Comparison of web-based and face-to-face interviews for application to an anesthesiology training program: a pilot study

Marissa G. Vadi, Mathew R. Malkin, John Lenart, Gary R. Stier, Jason W. Gatling, Richard L. Applegate

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study compared admission rates to a United States anesthesiology residency program for applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews during the admissions process. We also explored factors driving applicants to select each interview type.

METHODS: The 211 applicants invited to interview for admission to our anesthesiology residency program during the 2014-2015 application cycle were participants in this pilot observational study. Of these, 141 applicants selected face-to-face interviews, 53 applicants selected web-based interviews, and 17 applicants declined to interview. Data regarding applicants' reasons for selecting a particular interview type were gathered using an anonymous online survey after interview completion. Residency program admission rates and survey answers were compared between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews.

RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven (75.1%) applicants completed face-to-face and 42 (24.9%) completed web-based interviews. The admission rate to our residency program was not significantly different between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews. One hundred eleven applicants completed post-interview surveys. The most common reasons for selecting web-based interviews were conflict of interview dates between programs, travel concerns, or financial limitations. Applicants selected face-to-face interviews due to a desire to interact with current residents, or geographic proximity to the residency program.

CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that completion of web-based interviews is a viable alternative to completion of face-to-face interviews, and that choice of interview type does not affect the rate of applicant admission to the residency program. Web-based interviews may be of particular interest to applicants applying to a large number of programs, or with financial limitations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)102-108
Number of pages7
JournalInternational journal of medical education
Volume7
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 3 2016

Fingerprint

Anesthesiology
Interviews
Education
Internship and Residency

Keywords

  • graduate medical education
  • interviews
  • recuritment
  • residency
  • videoconferencing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

@article{76f17d04ab4f4d6bb0bb6b74c9be06f7,
title = "Comparison of web-based and face-to-face interviews for application to an anesthesiology training program: a pilot study",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: This study compared admission rates to a United States anesthesiology residency program for applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews during the admissions process. We also explored factors driving applicants to select each interview type.METHODS: The 211 applicants invited to interview for admission to our anesthesiology residency program during the 2014-2015 application cycle were participants in this pilot observational study. Of these, 141 applicants selected face-to-face interviews, 53 applicants selected web-based interviews, and 17 applicants declined to interview. Data regarding applicants' reasons for selecting a particular interview type were gathered using an anonymous online survey after interview completion. Residency program admission rates and survey answers were compared between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews.RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven (75.1{\%}) applicants completed face-to-face and 42 (24.9{\%}) completed web-based interviews. The admission rate to our residency program was not significantly different between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews. One hundred eleven applicants completed post-interview surveys. The most common reasons for selecting web-based interviews were conflict of interview dates between programs, travel concerns, or financial limitations. Applicants selected face-to-face interviews due to a desire to interact with current residents, or geographic proximity to the residency program.CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that completion of web-based interviews is a viable alternative to completion of face-to-face interviews, and that choice of interview type does not affect the rate of applicant admission to the residency program. Web-based interviews may be of particular interest to applicants applying to a large number of programs, or with financial limitations.",
keywords = "graduate medical education, interviews, recuritment, residency, videoconferencing",
author = "Vadi, {Marissa G.} and Malkin, {Mathew R.} and John Lenart and Stier, {Gary R.} and Gatling, {Jason W.} and Applegate, {Richard L.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "3",
doi = "10.5116/ijme.56e5.491a",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "102--108",
journal = "International journal of medical education",
issn = "2042-6372",
publisher = "International journal of medical education",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of web-based and face-to-face interviews for application to an anesthesiology training program

T2 - a pilot study

AU - Vadi, Marissa G.

AU - Malkin, Mathew R.

AU - Lenart, John

AU - Stier, Gary R.

AU - Gatling, Jason W.

AU - Applegate, Richard L.

PY - 2016/4/3

Y1 - 2016/4/3

N2 - OBJECTIVE: This study compared admission rates to a United States anesthesiology residency program for applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews during the admissions process. We also explored factors driving applicants to select each interview type.METHODS: The 211 applicants invited to interview for admission to our anesthesiology residency program during the 2014-2015 application cycle were participants in this pilot observational study. Of these, 141 applicants selected face-to-face interviews, 53 applicants selected web-based interviews, and 17 applicants declined to interview. Data regarding applicants' reasons for selecting a particular interview type were gathered using an anonymous online survey after interview completion. Residency program admission rates and survey answers were compared between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews.RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven (75.1%) applicants completed face-to-face and 42 (24.9%) completed web-based interviews. The admission rate to our residency program was not significantly different between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews. One hundred eleven applicants completed post-interview surveys. The most common reasons for selecting web-based interviews were conflict of interview dates between programs, travel concerns, or financial limitations. Applicants selected face-to-face interviews due to a desire to interact with current residents, or geographic proximity to the residency program.CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that completion of web-based interviews is a viable alternative to completion of face-to-face interviews, and that choice of interview type does not affect the rate of applicant admission to the residency program. Web-based interviews may be of particular interest to applicants applying to a large number of programs, or with financial limitations.

AB - OBJECTIVE: This study compared admission rates to a United States anesthesiology residency program for applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews during the admissions process. We also explored factors driving applicants to select each interview type.METHODS: The 211 applicants invited to interview for admission to our anesthesiology residency program during the 2014-2015 application cycle were participants in this pilot observational study. Of these, 141 applicants selected face-to-face interviews, 53 applicants selected web-based interviews, and 17 applicants declined to interview. Data regarding applicants' reasons for selecting a particular interview type were gathered using an anonymous online survey after interview completion. Residency program admission rates and survey answers were compared between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews.RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven (75.1%) applicants completed face-to-face and 42 (24.9%) completed web-based interviews. The admission rate to our residency program was not significantly different between applicants completing face-to-face versus web-based interviews. One hundred eleven applicants completed post-interview surveys. The most common reasons for selecting web-based interviews were conflict of interview dates between programs, travel concerns, or financial limitations. Applicants selected face-to-face interviews due to a desire to interact with current residents, or geographic proximity to the residency program.CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that completion of web-based interviews is a viable alternative to completion of face-to-face interviews, and that choice of interview type does not affect the rate of applicant admission to the residency program. Web-based interviews may be of particular interest to applicants applying to a large number of programs, or with financial limitations.

KW - graduate medical education

KW - interviews

KW - recuritment

KW - residency

KW - videoconferencing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84997631806&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84997631806&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5116/ijme.56e5.491a

DO - 10.5116/ijme.56e5.491a

M3 - Article

C2 - 27039029

AN - SCOPUS:84997631806

VL - 7

SP - 102

EP - 108

JO - International journal of medical education

JF - International journal of medical education

SN - 2042-6372

ER -