Survey of surgical critical care applicant and program director views on virtual interviews for fellowship training: a Surgical Critical Care Program Directors Society sponsored study.
internship and residency
survey
surveys and questionnaires
Journal
Trauma surgery & acute care open
ISSN: 2397-5776
Titre abrégé: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101698646
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
01
02
2022
accepted:
10
03
2022
entrez:
13
4
2022
pubmed:
14
4
2022
medline:
14
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The COVID-19 pandemic forced postgraduate interview processes to move to a virtual platform. There are no studies on the opinions of faculty and applicants regarding this format. The aim of this study was to assess the opinions of surgical critical care (SCC) applicants and program directors regarding the virtual versus in-person interview process. An anonymous survey of the SCC Program Director's Society members and applicants to the 2019 (in-person) and 2020 (virtual) interview cycles was done. Demographic data and Likert scale based responses were collected using Research Electronic Data Capture. Fellowship and program director responses rates were 25% (137/550) and 58% (83/143), respectively. Applicants in the 2020 application cycle attended more interviews. The majority of applicants (57%) and program faculty (67%) strongly liked/liked the virtual interview format but felt an in-person format allows better assessment of the curriculum and culture of the program. Both groups felt that an in-person format allows applicants and faculty to establish rapport better. Only 9% and 16% of SCC program directors wanted a purely virtual or purely in-person interview process, respectively. Applicants were nearly evenly split between preferring a purely in-person versus virtual interviews in the future. The virtual interview format allows applicants and program directors to screen a larger number of programs and applications. However, the virtual format is less useful than an in-person interview format for describing unique aspects of a training program and for allowing faculty and applicants to establish rapport. Future strategies using both formats may be optimal, but such an approach requires further study. Epidemiologic level IV.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The COVID-19 pandemic forced postgraduate interview processes to move to a virtual platform. There are no studies on the opinions of faculty and applicants regarding this format. The aim of this study was to assess the opinions of surgical critical care (SCC) applicants and program directors regarding the virtual versus in-person interview process.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
An anonymous survey of the SCC Program Director's Society members and applicants to the 2019 (in-person) and 2020 (virtual) interview cycles was done. Demographic data and Likert scale based responses were collected using Research Electronic Data Capture.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Fellowship and program director responses rates were 25% (137/550) and 58% (83/143), respectively. Applicants in the 2020 application cycle attended more interviews. The majority of applicants (57%) and program faculty (67%) strongly liked/liked the virtual interview format but felt an in-person format allows better assessment of the curriculum and culture of the program. Both groups felt that an in-person format allows applicants and faculty to establish rapport better. Only 9% and 16% of SCC program directors wanted a purely virtual or purely in-person interview process, respectively. Applicants were nearly evenly split between preferring a purely in-person versus virtual interviews in the future.
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
The virtual interview format allows applicants and program directors to screen a larger number of programs and applications. However, the virtual format is less useful than an in-person interview format for describing unique aspects of a training program and for allowing faculty and applicants to establish rapport. Future strategies using both formats may be optimal, but such an approach requires further study.
Level of evidence
UNASSIGNED
Epidemiologic level IV.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35415269
doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2022-000898
pii: tsaco-2022-000898
pmc: PMC8961168
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e000898Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
J Grad Med Educ. 2020 Oct;12(5):557-560
pubmed: 33149823
J Grad Med Educ. 2020 Jun;12(3):375-378
pubmed: 32595876
J Surg Educ. 2020 Jul - Aug;77(4):733-734
pubmed: 32278546
J Surg Educ. 2017 Jan - Feb;74(1):167-172
pubmed: 27425434
J Surg Educ. 2021 Jan-Feb;78(1):321-323
pubmed: 32741692
J Surg Educ. 2021 Jul-Aug;78(4):1175-1181
pubmed: 33250429
J Surg Educ. 2011 Jan-Feb;68(1):67-72
pubmed: 21292219
Acta Biomed. 2020 Mar 19;91(1):157-160
pubmed: 32191675
J Surg Educ. 2020 Sep - Oct;77(5):999-1004
pubmed: 32507697
West J Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;19(1):80-86
pubmed: 29383060
Urology. 2020 Sep;143:55-61
pubmed: 32562774