IntroductionCareer advising for medical students can be challenging for both the student and the adviser. Our objective was to design, implement, and evaluate a “flipped classroom” style advising session.MethodsWe performed a single-center cross-sectional study at an academic medical center, where a novel flipped classroom style student advising model was implemented and evaluated. In this model, students were provided a document to review and fill out prior to their one-on-one advising session.ResultsNinety-four percent (95% CI, 88%–100%) of the medical students surveyed felt that the advising session was more effective as a result of the outline provided and completed before the session and that the pre-advising document helped them gain a better understanding of the content to be discussed at the session.ConclusionUtilization of the flipped classroom style advising document was an engaging advising technique that was well received by students at our institution.

No abstract

Background With the recent announcement that Step 1 score reporting will soon change to pass/fail, residency programs will need to reconsider their recruitment processes. Objective We (1) evaluated the feasibility of blinding residency programs to applicants' Step 1 scores and their number of attempts throughout the recruitment process; (2) described the selection process that resulted from the blinding; and (3) reviewed if a program's initial rank list, created before scores were known, would be changed before submission for the Match. Methods During the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 recruitment seasons, all programs at a single sponsoring institution were invited to develop selection criteria in the absence of Step 1 data, and to remain blinded to this data throughout recruitment. Participating programs were surveyed to determine factors affecting feasibility and metrics used for residency selection. Once unblinded to Step 1 scores, programs had the option to change their initial rank lists. Results Of 24 residency programs, 4 participated (17%) in the first year: emergency medicine, neurology, pediatrics, and psychiatry. The second year had the same participants, with the addition of family and community medicine and radiation oncology (n = 6, 25%). Each program was able to determine mission-specific qualities in the absence of Step 1 data. In both years, one program made changes to the final rank list. Conclusions It was feasible for programs to establish metrics for residency recruitment in the absence of Step 1 data, and most programs made no changes to final rank lists after Step 1 scores were known.