Literature DB >> 26488571

Identifying and Promoting Best Practices in Residency Application and Selection in a Complex Academic Health Network.

Glen Bandiera1, Caroline Abrahams, Mariela Ruetalo, Mark D Hanson, Leslie Nickell, Salvatore Spadafora.   

Abstract

Medical education institutions have a social mandate to produce a diverse physician workforce that meets the public's needs. Recent reports have framed the admission process outcome of undergraduate and postgraduate medical education (UGME and PGME) programs as a key determinant of the collective contributions graduating cohorts will make to society, creating a sense of urgency around the issue of who gets accepted. The need for evidence-informed residency application and selection processes is growing because of the increasing size and diversity of the applicant pool and the need for equity, fairness, social accountability, and health human resource planning. The selection literature, however, is dominated by a UGME focus and emphasizes determination of desirable qualities of future physicians and selection instrument reliability and validity. Gaps remain regarding PGME selection, particularly the creation of specialty-specific selection criteria, suitable outcome measures, and reliable selection systems.In this Perspective, the authors describe the University of Toronto's centralized approach to defining system-level best practices for residency application and selection. Over the 2012-2013 academic year, the Best Practices in Application and Selection working group reviewed relevant literature and reports, consulted content experts, surveyed local practices, and conducted iterative stakeholder consultations on draft recommendations. Strong agreement arose around the resulting 13 principles and 24 best practices, which had either empirical support or face validity. These recommendations, which are shared in this article, have been adopted by the university's PGME advisory committee and will inform a national initiative to improve trainees' transition from UGME to PGME in Canada.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26488571     DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000954

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  9 in total

1.  Addressing bias and lack of objectivity in the Canadian resident matching process.

Authors:  Tammy Ryan
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Applicant gender and matching to first-choice discipline: a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Canadian Resident Matching Service (2013-2019).

Authors:  Shannon M Ruzycki; Madalene Earp; Irene W Y Ma
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2020-05-07

3.  Evaluation of Validity Evidence for Personality, Emotional Intelligence, and Situational Judgment Tests to Identify Successful Residents.

Authors:  Aimee K Gardner; Brian J Dunkin
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Recruitment of a diverse emergency medicine residency program: Creating and maintaining a culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Authors:  Michelle D Lall; Anika Backster; Melissa H White; Sheryl L Heron; Jeffrey N Siegelman
Journal:  AEM Educ Train       Date:  2021-09-29

5.  Scholarly activity as a selection criterion in the Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS): A review of published criteria by internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics programs.

Authors:  Jorin Lukings; Amanda Bell; Karl Stobbe; Vesa Basha; Jessie Brazier; Delia Dragomir; Meghan Glibbery; Hannah Kearney; Alison Knapp; Daniel Levin; Dyon Tucker; Seddiq Weera; Larry W Chambers
Journal:  Can Med Educ J       Date:  2020-07-15

6.  Fundamental trends within falling match rates: Insights from the past decade of Canadian residency matching data.

Authors:  Andy G X Zeng; Connor T A Brenna; Silvio Ndoja
Journal:  Can Med Educ J       Date:  2020-07-15

7.  Using the Association of American Medical Colleges Standardized Video Interview in a Holistic Residency Application Review.

Authors:  Andrew King; Chad Mayer; Andrew Starnes; Kelly Barringer; Lancelot Beier; Harsh Sule
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-12-06

8.  Opening the black box of selection.

Authors:  Sanne Schreurs; Kitty Cleutjens; Carlos F Collares; Jennifer Cleland; Mirjam G A Oude Egbrink
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 3.853

9.  An Overview of the GI Fellowship Interview: Part II-Tips for Selection Committees and Interviewers.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Samir C Grover; Rashmi Advani; Steven Bollipo; Aline Charabaty; Nikki Duong; Mohammad Bilal
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2022-02-05       Impact factor: 3.199

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.