Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct 25:8:23742895211052885.
doi: 10.1177/23742895211052885. eCollection 2021 Jan-Dec.

Prioritizing the Interview in Selecting Resident Applicants: Behavioral Interviews to Determine Goodness of Fit

Affiliations

Prioritizing the Interview in Selecting Resident Applicants: Behavioral Interviews to Determine Goodness of Fit

Michael B Prystowsky et al. Acad Pathol. .

Abstract

From our initial screening of applications, we assess that the 10% to 15% of applicants whom we will interview are all academically qualified to complete our residency training program. This initial screening to select applicants to interview includes a personality assessment provided by the personal statement, Dean's letter, and letters of recommendation that, taken together, begin our evaluation of the applicant's cultural fit for our program. While the numerical scoring ranks applicants preinterview, the final ranking into best fit categories is determined solely on the interview day at a consensus conference by faculty and residents. We analyzed data of 819 applicants from 2005 to 2017. Most candidates were US medical graduates (62.5%) with 23.7% international medical graduates, 11.7% Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine (DO), and 2.1% Caribbean medical graduates. Given that personality assessment began with application review, there was excellent correlation between the preinterview composite score and the final categorical ranking in all 4 categories. For most comparisons, higher scores and categorical rankings were associated with applicants subsequently working in academia versus private practice. We found no problem in using our 3-step process employing virtual interviews during the COVID pandemic.

Keywords: ERAS (Electronic Residency Application Service); GME (graduate medical education); NRMP (National Resident Matching Program); applicants; behavioral interview; residency.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest concerning the research, authorship, and publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Three step application review. Applications are screened by the program director and associate directors. Approximately 10% to 15% of applicants are invited for interviews based on academic performance and potential programmatic fit. Programmatic fit is assessed during the interview. A consensus conference is held immediately after interviews to rank order applicants.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Representative preinterview rank order of applicants. Academic performance and academic/life experience as determined by information in the ERAS application yield a preinterview composite score that determines which applicants will be invited for interviews.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Representative final rank order of applicants. Goodness of fit defines the color category of each applicant and academic scoring defines the rank order within each color category. The final rank order usually only containing the blue and green categories becomes the match list yielding approximately a 10:1 ratio of applicants to positions available. To demonstrate the impact of the interview within each color category, the preinterview ranking is given in the applicant column. Blue represents our highest priority applicants with Green as the next priority level. Yellow applicants are seldom included in the match and Red applicants are excluded from the match list.

References

    1. Bore M, Munro D, Powis D. A comprehensive model for the selection of medical students. Med Teach. 2009;31:1066–1072. doi:10.3109/01421590903095510 - PubMed
    1. Dowell J, Lumsden MA, Powis D, et al. Predictive validity of the personal qualities assessment for selection of medical students in Scotland. Med Teach. 2011;33:e485–e488. doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.599448 - PubMed
    1. Bernardi RA. Associations between Hofstede’s cultural constructs and social desirability response bias. J Bus Ethics. 2006;65:43–53. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-5353-0
    1. Hofstede G. What did GLOBE really measure? Researchers’ minds versus respondents’ minds. J Int Bus Stud. 2006;37:882–896. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400233
    1. Hofstede G. Asian management in the 21st century. Asia Pac J Manag. 2007;24:411–420. doi:10.1007/s10490-007-9049-0