In the Mind of the Ophthalmology Residency Applicant: Deciding Where to Apply, Interview, and Rank

Abstract

Objective This article characterizes the resources used by ophthalmology residency applicants when deciding where to apply, interview, and rank.

Design Cross-sectional, online survey.

Participants All applicants to the University of California–San Francisco ophthalmology residency program during the 2019 to 2020 and 2020 to 2021 application cycles.

Methods A secure, anonymous, 19-item post-match questionnaire was distributed to participants inquiring about demographic information, match outcomes, and resources used to learn and make decisions about residency programs. Results were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods.

Main Outcome Measures Qualitative ranking of resources used to decide where to apply, interview, and rank.

Results One hundred thirty-six of 870 solicited applicants responded to the questionnaire, for a response rate of 15.6%. Digital platforms were ranked as more important resources than people (i.e., faculty, career advisors, residents, and program directors) when applicants were deciding where to apply and interview. Digital platforms became far less important when applicants were formulating their rank lists, at which time the program's academic reputation, perceived happiness of residents and faculty, interview experience, and geographic location were more important. When learning about residency programs, 100% of respondents engaged with program Web sites, and the majority engaged with program emails (n=88 [85.4%]), Doximity (n=82 [79.6%]), Reddit (n=64 [62.1%]), Instagram (n=59 [57.3%]), the FREIDA residency program database (n=55 [53.4%]), and YouTube (n=53 [51.5%]). All 13 digital platforms included in the survey were utilized by at least 25% of respondents, largely passively (i.e., reading rather than producing content). Respondents indicated that the most important topics to include on program Web sites were the number of residents accepted per year, current resident profiles, and resident alumni job/fellowship placement.

Conclusion Applicants engage heavily with digital media in deciding where to apply and interview but rely heavily on their personal experiences with the program in deciding where to rank. Ophthalmology programs may facilitate recruitment of applicants by optimizing their digital media platforms.

Keywords

ophthalmology - applicant - residency - medical student - digital media - decision-making - information gathering

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

The study was approved by the UCSF Institutional Review Board (IRB) as IRB #20–30869 (Reference #281581) and qualifies as Exempt under the Revised Common Rule (January 2018) category 2: research that only includes interactions involving educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, aptitude, achievement), survey procedures, interview procedures, or observation of public behavior (including visual or auditory recording).

Disclosures

The authors have no funding, sponsorship, or conflicts of interest to disclose.

Publication History

Received: 01 December 2021

Accepted: 20 July 2022

Article published online:
08 September 2022

• References

• 1 Venincasa MJ, Cai LZ, Gedde SJ, Uhler T, Sridhar J. Current applicant perceptions of the ophthalmology residency match. JAMA Ophthalmol 2020; 138 (05) 460-466
• 2 Explaining COVID's Impact on the 2020–2021 Virtual Recruitment Season and NRMP Match Outcomes – Thalamus. Accessed October 16, 2021, at: https://thalamusgme.com/explaining-covids-impact-on-the-2020-2021-medical-residency-recruitment-season-and-nrmp-match-outcomes/
• 3 Nilsen K, Callaway P, Phillips JP, Walling A. How much do family medicine residency programs spend on resident recruitment? A CERA study. Fam Med 2019; 51 (05) 405-412
• 4 Yousuf SJ, Kwagyan J, Jones LS. Applicants' choice of an ophthalmology residency program. Ophthalmology 2013; 120 (02) 423-427
• 5 Embi PJ, Desai S, Cooney TG. Use and utility of Web-based residency program information: a survey of residency applicants. J Med Internet Res 2003; 5 (03) e22
• 6 Venincasa MJ, Steren B, Young BK. et al. Ophthalmology residency match in the Covid-19 era: applicant and program director perceptions of the 2020-2021 application cycle. Semin Ophthalmol 2022; 37 (01) 36-41
• 7 Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology. , SF Match. Ophthalmology Residency Match Summary Report 2021; 2021
• 8 Siatkowski RM, Mian SI, Culican SM. et al; Association of University Professors of Ophthalmology. Probability of success in the ophthalmology residency match: three-year outcomes analysis of San Francisco Matching Program Data. J Acad Ophthalmol 2018; 10 (01) e150-e157
• 9 Patel SJ, Abdullah MS, Yeh PC, Abdullah Z, Jayaram P. Content evaluation of physical medicine and rehabilitation residency websites. PM R 2020; 12 (10) 1003-1008
• 10 Luk L, Maher MD, Desperito E, Weintraub JL, Amin S, Ayyala RS. Evaluating factors and resources affecting ranking of diagnostic radiology residency programs by medical students in 2016-2017. Acad Radiol 2018; 25 (10) 1344-1352
• 11 Patel BG, Gallo K, Cherullo EE, Chow AK. Content analysis of ACGME accredited urology residency program webpages. Urology 2020; 138: 11-15
• 12 Goerlitz-Jessen M, Behunin N, Montijo M, Wilkinson M. Recruiting the digital-age applicant: the impact of ophthalmology residency program web presence on residency recruitment. J Acad Ophthalmol Published online 2018. DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1636513.
• 13 Huntington WP, Haines N, Patt JC. What factors influence applicants' rankings of orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the National Resident Matching Program?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (09) 2859-2866
• 14 Nuthalapaty FS, Jackson JR, Owen J. The influence of quality-of-life, academic, and workplace factors on residency program selection. Acad Med 2004; 79 (05) 417-425
• 15 Flynn TC, Gerrity MS, Berkowitz LR. What do applicants look for when selecting internal medicine residency programs? A comparison of rating scale and open-ended responses. J Gen Intern Med 1993; 8 (05) 249-254