The Resident Readiness Survey: A National Process for Program Directors to Provide Standardized Feedback to Medical Schools About Their Graduates.

Background The process for program directors (PDs) to provide feedback to medical schools about their graduates' readiness for postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) training is burdensome and does not generate national benchmarking data. Objective The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) tested the feasibility of administering a standardized Resident Readiness Survey (RRS) to PDs nationally about their PGY-1 residents' preparedness for residency. Methods In 2020 and 2021, the AAMC invited PDs via email to complete RRSs for their PGY-1s who graduated from participating schools; the AAMC provided schools with reports of identified RRS data for their graduates. Outcome measures included school participation rates, PD response rates, PGY-1s' coverage rates (RRSs completed/RRSs PDs invited to complete), RRS completion time (time-stamp difference: RRS opening-submission), and participating schools' feedback about the process collected via AAMC evaluation questionnaires sent to school leaders. Chi-square tested significance of differences between proportions. Results School participation increased from 43.8% (2020: 77 of 176) to 72.4% (2021: 131 of 181). PD response rates, similar in both years overall (2020: 1786 of 2847 [62.7%]; 2021: 2107 of 3406 [61.9%]; P=.48), varied by specialty (P<.001; range 65 of 154 [42.2%], neurology; 109 of 136 [80.1%], internal medicine-pediatrics, both years combined). PGY-1s' coverage rates were similar (P=.21) in 2020 (5567 of 10 712 [52.0%]) and 2021 (9688 of 18 372 [52.7%]). RRS completion time averaged less than 3 minutes. Numerous school leaders reported that RRS data stimulated new, or supported ongoing, curricular quality improvement. Conclusions Administration of a standardized RRS to PDs nationally about PGY-1s preparedness for residency is feasible and will continue.

Tolerance for Ambiguity Among Medical Students: Patterns of Change During Medical School and Their Implications for Professional Development.

PURPOSE: Tolerance for ambiguity (TFA) is important for physicians, with implications for ethical behavior and patient care. This study explores how medical students' TFA changes from matriculation to graduation and how change in empathy and openness to diversity are associated with this change. METHOD: Data for students who took the Matriculating Student Questionnaire (MSQ) in 2013 or 2014 and the Medical School Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) in 2017 or 2018 were drawn from the Association of American Medical Colleges (n = 17,221). Both the MSQ and GQ included a validated TFA scale and a shortened version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index; the MSQ also included an openness to diversity scale. Tercile groups were used to assess how TFA changed from the MSQ to GQ, and regression analyses were used to assess associations between change in TFA and openness to diversity and between change in TFA and change in empathy. RESULTS: Mean TFA scores decreased (d = -.67) among students with the highest TFA at matriculation but increased (d = .60) among students with the lowest TFA at matriculation. Regression results showed that change in TFA was significantly and positively associated with change in empathy (beta = .05, P < .001) and that openness to diversity (as reported at matriculation) was significantly and positively associated with TFA at graduation (beta = .05, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first nationally representative study to suggest that medical students' TFA changes over time, but in different directions depending on TFA at matriculation. TFA over time was also associated with change in empathy and openness to diversity. Medical schools should consider strategies to assess TFA in their admissions processes and for cultivating TFA throughout the learning process.

Ambiguity tolerance of students matriculating to U.S. medical schools.

PURPOSE: To examine the psychometric adequacy of a tolerance for ambiguity (TFA) scale for use with medical students. Also, to examine the relationship of TFA to a variety of demographic and personal variables in a national sample of entering U.S. medical students. METHOD: The authors used data from the 2013 Association of American Medical Colleges Matriculating Student Questionnaire in which questions on TFA were included for the first time that year. Data from 13,867 entering medical students were analyzed to examine the psychometric properties of the TFA scale. In addition, the relationships of TFA to sex, age, perceived stress, and desire to work in an underserved area were analyzed. Finally, the relationship of TFA to specialty preference was examined. RESULTS: The TFA scale was found to be psychometrically adequate for use in a medical student population. TFA was found to be higher in men and in older students. Lower TFA was associated with higher perceived stress levels. Students with higher TFA were more likely to express desire to work in an underserved area. Different levels of TFA may be associated with certain specialty preferences. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the assessment of TFA to understand how this personal characteristic may interact with the medical school experience and with specialty choice. Longitudinal work in this area will be critical to increase this understanding.

Which factors predict the likelihood of reapplying to medical school? An analysis by gender.

PURPOSE: To explore factors associated with becoming a repeat applicant to medical school--specifically, factors involving alternative educational and career plans and educational indebtedness--and how they differ by gender. METHOD: Using deidentified 2009 and 2010 American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS) data, the authors determined the potential and actual 2010 repeat applicants among first-time applicants who were not accepted to medical school in 2009. Using logistic regression models, they then analyzed the deidentified 2008 Pre-MCAT Questionnaire (PMQ) responses of those potential 2010 repeat applicants who had participated in the PMQ to examine associations between aspirants' self-reported alternative educational and career (Plan B) options as well as levels of indebtedness and the likelihood of reapplying. Using population-level demographic data from AMCAS, the authors weighted analyses to more accurately reflect the actual population of potential repeat applicants. They also explored gender-related differences. RESULTS: Considering as a Plan B applying to a different graduate degree program--business, law, science, another health profession--decreased the likelihood that an unsuccessful 2009 first-time applicant would reapply to medical school in 2010. Aspirants who had more than $20,000 of educational debt were also less likely to become repeat applicants. In separate analyses for men and women, factors associated with the likelihood of reapplying differed noticeably. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' findings provide insight into how medical school aspirants make decisions about their career and educational pathways, and how factors associated with those decisions shape the social composition of the medical school applicant pool.