Author
Listed:
- Amar R Chadaga
- Dana Villines
- Armand Krikorian
Abstract
Background: Applicant recruitment is an essential part of a residency program’s activities with valuable resources dedicated to ensuring its success. Most programs design interview days based on a mix of tradition, budget availability and perception of applicant preferences. There is a paucity of available data on preferences of applicants for interview days. Objective: We sought to investigate Internal Medicine applicant preferences for a residency recruitment day in aggregate and stratified by medical school background: United States vs. International Medical School Graduate. Methods: A survey was developed and used in a cross-sectional study of Internal Medicine categorical and preliminary medicine candidates. Applicants ranked different facets of the interview day using a Likert scale. Variables included interview type, start time, length of interview day, number of interviews, length of each interview, background of interviewers, types of questions, interaction time with residents, month of interview, and components of interview day. Results: 265 applicants received the surveys and 215 completed them correctly (81%). Overall, applicants tended to favor an 8–9 am start time (81.9%) and an optimal duration of four hours (82.8%). The interview was the most preferred component of the day (80.0%) with one-on-one (98.1%) and 15–30 min (95.3%) interviews preferred. Several statistically significant differences were found between the United States and International students as well as Categorical and Preliminary applicants. Conclusion: Our findings offer insights into various factors of the interview day that may appeal to Internal Medicine candidates. This information will be useful to graduate medical education departments engaged in recruitment.
Suggested Citation
Amar R Chadaga & Dana Villines & Armand Krikorian, 2018.
"Medical student preferences for the internal medicine residency interview day: A cross-sectional study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-8, July.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0199382
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199382
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0199382. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.