Residency Program Directors’ Views on Research Conducted During Medical School: A National Survey-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Residency Program Directors’ Views on Research Conducted During Medical School: A National Survey

Published:2023-04-21 Issue:10 Volume:98 Page:1185-1195
ISSN:1040-2446
Container-title:Academic Medicine
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Wolfson Rachel K.¹,Fairchild Paige C.²,Bahner Ingrid³,Baxa Dwayne M.⁴,Birnbaum Deborah R.⁵,Chaudhry Sarwat I.⁶,Chretien Katherine C.⁷,DeFranco Donald B.⁸,Deptola Amber Z.⁹,LaConte Leslie E.W.¹⁰,Lin Jenny J.¹¹,Petch Lee Leslie¹²,Powers Maureen A.¹³,Ropson Ira J.¹⁴,Sankaran Saumya M.¹⁵,Sawarynski Kara E.¹⁶,Sozio Stephen M.¹⁷

Affiliation:

1. R.K. Wolfsonis associate professor of pediatrics and assistant dean for medical school research, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; ORCID:.

2. P.C. Fairchildwas manager of medical education, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, at the time of writing and is now an epidemiologist, Jefferson County Public Health, Jefferson County, Colorado.

3. I. Bahneris professor, Department of Molecular Medicine, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida; ORCID:.

4. D.M. Baxais associate professor, Department of Foundational Medical Studies, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan; ORCID:.

5. D.R. Birnbaumis scholarly concentrations program director and project manager for the executive associate dean, Medical Education and Institutional Improvement, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana; ORCID:.

6. S.I. Chaudhryis professor of medicine and associate dean of student research, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

7. K.C. Chretienis associate dean for medical student affairs, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; ORCID:.

8. D.B. DeFrancois professor of pharmacology and chemical biology and associate dean of medical student research, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; ORCID:.

9. A.Z. Deptolawas assistant professor of medicine and associate program director, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, at the time of writing and is now a physician, Norton Healthcare, Louisville, Kentucky; ORCID:.

10. L.E.W. LaConteis associate professor of basic science education and assistant dean for research, Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, Virginia; ORCID:.

11. J.J. Linis professor of medicine and associate director for the medical school research office, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; ORCID:.

12. L. Petch Leeis associate dean for academic enhancement, Augusta University/University of Georgia Medical Partnership, Athens, Georgia.

13. M.A. Powersis associate professor of cell biology and director of the discovery phase, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.

14. I.J. Ropsonis associate professor of biochemistry and molecular biology and assistant dean for medical student research, Penn State University College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania; ORCID:.

15. S.M. Sankaranis assistant teaching professor of biomedical science, University of Washington Tacoma, Tacoma, Washington.

16. K.E. Sawarynskiis associate professor, Department of Foundational Medical Studies, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan; ORCID:.

17. S.M. Soziois associate professor of medicine and epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; ORCID:.

Abstract

Purpose With the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 transition to pass/fail in 2022, uncertainty exists regarding how other residency application components, including research conducted during medical school, will inform interview and ranking decisions. The authors explore program director (PD) views on medical student research, the importance of disseminating that work, and the translatable skill set of research participation. Method Surveys were distributed to all U.S. residency PDs and remained open from August to November 2021 to query the importance of research participation in assessing applicants, whether certain types of research were more valued, productivity measures that reflect meaningful research participation, and traits for which research serves as a proxy. The survey also queried whether research would be more important without a numeric Step 1 score and the importance of research vs other application components. Results A total of 885 responses from 393 institutions were received. Ten PDs indicated that research is not considered when reviewing applicants, leaving 875 responses for analysis. Among 873 PDs (2 nonrespondents), 358 (41.0%) replied that meaningful research participation will be more important in offering interviews. A total of 164 of 304 most competitive specialties (53.9%) reported increased research importance compared with 99 of 282 competitive (35.1%) and 95 of 287 least competitive (33.1%) specialties. PDs reported that meaningful research participation demonstrated intellectual curiosity (545 [62.3%]), critical and analytical thinking skills (482 [55.1%]), and self-directed learning skills (455 [52.0%]). PDs from the most competitive specialties were significantly more likely to indicate that they value basic science research vs PDs from the least competitive specialties. Conclusions This study demonstrates how PDs value research in their review of applicants, what they perceive research represents in an applicant, and how these views are shifting as the Step 1 exam transitions to pass/fail.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Education,General Medicine

Reference53 articles.

1. Associations between otolaryngology applicant characteristics and future performance in residency or practice: A systematic review.;Bowe;Otolaryngol Neck Surg,2017

2. Selection criteria for residency: Results of a national program directors survey.;Green;Acad Med,2009

3. The association between United States Medical Licensing Examination scores and clinical performance in medical students.;Gauer;Adv Med Educ Pract,2019

4. A narrative review of the evidence supporting factors used by residency program directors to select applicants for interviews.;Hartman;J Grad Med Educ,2019

5. Which applicant factors predict success in emergency medicine training programs? A scoping review.;Yang;AEM Educ Train,2020

Cited by 7 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Perceptions and Expectations Regarding the Step 1 Score Change Among Surgical and Non-Surgical Program Directors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis;The American Surgeon™;2024-02-02

2. Importance of Residency Applicant Factors Based on Specialty and Demographics: A National Survey of Program Directors;2024-01-12

3. Perspectives from two recent medical school graduates on exposure to pathology during undergraduate medical education: A narrative inquiry;Academic Pathology;2023-10

4. A modern-day research model for large academic institutions: A fellow-based solution;Surgery in Practice and Science;2023-09

5. The Importance of Research Experience With a Scoreless Step 1: A Student Survey at a Community-Based Medical School;Cureus;2023-08-14