Urology Residency Program Directors’ Criteria for Evaluating Applicants

Objective: To evaluate how the recent changes to the urology residency application process affect program directors' (PD) criteria for evaluating applicants. Methods: All 148 urology PDs were invited to participate in an anonymous survey administered by REDCap in 2024. Results: Forty-eight of 148 PDs (32.4%) responded to the survey. When evaluating whether to interview an applicant, the highest ranked criterion of the 9 options listed was sub-internship (sub-I) performance at the PD’s institution, followed by letters of recommendation (LORs), preference signal (PS) sent to institution, and grades on surgery clerkships. The differences between these top 4 criteria were not statistically significant. Only 23% of PDs were likely to interview applicants who did not complete a sub-I with or send a PS to their program; 23% were neutral. However, 51% of PDs were likely to interview an applicant who sent them a PS, even if the applicant did not complete any sub-Is in their geographic region or send a geographic preference signal to their region; 31% were neutral. Only 21% of PDs were likely to interview applicants who did not submit a Step 2 score with their application; 44% were neutral. Conclusions: Sub-I performance is the most important factor for urology PDs, highlighting the importance of away rotations. LOR and PS continue to have a strong influence on interview invitations, but geographic signaling and geographic location of sub-Is do not. Having a Step 2 score at the time of application has become critical for many PDs. These findings will help guide future applicants in navigating the match.