Time and Financial Costs for Students Participating in the National Residency Matching Program (the Match©): 2015 to 2020

Nilsen, Kari; Walling, Anne; Grothusen, Jill; Irwin, Gretchen; Meyer, Mark; Unruh, Greg

doi:10.17161/kjm.vol1414568

Cited by 5 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[31][32][33][34][35]37 Since the 2015-2016 application cycle, we have used an annual survey to track expenses, time spent interviewing, and other aspects of participation in the residency application process as reported by graduates of the University of Kansas School of Medicine (KUSM). 6,9,16 These surveys have very high response rates (range of 66.8%-97.0%, see Table 1), and the results are consistent with those of other studies. 6,9,16 For KUSM students, the average annual cost of applying to residency per applicant has been around $4,000, with the cost for applicants to individual specialties ranging from around $2,500 for family medicine to more than $8,000 for specialties such as radiation oncology and plastic surgery.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Our students also have reported greater average time spent interviewing than those in other studies (25 to 30 days vs 25 days) but showed similar patterns by specialty and in the wide range reported by individual applicants. 6 We repeated this annual survey during the 2020-2021 residency application cycle to capture differences between this unique year and earlier patterns. Our hypotheses were that all applicants would report statistically significant lower costs and less time investment than those in previous years and that these reductions would be greater for applicants to non-primary care specialties.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Impact of Virtual Interviewing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Residency Application Process: One Institution’s Experience

Nilsen¹,

Walling²,

Johnson³

et al. 2022

Academic Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the impact of virtual interviewing during the COVID-19 pandemic on the residency application process and to compare applicant costs and time spent interviewing during the 2020–2021 application cycle with prior years. Method Fourth-year medical students at the University of Kansas School of Medicine applying for first-year residency positions via the National Resident Matching Program Match completed an electronic 46-item survey after submitting their rank lists during each application cycle from 2015–2016 to 2020–2021. The authors used descriptive statistics and t tests to analyze and compare responses to demographics questions and questions regarding number of submitted applications, offered and completed interviews, ranked programs, costs, and time spent interviewing. They used thematic analysis to code respondents’ narrative comments about the virtual interviewing experience. Results From 2015–2016 to 2020–2021, 994 (of 1,190; 83.5%) respondents completed the survey. From 2019–2020 to 2020–2021, the average total cost of applying to residency per applicant dropped by $3,566 (P < .001) and the average time spent interviewing dropped by 13.3 days (P < .001). At the same time, the average number of applications per applicant dropped by 3.4, and applicants completed the same number of interviews and ranked 2.3 fewer programs, none of which were statistically significant differences. Narrative comments from 113 (79%) respondents in 2020–2021 revealed 4 themes related to virtual interviewing: convenience of time and cost, positive aspects of the process, negative aspects of the process, and overall impressions of the program. Conclusions Virtual interviewing during the 2020–2021 application cycle resulted in an approximately 80% reduction in cost for applicants and an approximately 50% decrease in time spent interviewing compared with previous years but was not associated with large increases in number of submitted applications, completed interviews, or ranked programs. Applicants generally perceived virtual interviewing as positive although they raised notable concerns.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Virtual Interviewing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Residency Application Process: One Institution’s Experience

Nilsen¹,

Walling²,

Johnson³

et al. 2022

Academic Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We examined data from a six-year study (2016-2021) of interviewing time and expenses for students at our institution that has been reported in previous publications. 6,15,23 The participants were all fourthyear medical students who participated in the NRMP © to secure first-year residency positions. Each year, approximately 120 students from the main campus and 75 from the regional campus apply nationwide to residencies in the full spectrum of medical specialties.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[5][6][7] Travel accounted for 60% to 70% of all expenses with other costs predominantly for food and accommodation. 6,8 None of the over 20 studies of NRMP © applicant expenses have reported data for regional campus students, [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] but studies have commented on higher costs for "out of town" applicants and increased travel burden for those from non-metropolitan areas. 21,22 One large study attributed lower costs for students from the Northeastern region to the concentration of medical schools and residency programs in a single 500 mile area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Schwasinger-Schmidt

Rohrberg

Walling

et al. 2021

JRMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The sudden change from in-person to remote interviews by the National Residency Matching Program© (NRMP©) in 2020 was expected to result in significant financial and time savings for applicants. This project aimed to compare savings before and after the 2020-2021 interviewing season reported by students graduating from our institution’s regional and main campuses. Methods: Data were collected over a six-year period at a Midwestern medical school. Each year, approximately 120 main campus and 75 regional campus students are surveyed regarding specialty choice, number of applications and interviews, time, and expenses to complete the NRMP. Chi-square and t-tests were used to determine statistical differences by campus and by specialty in savings during the 2020-21 interviewing season compared to the previous five years. Results: Data were provided by 957 students. The response rates were 81.5% (regional) and 82% (main campus). Compared to the previous five years, in 2021 main campus students saved $3,990 (79.9%) and regional campus students saved $2,789 (77.1%). The previous highly significant differences in expenses between campuses ($1,386 ± $243) dropped to $185 (p = 0.3). On both campuses, applicants to non-primary care specialties saved more than their classmates applying to primary care. The largest average saving was reported by non-primary care applicants on the main campus ($4,207) and the smallest by regional applicants to primary care ($2,328). Main campus applicants reported saving 13.1 and regional campus 15.4 days interviewing in 2021. The smallest average time saving was reported by main campus applicants to non-primary care (12.7 days) and the largest (16.2 days) by regional campus applicants to primary care. No significant changes occurred in number of applications, interviews, or Match outcomes in 2021 compared to previous years. Conclusion: Prior to 2021, students from our institution’s regional campus reported lower costs and similar interviewing time than their peers on the main campus. Cost and time were significantly decreased in 2021 for both regional and main campus students applying to any specialty and differences between campuses reduced to non-significant levels. The number of applications, completed interviews, and Match outcomes remained similar to previous years. Changes to the NRMP© incorporating remote interviewing may reduce applicant costs by 80% and provide up to two weeks of available curricular time in the senior year of medical school.

show abstract

“…Interview-related travel expenses make up a large part of these costs. 18 Given this, several studies have been conducted to investigate potential cost saving alternatives to the traditional residency interview process prior to the COVID-19 pandemic which found that utilizing video interviews for residency and fellowship programs could be a cost-saving alternative. 5,19–22 The 2020-2021 application cycle confirmed this.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Match Made in Cyberspace: Applicant Perspectives on a Virtual Residency Application Process

Chen

Schroeder

Park

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated an entirely virtual 2020-2021 residency application cycle. As many specialties plan to continue virtual interviews, it is essential to evaluate what aspects worked well and what can be improved. Methods: From April to June 2021, authors surveyed participants of the 2020-2021 Match about their experiences with the virtual application cycle. Survey items asked about benefits and drawbacks of virtual interviews, the utility of social media, and thoughts regarding preference signaling mechanisms and application/interview limits. Results: Participants (n=158) represented 24 states and applied to 31 specialties. The majority (73.1%) were satisfied with their experience during the 2020-2021 Match. Applicants found Twitter (78.4%) and Instagram (69.1%) to be the most helpful social media platforms. Almost all applicants (98.1%) believed that the virtual setting increased financial access to interviews. The majority (68.6%) indicated that residency programs should continue to provide virtual interviews. However, most applicants (73.9%) felt that the virtual setting allowed more students to hoard interviews. Many (66.1%) also felt their medical school did not provide adequate electronic equipment for conducting virtual interviews. While many applicants (56.9%) did not support a cap on the number of applications one can submit, most supported a limit on the number of interviews one can attend (62.7%) as well as a mechanism to signal genuine interest in a program (59.7%). Conclusions: Our study highlights that, across geography and specialty, many applicants would like virtual interviews to continue and offers insight into how medical schools and residency programs can best support applicants in the virtual environment. The virtual setting also provides an opportunity to evaluate mechanisms to address the congestion from the increasingly high number of applications residency programs receive, with most applicants supporting interview caps and preference signaling.

show abstract

Time and Financial Costs for Students Participating in the National Residency Matching Program (the Match©): 2015 to 2020

Cited by 5 publications

References 53 publications

The Impact of Virtual Interviewing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Residency Application Process: One Institution’s Experience

The Impact of Virtual Interviewing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Residency Application Process: One Institution’s Experience

Impact of Virtual Interviewing on Time and Financial Costs for NRMP© Applicants: Did Regional Campus Students Save More?

A Match Made in Cyberspace: Applicant Perspectives on a Virtual Residency Application Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About