A Nation-Wide Survey of Program Directors at a Large Health Care Organization: Prevalence and Perceptions of Resident Wellness Activities.

Background: This study evaluated wellness programs in a large hospital network to determine residency program directors' (PDs) perspectives on their wellness programs' state, including wellness prioritization, frequency of wellness activities, and wellness' influence on decision-making across organizational levels. Methods: In 2021, 211 PDs were sent surveys on program policies, program implementation frequency, perceptions of the administration's ability to prioritize wellness, funding sources, and perceptions of resident wellness' impact on decision-making. Results: Among 211 contacted programs, 148 surveys were completed (70.1%). The majority reported having wellness programs, committees, and funding. Fewer than 25% reported having a chief wellness officer. PDs perceived that fellow colleagues in their institution linked wellness to markers of institutional success to a greater extent than other available options (ie, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education [ACGME] requirements, budgetary concerns, resident input, core faculty priorities, and education quality). Financial well-being was perceived as least connected to wellness. Perceptions of wellness were rated across 3 organizational levels: program, institution, and organization. Across all levels, ACGME requirements (31.0%-32.8%) and budgetary/financial concerns (21.9%-37.0%) were perceived as having the most significant influence on overall decision-making, whereas resident wellness was rated lower in influence (8.0%-12.2%). Most programs allowed residents to attend mental health appointments without using paid time off (87.9%) and while on duty (83.1%). Conclusion: The frequency of wellness activities varied greatly across programs. PDs reported challenges making resident self-care and personal development a priority and perceived resident wellness as having limited importance to decision-making at higher levels.

Applicant Perception and Content Exploration of the 2024 podiatric Residency Interview Process.

Considerable resources are dedicated on an annual basis to the podiatric medicine and surgery residency interview by both students and programs. Despite this, relatively little is known about student perception of the process, nor the format and content of interview. The objective of this investigation was to study and organize experiences of fourth-year podiatric medical students following the 2024 Centralized Residency Interview Program (CRIP) process. An anonymous and voluntary survey was developed and made available to fourth year podiatric medical students. It was relatively common for there to be academic, social/personal, case work-up, and rapid-fire academic question components to the interview. It was also very common to be provided with the opportunity to ask programs questions. It was relatively uncommon for there to be ethical/moral questions, personality/psychologic assessments, logic assessments, and hands-on demonstrations. The most common hands-on demonstrations were suturing, hand ties and performance of fixation principles. Relatively high yield academic topics included plain film radiography interpretation, rearfoot/ankle osseous trauma, diabetic foot infection, advanced imaging interpretation, and fixation constructs/principles. When evaluating programs, students placed high value on surgical volume, surgical variety, relative resident autonomy, program location, exposure to outpatient clinics, salary, future connections as a program alumnus, unique off-service rotations, exposure to business management/coding/billing, scope of practice, exposure to inpatient management, resident salary, and who the senior co-residents would be. The results of this investigation provide unique information for both medical students and residency programs with respect to the perception, format and content of the podiatric residency interview process.

Navigating the Neurosurgery Match Process: Insights from the National Resident Matching Program - Program Director Surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Neurosurgery is one of the most competitive specialties, and navigating the match process is often challenging for aspiring applicants. Here, we analyze insights from the National Resident Matching Program Director Surveys, illustrating evolving trends in applicant selection for interviews and for the ranking process, and providing a comparison with other specialties. METHODS: We evaluated 7 surveys administered from 2012 to 2022. Six biennial surveys reported on factors influencing interview and ranking processes, while all 7 surveys included data about the program director (PD)'s attitude toward United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) test scores. RESULTS: The response rate of PDs decreased over the years. The most cited factor for interviews included specialty-specific recommendation letters (95%), USMLE Step 1 scores (91%), and interest in research (78%). A recent decline in emphasis on USMLE Step 1 scores coincided with a growing reliance on USMLE Step 2 scores. Award in basic science held significant esteem to a subset of programs. Personal characteristics dominated for ranking, with faculty interaction (89%), interpersonal skills (89%), and house staff interaction (85%) being the most important. Yet, PDs reported a difficulty in assessing interpersonal skills through virtual interviews. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed the pervasive importance of specialized endorsements and academic achievements when screening applicants for the interview process. A shift in emphasis toward the USMLE Step 2 became apparent. Personal characteristics, on the other hand, seemed crucial to make a match and rank high among the pool of interviewed applicants. We uncovered difficulties in assessing these characteristics through virtual interviews.

Otolaryngology residency program factors associated with female resident representation.

Objective: Female representation in the field of otolaryngology is lacking. Residency is the first point at which medical school graduates specialize in a chosen field and thus represents an opportunity to recruit and train more female otolaryngologists. This study sought to identify program factors associated with greater female representation among resident physicians. Methods: Departmental websites of all 124 otolaryngology residency programs in the United States and Puerto Rico were examined for a list of residents. For programs with a resident roster available, the genders of residents, faculty, program directors, and chairpersons were recorded. Location and city population for each program was also recorded, as was female resident representation. Programs were compared using Pearson Chi-squared univariate tests. Results: 1,632 residents and 2,605 faculty were included in the analysis of 109 programs. The median female resident representation was 40%. Programs with larger faculty sizes, more female faculty, and urban location were associated with an above-median female resident representation. Programs with a larger residency cohort approached significance regarding above-median female resident representation. Higher female faculty representation, program director gender, chairperson gender, and US region were not associated with variation in female resident representation. Conclusions: Greater female otolaryngology residency representation was associated with programs having an urban location and greater numbers of female and total faculty. It was also likely that a larger resident cohort size may affect female resident representation. The proportions of female faculty, program director, and chairperson gender, as well as the US region, were not associated with variation in female resident gender representation.

Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship Program Directors' Perspective on the Virtual Interview Process.

Background: Since the start of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the residency and fellowship recruitment process has changed significantly with the use of virtual interview (VI) platforms. Pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) candidates reported in a survey that VIs hindered their ability to evaluate their fit within the program. However, the program directors' (PDs') opinion of this process remains unknown. Objective: We aim to provide insight into the PCCM fellowship PDs' perspective regarding the virtual recruitment process since the first class of fellows undergoing this process has now completed 1 year of training. Methods: An anonymous survey was sent to the PDs of PCCM programs participating in the National Resident Matching Program match process in 2020 and 2021. The survey consisted of five sections and 26 closed-ended questions and was distributed via email using the SurveyMonkey platform. The survey was conducted for a total of 6 weeks. A follow-up email to nonrespondents was sent every week. The collected responses were divided into two categories: favoring VIs versus not favoring VIs. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with favoring VIs. Results: The survey was sent to 190 email accounts from the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access System website. Over the course of 6 weeks, 64 respondents participated in the survey, with a response rate of 33.68%. Of 64 respondents, 56 (87.5%) fully completed the survey and 8 (12.5%) partially completed the survey. The final sample size was 59. Thirty-six (61.02%) of the PDs favored VIs for future recruitment, and 23 (38.98%) did not (P < 0.001). Ninety-seven percent of PDs who favored VIs versus 72.73% of those who did not perceived the current fellows to fit well in the program (P = 0.007). The multivariable logistic regression analysis showed a trend toward higher odds of favoring VIs if PDs believed they were able to represent the program well virtually (adjusted odds ratio, 6.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 - 61.58) and if they found that the current fellows fit the program well (adjusted odds ratio, 7.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-66.52); however, these results were not statistically significant. Conclusion: In this survey research, we found that the majority of the PCCM fellowship PDs favored a virtual process for future recruitment.

National Survey on Support for Nurse Practitioner and Physician Assistant/Associate Postgraduate Fellowship/Residency Programs and Director Compensation.

Introduction Although there has been a significant and steady increase nationwide in the number of physician assistant/associate (PA) and nurse practitioner (NP) postgraduate residency/fellowship programs, there remains a paucity of research related to the level of operational support available in many of these programs to facilitate specialty training. Therefore, the primary aim of this study is to conduct a national survey to gather foundational data regarding advanced practice provider (APP) postgraduate fellowship/residency operational support and program director total compensation data in the United States. Methodology A descriptive cross-sectional survey consisting of 27 questions was distributed via email to 336 postgraduate NP, PA, joint NP/PA, and certified nurse-midwifery residency/fellowship programs between November 2023 and December 2023. Frequency tables and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the survey data. Additionally, Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were performed to determine the relationship between the dependent variables and the independent variable. Results There was a statistically significant positive relationship between the organization values the postgraduate program and having sufficient administrative time (rs = 0.342, p < 0.001), having adequate support staff (rs = 0.340, p < 0.001), and being fairly compensated (rs = 0.356, p < 0.001) for program roles and responsibilities. Moreover, slightly less than half of respondents reported having adequate support staff and sufficient administrative time to address program responsibilities. Only 50% of respondents believed they were fairly compensated for their position. Respondents moderately agreed that their organization values the postgraduate training program (M = 4.00, SD = 1.00). Conclusions The results of this study highlight the perceptions of postgraduate program directors regarding adequate administrative support and resources to facilitate specialty-specific training for NPs and PAs. Further research is warranted to evaluate the level of operational support needed to develop and sustain postgraduate APP residency/fellowship training programs now and in the future.

Orthopedic Surgery Residency Program Rankings and Gender Diversity.

Background Orthopedic surgery residency programs are some of the least gender-diverse specialty programs in medicine. Despite strong representation at the undergraduate and medical school levels and increased applications to orthopedic surgery residency programs by women, there is still a substantial gender gap at the resident level. This study explores the relationship between the gender diversity of orthopedic surgery residency programs and program rankings. Methodology Program rank, program director gender identity, and gender diversity data were collected for the top 100 programs by reputation in Doximity. Gender diversity was measured as the proportion of female residents in the program and alumni. Results The greatest percentage of women in a program was 33% and the smallest was 3%. After linear regression analysis, we found that there was a statistically significant positive correlation between program rank and the proportion of women. The higher ranked a program was, the greater the proportion of women. There was no significant correlation between program director gender, appointment year, and program rank. Conclusions These results suggest that, although there is still a long way to go before closing the gender gap in orthopedic surgery residency programs, higher-ranked programs are associated with greater gender diversity than their lower-ranked counterparts.

Lack of Diversity in Transplant Hepatology Fellowship Program Directorship.

BACKGROUND: Diversity in medicine has garnered significant attention in recent medical workforce research, as studies consistently reveal the beneficial impact of race-concordant visits on patient outcomes, adherence, and satisfaction. While diversity among residency and fellowship program directors has been studied in other fields, little is known about the diversity within niche fellowship programs such as transplant hepatology. This study aims to investigate the demographic information of program directors in transplant hepatology fellowship programs. METHODS: We identified transplant hepatology fellowship programs and their program directors from the American College of Gastroenterology website. Multiple reviewers compiled demographic and training information from internet searches, which was analyzed using chi-square analysis. In assessing racial diversity, researchers identified perceived race using multiple indicators, including name, physical appearance, and affiliation with identity associations. RESULTS: Our study analyzed data from 72 program directors, with 61.11% being male. Among the program directors, 55.6% appeared non-Hispanic White, 36.11% appeared Asian, while apparent Hispanics and Blacks represented 5.56% and 4.17%, respectively. Our analysis also found that male program directors appeared largely non-Hispanic white (72.72%) and were significantly more likely to be professors (p = 0.045) rather than associate or assistant professors. DISCUSSION: Our findings indicate that transplant hepatology fellowship programs are primarily led by male and non-Hispanic White physicians. To attract underrepresented medical students and residents, it is critical to make meaningful efforts to improve diversity and ensure equitable representation of leaders. Future research should focus on developing strategies to build a more inclusive workforce while addressing existing leadership inequities.

Program Directors' Perspectives on Residency Applications in the Post‒United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Era: A Case for Standardized Letters of Recommendation?

INTRODUCTION: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 test evolved into a key metric utilized by program directors (PDs) in assessing candidates for residency. The transition to a USMLE Step 1 binary pass/fail scoring system has resulted in a loss of an important objective assessment. With national movements toward pass/fail systems for clerkship grading and trends toward abandonment of class ranking, assessing residency applications has become increasingly challenging. METHODS: The Society of Academic Urologists convened a task force to, in part, assess the perspectives of urology PDs regarding the importance of various aspects of a residency application for predicting clinical performance. An anonymous survey was disseminated to all urology PDs in the US. Perspectives on 11 potential application predictors of clinical performance and demographics were recorded. Descriptive statistics characterized PD responses. Friedman test and pairwise Wilcoxon tests were used to evaluate the relative ranks assigned to application elements by PDs. RESULTS: There was a 60.5% response rate (89/147). Letters of recommendation (LORs) were ranked as the most important predictor, with a mean rank of 2.39, median of 2 (IQR 1-3). Clerkship grades and USMLE Step 1 were comparable and ranked second. Medical school reputation ranked the lowest. There was significant subjective heterogeneity among categories; however, this was less so for LORs, which predominated as the most important factor among application elements (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest sample size assessing PD perspectives on application factors that predict clinical performance. The second (clerkship grades) and third (USLME Step 1) most important factors moving toward binary pass/fail systems create an opportunity for actionable change to improve assessment objectivity. Our data demonstrate LORs to be the most important factor of residency applications, making a compelling argument for moving toward a standardized LOR to maximize this tool, mitigate bias, and improve interreviewer reliability.

Current state of musculoskeletal fellowship program directors and future directions.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the current state of musculoskeletal fellowship program directors and identify opportunities for formal training that could increase job satisfaction, provide a broader knowledge base for mentoring/advising trainees and increase diversity in musculoskeletal radiology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-one fellowship program directors who signed the Fellowship Match Memorandum of Understanding with the Society of Skeletal Radiology were sent a survey with questions about demographics, career, background, and training both for musculoskeletal radiology and for the fellowship director role. RESULTS: A 57/81 (70%) of program directors responded, representing 27 different states with a range of 1-9 fellowship positions. Nearly half are in their forties (48%) with most identifying as White (67%) followed by Asian (30%). The majority are male (72%) with over half (60%) remaining at the institution where they completed prior training. Over half plan to change roles within 5 years and do not feel adequately compensated. Top qualities/skills identified as important for the role include effective communication, being approachable, and clinical excellence. Other than clinical excellence, most do not report formal training in skills identified as important for the role. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high amount of interaction with trainees, program directors play a key role in the future of our subspecialty. The low diversity among this group, the lack of formal training, and the fact that most do not feel adequately compensated could limit mentorship and recruitment. Program directors identified effective communication, organizational/planning skills, and conflict resolution as the top skills they would benefit from formal training.

Analysis of Publication Productivity and Academic Rank of Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors in the United States.

PURPOSE: Female ophthalmologists are underrepresented in the field of ophthalmology. This study aimed to analyze the gender differences among ophthalmology residency program directors (PDs) in the United States with respect to academic rank, number of publications, and h-index. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 ophthalmology residency PDs from 120 ophthalmology residency programs during the 2022 San Francisco Match. The gender information was collected from institutional websites. The information regarding the state of each institute, academic rank, degree (MD or DO), age, and publication productivity was also recorded. RESULTS: From the 120 residency programs, 120 ophthalmology residency PDs were identified. Most PDs had an MD degree (118 out of 120, 98.3%), while only a few had a DO degree (2 out of 120, 1.7%). Only 31 (25.8%) out of 120 residency PDs were female. There was a statistically significant difference between female residency PDs and male residency PDs (p<0.0001). Male PDs had a higher h-index (15.2 ± 1.2) compared to their female counterparts (11.9 ± 0.97) (p=0.003). Regarding academic rank, male PD number was higher in each category, including assistant professor, associate professor, and full professor. CONCLUSIONS: United States ophthalmology residency programs have a smaller portion of females compared to male PDs. Furthermore, full professors are more likely to be male, and males have higher publication productivity in terms of h-index. To promote equality among ophthalmologists, future initiatives should focus on addressing the gender disparities in ophthalmology residency programs and the selection of residency PDs.

Key factors for residency interview selection from the National Resident Matching Program: analysis of residency Program Director surveys, 2016-2020.

CONTEXT: As the number of medical school graduates continues to outpace the available residency training positions, applying for residency in the United States has become a highly competitive process, often associated with a low rate of selection and invitation for interview. The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Program Director survey provides data assessing factors considered by Program Directors (PD) in selecting and inviting candidates for interview. Assessing the evolution of these factors over time is efficacious to inform and guide prospective applicants toward improving preparation for residency application. OBJECTIVES: We aim to synthesize NRMP data showing factors that PDs reported and rated as important in their decision to select and invite applicants for interview. METHODS: Data from residency PD surveys from 2008 to 2021 were accessed, but after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, only the data from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed and analyzed. The NRMP survey reports provided two metrics that characterized PDs' evaluation of the residency factors for interview, namely, "percent citing factor" and "average rating" on a 0 to 5 Likert-type scale. These two metrics were combined into an aggregate measure of importance (AI), and another measure of relative importance (RI) was constructed from normalizing the AI of each individual factor to the sum of the AI within each survey year. RESULTS: The top ranked factors were United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1/Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) Level 1, Letter of Recommendation (LOR) in the specialty, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK)/COMLEX Level 2 Cognitive Exam (CE) score, any failed attempt in USMLE/COMLEX, and perceived commitment to specialty. Factors rising in importance were Audition Elective/Rotation Within Your Department, Personal Statement (PS), Perceived Commitment to Specialty, Perceived Interest in Program, LOR in the Specialty, Other Life Experience, and Personal Prior Knowledge of the Applicant. Factors with declining importance were Interest in Academic Career, Awards or Special Honors in Basic Sciences, Graduate of Highly Regarded US Medical School, Awards or Special Honors in Clinical Clerkships, Lack of Gaps in Medical Education, Awards or Special Honors in Clerkship in Desired Specialty, and Consistency of Grades. Compared to the 2021 PD survey, our findings show continued predictive consistency, particularly related to specialty and program commitment. CONCLUSIONS: The factors identified for the selection of medical school graduates for interview into a residency program reveal that PDs move toward a more integrated approach. Specifically, PDs are placing increasing emphasis on factors that border on subjective qualities more so than the more traditional, quantitative, and objective metrics. Medical students and educators need to continually apprise themselves of the NRMP data to inform students' preparation endeavors throughout medical school to strengthen their application portfolios and enhance their competitiveness for the matching process.

How Did We Get Here and Where Are We Going? Career Trajectories of United States General Surgery Residency Program Directors.

OBJECTIVE: To develop the future of United States (US) surgical education leadership, surgical trainees and early career faculty who aspire to become program directors (PDs) must understand the potential career pathways and requisite skills and experience to become a general surgery residency PD. The objective of this study was to understand the demographics, career experiences, and professional satisfaction of US PDs in general surgery. DESIGN: An anonymous, cross-sectional survey utilizing a novel instrument. SETTING: An electronic survey distributed to US general surgery PDs between June and November 2022 PARTICIPANTS: PDs of US general surgery residency programs. A list of the Accrediting Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited general surgery PDs was created from the ACGME list from the 2022 to 23 academic year. RESULTS: The survey achieved a response rate of 46.2% (159/344). Only 32.1% of PDs identified as female and 67.3% identified as male with 1 respondent preferring not to identify their gender. PDs were White or Caucasian (68.6%), Asian (13.8%), and Black (3.7%); 4.4% were Hispanic or Latino. Only 83.7% of PDs completed fellowship training. PDs have been in the role for an average of 5.5 ± 4.9 years. The PDs were compensated for an average of 54.7% (±14.9% SD, 0%-100% range) of their time towards clinical duties. They were compensated on average for 35.7% (±12.6%, 0%-100%) of effort for residency-related administrative duties. Only 5% of PDs had obtained or were enrolled in an education-related degree. Only 55.4% of PDs had received formal surgical education training in teaching and assessment. 54.1% of PDs were interested in obtaining a more senior leadership position in the future. Most PDs (38.4%) expect to serve as PD for 5 to 8 years in total. Overall, the majority of PDs were very satisfied (29.6%) or satisfied (51.6%) professionally; similarly 28.9% were very satisfied and 48.4% satisfied personally. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the most up-to-date characterization of the personal, academic, and career-related features of current surgical residency PDs across the US. PDs enjoy a high degree of professional and personal satisfaction and most aspire to increasing leadership within their organizations. Compared to prior data, PDs have become more diverse in terms of both gender and race over time. Opportunities exist for increased mentorship of aspiring and current PDs as well as increased training in teaching and assessment.

Diagnostic Radiology Fellowship Applicant Selection Criteria: A Survey of Program Directors.

Introduction In this study, we aimed to investigate the importance of various characteristics used by diagnostic radiology subspecialty fellowship programs when selecting candidates for their fellowship programs. Methods An online survey was sent to program directors from multiple radiology fellowship programs in the United States. Multiple questions were asked, including applicant gender, personal statement, interview performance, research experience, United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) performance, and residency program attended. Survey recipients were asked to rank these characteristics from least to most important.  Results A total of 119 responses were collected (response rate of 26.2%), with a relatively balanced representation of the different subspecialties. An aggregate analysis of all the subspecialties showed interview performance, letters of recommendation, and residency program attended as the three most important factors considered by the program directors when selecting a candidate for their fellowship program. In contrast, the three least important factors were gender, prior subspecialty training, and minority status. The applicant's visa status, personal statement, and USMLE Step 3 performance were the only statistically significant (p<0.05) differences between the subspecialties. The women's and body imaging subspecialties rated the personal statement more important than musculoskeletal imaging and neuroradiology. Cardiothoracic and musculoskeletal imaging rated the applicant's visa status more important than neuroradiology. Women's and cardiothoracic imaging rated USMLE Step 3 performance as more important than musculoskeletal imaging. Conclusion Selecting the ideal candidate for a fellowship in radiology can be difficult. Our findings outline which applicant characteristics program directors believe are the most and least important when selecting an ideal candidate. For instance, personal characteristics such as interview performance and letters of recommendation are more valued than extracurricular activities such as research experience. Identifying these characteristics provides a better understanding of the fellowship application process and may guide future applicants.

Pediatric Resident Confidence in Assessing Neurological Cases: A Nationwide Survey.

BACKGROUND: A relative shortage of pediatric neurologists in proportion to estimated neurological disorders often results in general pediatricians evaluating and treating children with complex neurological conditions. Dedicated rotations in pediatric neurology are not mandated during medical school or pediatric residency. We evaluated the perceptions of a large cohort of pediatric residents and program directors (PDs) regarding child neurology training. METHODS: Using an online tool, surveys were sent to pediatric residents and pediatric and pediatric neurology PDs. RESULTS: Response rates were 41% from pediatric residency programs, yielding 538 resident responses; 31% from pediatric PDs; and 62% from pediatric neurology PDs. Only 27% of the surveyed residents reported completing a neurology rotation during residency, 89% of whom expressed a subjective improvement in confidence with neurological assessments. Factors affecting comfort with eliciting a neurological history included exposure to a neurology rotation during residency, year of training, duration of neurology rotation in medical school, and inpatient exposure to neurological patients, whereas those associated with examination additionally included program size and postresidency plans. Overall, 80% of surveyed residents, 78% of pediatric PDs, and 96% of pediatric neurology PDs acknowledged the potential value of a mandatory pediatric neurology rotation during residency. CONCLUSION: We suggest that a mandatory pediatric neurology rotation will boost the confidence of current and future pediatric trainees in assessing common neurological conditions of childhood.