The Virtual Interview Experience for MATCH 2021: A Pilot Survey of General Surgery Residency Program Directors.

BACKGROUND: Virtual interviews (VIs) for the 2020 residency application season were mandated as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to determine the perspectives of general surgery (GS) program directors (PDs) on the benefits and drawbacks of VIs. METHODS: A 14-item survey was emailed to all GS PDs from programs identified on the American Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Program directors were asked about the cost-time benefit of VIs, its ability to assess candidates, and their thoughts on the future of VIs for evaluating residency applicants. RESULTS: 60 PDs responded corresponding to a response rate of 21%. While 93% agreed/strongly agreed that VIs were less expensive, only 35% found VIs to be less time-consuming. 75% and 67%, respectively, disagreed/strongly disagreed that VIs allowed for an easier assessment of an applicant's fit, and personality and communication skills. Almost one-half of our survey respondents suggested that VIs made the selection committee rely more heavily on objective applicant data. Almost two-thirds of GS PDs suggested that they would adopt both VI and in-person interview formats for future application cycles. The median [interquartile range] cost saved through the implementation of VIs was US$ 4500 [1625 - 10 000]. CONCLUSION: Remarkably, VIs have been swiftly imbibed by all residency programs and many aspects of the VI experience were positive. While MATCH 2021 has definitely proved to be one of its kind, the implementation of VIs has been met with overall broad success and a promising future awaits this novel modality of resident selection to GME programs in the United States.

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.

A Canadian survey of residency applicants' and interviewers' perceptions of the 2021 CaRMS R1 virtual interviews.

BACKGROUND: All Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS) R1 interviews were conducted virtually for the first time in 2021. We explored the facilitators, barriers, and implications of the virtual interview process for the CaRMS R1 match and provide recommendations for improvement. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of CaRMS R1 residency applicants and interviewers across Canada in 2021. Surveys were distributed by email to the interviewers, and by email, social media, or newsletter to the applicants. Inductive thematic analysis was used for open-ended items. Recommendations were provided as frequencies to demonstrate strength. Close-ended items were described and compared across groups using Chi-Square Fisher's Exact tests. RESULTS: A total of 127 applicants and 400 interviewers, including 127 program directors, responded to the survey. 193/380 (50.8%) interviewers and 90/118 (76.3%) applicants preferred virtual over in-person interview formats. Facilitators of the virtual interview format included cost and time savings, ease of scheduling, reduced environmental impact, greater equity, less stress, greater reach and participation, and safety. Barriers of the virtual interview format included reduced informal conversations, limited ability for applicants to explore programs at different locations, limited ability for programs to assess applicants' interest, technological issues, concern for interview integrity, limited non-verbal communication, and reduced networking. The most helpful media for applicants to learn about residency programs were program websites, the CaRMS/AFMC websites, and recruitment videos. Additionally, panel interviews were preferred by applicants for their ability to showcase themselves and build connections with multiple interviewers. Respondents provided recommendations regarding: (1) dissemination of program information, (2) the use of technology, and (3) the virtual interview format. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of 2021 CaRMS R1 virtual interviews were favourable among applicants and interviewers. Recommendations from this study can help improve future iterations of virtual interviews.

Virtual Interviewing for Radiology Residency: Pluses, Minuses, and A Review of the Literature.

This article reviews current medical literature to assess the benefits and drawbacks of virtual interviews for radiology residencies as well as the downstream effects of these changes, best practices, and potential future recruitment methods. Topics covered include the effects of remote recruitment in promoting accessibility and applicant diversity and equality as well as fiscal, environmental, and time savings in combination with technical challenges, the complications of over application, challenges in assessment of program culture and location, impact on morale, and hidden financial and emotional costs. Learnings from other medical specialties are highlighted in addition to the process of signaling, guidelines for conducting and participating in virtual interviews, and matters for future consideration.

Employee well-being: New challenges in post-COVID-19 times

The COVID-19 period emphasized the vulnerability employees and employers face, and was characterized as a traumatic period throughout the world. However, it also accelerated the speed of changes at the workplace, and fundamentally changed the way people work. Practices such as working remotely, virtual Zoom meetings, and virtual Zoom interviews became more popular than ever. The current review aims to map the post-COVID-19 period, and to present several scenarios in the workplace field. The goal of the current review is not to articulate an all-encompassing model of every relevant consideration, but rather to identify some high priority factors in future determinants of employee well-being in the post-COVID-19 period based on the trends and cumulative knowledge gained during the pandemic. The review maps the significant workplace characteristics that may impact employee well-being in post-COVID-19 times such as remote working, job insecurity, unemployment, diversity, and uncertainty. The review suggests that employee well-being would be a dominant area of consideration in the future of the workplace, and provides some practical recommendations to both researchers and practitioners for further examination of future post-COVID-19 times. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Understanding the Urology Program Directors Perspective on the Current Resident Selection Process: The Society of Academic Urologists National Survey of Urology Program Directors.

OBJECTIVE: The traditional residency selection process was altered dramatically by the SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. For the 2020-2021 application cycle in-person interviews were transitioned to the virtual format. What was thought to be a temporary transition has now become the new standard with continued endorsement from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the Society of Academic Urologists (SAU) for virtual interviews (VI). We sought to assess the perceived efficacy and satisfaction of the VI format from the urology residency program director's (PDs) perspective. DESIGN: A designated SAU Taskforce on "Optimizing the Applicant Experience in the Virtual Interview Era" developed and refined a survey composed of 69 questions on VI and was distributed to all urology program directors (PD) of member institutions of the SAU. The survey focused on candidate selection, faculty preparation, and interview day logistics. PDs were also asked to reflect on the impact of VI on their match results, recruitment of underrepresented minorities and female gender, and what their preference would be for future applications cycles. PARTICIPANTS: Urology residency PDs (84.7% response rate) between January 13, 2022 - February 10, 2022 were included in the study. RESULTS: Most programs interviewed a total of 36 to 50 applicants (80%), with an average of 10 to 20 applicants per interview day. The top 3 ranked criteria for interview selection reported by urology PDs surveyed included letters of recommendation, clerkship grades, and USMLE Step 1 score. The most common areas of formal training for faculty interviewers were diversity, equity and inclusion (55%), implicit bias (66%), and review of the SAU guidelines on illegal questions (83%). Over half (61.4%) of PDs believed that they were able to accurately represent their training program through the virtual platform, while 51% felt that VI did not afford similar assessments of applicant as in-person interviews. Two-thirds of PDs believed the VI platform improve access for all applicants to attend interviews. Focusing on the impact of the VI platform for recruitment of underrepresented minorities (URM) and female gender applicants, 15% and 24% reported improved visibility respectively for their program, and 24% and 11% reported increased ability to interview URM and female gender applicants respectively. Overall, in-person interviews were reported to be preferred by 42%, and 51% of PDs desired VIs to be included in future years. CONCLUSIONS: PDs opinion and role of the VIs into the future is variable. Despite uniform agreement of cost savings and belief that VI platform improves access for all, only half of PDs expressed interest of the VI format being continued in some form. PDs note limitation of VI in the ability to comprehensively assess applicants as well as the in-person format. Many programs have begun to incorporate vital training in the areas of diversity equity and inclusion bias, and illegal questions. There is a role for continued development and research on ways to optimize virtual interviews.

Integrated vascular surgery applicants' perspectives of virtual residency interviews during the coronavirus disease 2019 application cycle.

BACKGROUND: In agreement with Association of American Medical Colleges guidelines, the 2020 to 2021 integrated vascular surgery (I-VS) residency interviews were conducted virtually. In the present study, we collected data about the virtual interview process from the applicant's perspective, including preferences for interview format and the virtual resources they found most helpful. METHODS: An anonymous, online survey study of medical students who had been accepted into I-VS residencies during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle was performed. The survey contained questions about applicant behavior during the virtual application cycle, their perception of the virtual interviews, the utility of the virtual format, their preferences, and the virtual resources they found the most helpful for determining their rank list. RESULTS: Of 72 applicants, 38 (18 women, 19 men, and 1 declined to answer) had completed the survey for a 57.2% response rate. The average number of programs interviewed was 25 to 30 (31%). More than one-half (55%) of the respondents had responded that they had interviewed at more programs than they would have had the interviews been in person. More than one-half of the applicants (55%) reported that they preferred remote interviews with the option to visit in-person at their top choice programs compared with the use of all remote interviews (21%) or all in-person interviews (18%). Most had somewhat or strongly agreed (79%) that virtual interviews allowed them to properly gauge a residency program and provided adequate opportunities to interact with the residents (65%). The online resources the applicants found the most helpful in determining their rank lists were attending educational conferences, prerecorded videos from faculty and residents, and the program's social media platforms. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have illuminated the current trends and attitudes of I-VS applicants for virtual interviews, including the virtual resources they found the most useful. Virtual interviews were a preferred method of interviewing and allowed applicants to assess a residency program and interact with the current residents. These variables should be considered by the program leadership when developing protocols for upcoming application cycles.

Initiation of the Virtual Interview: A 5-Y Evaluation of General Surgery Residency Match Results.

INTRODUCTION: The virtual residency application season posed numerous challenges for the 2021 residency match process. Many residency programs are exploring relationships between this novel format and the match process. The purpose of this study was to compare one of the largest general surgery residency program's applications and match data from preCOVID years to the 2021 virtual cycle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of applicants to a single general surgery residency program from 2017 to 2021. The primary outcome was the number of locally matched applicants. The secondary outcomes were the total number of applications, change in applicant demographics, and variability of the geographic spread during this study period. Chi-square tests of independence, Fisher's exact tests, and negative binomial regression were performed. RESULTS: 6819 applicants were included in the study. In 2021, an increase in applications was observed. The distribution of 2021 applications was statistically different from previous years regarding gender and race (P < 0.0001). The 2021 application cycle had a greater proportion of applicants from the United States (P < 0.0001) and southern US medical schools (P = 0.008). While the 2021 cycle had significantly more interviews (P = 0.013), there were no significant differences in the demographic composition of interviewees. During the 2021 application year, all 11 matches were from southern medical schools and there was a trend to more matched female applicants compared to previous years. CONCLUSIONS: During the 2021 COVID-19 virtual match cycle, an increase in both the number of applications and number of interviews for general surgery residency was identified. The characteristics of applicants who interviewed and matched were not different when compared to previous years. As virtual interviews may become more commonplace, it is important to assess all factors that may be involved in the dynamic residency application process.

General Surgery Residency Virtual Recruitment During the Pandemic: An Analysis of Applicant Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic forced a sudden change from in-person to virtual interviews for the general surgery residency match. General surgery programs and applicants adopted multiple strategies to best mimic in-person recruitment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate applicant opinions of the virtual recruitment format. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Postinterview survey responses for applicants interviewing at a single general surgery residency program in the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 cycles were evaluated. All interviewed applicants were sent an anonymous survey assessing the virtual interview structure, their impression of the program, and their opinions on recruitment in the future. RESULTS: The response rate was 31.2% (n = 60). Most (88.4%) respondents reported a more favorable view of the program after a virtual interview. Factors that were most likely to create a favorable impression were residents (89.6%) and culture (81.0%). 50.8% of applicants favored virtual-only interviews. The majority of applicants (60.3%), however, preferred the virtual interview remain a component of the application process, 34.4% recommended that virtual interviews be used as an initial screen before in-person invites, while 19.0% suggested applicants should interview in-person or virtually without penalty. 62.1% favored capping the number of interviews offered by programs and accepted by applicants. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual interview format for general surgery residency allows applicants to effectively evaluate a residency program. Applicants are in favor of a combination of virtual and in-person interviews in the future. Innovation in the recruitment process, including limiting the number of applications and incorporating virtual events, is supported by applicants.

Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Impact the Caliber of Trainees Taken During Match 2021? A Survey of General Surgery Residency Program Directors.

BACKGROUND: The cancellation of clinical rotations (CRs) and implementation of virtual interviews (VIs) profoundly affected the residency selection process leading up to the 2021 NRMP Match. The authors investigated how these changes influenced the caliber of applicants taken by general surgery (GS) residency programs from the perspectives of program directors (PDs). METHODS: A 14 question, web-based electronic survey was emailed to PDs of ACGME-accredited GS residency programs. Questions sought program characteristics and PDs' perspectives regarding potential differences in subjective characteristics and clinical skills demonstrated by their 2021 Match class relative to previous resident classes. RESULTS: A total of 75 PDs (27.2%) responded to our survey. Most respondents observed no changes in residents' fit with their program (72.0%), communication skills (68.0%), responsiveness to clinical instruction and feedback (73.3%), work ethic (73.3%), and rotation evaluations (68.0%). Only 21.3% of PDs believed that VIs negatively impacted their ability to accurately assess applicant intangibles. Conversely, 56.0% of PDs reported that the cancellation of CRs in 2020 negatively affected residents' clinical competency at the start of residency. At 1-year following the 2021 NRMP Match, 30.7% of PDs reported that the clinical skills exhibited by their 2021 Match class were poorer than previous resident classes. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that VIs limited selection committees' ability to accurately assess applicant's subjective characteristics to a lesser degree than previously described in the literature. Canceled CRs adversely affected the 2021 Match Class's clinical skills at the start of residency and at 1 year following the 2021 NRMP Match.

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.

Virtual interviewing for graduate medical education recruitment and selection: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 80.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused graduate medical education (GME) programs to pivot to virtual interviews (VIs) for recruitment and selection. This systematic review synthesizes the rapidly expanding evidence base on VIs, providing insights into preferred formats, strengths, and weaknesses. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ERIC, PsycINFO, MedEdPublish, and Google Scholar were searched from 1 January 2012 to 21 February 2022. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the Medical Education Research Quality Instrument. Findings were reported according to Best Evidence in Medical Education guidance. RESULTS: One hundred ten studies were included. The majority (97%) were from North America. Fourteen were conducted before COVID-19 and 96 during the pandemic. Studies involved both medical students applying to residencies (61%) and residents applying to fellowships (39%). Surgical specialties were more represented than other specialties. Applicants preferred VI days that lasted 4-6 h, with three to five individual interviews (15-20 min each), with virtual tours and opportunities to connect with current faculty and trainees. Satisfaction with VIs was high, though both applicants and programs found VIs inferior to in-person interviews for assessing 'fit.' Confidence in ranking applicants and programs was decreased. Stakeholders universally noted significant cost and time savings with VIs, as well as equity gains and reduced carbon footprint due to eliminating travel. CONCLUSIONS: The use of VIs for GME recruitment and selection has accelerated rapidly. The findings of this review offer early insights that can guide future practice, policy, and research.

Employee well-being: New challenges in post-COVID-19 times

The COVID-19 period emphasized the vulnerability employees and employers face, and was characterized as a traumatic period throughout the world. However, it also accelerated the speed of changes at the workplace, and fundamentally changed the way people work. Practices such as working remotely, virtual Zoom meetings, and virtual Zoom interviews became more popular than ever. The current review aims to map the post-COVID-19 period, and to present several scenarios in the workplace field. The goal of the current review is not to articulate an all-encompassing model of every relevant consideration, but rather to identify some high priority factors in future determinants of employee well-being in the post-COVID-19 period based on the trends and cumulative knowledge gained during the pandemic. The review maps the significant workplace characteristics that may impact employee well-being in post-COVID-19 times such as remote working, job insecurity, unemployment, diversity, and uncertainty. The review suggests that employee well-being would be a dominant area of consideration in the future of the workplace, and provides some practical recommendations to both researchers and practitioners for further examination of future post-COVID-19 times. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Virtual Interviews Improve Equity and Wellbeing: Results of a Survey of Applicants to Obstetrics and Gynecology Subspecialty Fellowships.

BACKGROUND: Nationwide restrictions and recommendations from the Association of American Medical Colleges mandated program directors to conduct all graduate medical education interviews virtually in the Spring of 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was conducted to assess the impact of virtual interviews on a candidates' ability to effectively create a rank list. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate Obstetrics and Gynecology (ObGyn) subspecialty fellowship applicants' perspectives regarding the effectiveness of virtual interviews for creating a rank list. Secondary outcomes included perceived advantages and disadvantages of the process and costs of the process. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional IRB-exempt study, using an electronic survey administered to a convenience sample of applicants to ObGyn subspecialty fellowship programs. The survey was administered via RedCap between the rank list submission deadline and the Match. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: Response rate was 158/330 (48%). Overall, 129/158 (82%) percent of respondents felt confident in making their rank list based on the virtual interviews, and 146/158 (92%) were "very satisfied" or "somewhat satisfied" with the process. Of those who expressed an interview style preference, 65/149(44%) of respondents preferred virtual interviews; 49/149(33%) had no preference or were not sure. Nearly all 146/148(99%) applicants cited cost-savings as a distinct advantage of virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Applicants to ObGyn subspecialty fellowships felt comfortable to create a rank list based on the virtual interview. This study indicates that the virtual format is effective, less stressful and less costly for ObGyn subspecialty interviews and should be considered beyond the pandemic to remove barriers and burdens for applicants.

The effect of virtual interviews on the musculoskeletal radiology fellowship match.

OBJECTIVE: Resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, a virtual interview format was adopted in lieu of in-person interviews for fellowship recruitment. The purpose of this study is to analyze the potential effect that virtual interviews have on musculoskeletal radiology fellowship match results and collect opinions of the process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to 87 listed US-based musculoskeletal radiology fellowship directors, who were asked for their 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 match data: fellowship positions, interviewees, ranked interviewees, and matched ranks. They rated effectiveness of virtual interviews on a ten-point scale (1 poor-10 excellent) and provided an ideal percentage of future interviews to be conducted virtually. RESULTS: Thirty responses were received (34.4% response rate). Primary analysis found significant increase in the mean number of candidates ranked in 2020-2021, 14.6 to 17.5 (p = 0.047). The mean rank of matched applicants increased from 6.02 to 6.43, without significance (p = 0.821). Secondary analysis, which attempted to exclude internally matched programs, found significant increases in 2020-2021 in the mean number of applicants-28.7 to 32.4 (p = 0.017), interviews conducted-17.8 to 21.3 (p = 0.007), and candidates ranked by programs-16.3 to 19.8 (p = 0.015). The mean rank of matched applicants increased from 6.39 to 7.03, without significance (p = 0.713). CONCLUSION: With results showing an increase in applications, interviews conducted, and ranked applicants while lowering the average rank of matched candidates, musculoskeletal radiology fellowship directors should consider interviewing more applicants than they usually would in the prior in-person recruitment format.

Perceived effectiveness of video interviews for orthopaedic surgery residency during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the 2020-21 residency interview season, interviews were conducted through virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to assess the general perceptions of applicants, residents and attendings at a single, large, metropolitan orthopaedic residency with regards to the video interview process before and after the interview season. METHODS: Surveys were sent to all orthopaedic applicants, residents, and attendings before the interview season. Applicants who received interviews and responded to the first survey (46) and faculty who responded to the first survey (28) were sent a second survey after interviews to assess how their perceptions of video interviews changed. RESULTS: Initially, 50% of applicants (360/722) and 50% of faculty and residents (28/56) responded before interview season. After interviews, 55% of interviewees (25/46) and 64% of faculty and residents (18/28) responded. Before interviews, 91% of applicants stated they would prefer in-person interviews and 71% were worried that video interviews would prevent them from finding the best program fit. Before interviews, 100% of faculty and residents stated they would rather conduct in-person interviews and 86% felt that residencies would be less likely to find applicants who best fit the program. Comparing responses before and after interviews, 16% fewer applicants (p = 0.01) perceived that in-person interviews provide a better sense of a residency program and faculty and residents' perceived ability to build rapport with interviewees improved in 11% of respondents (p = 0.01). However, in-person interviews were still heavily favored by interviewees (84%) and faculty and residents (88%) after the interview season. CONCLUSIONS: In-person interviews for Orthopaedic Surgery Residency are perceived as superior and are preferred among the overwhelming majority of applicants, residents, and interviewers. Nevertheless, perceptions toward video interviews improved in certain domains after interview season, identifying potential areas of improvement and alternative interview options for future applicants.

Applying to residency: survey of neurosurgical residency applicants on virtual recruitment during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant disruption to residency recruitment, including a sudden, comprehensive transition to virtual interviews. The authors sought to characterize applicant experiences and perceptions concerning the change in the application, interview, and match process for neurological surgery residency during the 2020-2021 recruitment cycle. METHODS: A national survey of neurosurgical residency applicants from the 2020-2021 application cycle was performed. This survey was developed in cooperation with the Society of Neurological Surgeons (SNS) and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons Young Neurosurgeons Committee (YNC) and sent to all applicants (n = 280) who included academic video submissions to the SNS repository as part of their application package. These 280 applicants accounted for 69.6% of the total 402 neurosurgical applicants this year. RESULTS: Nearly half of the applicants responded to the survey (44.3%, 124 of 280). Applicants favored additional reform of the interview scheduling process, including a centralized scheduling method, a set of standardized release dates for interview invitations, and interview caps for applicants. Less than 8% of students desired a virtual-only platform in the future, though the majority of applicants supported incorporating virtual interviews as part of the process to contain applicant costs and combining them with traditional in-person interview opportunities. Program culture and fit, as well as clinical and research opportunities in subspecialty areas, were the most important factors applicants used to rank programs. However, subjective program "fit" was deemed challenging to assess during virtual-only interviews. CONCLUSIONS: Neurosurgery resident applicants identified standardized interview invitation release dates, centralized interview scheduling methods, caps on the number of interviews available to each candidate, and regulated opportunities for both virtual and in-person recruitment as measures that could significantly improve the applicant experience during and effectiveness of future neurosurgery residency application cycles. Applicants prioritized program culture and "fit" during recruitment, and a majority were open to incorporating virtual elements into future cycles to reduce costs while retaining in-person opportunities to gauge programs and their locations.

COVID-19 Increased Residency Applications and How Virtual Interviews Impacted Applicants.

Background The number of residency applications submitted by medical students has risen at an alarming rate, causing increased cost of applications and subsequent interview travel. These both contribute to increased cost for medical students. In light of these concerns, specialty governing bodies have proposed ideas to fight these trends including, application limits, interview limits, using a preference signaling system, and continuing virtual interviews. During the Covid-19 pandemic, all residency interviews were performed virtually, essentially making travel expenses negligible. However, this created a new concern with regards to assessing program and applicant compatibility, as compared to in-person interactions and did nothing to combat the increases in application numbers. Therefore, we want to critically assess the effects of virtual interviews on number of applications submitted, number of interview invites received, and number of interviews attended. We also aim to analyze how applicants viewed the virtual process. Methods 600 medical students were eligible to participate. 456 students from years 2018-2020 were eligible to be surveyed following the NRMP match. 144 students were eligible to be surveyed following 2021 NRMP match. The survey was distributed to medical school graduates just prior to graduation and asked how many programs each student applied to, how many interview invites they received, and how many interviews they attended. The 2021 survey also asked, "How did virtual interviews affect your interview experience?" The quantitative results were compared with student's t-test and qualitative results are presented below.  Results The average number of programs each applicant applied to increased from 35.4 to 47.7 (p-value=0.002) when residency interviews switched from in-person to virtual. However, interview invites received and interviews attended did not change (16.8 vs 16.3, p-value=0.91, 11.8 vs 12.7, p-value=0.18). There were 188 participants in the in-person interview group (response rate=41.2%) and 128 participants in the virtual interview group (response rate=83.3%). The standard deviation and range also increased for number of applications, number of interview invites received, and number of interviews attended.  There were 123 responses to the free response question. 36 had a positive experience, 44 were neutral, 47 were negative. The positive themes included 15 noted less expenses, 18 noted more convenient/less time, and 18 were able to attend more interviews. Negative themes included, 38 noted difficulty assessing program fit, 19 wanted to see the program or city in person, eight had increased interest in home/local programs, six found it difficult to make connections or stand out.  Conclusion Sixty-three percent of students reported a positive or neutral experience with virtual interviews. Students applied to more programs when interviews were virtual, but did not receive more interview invites or attend more interviews. These results suggest that virtual interviews are sufficient to conduct residency interviews, however the number of applications continues to rise with no increase in the number interview invites received or number of interviews attended. The increase in the standard deviation and range for all three variables may point to some applicants being able to get more invites and attend more interviews leaving less available spots for other applicants.

Experiences, perspectives, and advice for using virtual interviews in post-graduate trainee selection: a national survey of CCFP (EM) program directors.

OBJECTIVE: Due to the COVID pandemic, restrictions were put in place mandating that all residency interviews be transitioned to a virtual format. Canadian CCFP(EM) programs were among the first to embark on this universal virtual interview process for resident selection. Although there have been several recent publications suggesting best practice guidelines for virtual interviews in trainee selection, pragmatic experiences and opinions from Program Directors (PDs) are lacking. This study aimed to elicit the experiences and perspectives of CCFP(EM) PDs after being amongst the first to conduct universal virtual interviews in Canada. METHODS: A 17-item online survey was created and distributed to all CCFP(EM) PDs (n = 17). It explored the virtual interview format employed, perceived advantages and disadvantages of a virtual configuration, confidence in determining a candidate's rank order, and PD preference for employing a virtual interview format in the future. It also elicited practical advice to conduct a smooth and successful virtual interview day. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 76.5% (13/17). Nine respondents (69.2%) agreed that the virtual interview format enabled them to confidently determine a candidate's rank order. With respect to preference for future use of virtual interviews, 23.1% agreed, 38.5% disagreed and 38.5% neither agreed nor disagreed. Inductive thematic analysis of free text responses revealed themes related to virtual interview advantages (time, financial, and resource costs), disadvantages (difficulty promoting smaller programs, getting a 'feel' for candidates and assessing their interpersonal skills), and practical tips to facilitate virtual interview processes. CONCLUSION: Once restrictions are lifted, cost-saving advantages must be weighed against suggested disadvantages such as showcasing program strengths and assessing interpersonal skills in choosing between traditional and virtual formats. Should virtual interviews become a routine part of resident selection, the advice suggested in this study may be considered to help optimize a successful virtual interview process.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En raison de la pandémie de COVID-19, des restrictions ont été mises en place pour obliger toutes les entrevues de résidence à passer à un format virtuel. Les programmes canadiens CCMF(MU) ont été parmi les premiers à se lancer dans ce processus universel d'entrevue virtuelle pour la sélection des résidents. Bien qu'il y ait eu plusieurs publications récentes suggérant des lignes directrices de pratiques exemplaires pour les entrevues virtuelles dans la sélection des stagiaires, les expériences et les opinions pragmatiques des directeurs de programme (DP) font défaut. Cette étude visait à recueillir les expériences et les points de vue des DP du CCMF(MU) après avoir été parmi les premiers à mener des entrevues virtuelles universelles au Canada. MéTHODES: Une enquête en ligne de 17 questions a été créée et distribuée à tous les DP du CCMF(MU) (n=17). Elle a exploré le format d'entretien virtuel employé, les avantages et inconvénients perçus d'une configuration virtuelle, la confiance dans la détermination de l'ordre de classement d'un candidat, et la préférence des DP pour l'emploi d'un format d'entretien virtuel à l'avenir. Elle a également permis de recueillir des conseils pratiques pour mener à bien une journée d'entretiens virtuels. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse à l'enquête a été de 76,5 % (13/17). Neuf répondants (69,2 %) ont convenu que le format d'entretien virtuel leur a permis de déterminer avec confiance l'ordre de classement d'un candidat. En ce qui concerne la préférence pour l'utilisation future des entrevues virtuelles, 23,1 % étaient d'accord, 38,5 % étaient en désaccord et 38,5 % n'étaient ni d'accord ni en désaccord. L'analyse thématique inductive des réponses en texte libre a révélé des thèmes liés aux avantages des entretiens virtuels (coûts en temps, en argent et en ressources), aux inconvénients (difficulté à promouvoir les petits programmes, à se faire une idée des candidats et à évaluer leurs compétences interpersonnelles) et aux conseils pratiques pour faciliter les processus d'entretien virtuel. CONCLUSION: Une fois les restrictions levées, les avantages liés à la réduction des coûts doivent être mis en balance avec les inconvénients suggérés, tels que la mise en valeur des points forts du programme et l'évaluation des compétences interpersonnelles, lors du choix entre les formats traditionnels et virtuels. Si les entretiens virtuels devaient devenir un élément de routine dans la sélection des résidents, les conseils suggérés dans cette étude pourraient être pris en compte pour aider à optimiser un processus d'entretien virtuel réussi.

Perceptions of a virtual interview process for pharmacy residents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multisite survey of residency candidates, preceptors, and residency program directors.

PURPOSE: To describe the perceptions of residency candidates, residency practitioners (current residents and preceptors), and residency program directors (RPDs) regarding a virtual interview process for pharmacy residency programs across multiple institutions. METHODS: In May 2021, an anonymous web-based questionnaire characterizing perceptions of the virtual interview process used during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was distributed to residency candidates, residency practitioners, and RPDs across 13 institutions. Quantitative responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale were summarized with descriptive statistics, and open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic qualitative methods. RESULTS: 236 residency candidates and 253 residency practitioners/RPDs completed the questionnaire, yielding response rates of 27.8% (236 of 848), and 38.1% (253 of 663), respectively. Overall, both groups perceived the virtual interview format positively. When asked whether virtual interviews should replace in-person interviews moving forward, 60.0% (18 of 30) of RPDs indicated they agreed or strongly agreed, whereas only 30.5% (61 of 200) of current preceptors/residents and 28.7% (66 of 230) of residency candidates agreed or strongly agreed. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses revealed that while virtual interviews were easier logistically, the lack of in-person interactions was a common concern for many stakeholders. Lastly, the majority (65.0%) of residency candidates reported greater than $1,000 in savings with virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Virtual interviews offered logistical and financial benefits. The majority of RPDs were in favor of offering virtual interviews to replace in-person interviews, whereas the majority of residency candidates and practitioners preferred on-site interviews. As restrictions persist with the ongoing pandemic, our results provide insight into best practices for virtual pharmacy residency interviews.