Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes

被引:10
|
作者
Hammoud, Maya M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Winkel, Abigail Ford [4 ,5 ]
Strand, Eric A. [6 ]
Worly, Brett L. [7 ]
Marzano, David A. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bronner, Baillie A. [8 ]
Forstein, David A. [9 ]
Katz, Nadine T. [10 ]
Woodland, Mark B. [11 ]
Morgan, Helen K. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Obstet, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Gynecol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Dept Learning Hlth Sci, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[4] NYU, Grossman Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, New York, NY USA
[5] Inst Innovat Med Educ, New York, NY USA
[6] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Div Gen Obstet & Gynecol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
[7] Ohio State Univ, Wexner Coll Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[8] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[9] Rocky Vista Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Parker, CO USA
[10] Albert Einstein Coll Med, Bronx, NY 10467 USA
[11] Drexel Univ, Coll Med, OBGYN Reading Hosp Tower Hlth, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
graduate medical education; interviews; residency applications; residency selection; standard timeline;
D O I
10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeholders on the feasibility of implementing the standards as well as the effect of these changes on applicant anxiety. DESIGN AND SETTING: The authors electronically distributed an anonymous survey in February 2020 to OBGYN residency applicants, clerkship directors, student affairs deans, program directors, and program managers. Participants received a 15-item survey, with questions assessing the importance and adoption of the guidelines, as well as their effect on perceived applicants' anxiety. Responses were measured on a 5item Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore which residency factors were associated with compliance with the standards. IRB exemption was granted by the University of Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1358 participants completed the survey for an overall response rate of 39.26%. Response rates were 36.04% for applicants (904/2508), 46.67% for CDs (105/225), 34.84% for members of GSAs (34/155), 59.43% for program directors (167/281), and 51.03% for program managers (148/290). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 39.26% (1358/ 3459) with 36.04% of applicants (904/2508), 46.67% of clerkship directors (105/225), 34.84% of student affairs deans (34/155), 59.43% of program directors (167/281), and 51.03% of program managers (148/290). The recommendations were perceived as important by all stakeholders. More than 90% of program directors reported compliance with some or all of the recommendations and more than 90% of all applicants, clerkship directors and student affairs deans reported that the standards reduced applicant anxiety. All stakeholders rated each guideline to be important to extremely important. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptance of universal standards for the residency application process in the field of OBGYN. The vast majority of stakeholders surveyed supported the initiative and participated in the guidelines. Applicant respondents perceived the guidelines to be important and to decrease anxiety surrounding the application and interview timelines. These findings are important for other specialties when considering similar interventions. (C) 2020 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
引用
收藏
页码:1103 / 1110
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] How to Succeed on Your Residency Interview
    Mourad, Talal
    Awan, Omer A.
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2025, 32 (03) : 1768 - 1770
  • [42] Residency Interview Invitations: A Call to Action
    Natalie Feldman
    Robert Boland
    Academic Psychiatry, 2020, 44 : 252 - 253
  • [43] The impact of the interview in pediatric residency selection
    Swanson, WS
    Harris, MC
    Master, C
    Gallagher, PR
    Mauro, AE
    Ludwig, S
    AMBULATORY PEDIATRICS, 2005, 5 (04) : 216 - 220
  • [44] Residency Interview Invitations: A Call to Action
    Feldman, Natalie
    Boland, Robert
    ACADEMIC PSYCHIATRY, 2020, 44 (02) : 252 - 253
  • [45] Virtual Residency Interview Experience: The Child Neurology Residency Program Perspective
    Ream, Margie A.
    Thompson-Stone, Robert
    PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY, 2022, 126 : 3 - 8
  • [46] Dermatology faculty and residents' perspectives on the dermatology residency application process: A nationwide survey
    Rojek, Nathan W.
    Shinkai, Kanade
    Fett, Nicole
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, 2018, 79 (01) : 157 - 159
  • [47] Perspectives of new practitioners concerning post-graduate residency application experiences
    Cho, Jonathan
    Girnys, Jonathan
    PHARMACOTHERAPY, 2017, 37 (12): : E161 - E161
  • [48] Development and Implementation of a Nurse Residency Program Stakeholder Evaluation
    Failla, Kim Reina
    Cosme, Sheri
    JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN NURSING, 2022, 53 (05): : 195 - 197
  • [49] Standardizing Research Training in Radiation Oncology Residency: A Pilot Program Evaluation
    Ariani, R.
    Wu, T. C.
    Farrell, M. J.
    Cao, M.
    Raldow, A.
    Kishan, A. U.
    McCloskey, S. A.
    Weidhaas, J. B.
    Steinberg, M. L.
    Deng, J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2024, 120 (02): : E673 - E674
  • [50] Stakeholder perspectives on radiation protection
    Ledwidge, L
    Moore, LR
    Crawford, L
    HEALTH PHYSICS, 2004, 87 (03): : 293 - 299