Are virtual residency interviews here to stay?

[retroflex]

You are absolutely correct, as I have previously mention...In-person interviews offer so much more of an opportunity for someone to shine than behind a computer screen, where some feel very awkward. The argument being made is it is now in the interest of equity to keep the interviews virtual, however, I say it will do more harm to the same set of people it is trying to help. Sure, you may save money and travel time, but think what it would do for the person that may not have the big name school behind them or big test scores....they were able to get an interview and had it been in-person, may have really connected with those interviewing and as we all know, those connections can sometimes trump all what's on paper.

Again, imho, keeping them all virtual is a mistake.

True, it seems that it’s a misguided attempt to save students money in the short-term. I agree, it will hurt candidates from “lower-tier” schools or students with lower step scores for the reasons you mention, but also because students with better tangibles (school name, step score) will hoard more interviews at programs they would have turned down interviews at due to travel costs.

As far as I can tell, the ACGME is merely recommending going all-virtual. They say to do all virtual or all in-person, and are discouraging a hybrid of both. I wonder how many programs follow this guidance, and if there’s a difference by specialty.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

You are absolutely correct, as I have previously mentioned...In-person interviews offer so much more of an opportunity for someone to shine than behind a computer screen, where some feel very awkward. The argument being made is it is now in the interest of equity to keep the interviews virtual, however, I say it will do more harm to the same set of people it is trying to help. Sure, you may save money and travel time, but think what it would do for the person that may not have the big name school behind them or big test scores....they were able to get an interview and had it been in-person, may have really connected with those interviewing and as we all know, those connections can sometimes trump all what's on paper.

Again, imho, keeping them all virtual is a mistake.

Agree! I have never felt comfortable behind a web-ex computer screen. I need to be face to face to get a sense of the environment and "read the room". It's just easier to have a natural conversation in my opinion and easier to build rapport. I think keeping virtual interviews is a huge mistake. And in regards to the money, no one wants to fork out thousands of dollars to fly across the country and interview, but let's be realistic... That is what loans are for. As medical students we all have money THROWN at us so I don't want to hear the crap about people not having money. There are always loans out there available to you if you just say you go to medical school. This is coming from someone who pays tuition and living expenses all with loans, no help.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

Whether virtual is a good or bad idea is unclear. The answer is going to vary by field, program, and applicant.

Some applicants might interview "better" in person. But some might be better virtually. Which is more likely is unknown.

Not being able to see a program could be a problem. It would be interesting to see what percentage of residents who matched after a virtual recruitment cycle are happy with their program / area, and whether they think an in person interview would have helped. But without a control (pre-virtual) to compare it with, it's hard to know what to make of any results.

For some people, the cost of interview travel is a huge burden. Those people definitely lose out in an in person system. I guess "more loans" is always an option, but I expect can be very problematic for some.

I personally don't see an issue with hybrid. Programs would need to commit to weighing both in person and virtual candidates equally -- although it might be difficult or impossible to avoid bias. But if candidates believe that in person interviews will get them ranked higher the whole system will collapse -- even if it's not true. But at least then applicants could choose what fit them best.

Despite all sorts of worries about interview hoarding, there wasn't much evidence for such in the last two match cycles. The unfilled rate was about the same. Applicants went on more interviews but programs also increased slots, seems to have cancelled each other out. Highly competitive fields remained close to 100% filled in the match -- if there was any hoarding involved that had any effect, "fixing" it would simply switch some people who matched and didn't match -- and whether that's a win or not depends upon whom you are. I also haven't seen any evidence that match rates from "low ranked" schools were any worse -- although not unsurprisingly those schools would be unlikely to advertise such.

 

[MDMechEngr]

it seemed more students from my school matched to our home program, which is awesome b/c it is an upper tier program for almost all specialties.

 

[DarkBluMage]

I hope not. Virtual interviews are awful. The vibe of them is entirely different from an in person interview. It requires more energy to not come off as bland over video as well which is taxing. I also don’t like the idea of not being able to observe the environment of where I’m interviewing.