The medical specialty of faculty interviewers does not influence scores in the internal medicine residency interview

BACKGROUND: In response to the growing number of applicants, internal medicine (IM) residency programs have needed to expand their faculty interviewer pool. Medicine specialists (MS) have increasingly been asked to serve as faculty interviewers (FI) in addition to general internal medicine (GIM) physicians. OBJECTIVE: To assess if MS rate IM applicants differently than GIM physicians. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of our institution’s IM residency interview evaluation forms for the 2017–18 application season. The FI assigned an interview score for each applicant ranging from 1 to 5 in 0.5-point increments, with 1 defined as “absolutely top candidate” and 5 as “not suitable.” We then compared characteristics of the FI based on mean interview score given using trend tests and linear regression. RESULTS: There were a total of 634 interviews of 274 applicants conducted by 72 FI over the 2017–18 recruitment period. 43 (59.7%) of the FI practiced GIM and 29 (40.3%) practiced an MS. The mean interview score given by an FI was 2.0 (SD 0.4). Trend test analyses showed no association between an interviewer’s medicine specialty status (p=0.09) and the mean interview score given. On linear regression, there was no significant difference in interview scores given by an FI who practiced GIM vs those who practiced an MS (−0.13 change, p=0.168). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any significant difference in the interview scores given to IM applicants by MS compared with GIM physicians. This finding supports the inclusion of MS in the IM residency selection process.