelings of success during the application cycle. Level of Evidence: 3.
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.