Physician Assistant/Associate School Interviews: Here, There, or Elsewhere?

Purpose Despite easing restrictions on social distancing and travel since the beginning of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, virtual interviews remain a widely used format for ophthalmology fellowship interviews. This study aims to evaluate the relative benefits and drawbacks of in-person versus virtual interviews during a cycle where both formats were prevalent. Methods A prospective cross-sectional study surveyed all fellowship applicants ( N = 311) who applied to Wills Eye Hospital and Bascom Palmer Eye Institute during the 2022 to 2023 application cycle. Results A total of 59 (19%) applicants responded to the survey, with the majority being male (53.0%) and between the ages of 20 and 35 (91.3%). There was no statistically significant difference between the number of virtual and in-person interviews attended or the total number of interviews attended. The highest ranked limitations of the virtual interview process were limited exposure to details of the program structure, limited opportunity to exhibit applicants' strengths to the program, and limited exposure to the fellows. The highest ranked strengths were less pressure during interviews, greater scheduling flexibility, and ability to interview at more fellowship programs. The highest ranked limitations of the in-person interview process were more pressure during interviews, inability to interview at all desired fellowship programs, and decreased scheduling flexibility. The highest ranked strengths based on median rankings were greater exposure to details of the program structure, greater ability to exhibit an applicant's strengths to the program, and greater exposure to the geographic location/city. Conclusion While both in-person and virtual interviews have their own benefits and limitations, virtual interviews appear to be more cost-effective and time-efficient while in-person interviews provide better opportunities to assess program fit and culture. A hybrid format that combines the ideal aspects of both formats may be an optimal solution.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on medical education at all levels, particularly on applicants applying to residency programs. The objective of the study was to gain a comprehensive understanding of applicants' perspectives on virtual interviews in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a quantitative survey and a qualitative study between March and April 2021. The link to an anonymous online survey was emailed to fourth-year medical students from one allopathic medical school. The survey link also was posted on the social media page of one allopathic medical school and one osteopathic medical school. Participants were then invited to participate in a follow-up 15- to 45-minute qualitative virtual interview. A total of 46 participants completed the survey, with a response rate of approximately 29.1%. The most beneficial aspect of the virtual interview was saving money on travel (31, 78.39%). In contrast, the least beneficial aspect of the virtual interview was the inability to personally explore the culture of the program (16, 34.78%), followed by the inability to explore the city and surrounding area (11, 23.91%). Thematic saturation was reached after interviewing 14 participants over Zoom. Four major themes of the virtual residency interview experience were discussed: virtual interviews offered many advantages, virtual interviews posed unique challenges, residency programs need more organizational improvements, and virtual specific preparations are needed. Despite the challenges associated with the virtual interview process, applicants rated the overall virtual interview experience positively. Given the continued impact of COVID-19 on medical education, the majority of residency programs will elect to continue virtual interviews for the 2022 Electronic Residency Application Services cycle. We hope that our findings may provide insight into the applicant's perspective on the virtual interview experience and help optimize virtual interviews for future cycles.

Perspectives on virtual interviews—A follow-up study of the Comprehensive Endocrine Surgery Fellowship interview process

Virtual interviews are still recommended for fellowship applications, 3years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Improving equity by reducing the cost for the applicants has been the most important reason for continuing virtual interviews. However, some argue that important information may be missed in a virtual setting. Our objective was to assess the perspective of Gastroenterology (GI) fellowship interviewers and applicants toward virtual interviews. We designed two different anonymous surveys directed at GI programs and GI applicants who were interviewed for GI fellowship programs from 2020 to 2022 and matched to a GI program. Survey links were emailed to the Program Directors (PDs) and Program Coordinators via the AGA listserv starting in January 2023. A descriptive analysis was performed using Excel, and Fisher's exact tests were performed using R version 4.3.1. Sixty-one applicants and 79 interviewers responded to our survey. More than 80% of applicants strongly agreed (n = 36; 59%) and agreed (n = 14; 23%) that they would prefer in-person interviews if money was not an issue. When applicants were asked about the interview format in order of their preference, "in-person, hybrid, virtual" was the most popular answer (n = 16; 26.2%). Most interviewers (n = 47; 59.5%) do not prefer virtual interviews over in-person interviews. Furthermore, some interviewers were rarely able to judge the applicants' interpersonal (n = 17; 21.5%) and ethical skills (n = 16; 20.3%). These results differed according to the type of interviewer (p = 0.013 and 0.018, respectively). Based on our survey, most programs still prefer in-person interviews. Despite the several advantages of virtual interviews, the majority of applicants would prefer an in-person setting if the financial burden was not a factor. Nonetheless, many applicants think that the cost savings outweigh all the disadvantages associated with virtual interviews. The lack of empathy, personal connections, and engagement may impact the ability of interviewers to judge and ultimately rank a candidate. The virtual interview is here to stay, and we need input from the applicants and the interviewers to make the process more productive.

In-Person and Virtual Interview Format for General Surgery Residency From an Applicant Perspective.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the nation's health care system, including on graduate medical education (GME) training programs. Traditionally, residency and fellowship training program applications involve in-person interviews conducted on-site, with only a minority of programs offering interviews remotely via a virtual platform. However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is anticipated that most interviews will be conducted virtually for the 2021 application cycle and possibly beyond. Therefore, GME training programs need to prepare for the transition to virtual interviews using evidence-based practices. At the University of California, San Francisco, a multidisciplinary task force was convened to review existing literature about virtual interviews and determine best practices. This article summarizes these findings, first discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the virtual interview format and then providing evidence-based best practices for GME training programs. Specifically, the authors make the following recommendations: develop a detailed plan for the interview process, consider using standardized interview questions, recognize and respond to potential biases that may be amplified with the virtual interview format, prepare your own trainees for virtual interviews, develop electronic materials and virtual social events to approximate the interview day, and collect data about virtual interviews at your own institution. With adequate preparation, the virtual interview experience can be high yield, positive, and equitable for both applicants and GME training programs.

Virtual Interviews for Sports Medicine Fellowship Positions Save Time and Money but Don’t Replace In-Person Meetings

Importance In-person interviews have traditionally been considered a crucial component of the residency application process. Virtual interviews (VIs) became the standard format for the 2020 to 2021 application cycle due to the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. VIs offer a new perspective and challenge to this process which warrants unique considerations and further understanding of effects on applicants. Objective This study aimed to assess the perceived efficacy of a VI preparedness exercise for ophthalmology residency applicants in the 2021 residency application cycle. Design, Setting, and Participants A cross-sectional survey was distributed online. All participants in a mock VI exercise conducted via video-telecommunication technology were invited to complete the survey. Data collection occurred from October 12, 2020, to November 2, 2020. A follow-up survey after a match results released was distributed to all participants and data collection occurred from February 18, 2021, to February 25, 2021. Main Outcome and Measures Applicant demographics, comfort, and attitudes toward VIs and VI practice were the primary measurements of this study. Results Responses to the initial survey were received from all 35 participants (100%) in the VI mock interviews. There was a statistically significant difference between the pre- and postinterview responses for “How prepared do you feel for virtual interviews with residency programs?” (p = 0.0003) and “How likely are you to practice virtual interviews with someone you know?” (p = 0.0023). Participants reported feeling more prepared for VIs with residency programs after the mock interview (p = 0.002). A greater proportion of participants responded with “Very Likely” after the mock interview in comparison to before the interview to the questions “How likely are you to practice interviews with someone you know?” (p = 0.039) and “How likely are you to practice virtual interviews in the same room/area as you will during the official interview season?” (p = 0.021). Of the 35 original participants, 20 completed the follow-up survey. There were an equal number of participants who responded either “Helped Somewhat” (n = 9) or “Helped Greatly” (n = 9) to “How much did the VI mock exercise help you for the actual interview season?” in the follow-up survey. The majority of follow-up survey respondents (17/20) reported that they had additional practice in the virtual environment for interviews after the VI mock exercise. There was no significant difference in perceived helpfulness of the VI mock exercise during the actual interview season between matched and unmatched participants. Conclusion and Relevance As residency applicants prepare for future VIs, practice and adequate preparation will be essential. In this study, implementation of a VI preparedness exercise had a positive impact on applicants' perception of their preparedness and intention to practice the format in the future.

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, interviews during the 2021 US residency match were conducted virtually, a practice again recommended and repeated by many programs in 2022. The impact of virtual interviews on recruitment and match outcomes has recently been of interest, with results showing the virtual format to be mostly well received by applicants due to cost, travel, and scheduling benefits. Few studies have looked at pre/posttransition comparisons of applicant geographic and demographic data. We compared objective match outcomes between in-person and virtual interviews across three residency programs. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of National Residency Matching Program data between 2015-2022 across three family medicine residency programs. Primary outcomes were fill rate, average rank position, distance from program, and percentage of underrepresented in medicine demographic status for matched applicants. We compared aggregate in-person data (2015-2019) to aggregate virtual data (2020-2022) for each program using χ2, Fisher Exact test, or 2-tailed t tests to 95% confidence. Saint Joseph Hospital in Reading, Pennsylvania, a 3-year community-based university affiliated program, had significantly more unfilled positions during virtual recruitment (P=.0058). Mount Nittany Medical Center in State College, Pennsylvania, a 3-year community based university-affiliated program, had a significant difference in distance of matched residents' current address (P=.048). Virtual interviews were not associated with significant differences in average position on rank list, average distance from permanent address zip code, or percentage of underrepresented in medicine (URiM) demographic status for matched applicants. The impact of virtual interviewing on unfilled positions and geographic data is likely site specific and generally small, as some programs had significant structural changes. Further research is needed to confirm the generalizability of these results and explore future comparisons of demographic and geographic characteristics of matched applicants pre/posttransition to the virtual format.

The Experience of the Virtual Interview Process for Hand Fellowship Program Directors

Reflections From Underrepresented in Medicine Applicants on the 2020 Virtual Interview Season.

BackgroundAll Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS) R1 interviews were conducted virtually for the first time in 2021. We explored the facilitators, barriers, and implications of the virtual interview process for the CaRMS R1 match and provide recommendations for improvement.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey study of CaRMS R1 residency applicants and interviewers across Canada in 2021. Surveys were distributed by email to the interviewers, and by email, social media, or newsletter to the applicants. Inductive thematic analysis was used for open-ended items. Recommendations were provided as frequencies to demonstrate strength. Close-ended items were described and compared across groups using Chi-Square Fisher’s Exact tests.ResultsA total of 127 applicants and 400 interviewers, including 127 program directors, responded to the survey. 193/380 (50.8%) interviewers and 90/118 (76.3%) applicants preferred virtual over in-person interview formats. Facilitators of the virtual interview format included cost and time savings, ease of scheduling, reduced environmental impact, greater equity, less stress, greater reach and participation, and safety. Barriers of the virtual interview format included reduced informal conversations, limited ability for applicants to explore programs at different locations, limited ability for programs to assess applicants’ interest, technological issues, concern for interview integrity, limited non-verbal communication, and reduced networking. The most helpful media for applicants to learn about residency programs were program websites, the CaRMS/AFMC websites, and recruitment videos. Additionally, panel interviews were preferred by applicants for their ability to showcase themselves and build connections with multiple interviewers. Respondents provided recommendations regarding: (1) dissemination of program information, (2) the use of technology, and (3) the virtual interview format.ConclusionsPerceptions of 2021 CaRMS R1 virtual interviews were favourable among applicants and interviewers. Recommendations from this study can help improve future iterations of virtual interviews.

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically altered the format of residency recruitment, leading to the widespread adoption of virtual interviews, followed by the adoption of preference signaling. This study examines how the structure of the 2023-2024 interview season influenced family medicine residency program directors' intentions for future interview formats and their preferences regarding the number of preference signals. A Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance survey, including demographic questions, was distributed to all family medicine residency program directors in the United States in spring 2024. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, cross-tabulations, χ2 tests, and multivariable logistic regression. The overall response rate to the question set was 43.7% (308/705). The majority of programs used a fully virtual interview structure in 2023-2024; programs with 100% virtual interviewing were significantly more likely to plan to maintain this model for future interviewing (P=.000) and to favor the current allotment of five preference signals (P=.005). Program director gender, ethnicity, or program type did not significantly influence the intention to maintain a virtual interview format. The structure of the 2023-2024 interview season was significantly consistent with program directors' plans for future recruitment practices.

Four randomized controlled trials revealed that virtual-reality job interview training (VR-JIT) improved interviewing skills and the odds of obtaining a job offer among trainees with severe mental illness or autism spectrum disorder. This study assessed whether postintervention interviewing skills mediated the relationship between completion of virtual interviews and receiving job offers by six-month follow-up. VR-JIT trainees (N=79) completed pre- and posttest mock interviews and a brief survey approximately six months later to assess whether they received a job offer. As hypothesized, analyses indicated that the number of completed virtual interviews predicted greater posttest interviewing skills (β=.20, 95% posterior credible interval [PCI]=.08-.33), which in turn predicted trainees' obtaining a job offer (β=.28, 95% PCI=.01-.53). VR-JIT may provide a mechanism of action that helps trainees with various psychiatric diagnoses obtain job offers in the community. Future research can evaluate the community-based effectiveness of this novel intervention.

Resident Perspective of the Virtual Diagnostic Radiology Residency Interview Process: A National Survey From the Association of Program Directors in Radiology