Timothy Long1, Sarah Dodd1, Lauren Licatino1, Steven Rose1. 1. The authors are at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN. is Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine; is a Resident, Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine; is a Resident, Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine; is Professor, Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The United States residency application and interview process is expensive and time consuming. The purpose of this study is to better understand and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the anesthesiology residency application and interview process. METHODS: Applicants to the anesthesiology residency at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN were anonymously surveyed after the 2016 National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match. Survey questions included medical school and program characteristics, factors important for applying to and interviewing at programs, and the frequency and impact of post interview communications. RESULTS: Three hundred two of the 705 (42.8%) applicants who received the survey responded. Program websites (159/229, 69.4%), residents enrolled in the program (130/231, 56.3%) and visiting rotations (92/225, 40.9%) were the most important resources used to evaluate programs. Most respondents (169/264, 64.0%) contacted at least one program about their NRMP rank order list and some (12/169, 7.1%) respondents informed more than one program they were ranked first. Many respondents (163/264, 61.7%) reported contact by at least one program about their rank order list. Forty-six of these 163 respondents (28.2%) moved the program higher based on this communication. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment of the best residency applicants is a priority for residency programs. Our survey informs residency programs on factors to consider in developing effective recruitment strategies. Department websites were the most frequently used tool to research programs. In spite of efforts to curtail post-interview communication between applicants and programs, it continues to be a common occurrence and may influence rank lists.
BACKGROUND: The United States residency application and interview process is expensive and time consuming. The purpose of this study is to better understand and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the anesthesiology residency application and interview process. METHODS: Applicants to the anesthesiology residency at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN were anonymously surveyed after the 2016 National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match. Survey questions included medical school and program characteristics, factors important for applying to and interviewing at programs, and the frequency and impact of post interview communications. RESULTS: Three hundred two of the 705 (42.8%) applicants who received the survey responded. Program websites (159/229, 69.4%), residents enrolled in the program (130/231, 56.3%) and visiting rotations (92/225, 40.9%) were the most important resources used to evaluate programs. Most respondents (169/264, 64.0%) contacted at least one program about their NRMP rank order list and some (12/169, 7.1%) respondents informed more than one program they were ranked first. Many respondents (163/264, 61.7%) reported contact by at least one program about their rank order list. Forty-six of these 163 respondents (28.2%) moved the program higher based on this communication. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment of the best residency applicants is a priority for residency programs. Our survey informs residency programs on factors to consider in developing effective recruitment strategies. Department websites were the most frequently used tool to research programs. In spite of efforts to curtail post-interview communication between applicants and programs, it continues to be a common occurrence and may influence rank lists.
Authors: Andrew P Johnson; Peter F Svider; Adam J Folbe; Syed N Raza; Mahdi Shkoukani; Jean Anderson Eloy; Giancarlo Zuliani Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Jesse C Jacobs; Michael L Guralnick; Jay I Sandlow; Peter Langenstroer; Frank P Begun; William A See; Robert Corey O'Connor Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Christopher L Camp; Paul L Sousa; Arlen D Hanssen; Matthew D Karam; George J Haidukewych; Daniel A Oakes; Norman S Turner Journal: J Surg Educ Date: 2016-04-29 Impact factor: 2.891
Authors: Mary R C Haas; Shuhan He; Kevan Sternberg; Jaime Jordan; Nicole M Deiorio; Teresa M Chan; Lalena M Yarris Journal: J Grad Med Educ Date: 2020-10
Authors: Samuel A Cohen; Michelle Xiao; Thompson Zhuang; John Michaud; Harsh Wadhwa; Lauren Shapiro; Robin N Kamal Journal: Curr Orthop Pract Date: 2022 May-Jun
Authors: Erin M White; Stefanie C Rohde; Nensi M Ruzgar; Shin Mei Chan; Andrew C Esposito; Kristin D Oliveira; Peter S Yoo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bradford B Smith; Timothy R Long; Andrea A Tooley; Julie A Doherty; Heather A Billings; Eric J Dozois Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Date: 2018-03-14