Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes

The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeho...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of surgical education 2021-07, Vol.78 (4), p.1103-1110
Hauptverfasser: Hammoud, Maya M., Winkel, Abigail Ford, Strand, Eric A., Worly, Brett L., Marzano, David A., Bronner, Baillie A., Forstein, David A., Katz, Nadine T., Woodland, Mark B., Morgan, Helen K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1110
container_issue 4
container_start_page 1103
container_title Journal of surgical education
container_volume 78
creator Hammoud, Maya M.
Winkel, Abigail Ford
Strand, Eric A.
Worly, Brett L.
Marzano, David A.
Bronner, Baillie A.
Forstein, David A.
Katz, Nadine T.
Woodland, Mark B.
Morgan, Helen K.
description The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeholders on the feasibility of implementing the standards as well as the effect of these changes on applicant anxiety. The authors electronically distributed an anonymous survey in February 2020 to OBGYN residency applicants, clerkship directors, student affairs deans, program directors, and program managers. Participants received a 15-item survey, with questions assessing the importance and adoption of the guidelines, as well as their effect on perceived applicants’ anxiety. Responses were measured on a 5-item Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore which residency factors were associated with compliance with the standards. IRB exemption was granted by the University of Michigan. A total of 1358 participants completed the survey for an overall response rate of 39.26%. Response rates were 36.04% for applicants (904/2508), 46.67% for CDs (105/225), 34.84% for members of GSAs (34/155), 59.43% for program directors (167/281), and 51.03% for program managers (148/290). The overall response rate was 39.26% (1358/3459) with 36.04% of applicants (904/2508), 46.67% of clerkship directors (105/225), 34.84% of student affairs deans (34/155), 59.43% of program directors (167/281), and 51.03% of program managers (148/290). The recommendations were perceived as important by all stakeholders. More than 90% of program directors reported compliance with some or all of the recommendations and more than 90% of all applicants, clerkship directors and student affairs deans reported that the standards reduced applicant anxiety. All stakeholders rated each guideline to be important to extremely important. This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptance of universal standards for the residency application process in the field of OBGYN. The vast majority of stakeholders surveyed supported the initiative and participated in the guidelines. Applicant respondents perceived the guidelines to be important and to decrease anxiety surrounding the application and interview timelines. These findings are important for other specialties when considering similar interventions.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2461401238</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1931720420304232</els_id><sourcerecordid>2461401238</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c336t-1e63b46ab51090d8af61b744aa0d5eb8eb21c9240f03c437232f8fb327f73e593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kLlOw0AQhi0EEiHwBDRb0jjs5augiCKOSJFAHBXFar07TtY4ttlxgsLTsyHUVDOa-f6R5ouiS0YnjLL0up7UuPHLCac8TNiEUn4UjVie5XEmE34c-kKwOONUnkZniDWliSx4MYreXwb9AauuseDJE3jswQxuC0i6loRda7W37tu1SzKsgDwDOgut2ZFp3zfO6MEFLlBk3g7gtw6-yJPvDCACnkcnlW4QLv7qOHq7u32dPcSLx_v5bLqIjRDpEDNIRSlTXSaMFtTmukpZmUmpNbUJlDmUnJmCS1pRYaTIuOBVXpWCZ1UmICnEOLo63O1997kBHNTaoYGm0S10G1RcpkxSxkUeUHFAje8QPVSq926t_U4xqvYqVa1-Vaq9SsWYCipD6uaQgvBF-NErNC5YAOt80KVs5_7N_wAmTH8l</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2461401238</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Hammoud, Maya M. ; Winkel, Abigail Ford ; Strand, Eric A. ; Worly, Brett L. ; Marzano, David A. ; Bronner, Baillie A. ; Forstein, David A. ; Katz, Nadine T. ; Woodland, Mark B. ; Morgan, Helen K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hammoud, Maya M. ; Winkel, Abigail Ford ; Strand, Eric A. ; Worly, Brett L. ; Marzano, David A. ; Bronner, Baillie A. ; Forstein, David A. ; Katz, Nadine T. ; Woodland, Mark B. ; Morgan, Helen K.</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeholders on the feasibility of implementing the standards as well as the effect of these changes on applicant anxiety. The authors electronically distributed an anonymous survey in February 2020 to OBGYN residency applicants, clerkship directors, student affairs deans, program directors, and program managers. Participants received a 15-item survey, with questions assessing the importance and adoption of the guidelines, as well as their effect on perceived applicants’ anxiety. Responses were measured on a 5-item Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore which residency factors were associated with compliance with the standards. IRB exemption was granted by the University of Michigan. A total of 1358 participants completed the survey for an overall response rate of 39.26%. Response rates were 36.04% for applicants (904/2508), 46.67% for CDs (105/225), 34.84% for members of GSAs (34/155), 59.43% for program directors (167/281), and 51.03% for program managers (148/290). The overall response rate was 39.26% (1358/3459) with 36.04% of applicants (904/2508), 46.67% of clerkship directors (105/225), 34.84% of student affairs deans (34/155), 59.43% of program directors (167/281), and 51.03% of program managers (148/290). The recommendations were perceived as important by all stakeholders. More than 90% of program directors reported compliance with some or all of the recommendations and more than 90% of all applicants, clerkship directors and student affairs deans reported that the standards reduced applicant anxiety. All stakeholders rated each guideline to be important to extremely important. This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptance of universal standards for the residency application process in the field of OBGYN. The vast majority of stakeholders surveyed supported the initiative and participated in the guidelines. Applicant respondents perceived the guidelines to be important and to decrease anxiety surrounding the application and interview timelines. These findings are important for other specialties when considering similar interventions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1931-7204</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-7452</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>graduate medical education ; interviews ; residency applications ; residency selection ; standard timeline</subject><ispartof>Journal of surgical education, 2021-07, Vol.78 (4), p.1103-1110</ispartof><rights>2020 Association of Program Directors in Surgery</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c336t-1e63b46ab51090d8af61b744aa0d5eb8eb21c9240f03c437232f8fb327f73e593</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c336t-1e63b46ab51090d8af61b744aa0d5eb8eb21c9240f03c437232f8fb327f73e593</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7546-856X ; 0000-0001-6149-5842 ; 0000-0002-9247-1664 ; 0000-0002-3157-4571</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hammoud, Maya M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkel, Abigail Ford</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strand, Eric A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Worly, Brett L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marzano, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bronner, Baillie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forstein, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katz, Nadine T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woodland, Mark B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgan, Helen K.</creatorcontrib><title>Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes</title><title>Journal of surgical education</title><description>The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeholders on the feasibility of implementing the standards as well as the effect of these changes on applicant anxiety. The authors electronically distributed an anonymous survey in February 2020 to OBGYN residency applicants, clerkship directors, student affairs deans, program directors, and program managers. Participants received a 15-item survey, with questions assessing the importance and adoption of the guidelines, as well as their effect on perceived applicants’ anxiety. Responses were measured on a 5-item Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore which residency factors were associated with compliance with the standards. IRB exemption was granted by the University of Michigan. A total of 1358 participants completed the survey for an overall response rate of 39.26%. Response rates were 36.04% for applicants (904/2508), 46.67% for CDs (105/225), 34.84% for members of GSAs (34/155), 59.43% for program directors (167/281), and 51.03% for program managers (148/290). The overall response rate was 39.26% (1358/3459) with 36.04% of applicants (904/2508), 46.67% of clerkship directors (105/225), 34.84% of student affairs deans (34/155), 59.43% of program directors (167/281), and 51.03% of program managers (148/290). The recommendations were perceived as important by all stakeholders. More than 90% of program directors reported compliance with some or all of the recommendations and more than 90% of all applicants, clerkship directors and student affairs deans reported that the standards reduced applicant anxiety. All stakeholders rated each guideline to be important to extremely important. This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptance of universal standards for the residency application process in the field of OBGYN. The vast majority of stakeholders surveyed supported the initiative and participated in the guidelines. Applicant respondents perceived the guidelines to be important and to decrease anxiety surrounding the application and interview timelines. These findings are important for other specialties when considering similar interventions.</description><subject>graduate medical education</subject><subject>interviews</subject><subject>residency applications</subject><subject>residency selection</subject><subject>standard timeline</subject><issn>1931-7204</issn><issn>1878-7452</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kLlOw0AQhi0EEiHwBDRb0jjs5augiCKOSJFAHBXFar07TtY4ttlxgsLTsyHUVDOa-f6R5ouiS0YnjLL0up7UuPHLCac8TNiEUn4UjVie5XEmE34c-kKwOONUnkZniDWliSx4MYreXwb9AauuseDJE3jswQxuC0i6loRda7W37tu1SzKsgDwDOgut2ZFp3zfO6MEFLlBk3g7gtw6-yJPvDCACnkcnlW4QLv7qOHq7u32dPcSLx_v5bLqIjRDpEDNIRSlTXSaMFtTmukpZmUmpNbUJlDmUnJmCS1pRYaTIuOBVXpWCZ1UmICnEOLo63O1997kBHNTaoYGm0S10G1RcpkxSxkUeUHFAje8QPVSq926t_U4xqvYqVa1-Vaq9SsWYCipD6uaQgvBF-NErNC5YAOt80KVs5_7N_wAmTH8l</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Hammoud, Maya M.</creator><creator>Winkel, Abigail Ford</creator><creator>Strand, Eric A.</creator><creator>Worly, Brett L.</creator><creator>Marzano, David A.</creator><creator>Bronner, Baillie A.</creator><creator>Forstein, David A.</creator><creator>Katz, Nadine T.</creator><creator>Woodland, Mark B.</creator><creator>Morgan, Helen K.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7546-856X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6149-5842</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9247-1664</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3157-4571</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes</title><author>Hammoud, Maya M. ; Winkel, Abigail Ford ; Strand, Eric A. ; Worly, Brett L. ; Marzano, David A. ; Bronner, Baillie A. ; Forstein, David A. ; Katz, Nadine T. ; Woodland, Mark B. ; Morgan, Helen K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c336t-1e63b46ab51090d8af61b744aa0d5eb8eb21c9240f03c437232f8fb327f73e593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>graduate medical education</topic><topic>interviews</topic><topic>residency applications</topic><topic>residency selection</topic><topic>standard timeline</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hammoud, Maya M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkel, Abigail Ford</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strand, Eric A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Worly, Brett L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marzano, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bronner, Baillie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forstein, David A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katz, Nadine T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woodland, Mark B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgan, Helen K.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of surgical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hammoud, Maya M.</au><au>Winkel, Abigail Ford</au><au>Strand, Eric A.</au><au>Worly, Brett L.</au><au>Marzano, David A.</au><au>Bronner, Baillie A.</au><au>Forstein, David A.</au><au>Katz, Nadine T.</au><au>Woodland, Mark B.</au><au>Morgan, Helen K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of surgical education</jtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>78</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1103</spage><epage>1110</epage><pages>1103-1110</pages><issn>1931-7204</issn><eissn>1878-7452</eissn><abstract>The purpose of this study was to examine stakeholder perspectives on recommended standards for the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residency application and interview processes proposed for the 2019 to 2020 application cycle. The authors aimed to assess the acceptance and perception of key stakeholders on the feasibility of implementing the standards as well as the effect of these changes on applicant anxiety. The authors electronically distributed an anonymous survey in February 2020 to OBGYN residency applicants, clerkship directors, student affairs deans, program directors, and program managers. Participants received a 15-item survey, with questions assessing the importance and adoption of the guidelines, as well as their effect on perceived applicants’ anxiety. Responses were measured on a 5-item Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore which residency factors were associated with compliance with the standards. IRB exemption was granted by the University of Michigan. A total of 1358 participants completed the survey for an overall response rate of 39.26%. Response rates were 36.04% for applicants (904/2508), 46.67% for CDs (105/225), 34.84% for members of GSAs (34/155), 59.43% for program directors (167/281), and 51.03% for program managers (148/290). The overall response rate was 39.26% (1358/3459) with 36.04% of applicants (904/2508), 46.67% of clerkship directors (105/225), 34.84% of student affairs deans (34/155), 59.43% of program directors (167/281), and 51.03% of program managers (148/290). The recommendations were perceived as important by all stakeholders. More than 90% of program directors reported compliance with some or all of the recommendations and more than 90% of all applicants, clerkship directors and student affairs deans reported that the standards reduced applicant anxiety. All stakeholders rated each guideline to be important to extremely important. This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptance of universal standards for the residency application process in the field of OBGYN. The vast majority of stakeholders surveyed supported the initiative and participated in the guidelines. Applicant respondents perceived the guidelines to be important and to decrease anxiety surrounding the application and interview timelines. These findings are important for other specialties when considering similar interventions.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7546-856X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6149-5842</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9247-1664</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3157-4571</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1931-7204
ispartof Journal of surgical education, 2021-07, Vol.78 (4), p.1103-1110
issn 1931-7204
1878-7452
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2461401238
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects graduate medical education
interviews
residency applications
residency selection
standard timeline
title Stakeholder Perspectives on Standardizing the Residency Application and Interview Processes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T12%3A20%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Stakeholder%20Perspectives%20on%20Standardizing%20the%20Residency%20Application%20and%20Interview%20Processes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20surgical%20education&rft.au=Hammoud,%20Maya%20M.&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=78&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1103&rft.epage=1110&rft.pages=1103-1110&rft.issn=1931-7204&rft.eissn=1878-7452&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jsurg.2020.11.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2461401238%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2461401238&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S1931720420304232&rfr_iscdi=true