The Experience of Virtual Interviews in Resident Selection: A Survey of Program Directors in Surgery

Virtual Interviews in Postgraduate Medical Education Recruitment: Is There a Future Post-Pandemic?

“…15 Surveys of residency program directors have demonstrated that the recent virtual interview processes have resulted in decreased program costs. 7,16 The interview process is not only expensive, but it also can be quite time-consuming. 2,17,18 Studies have demonstrated that an average of 8 to 12 days are missed during a residency program for fellowship interviews, with a majority of residents (61%) using their vacation time.…”

“…1,38,39 Some program directors believed that virtual interviews decreased their ability to assess a candidate's fit, particularly regarding interpersonal communication skills, clinical skills, and genuine interest in the program. 7,16,24 Some applicants expressed that having informal interactions with other residents and faculty, as well as opportunities for program tours, were important components in their assessments of the program's culture and structure. 40 For applicants, the incorporation of virtual interviews sometimes led to the loss of ability to assess programs and to poor quality of interactions with others, affecting confidence in their rank lists.…”

“…1,11,20,21,33,41,42 Despite their many limitations, these studies suggest that virtual interviews were generally wellreceived, and both programs and applicants appear to favor a hybrid interview model for the future. 1,9,16,21,22 However, no studies have yet compared hybrid models to in-person-only or virtualonly models. This could be one area for future exploration.…”

Virtual interviewing in the MedPhys match: Experiences of applicants and programs

“…Suggested disadvantages included the possibility of technical challenges, lack of personal connection or decreased opportunities for informal conversations, inability to see the program's facility and city or environs, difficulty assessing the culture/ethos of the program and the fit of the applicant, and concerns for overapplication (surge of indiscriminate applications to programs) and interview hoarding (accepting more interviews than is needed to statistically match). [1][2][3][4][5] A survey of MPM participants was developed to evaluate discriminatory behavior and ethical violations within the residency interview and match process and to gather data on the interview and match experiences of residency applicants and program directors (PDs). Quantitative and qualitative results from the first 4 years of the MPM (2015-2018) have been previously published.…”

“…Advantages identified for applicants and programs, either through survey data or anticipated by drawing on related scenarios, include financial savings, reduced time away from school and clinical work, the potential to interview at a greater number of programs or to interview more applicants, lower anxiety and stress while interviewing in their own environment, reduced environmental impact, increased equity of access, and reduced transmission of COVID‐19. Suggested disadvantages included the possibility of technical challenges, lack of personal connection or decreased opportunities for informal conversations, inability to see the program's facility and city or environs, difficulty assessing the culture/ethos of the program and the fit of the applicant, and concerns for overapplication (surge of indiscriminate applications to programs) and interview hoarding (accepting more interviews than is needed to statistically match) 1–5 …”