Steven J Weissbart1, Jeffrey A Stock2, Alan J Wein3. 1. Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: Stevenweissbart@gmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY. 3. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate urology residency program directors' criteria for resident selection. METHODS: In 2014, the urology residency program directors were surveyed using an email questionnaire. The generated questionnaire included the following 3 components: (1) assessing the factors used in selecting applicants for interviewing and matching, (2) rating the factors resulting in a negative decision for applicants for interviewing and matching, and (3) investigating the factors that gave applicants special attention or consideration from program directors. Analysis of variance testing and post hoc Student t tests were used to assess for differences in the mean importance score of the factors. RESULTS: Urology reference letters and United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores were ranked as the most important factors for applicant selection. A USMLE Step 1 score ≤220 and a USMLE Step 2 score ≤220 were the most deleterious factors to applicants, with a previous match failure being no less deleterious to an applicant than a USMLE Step 1 or 2 score ≤220. Program directors gave special attention or consideration to gender (25%), minority status (36.8%), being from the same medical school as the program director (61.8%), completing an away rotation at the program director's institution (86.8%), being a child of an academic urologist (47.4%), and being a child of an academic nonurologic physician (15.8%). CONCLUSION: Although program directors consider a variety of factors during the residency selection process, USMLE performance, urology references, and completing an away rotation at the program directors' institution appear to be the most important factors to program directors during the residency selection process.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate urology residency program directors' criteria for resident selection. METHODS: In 2014, the urology residency program directors were surveyed using an email questionnaire. The generated questionnaire included the following 3 components: (1) assessing the factors used in selecting applicants for interviewing and matching, (2) rating the factors resulting in a negative decision for applicants for interviewing and matching, and (3) investigating the factors that gave applicants special attention or consideration from program directors. Analysis of variance testing and post hoc Student t tests were used to assess for differences in the mean importance score of the factors. RESULTS: Urology reference letters and United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores were ranked as the most important factors for applicant selection. A USMLE Step 1 score ≤220 and a USMLE Step 2 score ≤220 were the most deleterious factors to applicants, with a previous match failure being no less deleterious to an applicant than a USMLE Step 1 or 2 score ≤220. Program directors gave special attention or consideration to gender (25%), minority status (36.8%), being from the same medical school as the program director (61.8%), completing an away rotation at the program director's institution (86.8%), being a child of an academic urologist (47.4%), and being a child of an academic nonurologic physician (15.8%). CONCLUSION: Although program directors consider a variety of factors during the residency selection process, USMLE performance, urology references, and completing an away rotation at the program directors' institution appear to be the most important factors to program directors during the residency selection process.