ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) policy outlines the conduct expected by both program directors and residency applicants. However, recent studies and personal experiences have introduced the possibility that NRMP policy is violated during the residency application process. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the communications that occur between dermatology applicants and dermatology programs during the residency application process. METHODS: From April to July 2009, we surveyed 2009 Stanford dermatology applicants, current US dermatology residents, and US dermatology program directors. The survey was anonymous and available online. The main outcome measures were the frequency and incidence of dermatology NRMP policy violations. RESULTS: Thirty-one percent of Stanford applicants and 19% of US dermatology residents felt pressured to reveal to programs how they ranked them before match day. Seventeen percent of Stanford applicants and 14% of US dermatology residents witnessed behavior that made them feel uncomfortable or that they thought was a possible ethical infraction of NRMP policy. LIMITATIONS: Response rates were as follows: 43% of Stanford applicants, 46% of residents, and 61% of program directors. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that some dermatology program directors violate NRMP policy during their communications with applicants. The most widespread violation is pressuring applicants into revealing how they intend to rank programs. Other violations include apparent sexual discrimination and reserving NRMP positions for preselected applicants. Additional studies should be done in order to determine the incidence of dermatology applicants violating NRMP policy.
Subject(s)
Dermatology/education , Internship and Residency/organization & administration , Leadership , Personnel Selection/ethics , Adult , Career Choice , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dermatology/ethics , Ethics, Professional , Faculty, Medical/organization & administration , Female , Humans , Internship and Residency/ethics , Male , Program Evaluation , Quality Control , Surveys and Questionnaires , United StatesSubject(s)
Melanoma/diagnosis , Melanoma/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic , Humans , Melanoma/mortality , Melanoma/pathology , Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy , Skin Neoplasms/mortality , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Survival AnalysisSubject(s)
Melanoma/etiology , Nevus, Pigmented/congenital , Nevus, Pigmented/surgery , Skin Neoplasms/etiology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , Melanoma/prevention & control , Nevus, Pigmented/complications , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , Skin Neoplasms/prevention & controlSubject(s)
Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Skin Diseases , Adult , Dermatology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the present attitudes of patients toward physicians' physical attributes. DESIGN: Written survey offered to all patients seen during a 1-week period. SETTING: Two outpatient dermatologic clinical practices (a county hospital and a private practice). PARTICIPANTS: Of 315 patients offered the survey, 275 agreed to complete it. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Opinions regarding physicians' demographic characteristics and opinions regarding desirability of 19 and 18 appearance-related characteristics in male and female physicians, respectively. RESULTS: Analysis of the responses revealed 25 characteristics that were significantly desirable or undesirable (defined as being selected desirable or undesirable by at least 25% of respondents). Further analysis revealed that patients in a private practice setting typically had more polar opinions about providers' appearances than did patients from a large county hospital. Most patients had no preference with regard to the sex, age, or race of their medical care providers. Age and sex of the patient did not independently contribute significantly to patient preferences, as determined by cross-tabulation analysis. Clinic site (private practice vs county hospital clinic) alone was the sole or most important predictor of preferences in 13 of the 25 significant characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Several characteristics of providers' dress and grooming were important to patients. There seemed to be little attitudinal change from similar studies performed 2 decades ago. Cognizance of these preferences may facilitate better interactions between medical care providers and patients.
