BACKGROUND: Residency interviews can place significant time and financial burdens on applicants. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of Skype as a screening tool during interview season in a family medicine residency is cost-effective and time-efficient for the applicant and the residency program. METHODS: We surveyed 2 groups of medical students during interviews for our family medicine program. Thirty-two students were interviewed via our face-to-face, traditional interview (TI) process, and 10 students, the second group, who did not meet the program's standard interview selection criteria for TI, underwent our Skype interview (SI) process. RESULTS: Using an unpaired t test, we found that the applicants' costs of an SI were significantly less than a TI, $566 (95% confidence interval [CI] $784-$349, P < .001). Direct cash savings plus indirect salary savings to the program were $5,864, with a time savings of 7 interview days. Three of the applicants who were participants in the SI limb of the study were in our final rank order list. CONCLUSIONS: For interviewing in family medicine residencies, use of Skype may be a cost-effective and time-efficient screening tool for both the applicant and the program. Alternate uses of SI may include the time-sensitive, postmatch Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program.
BACKGROUND: Residency interviews can place significant time and financial burdens on applicants. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of Skype as a screening tool during interview season in a family medicine residency is cost-effective and time-efficient for the applicant and the residency program. METHODS: We surveyed 2 groups of medical students during interviews for our family medicine program. Thirty-two students were interviewed via our face-to-face, traditional interview (TI) process, and 10 students, the second group, who did not meet the program's standard interview selection criteria for TI, underwent our Skype interview (SI) process. RESULTS: Using an unpaired t test, we found that the applicants' costs of an SI were significantly less than a TI, $566 (95% confidence interval [CI] $784-$349, P < .001). Direct cash savings plus indirect salary savings to the program were $5,864, with a time savings of 7 interview days. Three of the applicants who were participants in the SI limb of the study were in our final rank order list. CONCLUSIONS: For interviewing in family medicine residencies, use of Skype may be a cost-effective and time-efficient screening tool for both the applicant and the program. Alternate uses of SI may include the time-sensitive, postmatch Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program.
Authors: Satyan K Shah; Sanjeev Arora; Betty Skipper; Summers Kalishman; T Craig Timm; Anthony Y Smith Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Linda S Nield; Renee B Saggio; Emily K Nease; Sanjay Mitra; Kelley M Gannon; Erin N Vandenlangenberg; Norman D Ferrari Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2013-12