Cargando…

The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process

The residency application process is expensive, costing an average of $2149 in application fees per applicant during the 2020–2021 cycle. Additionally, the number of applications per applicant continues to rise annually across all specialties. This considerable cost creates a financial barrier for s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jackson, Kianna R., Makhoul, Alan T., Janis, Jeffrey E., Drolet, Brian C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35186632
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004078
_version_ 1784652466724274176
author Jackson, Kianna R.
Makhoul, Alan T.
Janis, Jeffrey E.
Drolet, Brian C.
author_facet Jackson, Kianna R.
Makhoul, Alan T.
Janis, Jeffrey E.
Drolet, Brian C.
author_sort Jackson, Kianna R.
collection PubMed
description The residency application process is expensive, costing an average of $2149 in application fees per applicant during the 2020–2021 cycle. Additionally, the number of applications per applicant continues to rise annually across all specialties. This considerable cost creates a financial barrier for students, particularly those from first-generation and underrepresented backgrounds. Moreover, the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application generates a lengthy, diluted output that hinders a holistic review. We developed the Plastic Surgery Common Application (PSCA), a focused, specialty-specific application external to ERAS with the goal of lessening the financial barrier for students and improving reviewer satisfaction. The PSCA was revised over a 5-month period after prepiloting with stakeholders. All integrated plastic surgery programs were invited to participate. Of the 86 plastic surgery programs, 20 agreed to participate in the pilot, accepting both ERAS and PSCA for direct comparison. A total of 181 completed applications were received through the PSCA. In a postparticipation survey, most applicants and reviewers felt that the PSCA offered a reasonable alternative to ERAS, despite minor technical difficulties. The PSCA pilot demonstrates that there is a reasonable alternative to applying to residency through ERAS and offers a template for developing a system that is not cost-prohibitive to applicants. The PSCA also demonstrates the benefit of a specialty-specific, customizable application for reviewer efficiency and satisfaction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8849438
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88494382022-02-18 The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process Jackson, Kianna R. Makhoul, Alan T. Janis, Jeffrey E. Drolet, Brian C. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Technology The residency application process is expensive, costing an average of $2149 in application fees per applicant during the 2020–2021 cycle. Additionally, the number of applications per applicant continues to rise annually across all specialties. This considerable cost creates a financial barrier for students, particularly those from first-generation and underrepresented backgrounds. Moreover, the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) application generates a lengthy, diluted output that hinders a holistic review. We developed the Plastic Surgery Common Application (PSCA), a focused, specialty-specific application external to ERAS with the goal of lessening the financial barrier for students and improving reviewer satisfaction. The PSCA was revised over a 5-month period after prepiloting with stakeholders. All integrated plastic surgery programs were invited to participate. Of the 86 plastic surgery programs, 20 agreed to participate in the pilot, accepting both ERAS and PSCA for direct comparison. A total of 181 completed applications were received through the PSCA. In a postparticipation survey, most applicants and reviewers felt that the PSCA offered a reasonable alternative to ERAS, despite minor technical difficulties. The PSCA pilot demonstrates that there is a reasonable alternative to applying to residency through ERAS and offers a template for developing a system that is not cost-prohibitive to applicants. The PSCA also demonstrates the benefit of a specialty-specific, customizable application for reviewer efficiency and satisfaction. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-01-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8849438/ /pubmed/35186632 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004078 Text en Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Technology
Jackson, Kianna R.
Makhoul, Alan T.
Janis, Jeffrey E.
Drolet, Brian C.
The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title_full The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title_fullStr The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title_full_unstemmed The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title_short The Plastic Surgery Common Application: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Inequity in the Application Process
title_sort plastic surgery common application: improving efficiency and reducing inequity in the application process
topic Technology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35186632
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004078
work_keys_str_mv AT jacksonkiannar theplasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT makhoulalant theplasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT janisjeffreye theplasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT droletbrianc theplasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT jacksonkiannar plasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT makhoulalant plasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT janisjeffreye plasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess
AT droletbrianc plasticsurgerycommonapplicationimprovingefficiencyandreducinginequityintheapplicationprocess