Will the next cycle return to in person interviews?

[MyOdyssey]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Does anyone have any inkling as to whether the next cycle will return to in person interviews?

I suspect not given that the Covid vaccines have been shown to be markedly reduced in effectiveness after a few months per Science:

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[shotgunlagoon]

Considering how the pandemic has progressed so far, I'm inclined to say no. At most, I think maybe a few schools will decide to do in-person again, while the majority continue with virtual interviews.

 

[KnightDoc]

It's way too soon to tell. Things really are getting back to normal, with leisure air travel returning to pre-pandemic levels. Most importantly, schools have returned to in person instruction. That statement about vaccines losing effectiveness after a few months is a red herring because there is a thing called a booster that mitigates that. 🙂

The big question is going to be whether schools place their interest in seeing candidates face to face, and the ability to "sell" in person, above the HUGE cost and convenience benefit to candidates of not having to take time off from school and work, or travel all over the country. If interviews remain virtual after this cycle, it's going to be a permanent change unrelated to COVID and totally related to the availability of the technology and the increase in access for applicants.

It simply remains to be seen. It's a GREAT question, but I guarantee you, at this point in the 2021-22 cycle, no one has even begun to give it any thought for 2022-23. Based on what happened last year, there won't be an answer until late next spring or early next summer, and the answer will have nothing to do with the half life of the vaccine.

 

[Goro]

Does anyone have any inkling as to whether the next cycle will return to in person interviews?

I suspect not given that the Covid vaccines have been shown to be markedly reduced in effectiveness after a few months per Science:

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

We barely know what we're going to do for the Spring semester, much less what's going to happen a year from now.

IF COVID recedes, then it's likely. But if a new viral mutation drives another surge, all bets are off.

US veterans are not exactly the cohort to be looking at to assess vaccine effectiveness, especially those > the age of 65. We've seen massive declines in COVID morbidity and mortality when the vaccines were introduced, and the delta surge was affecting the unvaxxed population in the US; and even that surge is now declining

 

[MyOdyssey]

It's way too soon to tell. Things really are getting back to normal, with leisure air travel returning to pre-pandemic levels. Most importantly, schools have returned to in person instruction. That statement about vaccines losing effectiveness after a few months is a red herring because there is a thing called a booster that mitigates that. 🙂

The big question is going to be whether schools place their interest in seeing candidates face to face, and the ability to "sell" in person, above the HUGE cost and convenience benefit to candidates of not having to take time off from school and work, or travel all over the country. If interviews remain virtual after this cycle, it's going to be a permanent change unrelated to COVID and totally related to the availability of the technology and the increase in access for applicants.

It simply remains to be seen. It's a GREAT question, but I guarantee you, at this point in the 2021-22 cycle, no one has even begun to give it any thought for 2022-23. Based on what happened last year, there won't be answer until late next spring or early next summer, and the answer will have nothing to do with the half life of the vaccine.

Are people availing themselves of the booster expeditiously and in sufficient numbers? That remains to be seen.

And what’s the half life of the booster? And to what extent will people’s attention spans endure in the face of the need for more boosters?

Perhaps I’m being influenced by knowing fully vaccinated people who came down with pretty bad cases of Covid.

 

[Proudfather94]

Honestly I think virtual interviews should be here to stay. Virtual interviews give people that don't have the money to travel all over the country the greatest chance to get into school. I wonder how many applicants in the past could only apply to medical schools within driving distance and as a result never got in due to low school count. I consider virtual interviews a welcome step in helping to end financial inequality between applicants.

 

[deleted965595]

Honestly I think virtual interviews should be here to stay. Virtual interviews give people that don't have the money to travel all over the country the greatest chance to get into school. I wonder how many applicants in the past could only apply to medical schools within driving distance and as a result never got in due to low school count. I consider virtual interviews a welcome step in helping to end financial inequality between applicants.

Hear! Hear!

 

[KnightDoc]

Are people availing themselves of the booster expeditiously and in sufficient numbers? That remains to be seen.

And what’s the half life of the booster? And to what extent will people’s attention spans endure in the face of the need for more boosters?

Perhaps I’m being influenced by knowing fully vaccinated people who came down with pretty bad cases of Covid.

Yes, everything remains to be seen. Regardless of whether the pandemic is going to disappear or morph into an endemic, however, things ARE returning to normal. People would freak out if anyone suggested med school become virtual because of this.

You see @Goro's gut reaction. He's only one person, so no way to know if he is representative, but he might be. Again, I just don't think the way to look at this is to question whether things will be under control over two years into it. They very likely will be, regardless of variants, attention spans, etc. They are pretty much under control right now, and plenty of people will be traveling to go see grandma during the upcoming holidays, so they can just as easily travel to med school interviews, if that's what adcoms want.

The issue will be whether or not schools embrace the technology that worked reasonably well during the emergency, in order to increase access and make things easier and a lot less expensive for people like you, or whether they will insist on going back to the way the things were because that works better for them. That answer is not going to be driven by booster fatigue or the fact that people will continue to get sick, because that will happen anyway, and vaccine mandates and masking will make that around as likely to happen traveling to and from an interview as traveling to and from whatever activity you would be engaged in if you weren't physically interviewing.

Question -- if schools gave you a choice, which might very well end up happening, would you stay home to save the money and eliminate whatever risks you fear might be lurking, and possibly cede an advantage to those appearing in person, even if the schools insist no such advantage would exist?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

It is going to come back in the winter in a big way. I can’t believe more people aren’t talking about seasonality.

Also small sample size, but 2 schools I interviewed at said that they were likely here to stay at those schools

 

[KnightDoc]

It is going to come back in the winter in a big way. I can’t believe more people aren’t talking about seasonality.

They're not talking about it due to vaccine penetration and upcoming mandates, as well as the natural immunity for many of the 46 million already infected. Pandemics burn themselves out, even without vaccines. This started in China at the end of 2019. It's not going to come back in a big way in North America this winter. The Spanish Flu lasted around 2 years with no vaccines.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Honestly I think virtual interviews should be here to stay. Virtual interviews give people that don't have the money to travel all over the country the greatest chance to get into school. I wonder how many applicants in the past could only apply to medical schools within driving distance and as a result never got in due to low school count. I consider virtual interviews a welcome step in helping to end financial inequality between applicants.

Didn’t some medical schools reimburse for interview related travel costs pre-pandemic?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Didn’t some medical schools reimburse for interview related travel costs pre-pandemic?

From my experience it was few who were willing to do this.

Obviously I understand the difference, but for on-site job interviews they will almost always pay for flight, hotel, and meal costs

 

[LizzyM]

We may be looking at Covid-19 becoming endemic with flares each winter as we spend more time indoors.

II do think that it has been easier to get interviewers with the virtual interviews and, of course, it is easier to get superstar applicants to come to interviews when it doesn't cost them a bundle to interview at six or eight schools. It is also possible that students with fewer economic resources are benefited by virtual interviews and schools may see this as an equity issue for students of modest means that costs the school very little (less than the in person interviews cost them).

@MyOdyssey I've not heard of schools paying interview costs although some schools defray the expense of second look. Some PhD programs cover the cost of interviews or at least the cost of lodging and then provide meals.

 

[KnightDoc]

From my experience it was few who were willing to do this.

Obviously I understand the difference, but for on-site job interviews they will almost always pay for flight, hotel, and meal costs

Yeah, this isn't a job interview. Rest assured, if they were paying to bring us in, they'd have gone virtual the day after Zoom was invented!

@MyOdyssey -- the answer to your question is a big fat no. A very few schools would provide assistance to low-SES candidates to support recruiting efforts there, but the availability of that kind of money was extremely limited. Nowhere near as widespread as FAP, and definitely not based on how spectacular anyone might look on paper. Much more common was people turning down IIs due to finances, especially after they received an A. I even heard of people turning down T10 IIs due to money.

 

[Dral]

Honestly I think virtual interviews should be here to stay. Virtual interviews give people that don't have the money to travel all over the country the greatest chance to get into school. I wonder how many applicants in the past could only apply to medical schools within driving distance and as a result never got in due to low school count. I consider virtual interviews a welcome step in helping to end financial inequality between applicants.

Also consider that other things are at work here. Virtual interviews offer a greater opportunity to hoard interviews.

Back when I interviewed for med school, I had an interview for U of C. I had an A at that point and instead of spending the money to fly to Chicago, I canceled the interview for someone else to be given the spot. If the interview was virtual, I probably would have just done the interview, thus taking that spot away from someone who may have been offered it earlier or at all.

In the end there are the same number of seats across the country and they are all hypothetically filled. However, hoarding can potentially prevent a wider array of candidates from at least being given a chance to show their stuff in an interview.

If I know I want to go to Penn, but am given 5 other interviews, why not do them if they are virtual...even if I already have a Penn acceptance? However, if I want to go to Penn and have an acceptance, am I gonna fly to interview at UCSD if I live in NJ? Eh, maybe, but probably not.

We are wrestling with this concept for people who are interviewing for residency spots in my specialty.

I'm not arguing that virtual interviews shouldn't stay in place, but just offering another side to them to consider.

 

[KnightDoc]

@MyOdyssey -- you haven't responded to my question above regarding what you would do if given a choice.

I actually think that is the most likely outcome, because it will allow the schools to have it both ways. They will know that most of us will be paranoid about giving up a perceived advantage by showing up in person, which will be the result schools want, but they will not be mandating it and will be accommodating those who have scheduling or monetary issues that create an undue burden on traveling.

Schools will also insist there is no advantage either way, but we will debate that on SDN ad nauseam, and will never reach an answer. This would also go a long way towards addressing @Dral's concerns. A degree of hoarding will still go on, no matter what, but it will be less when traveling becomes a thing again.

So, what would you do? 🙂

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Also consider that other things are at work here. Virtual interviews offer a greater opportunity to hoard interviews.

Back when I interviewed for med school, I had an interview for U of C. I had an A at that point and instead of spending the money to fly to Chicago, I canceled the interview for someone else to be given the spot. If the interview was virtual, I probably would have just done the interview, thus taking that spot away from someone who may have been offered it earlier or at all.

In the end there are the same number of seats across the country and they are all hypothetically filled. However, hoarding can potentially prevent a wider array of candidates from at least being given a chance to show their stuff in an interview.

If I know I want to go to Penn, but am given 5 other interviews, why not do them if they are virtual...even if I already have a Penn acceptance? However, if I want to go to Penn and have an acceptance, am I gonna fly to interview at UCSD if I live in NJ? Eh, maybe, but probably not.

We are wrestling with this concept for people who are interviewing for residency spots in my specialty.

I'm not arguing that virtual interviews shouldn't stay in place, but just offering another side to them to consider.

Doesn’t it technically just push the cycle further into spring. Presumably there will be a lot of WL movement and later interviews if people start cancelling all of a sudden

 

[KnightDoc]

Doesn’t it technically just push the cycle further into spring. Presumably there will be a lot of WL movement and later interviews if people start cancelling all of a sudden

No. It just doesn't work like this, unless a school has badly mismanaged its cycle. If things work the way they are supposed, everyone's WL is deep enough that IIs are not reopened once closed, regardless of what happens with yield or WL movement.

@Dral's worst case scenario is that some diamond in the rough that would have rocketed from the bottom of @LizzyM's staircase to an A after the II will never receive the chance, because that slot will be taken by someone who has 13 other IIs and will not be coming to the school. Last year's experience, however, showed that wasn't a widespread problem, and WL movement was pretty typical. People have been expecting an explosion in WL movement every year since 2019, first in response to the change in the traffic rules that year, then in response to virtual interviews last year. It just never seems to materialize.

 

[Dral]

Doesn’t it technically just push the cycle further into spring. Presumably there will be a lot of WL movement and later interviews if people start cancelling all of a sudden

Presumably yes. However, the point is that some candidates may never be given a chance.

In the end there are the same number of seats across the country and they are all hypothetically filled. However, hoarding can potentially prevent a wider array of candidates from at least being given a chance to show their stuff in an interview.

While someone doesn't obviously fill two seats, there is potential that some individuals never get invited for an interview at all. Basically virtual interviews give a hypothetical advantage to the stellar candidates and a hypothetical disadvantage to lower stat candidates as they will either get interviews late or possibly not at all.

In a hypothetical simplified example, if there are 5 schools with 1 spot each and 5 stellar candidates, those 5 candidates get interviewed for all 5 schools and it shakes out in the end they fill all 5 spots since they have nothing holding them back from interviewing at all 5 places. If even one of them cancels an interview due to travel or some other real life reason, the school they canceled on would then invite someone outside of that stellar 5 candidate group.

In my example above back in the day, I dropped my U of C interview. If I would have kept it, they could hypothetically fill all theirs seats with everyone they had interviewed at that point. Since I canceled it, my spot went to someone else. That could have been the only interview that person it went to got that year. Thus it hypothetically gave someone a chance who wouldn't have otherwise had it.

I used the word hypothetically often there, since I'm not sure it's a for sure significant thing, but something that could actually have a real affect on certain candidates...off the top of my head, those candidates with lower stats who could really shine during an interview, at best may have to wait on interviews later in the season when things can get more hectic/stressful or worst case never get the chance to interview at all.

 

[Proudfather94]

Presumably yes. However, the point is that some candidates may never be given a chance.

In the end there are the same number of seats across the country and they are all hypothetically filled. However, hoarding can potentially prevent a wider array of candidates from at least being given a chance to show their stuff in an interview.

While someone doesn't obviously fill two seats, there is potential that some individuals never get invited for an interview at all. Basically virtual interviews give a hypothetical advantage to the stellar candidates and a hypothetical disadvantage to lower stat candidates as they will either get interviews late or possibly not at all.

In a hypothetical simplified example, if there are 5 schools with 1 spot each and 5 stellar candidates, those 5 candidates get interviewed for all 5 schools and it shakes out in the end they fill all 5 spots since they have nothing holding them back from interviewing at all 5 places. If even one of them cancels an interview due to travel or some other real life reason, the school they canceled on would then invite someone outside of that stellar 5 candidate group.

In my example above back in the day, I dropped my U of C interview. If I would have kept it, they could hypothetically fill all theirs seats with everyone they had interviewed at that point. Since I canceled it, my spot went to someone else. That could have been the only interview that person it went to got that year. Thus it hypothetically gave someone a chance who wouldn't have otherwise had it.

I used the word hypothetically often there, since I'm not sure it's a for sure significant thing, but something that could actually have a real affect on certain candidates...off the top of my head, those candidates with lower stats who could really shine during an interview, at best may have to wait on interviews later in the season when things can get more hectic/stressful or worst case never get the chance to interview at all.

I think the lower chance of getting into each school is offset by the ability to apply to many more schools now that one doesn't need to worry about travel expenses.

 

[Dral]

Of course. I agree. Just realize it's likely not going to entirely be more advantageous all around. I think it potentially affects residency interviews more (especially in smaller fields).

I think those who are disadvantaged but have great stats and apps should be the best to benefit from virtual interviews with the assumption that they still have the actual time to interview.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Honestly I think virtual interviews should be here to stay. Virtual interviews give people that don't have the money to travel all over the country the greatest chance to get into school. I wonder how many applicants in the past could only apply to medical schools within driving distance and as a result never got in due to low school count. I consider virtual interviews a welcome step in helping to end financial inequality between applicants.

@MyOdyssey -- you haven't responded to my question above regarding what you would do if given a choice.

I actually think that is the most likely outcome, because it will allow the schools to have it both ways. They will know that most of us will be paranoid about giving up a perceived advantage by showing up in person, which will be the result schools want, but they will not be mandating it and will be accommodating those who have scheduling or monetary issues that create an undue burden on traveling.

Schools will also insist there is no advantage either way, but we will debate that on SDN ad nauseam, and will never reach an answer. This would also go a long way towards addressing @Dral's concerns. A degree of hoarding will still go on, no matter what, but it will be less when traveling becomes a thing again.

So, what would you do? 🙂

I’ve gotten pretty comfortable with virtual interactions due to the pandemic and have had far fewer in person interactions for the same reason. I might just choose virtual if given the option.

Other candidates will probably choose in person for schools that are closer and/or of greater interest to then (assuming they’re one of those candidates with 10 or more interviews.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I’ve gotten pretty comfortable with virtual interactions due to the pandemic and have had far fewer in person interactions for the same reason. I might just choose virtual if given the option.

Other candidates will probably choose in person for schools that are closer and/or of greater interest to then (assuming they’re one of those candidates with 10 or more interviews.

I would proceed with caution if you use this strategy. Schools say choosing virtual isn’t a disadvantage but I’m not quite sure that is true. Going in person may become a sign of interest

 

[Dral]

I'm not suggesting this should be done for med schools, but just for interest sake, this is what we have started as a specialty:

https://derminterest.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/statement-on-preference-signaling-september-2020.pdf

We didn't do it last year (as alluded to in that document), but it has been implemented this interview season.

So continuing on with my hypotheticals, we may invite someone for an interview with decent stats but gave us a token opposed to someone with stellar stats that lives on the other side of the country who didn't token us.

 

[MyOdyssey]

I would proceed with caution if you use this strategy. Schools say choosing virtual isn’t a disadvantage but I’m not quite sure that is true. Going in person may become a sign of interest

Are there schools currently offering applicants an option between in person and virtual interviews?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Are there schools currently offering applicants an option between in person and virtual interviews?

Yes. Not sure exactly which.

 

[KnightDoc]

I’ve gotten pretty comfortable with virtual interactions due to the pandemic and have had far fewer in person interactions for the same reason. I might just choose virtual if given the option.

Other candidates will probably choose in person for schools that are closer and/or of greater interest to then (assuming they’re one of those candidates with 10 or more interviews.

Right, but that's not really my point. My real question is whether you would think there is an advantage to showing up in person, even if the schools tell you they are fine either way. Last year, when this was a possibility, I speculated that no one would risk missing out on any advantage to be gleaned from showing up in person. That ended up being moot since virtually all schools stayed virtual. That is probably going to change next year, either partially or totally, and you might be given a choice.

 

[KnightDoc]

I would proceed with caution if you use this strategy. Schools say choosing virtual isn’t a disadvantage but I’m not quite sure that is true. Going in person may become a sign of interest

THIS^^^^ is exactly my point!!!

 

[KnightDoc]

Are there schools currently offering applicants an option between in person and virtual interviews?

Far and few between, but I think this might be the ultimate answer to your question next cycle.

I actually don't think that the few who went back to in person gave people a choice.

 

[DigNewton]

We may be looking at Covid-19 becoming endemic with flares each winter as we spend more time indoors.

This. I can't envision it not becoming endemic, at this point.

My naive MS1 hypothesis:
Things will stabilize at a "new normal" barring some evolutionarily improbable extreme mutation, and much of life will shift back to something closely resembling the pre-covid times. We'll wear masks during higher-risk seasons and in higher-risk situations. We'll monitor endemic strains and update easily-modifiable, highly-effective mRNA vaccines every so often, maybe annually. The politicization of covid-19 vaccines will eventually decrease (god I hope this is true), and much like the flu vaccine, a lot of people will take their doctor's advice and get it seasonally... a lot of people will insist that they "don't get covid" or "the vaccine gives me covid, so i don't get it anymore" and pass on the seasonal vaccine.

None of that is to downplay the seriousness of the ongoing pandemic. It is extremely serious, and I hope it forever changes how we approach public health as a society and as individuals, and how we work to curtail outbreaks of infectious diseases.

How will this affect the next cycle's interviews? Absolutely no idea. I personally hate virtual interviews, because I like interacting with people face-to-face... but I'm squarely in the camp that thinks virtual interviews make admissions more accessible and equitable – and those are things we desperately need more of in medicine.

 

[MyOdyssey]

This. I can't envision it not becoming endemic, at this point.

My naive MS1 hypothesis:
Things will stabilize at a "new normal" barring some evolutionarily improbable extreme mutation, and much of life will shift back to something closely resembling the pre-covid times. We'll wear masks during higher-risk seasons and in higher-risk situations. We'll monitor endemic strains and update easily-modifiable, highly-effective mRNA vaccines every so often, maybe annually. The politicization of covid-19 vaccines will eventually decrease (god I hope this is true), and much like the flu vaccine, a lot of people will take their doctor's advice and get it seasonally... a lot of people will insist that they "don't get covid" or "the vaccine gives me covid, so i don't get it anymore" and pass on the seasonal vaccine.

None of that is to downplay the seriousness of the ongoing pandemic. It is extremely serious, and I hope it forever changes how we approach public health as a society and as individuals, and how we work to curtail outbreaks of infectious diseases.

How will this affect the next cycle's interviews? Absolutely no idea. I personally hate virtual interviews, because I like interacting with people face-to-face... but I'm squarely in the camp that thinks virtual interviews make admissions more accessible and equitable – and those are things we desperately need more of in medicine.

Medical schools could achieve much the same effect by reimbursing interview related travel expenses. Cutting down on the number of secondary essays would save applicants time if saving applicants’ time were the primary driver of moving to virtual interviews.

 

[KnightDoc]

Medical schools could achieve much the same effect by reimbursing interview related travel expenses. Cutting down on the number of secondary essays would save applicants time if saving applicants’ time were the primary driver of moving to virtual interviews.

Where is this money supposed to come from? Waiving secondary fees is a non-cash expense that is recaptured by charging those who do pay a little more. Actually paying for air, ground transportation, meals and/or lodging would easily cost up to $1,000,000 or more per year, per school, depending on how accessible the school is, and where its applicants come from. Might sound like nothing, but, trust me, it adds up, and would be recaptured, probably through increased fees charged to students.

NEVER going to happen. If this is actually a concern, virtual IIs will be the answer, not paying for something schools never paid for before.

What little money schools have for things like this is used to subsidize second looks for those with serious financial need. By then, schools have narrowed the field down to those who are already accepted, and applicants have narrowed it down to a select few finalists, since these looks are all bunched around the same few weeks, so you can realistically only attend a few, no matter how many As you are sitting on. This reduces potential costs to the schools substantially, and is not going to change.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Where is this money supposed to come from?

Like everything else, it’ll come from a tax on billionaires…

 

[DigNewton]

Medical schools could achieve much the same effect by reimbursing interview related travel expenses. Cutting down on the number of secondary essays would save applicants time if saving applicants’ time were the primary driver of moving to virtual interviews.

I absolutely agree that secondary questions could be cut down, at least on the extreme end of the spectrum. I’d rather see schools just stop sending them to every applicant, and only send them to people who have a fighting chance after review of their primary.

In a world of endless available budget, travel reimbursement would be one approach to a more equitable interview process. But if you assume every school interviews 300 candidates that need $300 of reimbursement, we’re talking close to $100,000 per school per cycle. I can think of tons of ways schools could put that money to use bettering the health in their local communities. But budget isn’t endless, so i’m just daydreaming here.

Even if budget were endless, though, I actually think virtual interviews go further toward goals of equity. For many people, time is even more scarce than money. For an applicant who depends on earnings from their own job and has limited time off, taking 2+ days to travel to/from each interview can be a big problem. All the worse if their employment is hourly and time off is unpaid. Interview travel is also a barrier for people with caretaker responsibilities, people with disabilities that make travel particularly challenging, etc. So in the end, i still think the virtual interviews that i hate so much are still more equitable than in-person interviews.

But we’re getting pretty far from the original question, and I could ramble all day about ways I wish interviews were more equitable.

Will interviews be in person next cycle? Still no idea.

 

[MyOdyssey]

There's an uptick in European Covid cases based on news reports:

MSN

At least preliminarily, @voxveritatisetlucis's concern about Covid seasonality is confirmed as more people stay indoors in ventilation restricted spaces in the winter.

I'm curious to see whether the general public in the US and elsewhere see the need for a booster.

 

[WildWing]

According to this report from University of Buffalo, virtual interviews led to an increase in applications from first generation students:
"These changes meant University at Buffalo saw a 59 percent increase in applications from first-generation college students like Lian, who moved to the U.S. from a village in China when she was 13."

Here's the source: How the pandemic spurred American students to pursue health care careers

I suspect that schools may be looking long and hard at keeping interviews virtual permanently in order to support a more economically diverse applicant pool.

 

[wysdoc]

Didn’t some medical schools reimburse for interview related travel costs pre-pandemic?

Not that I ever heard of!

 

[trufflesalt]

It's way too soon to tell. Things really are getting back to normal, with leisure air travel returning to pre-pandemic levels. Most importantly, schools have returned to in person instruction. That statement about vaccines losing effectiveness after a few months is a red herring because there is a thing called a booster that mitigates that. 🙂

The big question is going to be whether schools place their interest in seeing candidates face to face, and the ability to "sell" in person, above the HUGE cost and convenience benefit to candidates of not having to take time off from school and work, or travel all over the country. If interviews remain virtual after this cycle, it's going to be a permanent change unrelated to COVID and totally related to the availability of the technology and the increase in access for applicants.

It simply remains to be seen. It's a GREAT question, but I guarantee you, at this point in the 2021-22 cycle, no one has even begun to give it any thought for 2022-23. Based on what happened last year, there won't be answer until late next spring or early next summer, and the answer will have nothing to do with the half life of the vaccine.

Well put

 

[KnightDoc]

After it killed 50 million people. “Pandemics burn themselves out” is a crass way of saying 50 million people died

True, although it was not really a reference to whether or how many people died. It was no more than a statement that viruses appear, circulate and then leave, with or without a vaccine to help them on their way. Would you like to include me as a co-author on your letter to the editor of Nature? 😎

"Another possibility is that immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is permanent. In that case, even without a vaccine, it is possible that after a world-sweeping outbreak, the virus could burn itself out and disappear by 2021. However, if immunity is moderate, lasting about two years, then it might seem as if the virus has disappeared, but it could surge back as late as 2024, the Harvard team found."

How the pandemic might play out in 2021 and beyond

This coronavirus is here for the long haul — here’s what scientists predict for the next months and years.

www.nature.com

 

[Aspiringalways24]

Does anyone have any inkling as to whether the next cycle will return to in person interviews?

I suspect not given that the Covid vaccines have been shown to be markedly reduced in effectiveness after a few months per Science:

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

Not sure if anyone will really know… but I can see a lot of schools continuing to do virtual interviews - especially for residency applications too.

A few residency directors at the school I attend noted that virtual interviews have been just as good at identifying ideal candidates and also save a lot of students a lot of money.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Not that I ever heard of!

KPSOM did when things were in person IIRC

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Not sure if anyone will really know… but I can see a lot of schools continuing to do virtual interviews - especially for residency applications too.

A few residency directors at the school I attend noted that virtual interviews have been just as good at identifying ideal candidates and also save a lot of students a lot of money.

Some people face severe disadvantages in virtual interviews and meetings. Mostly applicants who have a real life presence that doesn’t come across via Zoom

At least this is my impression from conducting interviews this year for work and alma mater.

 

[Aspiringalways24]

Some people face severe disadvantages in virtual interviews and meetings. Mostly applicants who have a real life presence that doesn’t come across via Zoom

At least this is my impression from conducting interviews this year for work and alma mater.

Yeah, that makes sense. I’m sure it all balances out though— right? Some people might find traveling/being in an unfamiliar space to be a bit anxiety inducing and thus might perform better via an online interface in the comfort of their own home.

It is strange to be in front of a camera, for sure. But COVID has transformed the world we are living in and online interviews can save some a lot of money and thus open up the interview pool to some that may not have otherwise applied. Also, it’s good practice for seeing patients virtually.

 

[Princeton Medical Student]

Where is this money supposed to come from? Waiving secondary fees is a non-cash expense that is recaptured by charging those who do pay a little more. Actually paying for air, ground transportation, meals and/or lodging would easily cost up to $1,000,000 or more per year, per school, depending on how accessible the school is, and where its applicants come from. Might sound like nothing, but, trust me, it adds up, and would be recaptured, probably through increased fees charged to students.

NEVER going to happen. If this is actually a concern, virtual IIs will be the answer, not paying for something schools never paid for before.

What little money schools have for things like this is used to subsidize second looks for those with serious financial need. By then, schools have narrowed the field down to those who are already accepted, and applicants have narrowed it down to a select few finalists, since these looks are all bunched around the same few weeks, so you can realistically only attend a few, no matter how many As you are sitting on. This reduces potential costs to the schools substantially, and is not going to change.

Putting up a diversity statement is a lot cheaper then actually making the process fair for low income applicants

 

[KnightDoc]

Putting up a diversity statement is a lot cheaper then actually making the process fair for low income applicants

This is why virtual interviews are the great equalizer, and should be made permanent. I'm not sure sending a plane ticket and a hotel voucher to everyone receiving an II and FAP, and then just adding the cost onto the loan balance of everyone who ends up enrolling is the answer. After all, it's not like the dean will be covering the cost out of his salary, but, you're right, making it difficult for people who did not or cannot save thousands upon thousands of dollars for this is terribly unfair.

 

[Proudfather94]

This is why virtual interviews are the great equalizer, and should be made permanent. I'm not sure sending a plane ticket and a hotel voucher to everyone receiving an II and FAP, and then just adding the cost onto the loan balance of everyone who ends up enrolling is the answer. After all, it's not like the dean will be covering the cost out of his salary, but, you're right, making it difficult for people who did not or cannot save thousands upon thousands of dollars for this is terribly unfair.

Yeah it also punishes people who have responsibilities which makes it hard to justify spending that much money on a chance of admission. The non VI route heavily favors those with rich parents or people who have no responsibilities and from what I've learned medical schools are trying to enroll more people with life experiences outside of school.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Looks like my prediction was correct re the resurgence of another variant and seasonality. Crude oil futures down over 13%, JETS airline ETF down over 7% yesterday. Both indicators that travel will not be back next year.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Looks like my prediction was correct re the resurgence of another variant and seasonality. Crude oil futures down over 13%, JETS airline ETF down over 7% yesterday. Both indicators that travel will not be back next year.

The new one looks bad. Lots of mutations to the spike protein.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

The new one looks bad. Lots of mutations to the spike protein.

I thought so too but apparently the chief medical officer in South Africa said cases have been mild so far so let’s hope that holds true. For what it’s worth I closed out all of my short positions Friday, meaning I don’t think it will have a substantial effect beyond general seasonality of viruses. Plus, Merck and Pfizer antivirals should still work.

 

[MyOdyssey]

I thought so too but apparently the chief medical officer in South Africa said cases have been mild so far so let’s hope that holds true. For what it’s worth I closed out all of my short positions Friday, meaning I don’t think it will have a substantial effect beyond general seasonality of viruses. Plus, Merck and Pfizer antivirals should still work.

The Israelis just implemented an across the board travel ban. They seem concerned.