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
. 2022 Jan-Feb;7(1):100842.
doi: 10.1016/j.adro.2021.100842. Epub 2021 Oct 29.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Radiation Oncology Residency Applicant Away Rotations, Interviews, and Rank Lists: A Comparison Between the 2020 Match and 2021 Match

Affiliations

The Impact of COVID-19 on Radiation Oncology Residency Applicant Away Rotations, Interviews, and Rank Lists: A Comparison Between the 2020 Match and 2021 Match

Kekoa Taparra et al. Adv Radiat Oncol. 2022 Jan-Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic modified the Residency Match process for fourth-year medical students. In-person away rotations were discouraged, interviews were virtual, and traditional factors used to rank programs were absent. Here, we compare survey results administered to both the 2020 and 2021 Match applicants to assess the influence of the pandemic on the radiation oncology (RO) Match process.

Methods: An institutional review board-approved prospective cross-sectional study was conducted. The 2020 and 2021 RO Match applicants at a large RO program were invited to participate. Descriptive summary statistics were assessed.

Results: The 2020 and 2021 Matches each had 76 applicants complete the survey with response rates of 54% and 57%, respectively. The 2 groups were predominantly white, cisgender male, single, and without children. Whereas 11% of 2020 applicants did not complete away rotations, 45% of 2021 applicants did not. For 2021 Match applicants, 65% of away rotations were performed virtually, whereas 51% were not for medical school credit. Of the applicants, 84% were satisfied with virtual interviews and 72% felt cost savings were worth not having in-person interviews. Whereas 49% of Match 2020 applicants spent >$5000 in interview costs, 0% of the Match 2021 applicants did so, with 45% spending <$100. Postinterview communications from programs increased during the pandemic from 36% to 42% in 2020 Match and 2021 Match, respectively. Although program culture was the most common factor influencing 2021 Match applicants program rankings, half of applicants did not gain a sense of program culture during virtual interviews.

Conclusions: We found 2021 Match applicants completed fewer away rotations, were satisfied with virtual interviews/reduced costs, and did not gain a sense of program culture through virtual rotations/interviews despite it being the most important ranking factor reported. This study supports further exploration of virtual away rotations and virtual interviews moving forward beyond the pandemic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
Number of completed away rotations by Match 2020 and Match 2021 applicants.
Fig 2
Fig. 2
Match 2021 applicant perspectives on virtual interviews. Binary categories were created with responses for either (1) very much or somewhat and (2) neutral, not much, or not at all.
Fig 3
Fig. 3
Interview cost comparison between 2020 Match and 2021 Match.
Fig 4
Fig. 4
Factors that impact how applicants rank programs during 2020 Match and 2021 Match.

References

    1. Liaison Committee on Medical Education . U.S. Osteopathic, and Non-U.S. Medical School Applicants; 2019. Final Report and Recommendations for Medical Education Institutions of LCME-Accredited.https://www.aamc.org/system/files/2020-05/covid19_Final_Recommendations_... Available at:
    1. National Resident Matching Program. Data Release and Research Committee: Results of the 2014 NRMP Program Director Survey. 2014. Available at: https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/PD-Survey-Report-2014.pdf.
    1. Puscas L, Sharp SR, Schwab B, et al. Qualities of residency applicants: Comparison of otolaryngology program criteria with applicant expectations. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;138:10–14. - PubMed
    1. Makdisi G, Takeuchi T, Rodriguez J, et al. How we select our residents—a survey of selection criteria in general surgery residents. J Surg Educ. 2011;68:67–72. - PubMed
    1. Pourmand A, Lee H, Fair M, et al. Feasibility and usability of tele-interview for medical residency interview. West J Emerg Med. 2018;19:80–86. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources