Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Academic Ophthalmology 2022; 14(02): e153-e165
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1744272
Research Article

Exploring Potential Schedule-Related and Gender Biases in Ophthalmology Residency Interview Scores

Chih-Chiun J. Chang
1   Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
,
Omar Moussa
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
,
Royce W. S. Chen
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
,
Lora R. Dagi Glass
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
,
George A. Cioffi
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
,
Jeffrey M. Liebmann
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
,
Bryan J. Winn 
1   Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
2   Department of Ophthalmology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York
3   Ophthalmology Section, Surgical Service, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California
› Author Affiliations Funding/Support This research was supported, in part, by the UCSF Vision Core shared resource of the NIH/NEI P30 EY002162 and unrestricted departmental grants from Research to Prevent Blindness to the Department of Ophthalmology at Columbia University and UCSF.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Purpose Prior studies have revealed grading discrepancies in evaluation of personal statements and letters of recommendation based on candidate's race and gender. Fatigue and the end-of-day phenomenon can negatively impact task performance but have not been studied in the residency selection process. Our primary objective is to determine whether factors related to interview time and day as well as candidate's and interviewer's gender have a significant effect on residency interview scores.

Methods Seven years of ophthalmology residency candidate evaluation scores from 2013 to 2019 were collected at a single academic institution, standardized by interviewer into relative percentiles (0–100 point grading scale), and grouped into the following categories for comparisons: different interview days (Day 1 vs. Day 2), morning versus afternoon (AM vs. PM), interview session (Day 1 AM/PM vs. Day 2 AM/PM), before and after breaks (morning break, lunch break, and afternoon break), residency candidate's gender, and interviewer's gender.

Results Candidates in the morning sessions were found to have higher scores than afternoon sessions (52.75 vs. 49.28, p < 0.001). Interview scores in the early morning, late morning, and early afternoon were higher than late afternoon scores (54.47, 53.01, 52.15 vs. 46.74, p < 0.001). Across all interview years, there were no differences in scores received before and after morning breaks (51.71 vs. 52.83, p = 0.49), lunch breaks (53.01 vs. 52.15, p = 0.58), and afternoon breaks (50.35 vs. 48.30, p = 0.21). No differences were found in scores received by female versus male candidates (51.55 vs. 50.49, p = 0.21) or scores given by female versus male interviewers (51.31 vs. 50.84, p = 0.58).

Conclusion Afternoon residency candidate interview scores, especially late afternoon, were significantly lower than morning scores, suggesting the need to further study the effects of interviewer's fatigue in the residency interview process. The interview day, presence of break times, candidate's gender, and interviewer's gender had no significant effects on interview score.

Keywords

ophthalmology residency - residency interview - resident selection - interview time - interview day - interview score - interviewer's fatigue

Ethical Approval

The project was approved by the Columbia University Irving Medical Center Institutional Review Board (IRB #AAAT2246) on September 8, 2020, and was compliant with protection of individually identifiable information.


Disclaimers

None.


Meeting Presentation

Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology (AUPO) Annual Meeting, February 4–6, 2021, virtual.




Publication History

Received: 21 June 2021

Accepted: 10 November 2021

Article published online:
03 August 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Taylor CA, Weinstein L, Mayhew HE. The process of resident selection: a view from the residency director's desk. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85 (02) 299-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Fine PL, Hayward RA. Do the criteria of resident selection committees predict residents' performances?. Acad Med 1995; 70 (09) 834-838
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Green M, Jones P, Thomas Jr JX. Selection criteria for residency: results of a national program directors survey. Acad Med 2009; 84 (03) 362-367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Westerman ME, Boe C, Bole R. et al. Evaluation of medical school grading variability in the United States: are all honors the same?. Acad Med 2019; 94 (12) 1939-1945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lee AG, Golnik KC, Oetting TA. et al. Re-engineering the resident applicant selection process in ophthalmology: a literature review and recommendations for improvement. Surv Ophthalmol 2008; 53 (02) 164-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Davis JL, Platt LD, Sandhu M, Shapiro F. Evaluating factors in the selection of residents. Acad Med 1995; 70 (03) 176-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sabin J, Nosek BA, Greenwald A, Rivara FP. Physicians' implicit and explicit attitudes about race by MD race, ethnicity, and gender. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2009; 20 (03) 896-913
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Capers IV Q, Clinchot D, McDougle L, Greenwald AG. Implicit racial bias in medical school admissions. Acad Med 2017; 92 (03) 365-369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Osseo-Asare A, Balasuriya L, Huot SJ. et al. Minority resident physicians' views on the role of race/ethnicity in their training experiences in the workplace. JAMA Netw Open 2018; 1 (05) e182723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Smith CJ, Rodenhauser P, Markert RJ. Gender bias of Ohio physicians in the evaluation of the personal statements of residency applicants. Acad Med 1991; 66 (08) 479-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Filippou P, Mahajan S, Deal A. et al. The presence of gender bias in letters of recommendations written for urology residency applicants. Urology 2019; 134: 56-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lin F, Oh SK, Gordon LK, Pineles SL, Rosenberg JB, Tsui I. Gender-based differences in letters of recommendation written for ophthalmology residency applicants. BMC Med Educ 2019; 19 (01) 476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Turrentine FE, Dreisbach CN, St Ivany AR, Hanks JB, Schroen AT. Influence of gender on surgical residency applicants' recommendation letters. J Am Coll Surg 2019; 228 (04) 356-365.e3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Grimm LJ, Redmond RA, Campbell JC, Rosette AS. Gender and racial bias in radiology residency letters of recommendation. J Am Coll Radiol 2020; 17 (1 Pt A): 64-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rand VE, Hudes ES, Browner WS, Wachter RM, Avins AL. Effect of evaluator and resident gender on the American Board of Internal Medicine evaluation scores. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13 (10) 670-674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Oyler J, Thompson K, Arora VM, Krishnan JA, Woodruff J. Faculty characteristics affect interview scores during residency recruitment. Am J Med 2015; 128 (05) 545-550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Loeppky C, Babenko O, Ross S. Examining gender bias in the feedback shared with family medicine residents. Educ Prim Care 2017; 28 (06) 319-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Nallasamy S, Uhler T, Nallasamy N, Tapino PJ, Volpe NJ. Ophthalmology resident selection: current trends in selection criteria and improving the process. Ophthalmology 2010; 117 (05) 1041-1047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Wagoner NE, Suriano JR, Stoner JA. Factors used by program directors to select residents. J Med Educ 1986; 61 (01) 10-21
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Brothers TE, Wetherholt S. Importance of the faculty interview during the resident application process. J Surg Educ 2007; 64 (06) 378-385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Brustman LE, Williams FL, Carroll K, Lurie H, Ganz E, Langer O. The effect of blinded versus nonblinded interviews in the resident selection process. J Grad Med Educ 2010; 2 (03) 349-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hauge LS, Stroessner SJ, Chowdhry S, Wool NL. Association for Surgical Education. Evaluating resident candidates: does closed file review impact faculty ratings?. Am J Surg 2007; 193 (06) 761-765
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Maxfield CM, Thorpe MP, Desser TS. et al. Bias in radiology resident selection: do we discriminate against the obese and unattractive?. Acad Med 2019; 94 (11) 1774-1780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Corcimaru A, Morrell MC, Morrell DS. Do looks matter? The role of the Electronic Residency Application Service photograph in dermatology residency selection. Dermatol Online J 2018; 24 (04) 1-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Heidemann DL, Thompson E, Drake SM. Does timing of internal medicine residency interview affect likelihood of matching?. South Med J 2016; 109 (08) 466-470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Martin-Lee L, Park H, Overton DT. Does interview date affect match list position in the emergency medicine national residency matching program match?. Acad Emerg Med 2000; 7 (09) 1022-1026
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Avasarala S, Thompson E, Whitehouse S, Drake S. Assessing correlation of residency applicants' interview dates with likelihood of matching. South Med J 2018; 111 (02) 83-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Neitzschman HR, Neitzschman LH, Dowling A. Key component of resident selection: the semistructured conversation. Acad Radiol 2002; 9 (12) 1423-1429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Stephenson-Famy A, Houmard BS, Oberoi S, Manyak A, Chiang S, Kim S. Use of the interview in resident candidate selection: a review of the literature. J Grad Med Educ 2015; 7 (04) 539-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Willihnganz MA, Meyers LS. Effects of time of day on interview performance. Public Pers Manage 1993; 22 (04) 545-550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Petros TV, Beckwith BE, Anderson M. Individual differences in the effects of time of day and passage difficulty on prose memory in adults. Br J Psychol 1990; 81 (01) 63-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Monk TH, Leng VC. Time of day effects in simple repetitive tasks: Some possible mechanisms. Acta Psychol (Amst) 1982; 51 (03) 207-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lewandowska K, Wachowicz B, Marek T, Oginska H, Fafrowicz M. Would you say “yes” in the evening? Time-of-day effect on response bias in four types of working memory recognition tasks. Chronobiol Int 2018; 35 (01) 80-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Gobin CM, Banks JB, Fins AI, Tartar JL. Poor sleep quality is associated with a negative cognitive bias and decreased sustained attention. J Sleep Res 2015; 24 (05) 535-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Simonsohn U, Gino F. Daily horizons: evidence of narrow bracketing in judgment from 10 years of M.B.A. admissions interviews. Psychol Sci 2013; 24 (02) 219-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lee A, Iskander JM, Gupta N. et al. Queue position in the endoscopic schedule impacts effectiveness of colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106 (08) 1457-1465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Pasupathy D, Wood AM, Pell JP, Fleming M, Smith GC. Time of birth and risk of neonatal death at term: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2010; 341: c3498
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Wright MC, Phillips-Bute B, Mark JB. et al. Time of day effects on the incidence of anesthetic adverse events. Qual Saf Health Care 2006; 15 (04) 258-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Kelz RR, Tran TT, Hosokawa P. et al. Time-of-day effects on surgical outcomes in the private sector: a retrospective cohort study. J Am Coll Surg 2009; 209 (04) 434-445.e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Zhang X, Qu X, Xue H, Tao D, Li T. Effects of time of day and taxi route complexity on navigation errors: an experimental study. Accid Anal Prev 2019; 125: 14-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Lenné MG, Triggs TJ, Redman JR. Time of day variations in driving performance. Accid Anal Prev 1997; 29 (04) 431-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Danziger S, Levav J, Avnaim-Pesso L. Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011; 108 (17) 6889-6892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Weinshall-Margel K, Shapard J. Overlooked factors in the analysis of parole decisions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011; 108 (42) E833 , author reply E834
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Glockner A. The irrational hungry judge effect revisited: simulations reveal that the magnitude of the effect is overestimated. Judgm Decis Mak 2016; 11 (06) 601-610
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Carter EC, Kofler LM, Forster DE, McCullough ME. A series of meta-analytic tests of the depletion effect: self-control does not seem to rely on a limited resource. J Exp Psychol Gen 2015; 144 (04) 796-815
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Dang J. An updated meta-analysis of the ego depletion effect. Psychol Res 2018; 82 (04) 645-651
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Hagger MS, Chatzisarantis NLD, Alberts H. et al. A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspect Psychol Sci 2016; 11 (04) 546-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Friese M, Loschelder DD, Gieseler K, Frankenbach J, Inzlicht M. Is ego depletion real? An analysis of arguments. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2019; 23 (02) 107-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hern Jr HG, Alter HJ, Wills CP, Snoey ER, Simon BC. How prevalent are potentially illegal questions during residency interviews?. Acad Med 2013; 88 (08) 1116-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Lee JS, Ji YD, Kushner H, Kaban LB, Peacock ZS. Residency interview experiences in oral and maxillofacial surgery differ by gender and affect residency ranking. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019; 77 (11) 2179-2195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Bennett AA, Campion ED, Keeler KR, Keener SK. Videoconference fatigue? Exploring changes in fatigue after videoconference meetings during COVID-19. J Appl Psychol 2021; 106 (03) 330-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 McNamara D.S., Bailenson J.N.. Nonverbal Overload: A Theoretical Argument for the Causes of Zoom Fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior 2021; 2 (01) DOI: 10.1037/tmb0000030.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar