Analysis of Abdominal Radiology fellowship website content and comprehensiveness

Ruddell, Jack H.; Hartley-Blossom, Zachary; Bajaj, Ankush; Grand, David; Eltorai, Adam E.M.

doi:10.1007/s00261-018-1861-0

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…24,30 -33 US fellowships also scored similarly among the top, middle, bottom tiered, and unranked programs (10.0 vs 8.8 vs 10.6, P = .179), which contrasts with previous literature in which universities ranked between top third had significantly more of the assessed criteria compared to universities in the middle and lower third. 6,7,14…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data were collected by 2 of the authors and 39 fellowship programs were evaluated using 26 criteria, deemed to be important to residents, modified from previous studies on radiology fellowship website evaluation. 13 -15 Criteria were divided into the following 5 subcategories: application, recruitment, education and research, clinical work, and benefits (Table 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Evaluation of the Content of Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine Fellowship Websites

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Radiology trainees frequently use the Internet to research potential fellowship programs across all subspecialties. For a field like nuclear medicine, which has multiple training pathways, program websites can be an essential resource for potential applicants. This study aimed to analyze the online content of Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine fellowship websites. Materials and Methods: The content of all active Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine fellowship websites was evaluated using 26 criteria in the following subdivisions: application, recruitment, education, research, clinical work, and incentives. Fellowships without websites were excluded from the study. Scores were summed per program and compared by geographic region and ranking. Results: A total of 42 active Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine fellowship programs were identified, of which 39 fellowships had dedicated fellowship websites available for the analysis. On average, fellowship websites contained 34.4% (9 ± 3.3) of the 26 criteria. Programs did not score differently on the criteria by geographical distribution ( P = .08) nor by ranking ( P = .18). Conclusion: Most Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine fellowship websites are lacking content relevant to prospective fellows. Addressing inadequacies in online content may support programs to inform and recruit residents into fellowship programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of the Content of Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine Fellowship Websites

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limitations to this study included subjectivity in selecting items to evaluate. Many of the 29 variables were based on prior studies of other fields [6][7][8][9][10][11][12], as well as surveys identifying which information is most valued by applicants [4,14]. The variables were chosen by the authors, which included medical students, a gastroenterology fellow, and a gastroenterology attending/program director.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-nine content variables (Table 1), derived from published website analyses of training programs in other medical disciplines [6][7][8][9][10][11][12] and from surveys identifying which information is most valued by applicants [4,14], with the addition of gastroenterology-specific content, were divided into training (10 variables related to curriculum quality and depth, teaching modes, and details of schedules), program (11 variables including the program size and other general characteristics), and lifestyle (8 variables concerning remuneration, social events, call time, and the type of career path fellows followed after graduating). They were evaluated separately by two authors (JHR and AML) reviewing websites of all 189 gastroenterology fellowships accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) as of August 2018.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Accredited Gastroenterology Fellowship Internet-Available Content: Twenty-Nine Steps Toward a Better Program Website

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goal To assess publicly available content derived from official websites of accredited gastroenterology fellowship programs, specifically evaluating data pertinent to prospective applicants. Background The Internet provides access to key information for applicants applying to gastroenterology fellowship, particularly as competition drives applicants to apply to a large number of programs. Thus, it is important for fellowship program websites to be up to date and contain accurate and pertinent information. Methods Twenty-nine variables, determined as important website content on the basis of prior published website analyses and from surveys of preferences, were extracted from the relevant websites of all accredited gastroenterology fellowships in the USA. Results were binary-i.e., a website either contained or did not contain each item. Results A total of 178 websites were evaluated. The mean number of online content items was 14.1(± 3.2 SD) out of a possible 29 (47.1%). Program coordinator contact information, application information, and the number of current fellows were accessible on > 80% of websites. In contrast, the typical number and types of procedures performed by fellows and number of hospitals covered by fellows on call were found on < 10% of websites. Analysis revealed that 23.2% of lifestyle, 48.3% of training, and 59.6% of program variables were met. Conclusions Gastroenterology fellowship websites lacked important content. Websites had a lower mean percentage of lifestyle content compared to training and program-related items. An organized website containing relevant information may not only attract qualified applicants but also avert unnecessary email inquiries and inappropriate applications. This study may provide guidance to gastroenterology fellowship programs seeking to improve their websites for applicants.

show abstract

“…One of the most raised topics in fellowship interviews, the number and structure of calls is important in deciding a fellowship when other factors between programs are equal. Fellows should ask if a program has only call shifts, a night float, or both and the structure of these shifts, as this information may not be available on a program’s website [ 17 ]. While it may be difficult to understand the complexity of another institution's call structure, inquiring about what a fellow may need to read, how many studies they will be reading, and for how long a time can help evaluate the call burden.…”

Section: Call Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

How to choose an abdominal imaging fellowship

Sun

Lee

2021

Abdom Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiologists in training draw from their early experiences in residency when choosing a fellowship. Once they have decided on an abdominal imaging fellowship, applicants must learn to navigate the interview process. During this challenging time, applicants explore the difference in clinical curricula and rotations, meet potential mentors and clinical faculty, consider potential academic interests and projects, and choose what location they would like to train for one year after residency. When in training, fellows undergo the challenge of finding employment while learning new skills and refining their abilities to become a well-rounded radiologist and clinician. This article summarizes key points potential applicants should consider when deciding on an abdominal imaging fellowship, how to prepare for the interview season, and how to plan their fellowship year before fellows take the next step to becoming attendings.

show abstract

Analysis of Abdominal Radiology fellowship website content and comprehensiveness

Cited by 18 publications

References 8 publications

An Evaluation of the Content of Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine Fellowship Websites

An Evaluation of the Content of Canadian and American Nuclear Medicine Fellowship Websites

Analysis of Accredited Gastroenterology Fellowship Internet-Available Content: Twenty-Nine Steps Toward a Better Program Website

How to choose an abdominal imaging fellowship

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About