Gotewal Simi, Feng Sing-Yi, Bansal Bharati Beatrix Chandra, Nesiama Jo-Ann
Pediatric Emergency Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Children's Health, Dallas, TX.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2025 Mar 1;41(3):165-171. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000003307. Epub 2025 Jan 22.
The primary aim of this study was to determine whether current fellows and program directors in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) were satisfied with virtual interviewing (VI) in terms of their respective matches. The secondary goal was to assess areas in which the virtual interview process could be improved.
After institutional review was obtained, fellow surveys were piloted to non-PEM fellows to solicit feedback. Surveys were distributed via the PEM Survey committee from September 18, 2023, to November 13, 2023. There were 2 separate surveys: one for PEM program directors (PDs) and another for PEM fellows. The first survey targeted PEM fellows who matched in interview cycles from 2020 to 2022; it evaluated VI accuracy in representing program attributes and assessed the effectiveness of specific interview components. The second survey was for PEM PDs and explored the types of interview components employed and the evolution of the VI process. Both surveys gauged overall satisfaction with the VI process regarding their matches and preference for interview modality (VI vs in-person vs hybrid).
A response rate of 25% (n = 56) from fellows and 44% (n = 40) from PDs were obtained. Three-quarters (75%) of fellows were satisfied or highly satisfied with the information obtained via the virtual interview in terms of being able to accurately assess their program. PD satisfaction trended upward from 2020 to 2022 regarding virtual interviewing. Sixty-four percent of fellows, compared to 72% of PDs believed that their in-person experience aligned well or very well with the perception they obtained via virtual interviewing.
Despite high satisfaction rates with the VI regarding matches and strong alignment of perception obtained via VI with in-person assessment during fellowship, both PDs and fellows continue to prefer a form of hybrid interviews. Our study provides valuable insights for guiding recommendations in future implementations of VI.
本研究的主要目的是确定儿科急诊医学(PEM)的现任研究员和项目主任对虚拟面试(VI)在各自匹配方面是否满意。次要目标是评估虚拟面试过程中可以改进的方面。
在获得机构审查后,对非PEM研究员进行了研究员调查试点以征求反馈意见。调查于2023年9月18日至2023年11月13日通过PEM调查委员会分发。有两项单独的调查:一项针对PEM项目主任(PDs),另一项针对PEM研究员。第一项调查针对在2020年至2022年面试周期中匹配的PEM研究员;它评估了VI在代表项目属性方面的准确性,并评估了特定面试组成部分的有效性。第二项调查针对PEM PDs,探讨了所采用的面试组成部分的类型以及VI过程的演变。两项调查都衡量了对VI过程在其匹配方面的总体满意度以及对面试方式(VI与面对面与混合)的偏好。
研究员的回复率为25%(n = 56),PDs的回复率为44%(n = 40)。四分之三(75%)的研究员对通过虚拟面试获得的信息感到满意或非常满意,认为能够准确评估他们的项目。关于虚拟面试,PDs的满意度从2020年到2022年呈上升趋势。64%的研究员认为他们的面对面体验与通过虚拟面试获得的认知非常匹配或匹配良好,而PDs的这一比例为72%。
尽管对VI在匹配方面的满意度很高,并且通过VI获得的认知与研究员培训期间的面对面评估高度一致,但PDs和研究员仍然更喜欢某种形式的混合面试。我们的研究为指导未来VI实施中的建议提供了有价值的见解。