Challenges Facing Program Directors in the Urology Match. Issue 6 (November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Weissbart, Steven J.; Stock, Jeffrey A.; Wein, Alan J.
• Is Part Of: Urology practice. Volume 3:Issue 6(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-11
• Subjects: internship and residency -- urology -- education -- medical -- graduate
• DOI: 10.1016/j.urpr.2015.10.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2352-0779

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: : We investigate urology residency program directors' perspectives on the current residency matching system. Methods: : A survey was emailed to Society of Urology Chairpersons and Program Directors members. The survey queried respondents' perspectives on the current residency matching system, with special attention to the recent surge in application volume and the usefulness of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation. Participants were also asked about their perspective on a possible application limit for students applying to urology residencies. Results: : A total of 70 members of the Society of Urology Chairpersons and Program Directors responded to the survey. The majority of respondents received more than 200 applications for their program's residency positions (77.1%) and used a Step 1 cutoff score to screen applications (81.4%). Approximately half of the respondents (51.4%) were in favor of imposing a limit to the number of applications that applicants are permitted to submit. The Medical Student Performance Evaluation was considered important or very important by 20% and 94.3% favored including an applicant's class rank in the evaluation. An applicant's projected likelihood of attending a respondent's program was considered by 76%, and 60% had previously not offered superior candidates interviews because they estimated the applicants were not truly interested in the program. Conclusions: : Urology program directors exclude a large number of applications based on board scores and applicants' perceived levels of interest in the programs. A significant number of program directors favored an application limit as well as including class rank in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation.