Using the American Association of Medical Colleges Standardized Video Interview in a Holistic Residency Application Review

King, Andrew; Mayer, Chad; Starnes, Andrew B.; Barringer, Kelly; Beier, Lancelot; Sule, Harsh

doi:10.7759/cureus.1913

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…22 The Association of American Medical Colleges is amidst developing a standardized video interview for resident applications as an adjunct to the Electronic Resident Application Service file in order to provide program directors a holistic view of applicants rather than purely examination scores and grades. 23 Husain et al found that these standardized video interviews were more likely to increase scores of applications, leading to an in-person interview. 24 A majority of our respondents thought that an in-person interview would allow a better chance to match at that program.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virtual Interviews for the Independent Plastic Surgery Match: A Modern Convenience or a Modern Misrepresentation?

Bamba

Bhagat

Tran

et al. 2021

Journal of Surgical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The virtual interview for residency and fellowship applicants has previously been utilized preliminarily in their respective processes. The COVID-19 pandemic forced many programs to switch to a virtual interview process on short notice. In the independent plastic surgery process, which was underway when the pandemic started, applicants had a heterogeneous experience of in-person and virtual interviews. The purpose of this study was to assess if applicants prefer a virtual interview experience to an in-person interview as well as determine if virtual interview applicants had a different opinion of a program compared to the in-person interview applicants. Design/Setting/Participants The 2019 to 2020 applicants who interviewed at the Indiana University Independent Plastic Surgery program were administered an anonymous online survey about their interview experience at our program. Results Our survey response was 60% (18/30). The in-person interview group ( n = 10) rated their overall interview experience higher than the virtual interview group ( n = 8) 8.8 vs 7.5 (p = 0.0314). The in-person interview group felt they became more acquainted with the program, the faculty, and the residents more than the virtual group (4.7 vs 3.25, p < 0.0001) (4.3 vs 3.25, p = 0.0194) (4.3 vs 2.75, p < 0.0001). The majority of applicants favored in-person interviews (16/18, 88.9%). The in-person interview group spent significantly more money on their interview at our program compared to the virtual interview group ($587 vs $0, p < 0.0001). Conclusion Our study demonstrated that the virtual interview process was an efficient process for applicants from both a financial and time perspective. However, the virtual interview process left applicants less satisfied with their interview experience. The applicants felt they did not become as acquainted with the program as their in-person counterparts. The virtual interview process may play a large role in residency and fellowship applications in the future, and programs should spend time on how to improve the process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virtual Interviews for the Independent Plastic Surgery Match: A Modern Convenience or a Modern Misrepresentation?

Bamba

Bhagat

Tran

et al. 2021

Journal of Surgical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of PDs focus on academic performance and do not emphasize professionalism during the application screening, even when the information is available 18–21. PDs instead rely heavily on the residency interview to identify personality issues,22 despite its lack of sensitivity for detecting problem applicants 23…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining the “Problem Resident” and the Implications of the Unfixable Problem: The Rationale for a “Front-door” Solution

Taira

Santen

Roberts

2018

WestJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionProblem residents are common in graduate medical education, yet little is known about their characteristics, deficits, and the consequences for emergency medicine (EM) residencies. The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) defines a problem resident as “a trainee who demonstrates a significant enough problem that requires intervention by someone of authority, usually the program director [PD] or chief resident.” Although this is a comprehensive definition, it lacks specificity. Our study seeks to add granularity and nuance to the definition of “problem resident,” which can be used to guide the recruitment, selection, and training of residents.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of EM PDs between 2011 and 2012. We performed qualitative analysis of the resulting transcripts with our thematic analysis based on the principles of grounded theory. We reached thematic sufficiency after 17 interviews. Interviews were coded as a team through consensus.ResultsThe analysis identified diversity in the type, severity, fixability, and attribution of problems among problem residents. PDs applied a variety of thresholds to define a problem resident with many directly rejecting the ABIM definition. There was consistency in defining academic problems and some medical problems as “fixable.” In contrast, personality problems were consistently defined as “non-fixable.” Despite the diversity of the definition, there was consensus that residents who caused “turbulence” were problem residents.ConclusionThe ABIM definition of the problem resident captures trainees who many PDs do not consider problem residents. We propose that an alternative definition of the problem resident would be “a resident with a negative sphere of influence beyond their personal struggle.” This combination acknowledges the identified themes of turbulence and the diversity of threshold. Further, the combination of PDs’ unwillingness to terminate trainees and the presence of non-fixable problems implies the need for a “front-door” solution that emphasizes personality issues at the potential expense of academic potential. This “front-door” solution depends on the commitment of all stakeholders including medical schools, the Association of American Medical Colleges, and PDs.

show abstract

“…The SVI is an online, asynchronous interview designed to assess applicant proficiency in interpersonal and communication skills as well as knowledge of personal behavior. Analysis of applicant responses then provides programs with objective, standardized information about soft competencies of interest …”

Section: Innovative Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adding Long‐term Value to the Residency Selection and Assessment Process

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The residency selection process is challenging for both applicants and programs. This is particularly true in competitive specialties such as otolaryngology. The importance of noncognitive competencies in successful residents has been well demonstrated in both medicine and surgery. Unfortunately, there is no streamlined or uniform process for incorporating this information into the selection and training of residents. This review provides a summary of innovative approaches in the selection of residents in otolaryngology and the important role these methods and associated data can play in resident selection and training. The goal of these processes is to create a holistic view of potential residents so programs can enhance the development of current residents and boost long-term success in our specialty.

show abstract

Using the American Association of Medical Colleges Standardized Video Interview in a Holistic Residency Application Review

Cited by 9 publications

References 9 publications

Virtual Interviews for the Independent Plastic Surgery Match: A Modern Convenience or a Modern Misrepresentation?

Virtual Interviews for the Independent Plastic Surgery Match: A Modern Convenience or a Modern Misrepresentation?

Defining the “Problem Resident” and the Implications of the Unfixable Problem: The Rationale for a “Front-door” Solution

Adding Long‐term Value to the Residency Selection and Assessment Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About