Residency Program Website Content May Not Meet Applicant Needs

Authors

  • Sangrag Ganguli BA, MMSc. Fourth-year Medical Student. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6889-0367
  • Sheena W. Chen MD. First-year Minimally Invasive Surgery Fellow. New York University Langone, New York, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8278-3517
  • Sam Maghami MD. Research Resident, Department of Surgery, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0705-6889
  • Florina Corpodean MD. PGY-4. Louisiana State University, New Orleans, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8429-248X
  • Paul P. Lin MD, FACS. Associate Professor of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Chief of Division of General Surgery, Vice Chair of Department of Surgery. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3071-3509
  • Yolanda C. Haywood MD, FACEP. Associate Dean of Student Affairs, Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2446-5884
  • Khashayar Vaziri MD, FACS. Professor of Surgery, Program Director of General Surgery Residency. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3977-8891
  • Juliet Lee MD, FACS. Associate Professor of Surgery, Clerkship Director, Director of Undergraduate Surgical Education. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0013-8184
  • Hope T. Jackson MD, FACS. Assistant Professor of Surgery, Associate Program Director. George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2373-9786

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2024.1635

Keywords:

Residency, Clinical education, residency websites, Residency Program, Medical Students, Website Content Evaluation, Applicant Needs, Online Information Seeking, Resident Wellness, Fellowship and Residency, Medical Education, Program Websites, Application Process, Resident Fellowship Acquisition, Faculty Data, Residency Location, Resident Lifestyle, Information Source Utilization, Likert Scale Assessment, Survey Analysis, Procedural Specialties, Non-Procedural Specialties, Digital Resource Accessibility

Abstract

Background: Residency program applicants use a variety of resources during the application cycle. Program websites can vary substantially, and it is unclear how the website information is used by applicants. We aimed to determine the most popular information source used by applicants. We also sought to identify specific online content that was deemed important in the decision-making process.

Methods: A survey was distributed to fourth-year medical students at an academic institution. Demographic information was collected, and the importance of various online resources was gauged using a Likert scale. Subgroup analysis was performed for procedural versus non-procedural specialty applicants.

Results: 91 of the 169 fourth-year medical students (54%) completed the survey. The most utilized sources for the students were residency program websites (41%), the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (FREIDA) website (36%), and the Doximity website (14%). The most valued (Likert scale of 4 and 5) website content for the students included information on resident wellness (86%), resident fellowship acquisition (85%), faculty data (84%), residency location and resident lifestyle (81%), and application point of contact (79%). There were significant differences between what procedural specialty applicants deemed important versus what those applying to non-procedural specialties deemed important.

Conclusion: Residency program websites are commonly used among applicants during the residency match process. Content on resident wellness was highly valued irrespective of specialty choice; however, this information was often not present on residency websites. These findings may help guide website content development initiatives for residency programs to reflect applicant needs more adequately.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Benson NM, Stickle TR, Raszka W V. Going “Fourth” From Medical School: Fourth-Year Medical Students’ Perspectives on the Fourth Year of Medical School. Acad Med. 2015;90(10):1386–93.

Callaway P, Melhado T, Walling A, Groskurth J. Financial and Time Burdens for Medical Students Interviewing for Residency. Fam Med. 2017;49(2):137–40.

Embi PJ, Desai S, Cooney TG. Use and utility of Web-based residency program information: a survey of residency applicants. J Med Internet Res. 2003;5(3):e22.

Winters, M. (2016, July 13). Online database simplifies residency, fellowship search. https://www.ama-assn.org/residents-students/match/online-database-simplifies-residency-fellowship-search. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

Reilly EF, Leibrandt TJ, Zonno AJ, Simpson MC, Morris JB. General surgery residency program websites: usefulness and usability for resident applicants. Curr Surg. 2004;61(2):236–40.

Stoeger SM, Freeman H, Bitter B, Helmer SD, Reyes J, Vincent KB. Evaluation of general surgery residency program websites. Am J Surg. 2019;217(4):794–9.

Gaeta TJ, Birkhahn RH, Lamont D, Banga N, Bove JJ. Aspects of residency programs’ web sites important to student applicants. Acad Emerg Med. 2005;12(1):89–92.

FREIDA Residency Program Database: Medical Fellowship Database. (n.d.). Available at: https://freida.ama-assn.org/Freida/#/. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

ACGME Home. (n.d.). Available at: https://www.acgme.org/. Accessed March 28, 2020.

Svider PF, Gupta A, Johnson AP, et al. Evaluation of otolaryngology residency program websites. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;140(10):956–60.

Hashmi A, Policherla R, Campbell H, Zuliani G, Shkoukani MA, Eloy JA, et al. How Informative are the Plastic Surgery Residency Websites to Prospective Applicants? J Surg Educ. 2017;74(1):74–8.

Oladeji LO, Yu JC, Oladeji AK, Ponce BA. How Useful are Orthopedic Surgery Residency Web Pages? J Surg Educ. 2015;72(6):1185–9.

Silvestre J, Tomlinson-Hansen S, Fosnot J, Taylor JA. Plastic surgery residency websites: a critical analysis of accessibility and content. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;72(3):265–9.

Skovrlj B, Silvestre J, Ibeh C, Abbatematteo JM, Mocco J. Neurosurgery Residency Websites: A Critical Evaluation. World Neurosurg. 2015;84(3):727–33.

Wakefield D V, Manole BA, Jethanandani A, May ME, Marcrom SR, Farmer MR, et al. Accessibility, availability, and quality of online information for US radiation oncology residencies. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2016;6(3):160–5.

Hansberry DR, Bornstein J, Agarwal N, McClure KE, Deshmukh SP, Long S. An Assessment of Radiology Residency Program Websites. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(4):663–6.

Mulcahey MK, Gosselin MM, Fadale PD. Evaluation of the content and accessibility of web sites for accredited orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(12):e85.

Shaath MK, Yeranosian MG, Ippolito JA, Adams MR, Sirkin MS, Reilly MC. Evaluation of the Content and Accessibility of Web Sites for Accredited Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery Fellowships. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(9):e60.

Chu LF, Young CA, Zamora AK, Lowe D, Hoang DB, Pearl RG, et al. Self-reported information needs of anesthesia residency applicants and analysis of applicant-related web sites resources at 131 United States training programs. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2011;112(2):430-9.

Paul HY, Novin S, Vander Plas TL, Huh E, Magid D. How does the current generation of medical students view the radiology match?: An analysis of the AuntMinnie and Student Doctor Network online forums. Academic radiology. 2018;25(6):699-707.

Doximity Residency Navigator. Available at: https://residency.doximity.com/. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

[Residency] 2019-2020 Interview Spreadsheets (so far). (2019, August 16). https://www.reddit.com/r/medicalschool/comments/cr7pcp/residency_20192020_interview_spreadsheets_so_far/. Accessed on March 28, 2020

Residency Explorer. https://www.residencyexplorer.org/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=/. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

AAFP Home: American Academy of Family Physicians. (2015, October 16). https://www.aafp.org/home.html. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

Deloney LA, Perrot LJ, Lensing SY, Jambhekar K. Radiology resident recruitment: a study of the impact of web-based information and interview day activities. Academic radiology. 2014;21(7):931-7.

Chen VW, Hoang D, Garner W. Do Websites Provide What Applicants Need? Plastic Surgery Residency Program Websites Versus Applicant Self-reported Needs. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018;6(10):e1900.

John E, Marcus J, Burnett W, Shapiro B. Home • Student Doctor Network. https://www.studentdoctor.net/. Accessed on March 28, 2020.

“Improving Physician Well-Being, Restoring Meaning in Medicine.” ACGME Main Page, www.acgme.org/What-We-Do/Initiatives/Physician-Well-Being. Accessed on April 21, 2020.

“Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER).” ACGME Main Page, www.acgme.org/What-We-Do/Initiatives/Clinical-Learning-Environment-Review-CLER. Accessed on May 20, 2020.

“The FIRST Trial - Home Page.” The FIRST Trial - Home Page, www.thefirsttrial.org/. Accessed on May 20, 2020.

Ellis RJ, Hewitt DB, Hu YY, Johnson JK, Merkow RP, Yang AD, et al. An Empirical National Assessment of the Learning Environment and Factors Associated With Program Culture. Annals of surgery. 2019;270(4):585-92.

Virtual Interviews: Tips for Program Director. https://www.aamc.org/system/files/2020-05/Virtual_Interview_Tips_for_Program_Directors_05142020.pdf. Accessed May 20, 2020.

AAMC (American Association of Medical Colleges). Specialty Response to COVID-19. https://students-residents.aamc.org/applying-residency/article/specialty-response-covid-19/. Accessed March 28, 2020.

Lambdin J, Lin RP, DeAngelis EJ, Vaziri K, Lin P, Lee J, Jackson HT. Analysis of Surgery Residency Website Content: Implications during the COVID-19 Era. J Surg Educ. 2022;79(4):904-8.

The image is a bar chart displaying the most common sources of information for medical students learning about residency programs. The vertical bars represent the percentage of participants selecting each source. Program websites are the most frequently used, reaching close to 40%, followed closely by the FREIDA website. The Doximity website appears to be less used, shown by a shorter bar, and an even smaller percentage of respondents reported using other sources, which are detailed in the legend. These other sources include specific websites such as ACGME, AAFP, SDN, the AAMC's Residency Explorer, and Reddit Spreadsheets, each with smaller individual percentages contributing to the 'Other' category.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-25 — Updated on 2024-04-12

How to Cite

Ganguli, S., Chen, S. W., Maghami, S., Corpodean, F., Lin, P. P., Haywood, Y. C., Vaziri, K., Lee, J., & Jackson, H. T. (2024). Residency Program Website Content May Not Meet Applicant Needs. International Journal of Medical Students, 12(1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2024.1635

Issue

Vol. 12 No. 1 (2024)

Section

Original Article

Categories

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Sangrag Ganguli, Sheena Chen, Sam Maghami, Florina Corpodean, Paul P Lin, Yolanda C Haywood, Khashayar Vaziri, Juliet Lee, Hope T Jackson

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site; with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
    2. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
    3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
    4. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
    5. The Author represents and warrants that:
      1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
      2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
      3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
      4. the Work has not previously been published;
      5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
      6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
    6. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from the Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Enforcement of copyright

The IJMS takes the protection of copyright very seriously.

If the IJMS discovers that you have used its copyright materials in contravention of the license above, the IJMS may bring legal proceedings against you seeking reparation and an injunction to stop you using those materials. You could also be ordered to pay legal costs.

If you become aware of any use of the IJMS' copyright materials that contravenes or may contravene the license above, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org

 

Infringing material

If you become aware of any material on the website that you believe infringes your or any other person's copyright, please report this by email to contact@ijms.org