Prevalence of Post-Interview Communication in the Ophthalmology Match and Its Impact on Program Directors' Ranking of Applicants

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of post-interview communication (PIC) during the ophthalmology residency match process and its impact on program directors' (PD's) ranking of applicants.

Design Prospective cross-sectional survey.

Methods An anonymous, online survey was emailed to the PD of each ophthalmology residency program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education.

Results Fifty-four percent (63/116) of PDs completed the survey. Eighty-five percent (54/63) of PDs received PIC from applicants or applicants' faculty mentors during the 2018 to 2019 application cycle; 62% (39/63) received PIC regarding >25% of applicants interviewed. Although 41% (26/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor known to the PD, only 3% (2/63) believed that applicants who did not have a faculty mentor conduct PIC on their behalf were disadvantaged. Fourteen percent (9/63) of PDs reported they would likely rank an applicant higher due to PIC endorsement from a faculty mentor unknown to the PD, and 3% (2/63) reported they would likely rank an applicant higher as a result of PIC from the applicant.

Conclusion There is a high prevalence of PIC during the ophthalmology residency match process. The potential impact of PIC on PDs' ranking of applicants varies according to whether the PIC is from a faculty member known to the PD, a faculty member unknown to the PD, or the applicant. This may disadvantage applicants without faculty mentors known to PDs.

Keywords

residency - post-interview communication - survey - San Francisco Match - match - interview - medical student - prevalence - impact - mentor - faculty mentor

• References

• 1 San Francisco Match. Overview-Ophthalmology Residency Match. Available at: https://sfmatch.org/SpecialtyInsideAll.aspx?id=6&typ=2&name=Ophthalmology . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 2 The National Resident Matching Program. About NRMP. Available at: http://www.nrmp.org/about-nrmp . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 3 Brooks JT, Reidler JS, Jain A, LaPorte DM, Sterling RS. Post-interview communication during application to orthopaedic surgery residency programs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016; 98 (19) e84
• 4 Farber NJ, Neylan CJ, Srivastava A. , et al. The urology match process and the limited value of post-interview communication for program directors. Urology 2019; 128: 23-30
• 5 Jena AB, Arora VM, Hauer KE. , et al. The prevalence and nature of postinterview communications between residency programs and applicants during the match. Acad Med 2012; 87 (10) 1434-1442
• 6 Berriochoa C, Reddy CA, Dorsey S. , et al. The residency match: interview experiences, postinterview communication, and associated distress. J Grad Med Educ 2018; 10 (04) 403-408
• 7 Chen AJ, Tran EM, Clark MA, Scott IU, Greenberg PB. Preferences and practices of U.S. ophthalmology residency program directors regarding post-interview communication with residency applicants. J Acad Ophthalmol 2018; 10 (01) 43-47
• 8 Swan EC, Baudendistel TE. Relationship between postinterview correspondence from residency program applicants and subsequent applicant match outcomes. J Grad Med Educ 2014; 6 (03) 478-483
• 9 Grimm LJ, Avery CS, Maxfield CM. Residency postinterview communications: more harm than good?. J Grad Med Educ 2016; 8 (01) 7-9
• 10 Teichman JM, Anderson KD, Dorough MM, Stein CR, Optenberg SA, Thompson IM. The urology residency matching program in practice. J Urol 2000; 163 (06) 1878-1887
• 11 American Urological Association. Urology and Specialty Matches. Available at: https://www.auanet.org/education/auauniversity/for-residents/urology-and-specialty-matches . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 12 Farber NJ, Neylan CJ, Kaplan A, Singer EA, Elsamra SE. The urology match and postinterview communication. Urology 2018; 122: 44-51
• 13 The National Resident and Matching Program. Match Communication Code of Conduct. Available at: http://www.nrmp.org/communication-code-of-conduct . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 14 Frishman GN, Matteson KA, Bienstock JL. , et al. Postinterview communication with residency applicants: a call for clarity!. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211 (04) 344-350.e1
• 15 The American Medical Association. The AMA Residency & Fellowship Database. Available at: https://freida.ama-assn.org/Freida . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 16 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
• 17 The National Residency and Matching Program. Charting Outcomes in the Match: U.S. Allopathic Seniors. Available at: https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Seniors.pdf . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 18 The San Francisco Match and the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology Residency Match Summary Report 2018 . Available at: https://www.sfmatch.org/PDFFilesDisplay/Ophthalmology_Residency_Stats_2018.pdf . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 19 The National Resident and Matching Program. Results of the 2018 NRMP Program Director Survey. Available at: https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/NRMP-2018-Program-Director-Survey-for-WWW.pdf . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 20 United States Medical Licensing Examination. USMLE Score Reporting FAQs. Available at: http://usmle.org/usmlescoring/faq.html . Accessed August 10, 2019
• 21 Chen AJ, Chan JJ, Scott IU, Greenberg PB. Ophthalmic resident education on preventable surgical errors. JAMA Ophthalmol 2013; 131 (09) 1238-1240
• 22 Coombs PG, Feldman BH, Lauer AK, Paul Chan RV, Sun G. Global health training in ophthalmology residency programs. J Surg Educ 2015; 72 (04) e52-e59