Beyond the Recruitment Pipeline: A Call to Action for Centering the Success of Under-represented Minority Trainees in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Just like all aspects of the American experience, racism has had a significant presence in Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN). Black physicians in OBGYN face unique challenges in training programs, having to learn a specialty while combating racial macroaggression and microaggressions constantly and, often, in isolation. We present the stories of black OBGYNs who have sustained such an experience while also offering equitable and actionable solutions to improve clinical training environments.

Improving the Medical School to Residency Transition: Narrative Experiences From First-Year Residents.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify first-year obstetrics and gynecology residents' perceptions of both support needed at the medical school to residency transition and readiness to address structural racism and bias at the start of residency training. STUDY DESIGN: Residents were recruited by email and social media for 1:1 interviews from March to June 2021. All interviews were completed by a first-year resident or fourth-year medical student using an interview guide created by the authorship team. Recorded interviews were anonymously transcribed and independently reviewed for themes by two authors. SETTING: Virtual interviews on the Zoom platform. PARTICIPANTS: First-year obstetrics and gynecology residents. RESULTS: Interviews were performed with 26 residents, and six themes for support emerged from their narratives: 1) Establishing a residency program community; 2) Relocation resources; 3) Residency preparation content in medical school and residency; 4) Preparedness to address racism and bias; 5) Connecting with peers with similar lived experiences across institutions; and 6) More proactive intentional touchpoints from program leadership early in residency. CONCLUSIONS: Resident narratives described multiple crucial opportunities to improve learners' transition to residency. These findings can help define a roadmap of resources and support that residency programs can provide for learners from Match Day through the first few months of residency.

Stakeholder Perspectives on Limiting Residency Applications and Interviews in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

PURPOSE: Application inflation in the current residency application process leads to congestion, inefficiency, and perceptions of inequity. The authors aimed to assess the interest of key stakeholders on the topic of capping applications and interviews, and their perceptions regarding equity of the process. METHODS: An anonymous survey was electronically distributed in March 2021 to Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) residency applicants, clerkship directors, program directors, and student affairs deans after the submission of the rank order list for the 2021 application cycle and prior to the release of final Match results. Participants answered questions regarding the perceived equity of the current process (no limits on applications submitted or interviews completed) compared with limiting the number of applications and interviews students could submit or complete. Respondents supporting caps reported the number they considered a reasonable cap for applications and interviews. Associations between the profiles of applicants and program directors and their interest in application and interview caps were explored using chi-squared tests for non-parametric statistics and t-tests for normally distributed interval data. The University of Michigan determined the study exempt from IRB review. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 36.0% (1167/3243), including 34.0% of applicants (879/2579), 50.3% of program directors (143/284), 41.8% of clerkship directors (94/225) and 32.9% of student affairs deans (51/155). All groups reported application caps for either all applicants or the most competitive applicants to be more equitable than the current process, and suggested a median application cap ranging from 25 (clerkship directors and program directors) to 40 (applicants). All groups also believed interview caps to be more equitable than the current process, and suggested a median interview cap ranging from 12 (clerkship directors) to 15 (applicants, program directors, and student affairs deans). CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders in the OBGYN application process consider caps to applications and interviews a promising means to improve equity in the Match.