Best Practices for Writing Letters of Recommendation for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Fellowship: An Empty Scoping Review

Author:

Dotters-Katz Sarah K.1,Kirsch Elayna2,Cantrell Sarah3,Shanks Anthony4,Temming Lorene5,Gray Beverly6

Affiliation:

1. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

2. Duke School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

3. Duke University Medical Center Library and Archives, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina

4. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana

5. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wake Forest School of Medicine Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina

6. Division of Population and Community Health, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

Abstract

Objectives Though letters of recommendation (LOR) for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (MFM) fellowship are a critical part of application process, little is known regarding best practices for writing them. This scoping review sought to identify published data outlining best practices in writing MFM fellowship LOR. Study Design Scoping review conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and JBI guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC were searched, by professional medical librarian using database-specific controlled vocabulary and keywords representing MFM, fellowship, as well as personnel selection, academic performance, examinations, or clinical competence in 4/22. Prior to execution, the search was peer reviewed by another professional medical librarian using the Peer Review Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) checklist. Citations imported to Covidence, dual screened by authors with disagreements resolved by discussion, and extraction performed by one author and checked by the second. Results A total of 1,154 studies were identified, with 162 removed as duplicates. Of the 992 screened, 10 imported for full-text review. None of these met inclusion criteria; four were not about fellows and six did not report on best practices for writing LOR for MFM. Conclusion No articles were identified that outlined best practices for writing LOR for MFM fellowship. The lack of guidance and published data guiding those writing LOR for MFM fellowship applicants is concerning given the importance of these as a tool used by fellowship directors in selecting applicants for interviews and ranking. Key Points

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Cited by 3 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3