Shifting the Surgical Residency Match to a 100% Virtual Interview Format During the COVID-19 Pandemic, How has It Affected Placement Into Surgical Training Programs?

INTRODUCTION: The AAMC transitioned to virtual interview formats for the 2020-2021 residency match. This study aims to examine the impact of the 100% virtual interview format for the 2020-2021 residency match on both application and match changes for multiple surgical specialties, including neurosurgery (NS), orthopedic surgery (OS), plastic surgery (PS), general surgery (GS), thoracic surgery (TS), and vascular surgery (VS). METHODS: Cross-sectional study comparing application and match changes between the in-person 2019-2020 and virtual 2020-2021 residency match cycles for different surgical specialties. RESULTS: There was an overall increase in the number of applicants for 5 of the surgery specialties but not VS, and an overall increase in the number of applications per residency program across all specialties. The average number of applications per applicant also increased, except in TS. There were no major match changes except in TS, which saw an increase in number of spots filled by MDs to nearly 100% from 84.2% in the previous cycle. CONCLUSION: The switch to the 100% virtual 2020-2021 residency match interview format was associated with an overall increase in the number of applications per program and number of applications per applicant across multiple surgical specialties. There was a decrease in the number of applicants to VS and an increase in the number of applications per applicant. The switch to a virtual interview format in 2020-2021 was also associated with an increase in TS spots filled by MDs to almost 98%, increasing the already concerning TS match disparity for DO and IMG applicants.

Relationship Between Residency Match Distance From Medical School and Virtual Application, School Characteristics, and Specialty Competitiveness.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the residency match process by eliminating away rotations and changing from in-person to virtual interviews. In this study, we explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the geographic match distance of United States (US) senior medical students across all specialties. METHODS: We collected publicly available student match data between 2018 and 2021 from US allopathic medical schools and calculated match distance between medical school and residency training using a novel metric - the "match space." Match space was codified by whether the student matched at their home institution, home state, adjacent state, same or adjacent US census division (non-adjacent state) or skipped at least one US census division. Adjusting for covariates, ordinal logistic regression correlated school and specialty characteristics with match distance pre- and post-pandemic for all specialties. We defined and ranked specialty competitiveness using predictive values from factor analysis. RESULTS: A total of 34,672 students representing 66 medical schools from 28 states matched into 26 specialties in 50 states and Canada. Fifty-nine percent of students were from public institutions, and 27% of schools ranked in the top 40 for research. The mean percentage of in-state students by school was 60.3% (range 3-100%). Match space was lower after the pandemic (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98; p=0.006), from schools with higher in-state percentages (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.72-0.76), from top National Institutes of Health-funded institutions (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.92), from the Northeast (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.75; Midwest reference), and the West (OR 0.67, 95% 0.60-0.74). Match space was higher for students graduating from private schools (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.19), from the South (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.2-1.33), and matching into more competitive specialties (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.14). The top five most competitive specialties were Plastic Surgery, Neurosurgery, Dermatology, Orthopedic Surgery, and Otolaryngology. Internal Medicine ranked eighth. CONCLUSIONS: After the COVID-19 pandemic, students graduating from US allopathic schools matched closer to their home institution. Students attending public schools, schools with more in-state matriculants, and schools with higher research rankings also matched closer to their home institutions. Specialty competitiveness and US census region also impacted match distance. Our study adds insight into how geographic match patterns were influenced by school, specialty choice, and the pandemic.

Changes in United States Residency Program Online Presence Following COVID-19.

PHENOMENON: The 2020-2021 residency application cycle was subject to major alterations following the COVID-19 global pandemic. This study determined the online presence of US-based residency training programs during this time period. APPROACH: An official list of accredited US residency programs for 24 medical specialties was obtained through the Electronic Residency Application Service Programs' online presence and was evaluated for website ownership in addition to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook account ownership. Date of social media account foundation and virtual opportunities offered were recorded. Doximity Residency Navigator for 2020-2021 was used to determine program rank, and programs were stratified by location using Association of American Medical Colleges regions. Program rank and geographic location were used to determine potential trends in online presence. This study was performed during the residency application cycle from September 2, 2020, to November 29, 2020, during which applications were submitted and the interview cycle began. FINDINGS: Fifty-seven percent of the 4,562 programs had a presence on social media. One-third of all accounts were created after March 1, 2020, and most (58%) were residency program-associated. A total of 1,315 programs offered virtual open houses through Twitter (829), Instagram (792), and Facebook (295). First-quartile programs had significantly more social media accounts per program on average (1.8) than those in subsequent quartiles, and Western region programs had significantly more accounts per program on average (1.3) than the Central (1.0), Northeastern (1.0), and Southern (1.1) regions. INSIGHTS: US residency programs created social media accounts and online opportunities for applicants following March 1, 2020. Online interactions may serve as substitutes at a time when in-person interaction is not possible. Future studies may examine the influence and impact of virtual interactions.

An Assessment of Pediatric Residency Applicant Perceptions of "Fit" During the Virtual Interview Era.

PURPOSE: Residency recruitment events and interviews are widely considered an integral component of the residency match experience. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency recruitment and interviewing throughout the 2020-2021 academic year were performed virtually, which created challenges for applicants' ability to discern "fit" to a program. Given this change, it is reasonable to suspect that applicants would be less able to discern program fit. Therefore, this study evaluated how virtual interviews impacted pediatric residency applicants' ability to assess factors contributing to fit and subsequently how applicants assessed their self-perceived fit to their top-ranked programs. METHODS: An online, anonymous survey was distributed to all residency applicants who applied to any specialty at our large academic institution. The survey utilized a 5-point Likert-type scale to evaluate qualities of fit as well as the applicants' self-perceived ability to assess these qualities through a virtual platform. RESULTS: 1,840 surveys were distributed, of which 473 residency applicants responded (25.7% response rate). Among these responses, 81 were pediatric applicants (27.6%). Factors deemed most important in determining fit included how well the residents get along with one another (98.8%), how much the program appeared to care about its trainees (97.5%), and how satisfied residents were with their program (97.5%). Qualities deemed most difficult for applicants to discern included the quality of facilities (18.6%), patient diversity (29.4%), and how well the residents got along with one another (30.2%). When compared to all other residency applicants, pediatric applicants placed more value on whether a program was family-friendly (p = 0.015), the quality of the facilities (p = 0.009), and the on-call system (p = 0.038). CONCLUSION: This study highlights factors that influence pediatric applicants' perception of fit into a program. Unfortunately, many factors deemed most important for pediatric applicants were also among the most difficult to assess virtually. These include resident camaraderie, whether a program cares about its residents, and overall resident satisfaction. Taken together, these findings and the recommendations presented should be considered by all residency program leaders to ensure the successful recruitment of a pediatric residency class.

Understanding General Surgery Applicant Expectations and Perceptions in the Virtual Interview Process.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has played a lasting role on residency recruitment through the virtual interview process. The objective of this study was to 1) examine general surgery applicants' priorities and perceptions following pre-interview virtual open houses and 2) to assess applicant expectations and efficacy of the virtual interview day process. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: This study utilized two voluntary and anonymous cross-sectional surveys administered via email to evaluate the virtual interview process of a general surgery residency program. The first was administered to registrants following completion of three open houses of various topics. The second was administered following each interview day. The post-open house survey had 78 respondents, two excluded for no open house attendance. The post-interview survey was completed by 44 applicants (62.9% response rate). RESULTS: Majority of respondents reported that attending virtual open houses made them want to apply to (90.9%) and improved their perception of the program (94.7%). Applicants who felt a sense of obligation to attend open houses (68.4%) were significantly more likely to feel that they contributed to the stress and time commitment of applications (81.8% vs 18.2%, p=0.028). Interview expectations were identified in recurrent themes: 1. Clear organization with breaks, 2. Interactive resident sessions, 3. Meetings with program leadership, 4. Additional information unavailable on other resources. The pre-interview social and interview day improved 90.2% of the applicants' perceptions of the program. The interview significantly improved applicants' ability to assess nearly all aspects of the program, notably resident camaraderie and culture (30.8% vs 97.4%, p=0.01) and strengths and weaknesses (30.8% vs 92.3%, p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: While virtual open houses can improve applicants' perceptions and desire to apply to a program, the associated stress and obligation should be considered. Virtual interviews should provide information unavailable using other resources and provide avenues for conveying the resident culture and camaraderie.

Cost of the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process: Comparison With Other Specialties and Equity Implications.

Objective: This study aims to assess trends in applicant-reported costs of the otolaryngology residency application process between 2019 and 2021 and evaluate the impact of application costs on number of interview offers. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: US allopathic and osteopathic medical schools. Methods: Survey data from applicants were obtained from the Texas STAR database (Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency) for the years 2019 to 2021. Outcomes included total cost, interview cost, other costs, application fees, and number of interview offers. Simple and multivariable linear regression was used to identify novel predictors of cost and assess the correlation between cost and interview offers. Results: Among 363 otolaryngology applicants, there was a 74% reduction in total costs and a 97% reduction in interview costs in the 2021 cycle vs the 2020 cycle. Significant predictors of total cost among otolaryngology applicants included the number of away rotations (P < .01), the number of research experiences (P = .04), and couples matching (P < .01). During the 2019 and 2020 application cycles, there was a significant association between applicant-reported total spending and number of otolaryngology interview offers (P < .01), which was not present during the 2021 cycle (P = .35). Conclusion: Number of otolaryngology interview offers appears to be directly correlated with applicant-reported total costs regardless of number of applications or interviews attended, which may be a source of inequality in the application process. There was a drastic reduction in total costs, interview costs, and other costs during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was likely driven by virtual interviewing and the absence of away rotations.

Impact of COVID-19 on Radiology Residency Selection Process: A Survey of Radiology Residency Programs in the US.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Virtual residency interviews have become crucial in maintaining CDC-recommended precautionary measures throughout the ongoing COVID-era. However, scant literature exists regarding the direct impact the pandemic has had on the radiology program selection process, including preferred modalities of residency interviews and social media utilization. This survey aimed to understand how radiology programs adapted to changes in the 2020-2021 virtual application cycle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 32-question survey was distributed to 194 residency programs between July and August of 2021. Data were analyzed primarily by using descriptive statistics and Paired Student's T-testing. RESULTS: A total of 31 programs completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 16%. When queried about the perceived success of virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application cycle, 21 programs (68%) said the new interview format was very successful. Twenty-seven of the programs (87%) believed they were able to adequately gauge applicants through virtual interviews. However, when surveyed about personal preferences for interviews, the responses were more evenly distributed between virtual (11/31, 35%) and in-person (14/31, 45%). Pre-COVID, the top three criteria programs used to rank candidates were USMLE Step 1 score (20/31, 65%), letters of recommendation (17/31, 55%), and MSPE (12/31, 39%). Within the virtual, COVID-19 era, these criteria remained statistically unchanged (p = 0.22): USMLE Step 1 score (21/31, 68%), letters of recommendation (17/31, 55%), and MSPE (14/31, 45%). About half of programs who had not previously utilized social media (12 of 23, 52%) created accounts, mostly via Twitter or Instagram. CONCLUSION: The primary findings indicate that programs perceived success with virtually interviewing and ranking applicants, the criteria to rank applicants remain unchanged despite the virtual environment, and programs' social media utilization increased.

PGY1 Resident-Led Mock Virtual Interviews to Prepare for the 2022 Otolaryngology Residency Virtual Interviews.

Due to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, virtual interviews are planned for the 2021-2022 residency application cycle. The virtual interview will remain novel to applicants for each match cycle until the graduating medical student class has experience from virtual interviews during their medical school admissions. The virtual interview poses unique challenges that are unique from in-person formats. Given the lack of experience of applicants in the 2022 match, practicing interviewing skills prior to the actual date is vital to success. We describe a postgraduate year 1 (PGY1)-run mock interview session for applicants preparing for the 2021-2022 otolaryngology interview cycle and discuss the methodology. Deliberate practice with PGY1 residents who have just recently undergone the virtual interview process can better prepare applicants for their virtual interviews, improve on-camera behaviors, and ameliorate mental health challenges unique to the virtual format.

Resource Utilization and Emergency Medicine Advisors' Approach to Video Interview Preparation.

Introduction The Standardized Video Interview (SVI) was a residency application component introduced by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) as a supplement to the existing process, which aimed to measure knowledge of professional behaviors and interpersonal skills. Given its novelty in both aim and execution, little advice or experience was available to inform preparation strategies. We sought to perform a cross-sectional analysis to explore advisors' practices in guiding students' preparation for the SVI. Methods An electronic questionnaire was developed and piloted for flow and usability, then distributed to all members of the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine (CORD EM), the professional society for emergency medicine educators, via listserv, comprised of 270 residency programs. Questions were both open- and closed-ended and therefore analyzed in a mixed-method fashion.  Results We received 56 responses from a listserv representing 270 residency programs. Respondents cited personal experience and consensus opinions from national organizations as the primary sources for their advice. The most common resources offered to students were space for completing the SVI (41%) or technical support for completing the SVI (47%). The time committed to student advising specifically for the SVI ranged from zero to 20 hours. Estimated associated costs of preparation ranged from zero up to $10,000 (time plus resources). Two individuals reported recommending commercial preparation resources to students.  Conclusion The SVI was a novel attempt to augment the resident application process. We found variability in resources and advice offered to students, including broad ranges of time dedicated, the monetary value of resources contributed, and the types of resources utilized. As the global COVID-19 pandemic has inspired a wave of innovation and process changes, we present this data for consideration as a snapshot of the variable responses to a single uniform process change.

Prioritizing the Interview in Selecting Resident Applicants: Behavioral Interviews to Determine Goodness of Fit.

From our initial screening of applications, we assess that the 10% to 15% of applicants whom we will interview are all academically qualified to complete our residency training program. This initial screening to select applicants to interview includes a personality assessment provided by the personal statement, Dean's letter, and letters of recommendation that, taken together, begin our evaluation of the applicant's cultural fit for our program. While the numerical scoring ranks applicants preinterview, the final ranking into best fit categories is determined solely on the interview day at a consensus conference by faculty and residents. We analyzed data of 819 applicants from 2005 to 2017. Most candidates were US medical graduates (62.5%) with 23.7% international medical graduates, 11.7% Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (DO), and 2.1% Caribbean medical graduates. Given that personality assessment began with application review, there was excellent correlation between the preinterview composite score and the final categorical ranking in all 4 categories. For most comparisons, higher scores and categorical rankings were associated with applicants subsequently working in academia versus private practice. We found no problem in using our 3-step process employing virtual interviews during the COVID pandemic.

An Orthopaedic Virtual Clinical Clerkship for Visiting Medical Students: Early Successes and Future Implications.

OBJECTIVE: The visiting orthopaedic clerkship is viewed by both students and program directors as an important part of the orthopaedic surgery residency application process, despite being criticized as costly and inefficient. Restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic prevented students from participating in in-person clerkships at institutions other than at their home programs, necessitating a virtual replacement for the in-person orthopaedics clerkship experience. It remains unclear how the virtual clerkships will affect the application process this year, and moving forward. We describe and review our institution's initial experience with a virtual orthopaedic clerkship. We hypothesize that students would view the virtual clerkship as valuable, and that students would see a role for such clerkships going forward. DESIGN: A virtual orthopaedic surgery clerkship was created and students were invited to enroll. Thirty-one 4th-year medical students participated. Each clerkship included 8 two-hour sessions. Each session was moderated by a faculty member, and participants included only medical students. Students presented virtual cases, which provided the basis for the discussion and education. At the conclusion of each clerkship, students were given an anonymous survey assessing various aspects of the clerkship. RESULTS: Twenty-seven students responded to the survey. Overall, 15 students rated the experience as outstanding, 11 excellent, and 1 good. Twenty-two students saw a role for virtual clerkships moving forward, and five students did not see a role moving forward. Student reported strengths of the clerkship included direct faculty interaction, structured curriculum, and student-centered discussions. Lack of hands-on experience was cited as the biggest weakness. CONCLUSIONS: Students valued the opportunity for a virtual clerkship, and most could envision a role for such virtual clerkships moving forward. We suggest that virtual clerkships may be a cost-effective and useful tool in helping both students and programs navigate the residency selection process.

Virtual Residency Interview Experience: The Child Neurology Residency Program Perspective.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented many challenges for graduate medical education, including the need to quickly implement virtual residency interviews. We investigated how different programs approached these challenges to determine best practices. METHODS: Surveys to solicit perspectives of program directors, program coordinators, and chief residents regarding virtual interviews were designed through an iterative process by two child neurology residency program directors. Surveys were distributed by email in May 2021. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Responses were received from 35 program directors and 34 program coordinators from 76 programs contacted. Compared with the 2019-2020 recruitment season, in 2020-2021, 14 of 35 programs received >10% more applications and most programs interviewed ≥12 applicants per position. Interview days were typically five to six hours long and were often coordinated with pediatrics interviews. Most programs (13/15) utilized virtual social events with residents, but these often did not allow residents to provide quality feedback about applicants. Program directors could adequately assess most applicant qualities but felt that virtual interviews limited their ability to assess applicants' interpersonal communication skills and to showcase special features of their programs. Most respondents felt that a combination of virtual and in-person interviewing should be utilized in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Residency program directors perceived some negative impacts of virtual interviewing on their recruitment efforts but in general felt that virtual interviews adequately replaced in-person interviews for assessing applicants. Most programs felt that virtual interviewing should be utilized in the future.

Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs in the United States conducted virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application season. As a result, programs and applicants may have relied more heavily on social media-based communication and dissemination of information. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine social media's impact on residency applicants during an entirely virtual application cycle. METHODS: An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 465 eligible 2021 Match applicants at 4 University of California Schools of Medicine in the United States. RESULTS: A total of 72 participants (15.5% of eligible respondents), applying to 16 specialties, responded. Of those who responded, 53% (n=38) reported following prospective residency accounts on social media, and 89% (n=34) of those respondents were positively or negatively influenced by these accounts. The top three digital methods by which applicants sought information about residency programs included the program website, digital conversations with residents and fellows of that program, and Instagram. Among respondents, 53% (n=38) attended virtual information sessions for prospective programs. A minority of applicants (n=19, 26%) adjusted the number of programs they applied to based on information found on social media, with most (n=14, 74%) increasing the number of programs to which they applied. Survey respondents ranked social media's effectiveness in allowing applicants to learn about programs at 6.7 (SD 2.1) on a visual analogue scale from 1-10. Most applicants (n=61, 86%) felt that programs should use social media in future application cycles even if they are nonvirtual. CONCLUSIONS: Social media appears to be an important tool for resident recruitment. Future studies should seek more information on its effect on later parts of the application cycle and the Match.

How We Do It: Otolaryngology Applicant Impressions of Virtual Meet and Greets at a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic altered residency recruitment in the 2021 application cycle. As a result, many programs adapted by creating virtual opportunities to connect with applicants such as clerkships, open houses, meet and greets, and interviews. Recent research has explored applicant impressions on virtual interviews and open houses, but none have assessed the utility of meet and greets, optimal structure, or desired topics to be addressed. METHODS: We hosted two virtual meet and greets for otolaryngology applicants and subsequently conducted a structured survey to assess the benefit, gather insight into desired topics, and determine how future sessions could be optimized. RESULTS: Twenty of 65 participants responded to the survey (31% response rate). The majority of participants learned about the event through social media (n = 15) or online resources such as OtoMatch or HeadMirror (n = 12). Desired topics to be addressed included faculty-resident relationships (85%), research (80%), the city of Madison (75%), breadth and depth of faculty (75%), and ability to train residents for future positions and fellowships (75%), among others. Overall, participants found the events helpful in conveying the culture and environment, exposure to faculty and residents, addressing questions, and providing insight into intangible aspects of the program. The main area of improvement identified was related to having breakout rooms, longer sessions, and varying the topics for breakout rooms. CONCLUSION: Virtual meet and greets facilitate outreach and provide opportunities for applicants to engage with residency programs and demonstrate interest. While initially implemented due to the COVID-19 pandemic, they will likely remain helpful in generating interest, reaching broader audiences, and possibly facilitating a successful match. It is critical to understand and incorporate the content that applicants wish to learn about at virtual meet and greets to best address questions, highlight key features, and demonstrate the intangible aspects of a residency program.

General Surgery Residency Match: Time for More than a Virtual Change.

The 2020-2021 General Surgery Residency Match presents unique challenges in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights pre-existing concerns. In order to move toward an equitable and manageable surgical residency application process for both programs and applicants, systemic change is warranted.

Social Media Changes in Pediatric Residency Programs During COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pediatric residency program's virtual presence and opportunities for the 2021 application cycle. METHODS: A total of 202 pediatric residency programs from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) were reviewed for departmental and residency Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook accounts. These accounts, residency websites, and the Visiting Student Application Service (VSAS) were reviewed for open house opportunities and virtual subinternships. All data were collected from October 12-15, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 261 social media accounts were identified. 123 (61%) programs had at least one account, with 32 (16%) programs having presence on all 3 platforms. 68 (34%) programs established new accounts after March 1, 2020. Instagram appeared most utilized with 106 (52%) programs having accounts. A total of 115 virtual open house opportunities were offered with most offers on Instagram by 61 (30%) programs. Only 2 virtual subinternships were listed on program websites, 2 on Twitter, 1 on Instagram, and 1 on Facebook. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 increased the number of social media accounts used by residency programs. Approximately one-third of all accounts were created after March 1, 2020. However, only 16% of residency programs have a presence on all 3 platforms, allowing for more online growth.

Nationwide Analysis of Integrated and Independent Interventional Radiology Residency Websites During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze current interventional radiology residency program websites based on validated criteria and highlight areas for improvement during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ACGME-accredited interventional radiology residency programs were identified from the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) public database, including 91 independent and 89 integrated programs. Program Webpages were then evaluated during September and October 2020 based on the presence of 48 criteria, organized into seven main categories including visibility & communication, program information, curriculum information, faculty description, research, recruitment, and salary and benefits. Programs were also evaluated based on region and research ranking. Additionally, 166 programs with accreditation for Early Specialization in Interventional Radiology (ESIR) were assessed for the presence or absence of ESIR pathway acknowledgement on program webpages. RESULTS: The online search yielded information on all integrated programs (89/89, 100%) and 74 independent programs (74/91, 80.3%). For the ESIR programs, the online search for accreditation acknowledgement yielded 108 programs (108/166, 65%) approved for this pathway. Only seven of the 89 integrated programs met at least 75% of the criteria. Of the 91 independent programs, only one met at least 75% of the criteria. On average, integrated programs met more criteria (25, 52%) than independent programs (17, 36%). When comparing programs based on national rank, the visibility & communication category met more criteria on average than the lower ranked programs (integrated =73% vs. 64%, p = 0.01), (independent = 73% vs. 45%, p = 0.01). When comparing programs regionally, statistical significance was found only in the research category (p = 0.01). When comparing the integrated programs with the independent programs for averages in the 7 categories and the total criteria, statistical significance was found in all categories except facility description: visibility & communication (67.5% vs. 53. 7%, p = 0.01), program information (75.7% vs. 58%, p = 0.01), curriculum information (54.8% vs. 31.4, p = 0.01), research (42.5% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.01), recruitment (42.6% vs. 26.8%, p = 0.01), salary & benefits (47.8% vs. 26.8%, p = 0.01), and total criteria (52% vs. 35.8%, p = 0.01. CONCLUSION: IR residency programs across the country are proficient in providing curricular, and logistical information online. However, improvement is needed in providing nonacademic highlights unique to programs that can aid in maximizing applicant match and compatibility. The information provided by online resources has the potential to influence residency applicant's program ranking and chosen pathway, particularly during the COVID19 pandemic.

Improving the online presence of residency programs to ameliorate COVID-19's impact on residency applications.

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created several challenges for residency programs and prospective interns alike during the upcoming application cycle, including the cancellation of away sub-internships and in-person interviews. Given prior research documenting that applicants' application and ranking decisions are significantly influenced by residency webpages, a potential solution to the loss of in-person experiences during the pandemic is the expansion of residency programs' online presence through their program websites, provision of virtual grand rounds and pseudo-away rotations, and enhancement of virtual interviews. This study seeks to summarize the existing literature on these areas and provide concrete suggestions for improving programs' virtual presence.Methods: The authors summarize earlier literature querying the content of program websites across 14 medical specialties, which documented significant gaps in the content of interest to applicants.Results: Among 14 analyzed specialties, the majority of programs had a functional website (>90%), with the exception of interventional radiology (73.9%). However, significant gaps in content were documented, with the percentage of content variables contained on websites ranging from 33.3% to 70.5% (median = 47.0%, interquartile range = 37.8-52.6%). Program websites were also limited by underrepresentation of content most valued by applicants as well as potential areas of inaccurate or outdated information.Conclusions: There are several interventions programs can undertake to address existing gaps in online presence. During an application cycle facing unprecedented resource strain, bolstering the online presence of programs may facilitate an improved fit between programs and future residents.

Virtual Med-Peds: Description of the First Virtual Med-Peds Student Elective During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: For medical students seeking additional specialty experience in Med-Peds, in-person electives have often been a source of mentorship and guidance. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the ability for the completion of in-person clerkships for medical students across the nation. Virtual opportunities to increase exposure to Med-Peds programs and didactics are lacking at this time.  Objective: To develop a virtual Med-Peds student elective that serves to increase awareness of the Med-Peds specialty, exposure to Med-Peds topics and relevant didactics, and exposure to Med-Peds specific mentorship when on-site clerkships are not available due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  Methods: Fifteen medical students participated in a virtual Med-Peds student elective utilizing Zoom (Zoom Inc, San Jose, CA). Three separate cohorts of five students each completed two-week elective experiences. The virtual elective curriculum was created using asynchronous and synchronous learning modalities. Sessions were composed of self-directed learning topics, peer-to-peer interactive case discussions, resident-led didactics, and attending physician-led didactics and mentorship sessions. A pre-survey was administered at the beginning of the elective and a post-survey was administered at the end of the elective to assess the effectiveness of the elective, student experiences with Med-Peds mentors, and students' general perceptions of Med-Peds as a residency application choice.  Results: All students (100%), rated the Med-Peds elective to have exceeded their expectations. All students indicated this elective had been extremely (100%) valuable to increase their understanding and interest in Med-Peds (top rating on a five-point Likert scale). Compared to prior to the elective, most were very likely (87%) or likely (7%) to apply to Med-Peds as their top (preferred) specialty. Similar to pre-survey data, one-third (33%) of the students were still likely to apply to an alternate specialty in addition to Med-Peds. Hundred percent of students indicated that the mentorship component of the elective exceeded their original expectations. While most students indicated that they are much more strongly considering applying to Med-Peds as a top (preferred) specialty, the number of students who continue to consider dual-application to include either categorical Internal Medicine, categorical Pediatrics, or Family Medicine did not differ before and after completion of the virtual elective.  Conclusions: Implementation of a virtual medical student elective focusing on exposure to Med-Peds can strengthen medical students' interest in the combined specialty despite a paucity of previous experiences or an affiliated Med-Peds program. This new type of rotation can positively impact a student's view of a hospital system and a residency program when in-person clinical rotations are not available.