Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Institute for Innovations in Medical Education, New York University Grossman School of Medicine. New York, New York.
J Surg Educ. 2022 Mar-Apr;79(2):362-369. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2021.10.012. Epub 2021 Nov 30.
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.
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.
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).
Stakeholders in the OBGYN application process consider caps to applications and interviews a promising means to improve equity in the Match.
当前住院医师申请过程中的申请膨胀导致拥堵、效率低下和不公平感。作者旨在评估主要利益相关者对申请和面试上限的兴趣,以及他们对过程公平性的看法。
在 2021 年申请周期提交排名名单后,在最终匹配结果公布之前,2021 年 3 月,向妇产科住院医师申请人、实习主任、项目主任和学生事务院长以电子方式分发了一份匿名调查。参与者回答了关于当前流程(提交的申请和完成的面试次数没有限制)与限制学生提交或完成的申请和面试数量相比,他们认为公平的问题。支持上限的受访者报告了他们认为合理的申请和面试上限数量。使用非参数统计的卡方检验和正态分布间隔数据的 t 检验,探讨了申请人和项目主任的个人资料与他们对申请和面试上限的兴趣之间的关联。密歇根大学确定该研究免除了 IRB 审查。
总回复率为 36.0%(1167/3243),包括 34.0%的申请人(879/2579)、50.3%的项目主任(143/284)、41.8%的实习主任(94/225)和 32.9%的学生事务院长(51/155)。所有群体都报告说,对于所有申请人或最具竞争力的申请人,申请上限比当前流程更公平,并建议中位数申请上限从 25(实习主任和项目主任)到 40(申请人)不等。所有群体也认为面试上限比当前流程更公平,并建议中位数面试上限从 12(实习主任)到 15(申请人、项目主任和学生事务院长)不等。
妇产科申请流程中的利益相关者认为申请和面试上限是提高匹配公平性的有希望的手段。