(127) INFERTILITY FELLOWSHIP WEBSITE ANALYSIS: THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT

Abstract Introduction In order for both programs to select the best fitting applicant and the applicant to find the best fitting program, both parties need to be transparent with each other. Currently, applicants that apply for andrology fellowships can investigate programs on the web but the information available to them is inconsistent, lacking, and possibly even inaccurate. To date, there have yet to be any formal studies that assess Infertility and Sexual Medicine Fellowships on this subject. Objective This project aims to identify gaps in basic information provided on these fellowship websites, thus thwarting potential applicants from reaching informed decisions regarding their advanced training. Methods Utilizing publicly available lists of Infertility and Sexual Medicine fellowship programs from the American Urological Association (AUA) website, The Society for Male Reproduction and Urology (SMRU) website, and Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) website, we documented each of the advertised programs. All program websites were accessed on the same day (6/6/2024) to reduce variability as websites may update over time. Any program with an active fellowship website was included and had to be a clinical fellowship geared toward training graduates of urology training programs. The analysis did not include any programs geared toward primary care providers, programs that were research-based only, or did not have an active website. Included programs were assessed on the transparency of their respective websites. A number of factors were assessed including participation in the infertility match, inclusion of rotations schedules, expected length of the fellowship, and estimated number of procedures to be completed by end of the fellowship. Results A total of 25 programs were included in the analysis. We found that the majority of programs included information on research opportunities (92.6 %) and included current faculty profiles (96.3%). 77.8% of programs included information on potential procedures that a fellow may participate in during the course of their fellowship but only 14.8% of programs included information regarding fellow case logs including the number of completed procedures during the fellowship. The majority of programs lacked information regarding DEI (18.5%), wellness initiatives (3.7%), call responsibilities (18.5%), and salary/benefits (7.4%). Additionally, of those participating in the AUA Andrology fellowship match (n = 17), only 17.6% had mention of the match application on their website (n = 3). Conclusions Our data suggests a significant lack of standardization among fellowship websites as well as major gaps in data that are pertinent to applicants, such as comprehensive procedure logs. If the priorities of the program do not align with those of the applicant, and vice versa, the successful outcome of both parties will be compromised. Our study demonstrates that the current state of fellowship websites could be improved and that this would likely better serve both applicant and program. Disclosure No.