A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Postinterview Communications: Two Surveys of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors Before and After Guideline Implementation. | LitMetric

Postinterview Communications: Two Surveys of Internal Medicine Residency Program Directors Before and After Guideline Implementation.

Acad Med

K.M. Chacko is associate professor of medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. S. Reddy is professor of medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. M. Kisielewski is survey and data mana

Published: September 2018


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: Guidelines surrounding postinterview communication (PIC) after residency interviews were issued by the National Resident Matching Program and Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine. How they have influenced PIC and program directors' (PDs') reasons for PIC is unknown.

Method: Annual surveys of 365 U.S. internal medicine residency PDs in 2013 and 368 in 2015 were used. Questions about frequency, intent, and usefulness of PIC and knowledge of guidelines before and after new PIC guidelines were included. Chi-square tests were used to compare data sets, and multivariate logistic regression was performed for 2015 data to identify factors predicting engagement in PIC, using program characteristics, PD characteristics, and beliefs about the benefits of PIC as independent variables.

Results: There were 265 (73%) respondents in 2013 and 227 (62%) in 2015. While the number of programs with a PIC policy increased 43%, the level of contact increased 7%. Few PDs indicated PIC was helpful to them; however, PDs who felt PIC helps target applicants were more likely to engage in PIC (OR 4.21, SE 1.88, P = .001). The main reason for continuing PIC (50% of PDs) was that PIC, part of their program's culture, was considered "good manners."

Conclusions: New guidelines increased the number of programs with a PIC policy, but the overall rate of applicant contact did not change despite few PDs feeling PIC was helpful to recruitment. The culture surrounding PIC may be difficult to overcome via guidelines alone, and more definitive rules are necessary to implement change.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002261DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

pic
16
internal medicine
12
medicine residency
8
program directors
8
pic program
8
number programs
8
programs pic
8
pic policy
8
pic helpful
8
program
5

Similar Publications