Cargando…

The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()

The application and interview process for gynecologic oncology fellowship is highly competitive, time-consuming and expensive for applicants. We conducted a survey of successfully matched gynecologic oncology fellowship applicants to assess problems associated with the interview process and identify...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gressel, Gregory M., Van Arsdale, Anne, Dioun, Shayan M., Goldberg, Gary L., Nevadunsky, Nicole S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5393158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28443321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2017.04.003
_version_ 1783229549601882112
author Gressel, Gregory M.
Van Arsdale, Anne
Dioun, Shayan M.
Goldberg, Gary L.
Nevadunsky, Nicole S.
author_facet Gressel, Gregory M.
Van Arsdale, Anne
Dioun, Shayan M.
Goldberg, Gary L.
Nevadunsky, Nicole S.
author_sort Gressel, Gregory M.
collection PubMed
description The application and interview process for gynecologic oncology fellowship is highly competitive, time-consuming and expensive for applicants. We conducted a survey of successfully matched gynecologic oncology fellowship applicants to assess problems associated with the interview process and identify areas for improvement. All Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) list-serve members who have participated in the match program for gynecologic oncology fellowship were asked to complete an online survey regarding the interview process. Linear regression modeling was used to examine association between year of match, number of programs applied to, cost incurred, and overall satisfaction. Two hundred and sixty-nine eligible participants reported applying to a mean of 20 programs [range 1–45] and were offered a mean of 14 interviews [range 1–43]. They spent an average of $6000 [$0–25,000], using personal savings (54%), credit cards (50%), family support (12%) or personal loans (3%). Seventy percent of respondents identified the match as fair, and 93% were satisfied. Interviewees spent a mean of 15 [0–45] days away from work and 37% reported difficulty arranging coverage. Linear regression showed an increase in number of programs applied to and cost per applicant over time (p < 0.001) between 1993 and 2016. Applicants who applied to all available programs spent more (p < 0.001) than those who applied to programs based on their location or quality. The current fellowship match was identified as fair and satisfying by most respondents despite being time consuming and expensive. Suggested alternative options included clustering interviews geographically or conducting preliminary interviews at the SGO Annual Meeting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5393158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53931582017-04-25 The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement() Gressel, Gregory M. Van Arsdale, Anne Dioun, Shayan M. Goldberg, Gary L. Nevadunsky, Nicole S. Gynecol Oncol Rep Survey Article The application and interview process for gynecologic oncology fellowship is highly competitive, time-consuming and expensive for applicants. We conducted a survey of successfully matched gynecologic oncology fellowship applicants to assess problems associated with the interview process and identify areas for improvement. All Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) list-serve members who have participated in the match program for gynecologic oncology fellowship were asked to complete an online survey regarding the interview process. Linear regression modeling was used to examine association between year of match, number of programs applied to, cost incurred, and overall satisfaction. Two hundred and sixty-nine eligible participants reported applying to a mean of 20 programs [range 1–45] and were offered a mean of 14 interviews [range 1–43]. They spent an average of $6000 [$0–25,000], using personal savings (54%), credit cards (50%), family support (12%) or personal loans (3%). Seventy percent of respondents identified the match as fair, and 93% were satisfied. Interviewees spent a mean of 15 [0–45] days away from work and 37% reported difficulty arranging coverage. Linear regression showed an increase in number of programs applied to and cost per applicant over time (p < 0.001) between 1993 and 2016. Applicants who applied to all available programs spent more (p < 0.001) than those who applied to programs based on their location or quality. The current fellowship match was identified as fair and satisfying by most respondents despite being time consuming and expensive. Suggested alternative options included clustering interviews geographically or conducting preliminary interviews at the SGO Annual Meeting. Elsevier 2017-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5393158/ /pubmed/28443321 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2017.04.003 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Survey Article
Gressel, Gregory M.
Van Arsdale, Anne
Dioun, Shayan M.
Goldberg, Gary L.
Nevadunsky, Nicole S.
The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title_full The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title_fullStr The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title_full_unstemmed The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title_short The gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: Challenges and potential areas for improvement()
title_sort gynecologic oncology fellowship interview process: challenges and potential areas for improvement()
topic Survey Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5393158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28443321
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2017.04.003
work_keys_str_mv AT gresselgregorym thegynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT vanarsdaleanne thegynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT diounshayanm thegynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT goldberggaryl thegynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT nevadunskynicoles thegynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT gresselgregorym gynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT vanarsdaleanne gynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT diounshayanm gynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT goldberggaryl gynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement
AT nevadunskynicoles gynecologiconcologyfellowshipinterviewprocesschallengesandpotentialareasforimprovement