Hiring in the Pediatric Hospital Medicine Board Certification Era: PHM Leader Perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: The designation of pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) as a board-certified (BC) subspecialty has led to uncertainty about the importance of PHM board certification in hiring pediatric hospitalists and ambiguity in counseling trainees interested in PHM careers about the decision to pursue fellowship. We sought to determine the importance of PHM board eligibility or certification in hiring practices. METHODS: We conducted an online, cross-sectional, survey-based study of individuals who self-identified as PHM division leadership utilizing the PHM Division Director Listserv and participant recruitment at a national meeting. RESULTS: A total of 86 responses were received. A total of 64% (30/47) of university-setting hospitals, 77% (17/28) of community hospitals, and 100% (11/11) of combined settings reported that they will hire applicants who are not board-eligible (BE) or BC (P = .83). Of the hospitals who will be hiring non-BE hospitalists, 50% of university settings, 77% of community settings, and 55% of combined settings plan to give equal consideration to both BE and non-BE applicants (P = .21). A total of 57% (21/37) of programs with a PHM fellowship felt that fellowship training was an important or very important consideration in hiring, compared with 27% (13/49) of programs without a PHM fellowship (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Programs with a PHM fellowship were significantly more likely to believe that fellowship training is an important consideration in hiring hospitalists. PHM board certification and fellowship training are perceived as more important by university-based programs, although all settings will consider hiring applicants who are not BC or BE.

How Prominent Are Gender Bias, Racial Bias, and Score Inflation in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Recommendation Letters? A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Letters of recommendation are considered an important factor in the holistic ranking of orthopaedic residency applications. The standardized letter of recommendation (SLOR) was introduced in 2017 in response to the inherent bias and limited comparative value of traditional LORs. It includes standardized questions about an applicant's orthopaedic qualifications, designed to enable fair comparisons among candidates. However, disparate and inconsistent findings have made it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from individual studies on the SLOR and narrative letter of recommendation. QUESTION/PURPOSES: In this systematic review we asked: (1) What is the distribution of applicant SLOR rating among nine domains and summative scores? (2) Are there applicant characteristics associated with SLOR ratings? (3) Is there gender and racial bias in the SLOR and narrative letter of recommendation? METHODS: PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar electronic databases were queried on March 20, 2023, to identify all studies evaluating SLOR and narrative letter of recommendations between January 1, 2017, and March 20, 2023. Articles that evaluated orthopaedic SLOR or narrative LORs were included. Systematic reviews, case reports, duplicate studies between databases, and grey literature such as abstracts and articles on preprint servers were excluded. Eight studies including 6179 applicants and 18,987 letters of recommendation were included in the final analysis. The applicant classes ranged from years 2014 to 2020. Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool for cross-sectional studies. The mean JBI score of included studies was 7.4 out of a maximum of 8, with higher scores indicating better quality. The primary outcome was to determine the distribution of applicant SLOR rankings in their summative score. Summative scores were separated into ranked to match, top one-third, middle one-third, lower one-third, and not a fit. Four studies reported the summative SLOR scores of applicants. Our secondary study goal was to assess applicant characteristics associated with SLOR summative scores and assess any bias present in the SLOR or narrative recommendation. Five studies compared SLOR ratings across applicant characteristics including gender, race, USMLE Step 1 score, USMLE Step 2 score, Alpha Omega Alpha (AΩA) membership, clerkship grades, and publications. Gender and racial bias were also assessed across five studies. Four studies utilized a linguistic analysis software to search letters of recommendation for differences in word category use by gender and race. RESULTS: Studies consistently found that a higher percentage of candidates were identified in the top percentile blocks than is mathematically possible. For example, the two studies that tallied the proportion of candidates ranking in the top 10% of applicants found that 36% and 42% were rated as being in the top 10%. Similarly, articles found more than 87% of applicants scored in the top one-third. Studies had mixed results, but in general, they suggested that AΩA status, higher Step 1 scores, and more research publications have a slightly positive association with increased SLOR scores. We found no evidence of gender bias against women, and in fact, most studies evaluating word choices found word choices for women candidates generally were stronger. Similarly, no consistent disparities were identified in word categories utilized in SLORs based on applicant race. CONCLUSION: Most notably, a mathematically impossible proportion of applicants were counted in the top percentiles in letters of recommendation. This compromises readers' abilities to differentiate candidates. Factors like AOA status and research publications displayed a modest positive correlation with SLOR scores. Gender bias against women or candidates from racial minority groups was not evident. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We suggest that group SLOR authorship, with a consensus assessment by clerkship or residency directors, should be considered. We also recommend the incorporation of mean and SD scores for each letter writer (or group) alongside their letters. Furthermore, studies indicate that submitting all four SLOR letters can substantially improve an applicant's chances of success. We advise students to choose strategically and submit the maximum allowable number of SLORs.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Websites: Assessing Information Gaps and Opportunities for Attracting Applicants.

INTRODUCTION: The quality and volume of information on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites are helpful for informed decision making of prospective applicants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the content on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites and identify areas for improvement. METHODS: In November 2023, 203 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were reviewed using the Association of American Medical Colleges Residency Explorer tool. Fourteen nonfunctional websites were excluded, leaving n = 189. Websites were assessed for 11 variables: resources for assisting resident research (eg, biomechanics laboratory, research assistant, and advisors), residents' past institutional affiliations, current resident profiles (including hometown and interests), alumni data, fellowship matches, American Board of Orthopedic Surgery I/II pass rates, Alpha Omega Alpha Society affiliation, target United States Medical Licensing Examination/ Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Learning Exam Step 2 scores, educational activities (journal club, grand rounds, didactics), evaluation methods, and mentorship. RESULTS: Website variables differed markedly among identified program types, which included community programs, university programs (UPs), and affiliated programs (APs). Disparities were noted in the disclosure of residents' previous institutions ( P = 0.001), the availability of alumni names ( P = 0.001), research resources ( P = 0.001), academic activities ( P = 0.007), assigned mentorship programs ( P = 0.006), and fellowship match information ( P = 0.027). Notably, community programs shared statistically significantly less information in these areas compared with UPs and APs ( P = 0.001). While there was a proportionate sharing of information between UPs and APs, UPs exhibited a slightly higher overall percentage of websites sharing more detailed information. CONCLUSION: The quality and comprehensiveness of information on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites vary markedly. Most of the orthopaedic surgery residency programs provided information on residents' past institutions and academic activities. However, very few provided information on designated mentorship programs or objective measures such as target Step 2 examination scores and ABOS pass rates. Improving the quality of information available on program websites will enhance transparency and consistency, enabling prospective applicants to make more informed decisions about where to apply and interview.

Foreword: U.S. Marine Gender Integration in Recruit Training.

The 2020 National Defense Authorization Act mandated that the Marine Corps not segregate recruit training by gender. This Military Medicine supplement details an independent academic study contracted by the Marine Corps Training and Education Command to inform the Marine Corps' future approaches to gender integration at recruit training. The authors conclude that with proper science-based training and an intentional approach to gender integration, the Marine Corps can bolster gender integration without losing its traditions, high standards, or warrior ethos in recruit training. A feasible path lies ahead to enhance the Corps' legacy of success. This special issue supports the Marine Corps Training and Education Command 2030 posture statement for leveraging science and technology for policy and doctrine to prepare and modernize the Marine Corps for the future operating environment.

Recruit Profiles Across the U.S. Armed Forces: Implications for Increasing Gender Integration in Recruit Training.

INTRODUCTION: This article uses recent survey data from a study on gender integration at recruit training across the U.S. Armed Forces to examine service, gender, and training differences in recruit's gender attitudes, beliefs, and cohesion metrics. In addition to providing a descriptive understanding of our recruit sample, this article examines factors germane to gender integration at recruit training such as gender attitudes, sexist beliefs, and unit cohesion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This article uses data from a survey of U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Coast Guard recruits as part of a USMC-commissioned study to develop alternate models and recommendations for increasing gender integration in USMC recruit training. At all sites but the USMC, recruits completed the survey 1 to 2 weeks before graduation. At the Marine Corps Recruit Depots, recruits participated in the survey at the beginning (week 2) and end (week 11) of their 13-week training cycle. A 19-question survey captured sociodemographic information, perspectives and experiences during recruit training, and gender attitudes and beliefs. Analyses were conducted on the sample with complete data on the measures reported, including those USMC recruits observed at both week 2 and week 11 (n = 629). Descriptive statistics (percentage) were calculated for all categorical outcome variables. Outcome variables (cohesion, gender, and sexism attitudes) were compared between groups using chi-squared tests or Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate. RESULTS: Recruits differed significantly across services in perceptions of unit cohesion on 3 of the 4 indicators: Platoon members are cooperative, know they can depend on each other, and really respect each other (P < .05). These differences appear to be driven by female recruit difference across service. They reported significant differences in gender role attitudes across the services, with USMC recruits being most likely to endorse traditional gender roles compared to other service recruits. Male USMC recruits were significantly more likely than their female peers to agree that men should achieve outside the home and women should take care of the home and family (21.3% versus 6.3%, P < .05). The only statistical differences in attitudes about equality of treatment and opportunity among recruits were between male and female USMC recruits. All items capturing sexist attitudes elicited statistically significant differences between male USMC recruits and male recruits in other services (P < .05). There were significant differences in all sexism measures between male and female USMC recruits (P < .05). There is a significant decline in some sexist attitudes between weeks 2 and 11 of training among male USMC recruits (P < .05). Nearly one-half to three-fourths of male USMC recruits hold sexist attitudes, even near the end of recruit training. CONCLUSIONS: The disparate gender and sexism attitudes of male USMC recruits compared with their peers in other services, and their fellow female USMC recruits suggest efforts to increase gender integration at entry-level training are needed, but also may be challenging since male USMC recruits report the highest levels of sexist attitudes among all recruits.

Design Considerations for a Multidisciplinary Approach to Provide Policy Recommendations on Gender-Integrated Recruit Training in the Marine Corps.

INTRODUCTION: Recruit training is designed to transform civilians into physically fit military service members, who embody their service's core values and possess military discipline and skills. At the time this research began, the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) remained the only service that segregated recruits by gender at the lowest unit level (e.g., platoon) and employed gender-segregated drill instructor teams. USMC's Marine Corps Recruit Depots (MCRD) must comply with a 2020 Congressional Mandate to not segregate training by gender in Parris Island by 2025 and San Diego by 2028. In turn, USMC requested an independent scientific study to analyze current approaches to gender integration at recruit training to propose alternate models and other policy recommendations that increase gender integration while maintaining current USMC standards. The Marine Corps is currently evaluating alternate models and recommendations to optimize entry-level training. This article outlines considerations for choosing the optimal research study design, research methods, and types of data collected in a study intended to provide policy recommendations on gender-integrated recruit training for the USMC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Research data were collected during visits to the MCRDs and selected recruit training locations for the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Coast Guard. Data collection on USMC recruits from three cohorts involved social science assessments (focus groups and surveys) and human performance testing (countermovement jumps and isometric mid-thigh pulls, sleep and activity wearables, and cortisol data) at multiple points in the training cycle. Data on recruits from the sister services were limited to social science assessments. Approximately 600 recruits between the two MCRDs and 160 recruits from the sister services participated in the study during a 7-month timeframe in 2021. The research team conducted extensive ethnographic observations of recruit training at all selected research sites and interviewed training cadre, drill instructors, and service leadership responsible for recruit training (∼90 interviews). Additionally, the research team interviewed 20 experts on gender integration or recruit training who possessed alternate viewpoints from the current USMC practice. RESULTS: The mixed methods study was designed to assess the current gender integration practices at recruit training across the services to generate alternative models of gender integration for USMC. The research team developed a set of multidisciplinary objectives and research questions serving as the foundation of the research study design and data collection process. The study was designed to collect qualitative, quantitative, and administrative data informed by social science and human performance disciplines. To ensure that all aspects and implications relevant to gender integration were considered, select data were collected across services and with stakeholders at all levels. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary research approach provided a comprehensive picture of the current USMC recruit training models. The research team captured multiple perspectives and data points for analysis through an expansive view on gender integration across all services, by interacting with participants at all levels of the institutions in varied ways. The information and data gathered enabled the research team to establish objective, data-driven alternate models, and recommendations for enhancing gender integration at recruit training for the USMC.

Increasing Gender Integration in U.S. Marine Corps Recruit Training: Policy Recommendations and Rationales From an Interdisciplinary Study.

INTRODUCTION: This article describes alternate models and policy recommendations created by an interdisciplinary team of researchers to increase gender integration at U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) recruit training. The USMC requested a study to analyze current approaches to gender integration at recruit training and provide alternate models that maximize integration, while continuing to train marines to established standards. USMC remains the only service that segregates recruits by gender at the lowest unit level (e.g., platoon) in recruit training and maintains gender-segregated drill instructor teams (i.e., same-gender teams train platoons of same-gender recruits). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mixed-method, interdisciplinary approach was used to capture multiple perspectives and informed recommendations and alternate models for gender integration. The team studied select USMC, army, navy, air force, and coast guard recruit training locations, between June and November 2021. At each site, the team collected qualitative, quantitative, and administrative data as well as physical performance metrics and human performance outcomes. Study participants included recruits, drill instructors, training cadre, service leaders, and subject matter experts on gender integration in military services. Each alternate model was designed to maximize the feasibility of implementation within current USMC training conditions. RESULTS: The research team developed three alternate models and several policy recommendations. Alternate model 1 proposed a methodology for mixed-gender drill instructor teams within the Integrated Company model, USMC's current integrated training model. Alternate model 2 proposed an Integrated Company Plus model which increases the number and types of gender-integrated training events at or below the platoon level within the Integrated Company model. Alternate model 3 outlined an integrated platoon model where recruits fall out into integrated training platoons after their morning routine, with two options of varying integration based on USMC priorities for integration. The team also proposed a set of policy recommendations independent of the three alternate models to support current and future gender integration efforts at the Marine Corps Recruit Depots. CONCLUSIONS: Gender-integrated military training has been shown to positively alter perceptions and evaluations of women in military settings over detrimental aspects developed by gender-segregated training. The study team recommended USMC train recruits in the Integrated Company model with mixed-gender drill instructor teams (alternate model 1) and integrate more training events following the priority tiers outlined in the Integrated Company plus model (alternate model 2). The combined execution of these two alternate models would provide USMC recruits increased exposure to direct, sustained training from opposite-gender drill instructors and deliver intentional training opportunities for male and female recruits to work together and interact in meaningful ways. The integrated platoon model (alternate model 3) would offer USMC recruits the most direct exposure to training and working with members of the opposite gender, but it requires substantial changes to current logistics, accountability, and training procedures.

Hawks and Doves in Standardized Letters of Evaluation: 6 Years of Rating Distributions and Trends in Emergency Medicine.

Background Standardized Letters of Evaluation (SLOEs) are an important part of resident selection in many specialties. Often written by a group, such letters may ask writers to rate applicants in different domains. Prior studies have noted inflated ratings; however, the degree to which individual institutions are "doves" (higher rating) or "hawks" (lower rating) is unclear. Objective To characterize institutional SLOE rating distributions to inform readers and developers regarding potential threats to validity from disparate rating practices. Methods Data from emergency medicine (EM) SLOEs between 2016 and 2021 were obtained from a national database. SLOEs from institutions with at least 10 letters per year in all years were included. Ratings on one element of the SLOE-the "global assessment of performance" item (Top 10%, Top Third, Middle Third, and Lower Third)-were analyzed numerically and stratified by predefined criteria for grading patterns (Extreme Dove, Dove, Neutral, Hawk, Extreme Hawk) and adherence to established guidelines (Very High, High, Neutral, Low, Very Low). Results Of 40 286 SLOEs, 20 407 met inclusion criteria. Thirty-five to 50% of institutions displayed Neutral grading patterns across study years, with most other institutional patterns rated as Dove or Extreme Dove. Adherence to guidelines was mixed and fewer than half of institutions had Very High or High adherence each year. Most institutions underutilize the Lower Third rating. Conclusions Despite explicit guidelines for the distribution of global assessment ratings in the EM SLOE, there is high variability in institutional rating practices.

Should my recommendation letter be written by artificial intelligence?

SummaryLetters of recommendation are increasingly important for the residency match. We assessed whether an artificial intelligence (AI) tool could help in writing letters of recommendation by analyzing recommendation letters written by 3 academic staff and AI duplicate versions for 13 applicants. The preferred letters were selected by 3 blinded orthopedic program directors based on a pre-determined set of criteria. The first orthopedic program director selected the AI letter for 31% of applicants, and the 2 remaining program directors selected the AI letter for 38% of applicants, with the staff-written versions selected more often by all of the program directors (p < 0.05). The first program director recognized only 15% of the AI-written letters, the second was able to identify 92%, and the third director identified 77% of AI-written letters (p < 0.05).

Urology Residency Applicant Selection: Program Directors' New Criteria.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the recent changes to the urology residency application process on the criteria utilized by residency program directors (PDs) for interview invitations and their perspectives concerning these changes. METHODS: One hundred thirty-seven urology residency PDs were invited to participate in an anonymous survey to explore interview selection criteria and the impact of the increase in preference signals (PS) per applicant. RESULTS: Fifty-eight PDs (42.8%) completed the survey. The highest-ranked criteria were letters of recommendation (LoR) and successful sub-internship (sub-I) at the PD's institution, without statistically significant differences between these 2. Gender, ethnicity, and medical school prestige were the lowest rated criteria, without significant differences between these 3. Compared to before the increase in the number of PS per applicant, 80.7% of PDs reported that not receiving a PS from an applicant this cycle would more negatively impact the chances of offering an interview to that applicant. Moreover, 12.2% stated they would not interview any applicants who did not send a PS. Finally, 62.1% of PDs believed recent changes worsened the process. CONCLUSION: Recent changes impacted PDs applicant evaluation, with the highest ranked criteria being LoRs and sub-I. Paradoxically, the increase in the number of PS per applicant has increased their importance as applicants are much less likely to receive interview offers from programs they have not signaled. Lastly, most PDs believe changes have worsened the evaluation process.

Update on the Selection Criteria of Plastic Surgery Residents: A Survey of Program Directors and Associate Program Directors.

BACKGROUND: Plastic and reconstructive surgery (PRS) is recognized as a highly competitive specialty. Since the first assessment of resident selection criteria in 2007, PRS residency programs have adopted holistic review processes and adapted to changes such as a decline in medical schools participating in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society as well as the recent transition to pass/fail grading for the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 examination (Schultz et al. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open . 2020;8:e2892; Tadisina et al. Plast Reconstr Surg . 2017;139:330e-331e). This study was devised to evaluate current PRS residency criteria in light of these changes. METHODS: An anonymous, 12-item, electronic survey was generated and distributed using Alchemer. An email was sent to 171 program directors (PDs) and associate program directors (APDs) of PRS residency programs. Survey questions were developed to collect data regarding respondent demographics and their desired criteria when assessing residency applicants. Complete responses were collected and analyzed with summary statistics and multivariate logistic regression using RStudio (version 1.3.109). RESULTS: In total, 44 (25.7% response rate) of the 171 PDs and APDs completed the survey. Of the 16 programs (36.4%) with a USMLE cutoff score, 7 (43.8%) reported a range of 230 to 239 and 6 (37.5%) reported a range of 240 to 249. Without a score for step 1, the majority (48.8%) of respondents believe that step 2 scores will replace step 1 scores in terms of assessment criteria, and the content of recommendation letters was selected as the criterion with the greatest increase in weight (66.7%). In addition, 27.3% of programs require a step 2 score at the time of interview. The top 3 academic criteria in order of decreasing importance were the content of recommendation letters, clinical grades, and letter writers, whereas the top 3 nonacademic criteria were subinternship performance, maturity, and interview performance. CONCLUSIONS: Plastic and reconstructive surgery remains a highly competitive specialty for residency applicants. Our findings suggest that Alpha Omega Alpha membership remains diminished in importance, whereas USMLE cutoff scores have increased. With recent changes in the step 1 grading system, PDs and APDs will rely more heavily on step 2 scores and the content of recommendation letters.

Effect of United States Medical Licensing Examination Score Cutoffs on Recruitment of Underrepresented Applicants in the Urology Match.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the use of United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) score cutoffs during the screening process of the Urology Residency Match Program may affect recruitment of applicants who are underrepresented in medicine (URM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Deidentified data from the Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC) Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) system was reviewed, representing all applicants to our institution's urology residency program from 2018 to 2022. We analyzed self-reported demographic variables including race/ethnicity, age, sex/gender, as well as USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores. Chi-square tests and ANOVA were used to determine the association between race/ethnicity and other sociodemographic factors and academic metrics. Applicants were stratified according to USMLE Step 1 cutoff scores and the distribution of applicants by race/ethnicity was assessed using a Gaussian nonlinear regression fit. RESULTS: A total of 1258 applicants submitted applications to our program during the 5-year period, including 872 males (69.3%) and 386 females (30.7%). Most applicants were White (43.5%), followed by Asian (28.3%), Hispanic/Latino (11.7%), and Black (7.0%). There was an association between race/ethnicity and USMLE scores. Median USMLE Step 1 scores for White, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, and Black applicants were 242, 242, 237, and 232, respectively (P < .001). As cutoff score increases, percentage of URM applicants decreases. CONCLUSION: The use of cutoffs based on USMLE scores disproportionately affects URM applicants. Transitioning from numeric scores to pass/fail may enhance holistic review processes and increase the representation of URM applicants offered interviews at urology residency programs.

Psychometric properties of automated video interview competency assessments.

Interviews are one of the most widely used selection methods, but their reliability and validity can vary substantially. Further, using human evaluators to rate an interview can be expensive and time consuming. Interview scoring models have been proposed as a mechanism for reliably, accurately, and efficiently scoring video-based interviews. Yet, there is a lack of clarity and consensus around their psychometric characteristics, primarily driven by a dearth of published empirical research. The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of automated video interview competency assessments (AVI-CAs), which were designed to be highly generalizable (i.e., apply across job roles and organizations). The AVI-CAs developed demonstrated high levels of convergent validity (average r value of .66), moderate discriminant relationships (average r value of .58), good test-retest reliability (average r value of .72), and minimal levels of subgroup differences (Cohen's ds ≥ -.14). Further, criterion-related validity (uncorrected sample-weighted r¯ = .24) was demonstrated by applying these AVI-CAs to five organizational samples. Strengths, weaknesses, and future directions for building interview scoring models are also discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Factors Associated with the Willingness to Perform a Physical Employment Standard in Probation Officers.

PURPOSE: This study examined worker characteristics and behaviors and the perceived importance of job-related tasks associated with the willingness to perform a proposed probation officer physical ability test (PROPAT). METHODS: North Carolina probation officers (N = 1213, 46.2% female, 39.8 ± 10.1 yr, 30.7 ± 6.6 kg·m-2) completed a survey including demographics, health history, and job-related tasks. A multivariable logistic regression model estimated the odds of being willing to perform the PROPAT. Adjusted odds ratios (ORadjusted) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, with those excluding 1.00 deemed statistically significant. RESULTS: The majority (72%) of probation officers were willing to perform the PROPAT. Being male (compared with female) (ORadjusted = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.12-2.02) and having moderate (ORadjusted = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.10-2.08) and high physical activity status (ORadjusted = 2.89, 95% CI = 1.97-4.28) (compared with low) increased the odds of being willing to perform the PROPAT. Additionally, reporting a greater importance of tasks, including running to pursue a suspect (TASKRUN, 1-unit increase, ORadjusted = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.10-1.43) and dragging an unresisting person (TASKDRAG, 1-unit increase, ORadjusted = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.01-1.32), increased the odds of being willing to perform the PROPAT. Increasing age (1-yr increase, ORadjusted = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.94-0.98), class II (ORadjusted = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.28-0.71) and class III obesity (compared with normal weight, ORadjusted = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.32-0.93), and a previous musculoskeletal injury (ORadjusted = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35-0.93) all decreased the odds of being willing to perform the PROPAT. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest being older, previously injured, obese (body mass index ≥ 35 kg·m-2), and less active is associated with being less willing to participate in the PROPAT, whereas males and reporting a higher importance of the TASKRUN and TASKDRAG activities is associated with being more willing to participate in the PROPAT. Departments can use these findings to identify feasible strategies (e.g., education and physical training) to improve the implementation of physical employment standards.

Novel Strategies for Evaluating and Improving Plastic Surgery Applicant Selection.

SUMMARY: Residency applicant evaluation and selection is a critical part of developing and maintaining a high-quality plastic surgery residency program. Currently, many programs rely on objective measures such as the United States Medical Licensing Exam scores, number of research publications, grade point average, Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society status, or a combination of these objective metrics. However, there is a growing body of literature suggesting that the current means of residency applicant evaluation and selection may not be the best predictive factors of future resident success. The aim of this study was to identify nontraditional means of evaluating plastic surgery residency candidates and discuss how these means have been implemented at the authors' institution. After reviewing industry hiring practices, the authors propose that standardized interviewing and personality testing can help evaluate some of the previously intangible parts of an applicant that may play a role in teamwork, commitment, and dedication to patient care.