Opportunity for Improved Transparency on Otolaryngology Residency Websites for Prospective Applicants

Mott, Nicole M.; Guduguntla, Bhavna A; Bohm, Lauren A.

doi:10.1177/2473974x211060825

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This issue is not unique to craniofacial surgery fellowship websites and has been reported in other specialties including microsurgery fellowship, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, otolaryngology, hand surgery, and vascular surgery programs among many others. 16,[23][24][25] While information such as call schedules, case logs, and away rotations are important to applicants, this information was included in fewer than one quarter of websites. With the variability of call responsibilities for fellows (eg, no call requirements vs primary call), including this information may be valuable for applicants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Analysis of Craniofacial Surgery Fellowship Websites and Social Media Presence

Wang

2023

FACE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Applying to craniofacial surgery fellowship is a competitive process, and applicants may find it challenging to determine which programs are the best fit. We sought to evaluate the quality of information available on craniofacial surgery fellowship websites (CFWs), identify areas for improvement, and evaluate social media presence. Methods: Individual CFWs were identified from the ASCFS directory and Google search. Demographic information was collected from the ASCFS directory, and CFWs were evaluated for qualitative information. Social media presence was assessed by querying Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for official and active accounts. Results: Thirty-one programs were identified. While most ASCFS listings included addresses (93.6%) and program coordinator contact (87.1%), only half included program director contact. The majority of CFWs included a procedure list (71.0%), research opportunities (58.1%), current fellows (56.7%), and didactic schedules (71.0%). Few CFWs included case logs (16.1%), call schedule (22.6%), salary/benefits (25.8%), and alumni information (38.7%). Regarding social media presence, only 3 craniofacial fellowship programs were on Facebook (9.7%), 2 on Instagram (6.5%), and none on Twitter. In comparison, affiliated plastic surgery residencies were more active on Instagram (64.5%), Facebook (38.7%), and Twitter (25.8%). Conclusion: There are several potential areas for improvement of CFWs, including maintaining an updated ASCFS directory of CFWs. Programs may consider adding information about case logs, call schedule, and alumni career path. Creating comprehensive websites and increasing social media presence would provide a valuable source of information to potential applicants and serve as an effective tool for recruitment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Craniofacial Surgery Fellowship Websites and Social Media Presence

Wang

2023

FACE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, only 48% of programs specifically listed required application components and 70% lacked information regarding the number of applications received or interviews granted. 9 If the right information, applicants can make informed decisions about where to apply to maximize their chances of matching while potentially minimizing interview expenses. The financial burden placed on applicants to apply and attend interviews is increasing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Prospective Applicants Look for on Otolaryngology Residency Websites

Dinardo

Reese

Seeley

et al. 2022

Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine what prospective residency applicants look for on otolaryngology residency program websites. Study Design: Survey. Setting: The survey was distributed in a virtual format through Google Forms. A link to the survey was given at the University at Buffalo Otolaryngology Chautauqua, sent to Otolaryngology program directors with requests to forward to PGY1 residents and Otolaryngology interest groups, sent to medical school Otolaryngology interest group leaders, posted on Twitter through several accounts, and on otomatch.com Methods: A 45 item survey was given to fourth year medical students applying to otolaryngology, re-applicants applying to otolaryngology, and first year otolaryngology residents who had recently matched. Data collected included participant’s age, sex, race and ethnicity, current status in school/residency program, and their type of medical degree (MD or DO). Participants were then asked to mark the components listed that they wished to see. Components were separated into 5 categories: Application/Selection Criteria, Employment Aspects, Program Features, Social/Community, and Faculty/Contact Information. Data was analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal Wallis tests when appropriate. P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: One hundred one surveys were collected. Sixty-four (63.4%) participants were fourth-year medical students, 32 (31.7%) were first-year residents, and 5 (5.0%) were re-applicants. Thirteen of the items on the survey were sought by 80% or more of respondents. Ninety-nine (98.0%) of the participants wanted to see a current resident list with photos and 97 (96.0%) wanted to see the intern year schedule online. Eighty-five percent agreed that salary and benefits information would be valuable on residency websites. Women expressed significantly more interest in salary ( P = .034), benefits ( P = .026), and parking information ( P = .048). Conclusion: Our study provides insight on key items to include on residency program websites. Websites that contain information that applicants want to use can be helpful for application decisions in the future.

show abstract

“…4 This is of particular importance in competitive specialties such as otolaryngology, where students submitted an average of 77 applications during the 2020-2021 cycle. 5 Prior to the 2020-2021 match cycle, applicants also accrued travel and lodging costs for their in-person residency interviews.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is followed by the Electronic Residency Application Service, where students pay a flat $99 fee for their first 10 applications and an additional fee per each extra application submitted (herein, application fee) 4 . This is of particular importance in competitive specialties such as otolaryngology, where students submitted an average of 77 applications during the 2020‐2021 cycle 5 . Prior to the 2020‐2021 match cycle, applicants also accrued travel and lodging costs for their in‐person residency interviews.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost of the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process: Comparison With Other Specialties and Equity Implications

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study aims to assess trends in applicant-reported costs of the otolaryngology residency application process between 2019 and 2021 and evaluate the impact of application costs on number of interview offers. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting US allopathic and osteopathic medical schools. Methods Survey data from applicants were obtained from the Texas STAR database (Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency) for the years 2019 to 2021. Outcomes included total cost, interview cost, other costs, application fees, and number of interview offers. Simple and multivariable linear regression was used to identify novel predictors of cost and assess the correlation between cost and interview offers. Results Among 363 otolaryngology applicants, there was a 74% reduction in total costs and a 97% reduction in interview costs in the 2021 cycle vs the 2020 cycle. Significant predictors of total cost among otolaryngology applicants included the number of away rotations ( P < .01), the number of research experiences ( P = .04), and couples matching ( P < .01). During the 2019 and 2020 application cycles, there was a significant association between applicant-reported total spending and number of otolaryngology interview offers ( P < .01), which was not present during the 2021 cycle ( P = .35). Conclusion Number of otolaryngology interview offers appears to be directly correlated with applicant-reported total costs regardless of number of applications or interviews attended, which may be a source of inequality in the application process. There was a drastic reduction in total costs, interview costs, and other costs during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was likely driven by virtual interviewing and the absence of away rotations.

show abstract

Opportunity for Improved Transparency on Otolaryngology Residency Websites for Prospective Applicants

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

An Analysis of Craniofacial Surgery Fellowship Websites and Social Media Presence

An Analysis of Craniofacial Surgery Fellowship Websites and Social Media Presence

What Prospective Applicants Look for on Otolaryngology Residency Websites

Cost of the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process: Comparison With Other Specialties and Equity Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About