United States Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors' Description of the Interview Selection Process

Purpose: To describe the methods ophthalmology residency programs use to determine which applicants receive an interview invitation. Design: Anonymous online survey Method: A validated questionnaire was distributed to all ophthalmology residency program directors through the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology regarding their process to screen residency applications for the 2020 – 2021 application cycle. Question items consisted of a combination of multiple-choice (20), single-answer response (7), Likert scale (2), and free-response (1). Results: The response rate was 40% (46/116). The average number of applications received per program was 486.5 ± 98.1. Most programs (78%) have multiple independent reviewers for each application (median number of reviewers = 3). A single faculty member reviews an average of 83.5 applications. Reviewers in 43.5% of programs utilize a standardized rubric. Following an initial screening, the program director most frequently makes the final decision (55.5%). At least 20% of programs exclude international medical graduates and D.O applicants. Most programs (83%) always grant interviews to students at their home institution. Conclusion: There is wide variability in the interview selection practices among ophthalmology residency programs. Given the large number of applications that residency programs must review, exploring best practices for the process of interview selection may be beneficial for program directors.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Academic Ophthalmology
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.62199/2475-4757.1003
Primary Topic
Diversity and Career in Medicine
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

United States Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors' Description of the Interview Selection Process

Mya Abousy, Conran Joseph, Alex Pham, Michael J. Fliotsos et al.
Journal of Academic Ophthalmology
Diversity and Career in Medicine
article

United States Ophthalmology Residency Program Directors' Description of the Interview Selection Process

Mya Abousy, Conran Joseph, Alex Pham, Michael J. Fliotsos, Ximin Li, Fasika A. Woreta, Divya S. Srikumaran
article en

Abstract

Purpose: To describe the methods ophthalmology residency programs use to determine which applicants receive an interview invitation. Design: Anonymous online survey Method: A validated questionnaire was distributed to all ophthalmology residency program directors through the Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology regarding their process to screen residency applications for the 2020 – 2021 application cycle. Question items consisted of a combination of multiple-choice (20), single-answer response (7), Likert scale (2), and free-response (1). Results: The response rate was 40% (46/116). The average number of applications received per program was 486.5 ± 98.1. Most programs (78%) have multiple independent reviewers for each application (median number of reviewers = 3). A single faculty member reviews an average of 83.5 applications. Reviewers in 43.5% of programs utilize a standardized rubric. Following an initial screening, the program director most frequently makes the final decision (55.5%). At least 20% of programs exclude international medical graduates and D.O applicants. Most programs (83%) always grant interviews to students at their home institution. Conclusion: There is wide variability in the interview selection practices among ophthalmology residency programs. Given the large number of applications that residency programs must review, exploring best practices for the process of interview selection may be beneficial for program directors.

Journal of Academic OphthalmologyVol. 16(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Diversity and Career in Medicine
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.