80% of program directors support virtual radiology residency interviews, but the future is still up for debate
While respondents agree that the current virtual interview process is suitable, they admit "interview hoarding" is a problematic ramification.
Although 80% of program directors and 76% of applicants describe virtual radiology residency interview processes as “excellent,” survey results published in Academic Radiology reveal mixed feelings on whether it is the way of the future.
COVID-19 forced the 2020-2021 interview season to pivot toward virtual exchanges rather than in-person meetings. And the recent news that 2021-2022 will again be virtual has some questioning whether this process should become permanent.
To better understand the viewpoints of those who have experienced this firsthand, a survey was deployed to radiology residency program directors (PD) and applicants.
The Radiology Residency Education Research Alliance, which comprises thirty-three different residency programs, distributed the surveys. The goal was to evaluate demographics, experiences with technology and mindsets about the current virtual processes and prospective changes.
When describing the virtual interview season, program directors and applicants both gave good marks, with 80% of PDs and 74% of applicants describing it as “excellent” or “very good.”
Similarly, 60% of PDs and 80% of applicants believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Both groups noted the virtual process promoted equity and wellness among applicants, with many pointing to the economic benefits of eliminating travel requirements.
However, there were some drawbacks cited in the survey results. Interview slots increased by 15%, leading to “over-application” and “interview hoarding.” The latter decreased the time available for applicants, leading to concerns they may not get a firm grasp of the program’s culture or accurately portray themselves.
Interestingly, although the majority of respondents had positive remarks on the process, when asked about future operations PDs were split on whether to return to in-person, with 40% in favor and 36% opposed.
The authors did have a possible explanation for this.
“The PDs may have viewed the benefits of the virtual season outweighing the drawbacks in terms of the collective interest; whereas the split preference for returning to in-person interviewing may represent a self-interest,” Shamus K. Moran, MD with the Department of Radiology at the University of Washington School of Medicine, and co-authors wrote.
Overall, the results show that the current processes are suitable to those involved, but preferred future methods are still up for debate.
For full survey results visit Academic Radiology.
In addition to her background in journalism, Hannah also has patient-facing experience in clinical settings, having spent more than 12 years working as a registered rad tech. She joined Innovate Healthcare in 2021 and has since put her unique expertise to use in her editorial role with Health Imaging.