Editorial Comment

Carson, Culley C.

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2016.03.064

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Carson reasoned this is due to the unfamiliarity of urology PDs with the medical education and training of IMGs, as well as a general lack of potentials and accomplishments among IMGs. 14 Running in contrast with Carson’s explanation, a comparative study by Schenarts et al of U.S medical school graduates vs U.S.-born and foreign-born international medical school graduates applying to surgical residency reported that while IMGs are usually older and scored lower than U.S. graduates in USMLE examinations, they have greater international clinical experience, add to the maturity of the program, hold more advanced degrees, and produce more scholarly work. 15 Therefore, beyond helping resolve the lack of diversity within urology, IMGs would enrich the field of urology clinically and academically.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

A Survey of Urology Residency Program Directors Assessing Criteria to Interview Applicants during the COVID-19 Pandemic

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:We aimed to determine criteria of interest to urology residency program directors when selecting applicants for residency interviews during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: An anonymous survey was sent via email to all urology residency program directors across the United States. Program directors were asked to assign the degree of importance (1e5, with 5 being very important) of selected factors in deciding which applicants to interview. Surveys were distributed and study data were managed using REDCap. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed.Results: In total, 130 urology residency program directors were contacted and 64 (49.3%) responded to the survey. Urology letter(s) of recommendation based on nonvirtual rotation(s), urology clerkship grades, research experience, and visa status of the applicant were cited as the most important factors in selecting applicants for interview with median importance ratings of 5, 4, 4, and 5, respectively. Urology letter(s) of recommendation based on virtual rotation(s), virtual subinternship(s), and participation in social media activities were the least important in selecting applicants for interviews with median importance ratings of 2 for each. Notably, urology letter(s) of recommendation based on nonvirtual rotation(s) and visa status were consistently ranked as the most important factors by more than 50% of program directors.Conclusions: Urology program directors value urology letter(s) of recommendation from nonvirtual rotation(s), urology clerkship grades, research experience, and applicant visa status as the most important factors in selecting applicants for interviews during the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual rotation(s) and social media activity were ranked the lowest among criteria that influence the selection process for interviews.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%