Mara L Schenker1, Keith D Baldwin2, Craig L Israelite3, L Scott Levin3, Samir Mehta3, Jaimo Ahn4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: mara.schenker@emory.edu. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resident selection is integral to the graduate medical educational process and the future of our profession. There is no consensus among residency directors as to how to systematically and consistently screen and select applicants who would perform well as residents. The purpose of this study was to introduce and assess a high volume application screening tool and semistructured interview process. METHODS: This study took place in an academic orthopedic surgery department over 2 years (2013-2014). Overall, 1382 applications were screened in 7 categories, with a maximum score of 100. A total of 14 faculty reviewed applications; 218 interviews were offered; 165 applicants accepted the interview. Overall, 4 interview domains (cognitive, affective, activities, and theme), and an impression score were ranked from 1 (Exceptional) to 6 (Concern). Each room had an assigned "theme" (ethics, affective, cognitive, research, and "fit") with standardized questions. A summary score was generated of all scores to determine the preliminary rank list; the final rank list was determined after group discussion. Correlation between preliminary rank, final rank, and screening scores were assessed. RESULTS: The average screening score was 62.5 (range: 0-100, median = 64). The average interview score was 69.5 (range: 32.24-95.0). Final rank lists correlated most highly with initial rank (0.912, p < 0.001), impression (0.847, p < 0.001), and affective domain (0.834, p < 0.001). Cognitive domain (0.628, p < 0.001) and screening scores (0.264, p < 0.001) less highly correlated with final rank position. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic approach was used to screen and evaluate a large number of orthopedic surgery applicants. Our system demonstrated excellent feasibility, reliability, and predictability for the final rank list.
BACKGROUND: Resident selection is integral to the graduate medical educational process and the future of our profession. There is no consensus among residency directors as to how to systematically and consistently screen and select applicants who would perform well as residents. The purpose of this study was to introduce and assess a high volume application screening tool and semistructured interview process. METHODS: This study took place in an academic orthopedic surgery department over 2 years (2013-2014). Overall, 1382 applications were screened in 7 categories, with a maximum score of 100. A total of 14 faculty reviewed applications; 218 interviews were offered; 165 applicants accepted the interview. Overall, 4 interview domains (cognitive, affective, activities, and theme), and an impression score were ranked from 1 (Exceptional) to 6 (Concern). Each room had an assigned "theme" (ethics, affective, cognitive, research, and "fit") with standardized questions. A summary score was generated of all scores to determine the preliminary rank list; the final rank list was determined after group discussion. Correlation between preliminary rank, final rank, and screening scores were assessed. RESULTS: The average screening score was 62.5 (range: 0-100, median = 64). The average interview score was 69.5 (range: 32.24-95.0). Final rank lists correlated most highly with initial rank (0.912, p < 0.001), impression (0.847, p < 0.001), and affective domain (0.834, p < 0.001). Cognitive domain (0.628, p < 0.001) and screening scores (0.264, p < 0.001) less highly correlated with final rank position. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic approach was used to screen and evaluate a large number of orthopedic surgery applicants. Our system demonstrated excellent feasibility, reliability, and predictability for the final rank list.
Authors: Jaime Jordan; Kevan Sternberg; Mary R C Haas; Shuhan He; Lalena M Yarris; Teresa M Chan; Nicole M Deiorio Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-12-18