Should Radiology Residency Interviews Remain Virtual? Results of a Multi-institutional Survey Inform the Debate.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The recent completion of the inaugural virtual interview season has triggered calls for the permanency of virtual interviews in the radiology resident selection process. We designed a study to assess the inaugural 2020-2021 virtual interview season and inform the anticipated debate on the future of radiology residency interviews. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four and 39-question survey instruments developed for program directors (PDs) and applicants, respectively, were distributed through the Radiology Residency Education Research Alliance to measure the demographics, experiences with technology, attitudes toward the virtual interview season and attitudes about proposed changes to the interview process. Comparisons were made between demographics and survey queries. RESULTS: PD and applicant response rates were 74% (25/34) and 45% (84/186), respectively. Eighty percent (20/25) of PDs and 76% (64/84) of applicants described the virtual interview season as excellent or very good. Sixty percent of PDs agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "The benefits of the virtual interview season outweighed the drawbacks," while 24% disagreed or strongly disagreed, and 16% were neutral. Among applicants, 80% agreed or strongly agreed, 10% disagreed or strongly disagreed, and 10% were neutral toward the same statement. Ninety-two percent of PDs noted that their rank order list performed the same or better than in years prior. Both PDs and applicants identified applicant equity and wellness as major benefits of virtual interviews, while identifying over-application and interview hoarding as significant detriments. CONCLUSION: The virtual interview provides an adequate substitute for the conventional in-person residency interview, with real and perceived benefits to applicant wellness, equity, and financial well-being. The downsides of virtual interviews, namely over-application and interview hoarding, have workable solutions.

Radiology Stereotypes, Application Barriers, and Hospital Integration: A Mixed-methods Study of Medical Student Perceptions of Radiology.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Limited exposure to radiology by medical students can perpetuate negative stereotypes and hamper recruitment efforts. The purpose of this study is to understand medical students' perceptions of radiology and how they change based on medical education and exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-institution mixed-methods study included four groups of medical students with different levels of radiology exposure. All participants completed a 16-item survey regarding demographics, opinions of radiology, and perception of radiology stereotypes. Ten focus groups were administered to probe perceptions of radiology. Focus groups were coded to identify specific themes in conjunction with the survey results. RESULTS: Forty-nine participants were included. Forty-two percent of participants had positive opinions of radiology. Multiple radiology stereotypes were identified, and false stereotypes were diminished with increased radiology exposure. Opinions of the impact of artificial intelligence on radiology closely aligned with positive or negative views of the field overall. Multiple barriers to applying for a radiology residency position were identified including board scores and lack of mentorship. COVID-19 did not affect perceptions of radiology. There was broad agreement that students do not enter medical school with many preconceived notions of radiology, but that subsequent exposure was generally positive. Exposure both solidified and eliminated various stereotypes. Finally, there was general agreement that radiology is integral to the health system with broad exposure on all services. CONCLUSION: Medical student perceptions of radiology are notably influenced by exposure and radiology programs should take active steps to engage in medical student education.