Original Investigation
American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship Survey: Fellows Selection Criteria for Training Programs Jessica G. Shantha, M.D.*, Benjamin Shulman, B.A.†, Mithra Gonzalez, M.D.‡, Eric M. Hink, M.D.‡, and Vikram D. Durairaj, M.D., F.A.C.S.‡§ *Department of Ophthalmology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and Departments of †Biostatistics and Informatics, ‡Ophthalmology, and §Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
Purpose: To investigate the characteristics that American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellows seek in fellowship training programs. Methods: A 14-question anonymous SurveyMonkey survey was created for the 2011 to 2014 American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery graduates. The survey evaluated fellow demographics, the interview process, and qualities fellows seek in fellowship training programs. A Likert scale was used to rate different qualities (1: not important, 9: very important), and summary statistics are reported as overall means and standard deviations. Analysis of variance comparisons were made between the different Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellow graduate years, gender, and future practice goals. Results: In total, 87 surveys were e-mailed with 67 responses, a 77% response rate. The qualities with the highest mean were variety of surgical procedures (mean ± standard deviation: 8.6 ± 0.7), volume of procedures/surgeries (8.6 ± 0.7), personality of the program director (8.2 ± 1.3), and interview (7.7 ± 1.4). The characteristics that ranked the lowest in descending order were presence of a county hospital (5.1 ± 2.2), proximity to family (4.8 ± 2.7), didactics (4.7 ± 1.9), and benefits (4.4 ± 2.0). There was no statistically significant difference when comparing the groups according to gender and year of graduation. Fellows who want to pursue a career in academic medicine ranked academic fellowships higher in importance (8.0 ± 1.0) than those who wanted a career in private practice (5.3 ± 2.2). Conclusions: American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellows place an emphasis on surgical experience, the program director’s personality, and the interview process when ranking fellowship training programs. This information is valuable for program directors to better recruit fellows. (Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;29:428–430)
O
verall, there has been an increase in ophthalmology residents applying for fellowship training positions in retina,
Accepted for publication April 21, 2013. The authors have no financial or conflicts of interest to disclose. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Vikram D. Durairaj, M.D., f.a.c.s., Departments of Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology, University of Colorado, Denver, 1675 Aurora Ct, F-731, Aurora, CO 80045. E-mail: [email protected] DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e31829a72a1
428
oculofacial plastics, and cornea/external diseases.1 Factors influencing ophthalmology residents pursuit of fellowship training include obtaining new skills, prestige, and becoming more marketable for jobs after completion of their specialized training.2 The American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) fellowship is one of many fellowships offered in ophthalmology, and it includes 2 years of training after completion of an ophthalmology residency, with programs recruiting fellows every other year. Previously, this match was part of the National Resident Matching Program, but it has recently joined the San Francisco Matching Program. During ASOPRS fellowship’s participation in the National Resident Matching Program, it was considered one of the most competitive fellowship matches. In 2009, in comparison with other fellowship matches, the ASOPRS fellowship match had the highest percentage of United States graduates matching (88%), the lowest first choice ranking rate among the applicants (22%), and one of the highest percentages of unmatched candidates (48.6%).3 In 2011, there were 45 certified applicants, with 22 matched applicants (49%) and 23 (51%) unmatched candidates.4 Due to the small number of programs and extremely competitive nature of the match, there is significant scrutiny of applicants by fellowship directors and preceptors and correspondingly of fellowship training positions by applicants.3 Given the rise in ophthalmology residents pursuing fellowship training, there is a curiosity about what characteristics program directors are looking for in potential candidates and what applicants seek in fellowship training programs. A survey of the ASOPRS program directors by Meyer and Dewan5 revealed that the most important factors in ASOPRS fellow selection are the interview process, the ability to work and communicate with others, and letters of recommendation from subspecialty faculty. There has not been a study of the characteristics that resident-applicants/fellows seek in ASOPRS fellowship training programs. This article highlights the characteristics in ASOPRS fellowship that are important to applicants and fellows. It gives ASOPRS program directors a better understanding of the applicants and the training aspects most valued by fellows-in-training.
METHODS A 14-question anonymous survey was created on SurveyMonkey that included questions about applicants/fellows demographic data, the ASOPRS interview process, and qualities applicants seek in fellowship training programs. The survey was modeled after surveys given
Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2013
Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2013
ASOPRS Fellowship Surgery: Fellows Selection Criteria
TABLE 1. Demographic data Variable
Percent
Sex Male Female Graduating class 2011 2012 2013 2014 Spouse Yes No Children Yes No Practice environment in 5 years Academic Private practice Private practice and academic No response
74.6 25.4 25.4 31.3 22.4 20.9 68.7 31.3 43.3 56.7 40.3 6.0 47.7 6.0
to pediatric surgery residents and general internal medicine fellows. When ranking different qualities of fellowship programs, a Likert scale was used with a range of 1 to 9 (1: not important, 9: very important). E-mail addresses were obtained from the ASOPRS database. The survey was sent to ophthalmology residents who have recently matched into a fellowship position (2014 graduates), first-year fellows (2013 graduates), second-year fellows (2012 graduates), and ASOPRS 2011 fellowship graduates. The surveys were administered from August to November 2011. Summary statistics were produced for demographic information on the survey respondents. The qualities that the respondents rated are summarized by means and standard deviations. Results are given as the overall means and standard deviations for the entire respondent population. Analysis of variance comparisons were made, categorizing the respondents into the different years of graduation, gender, and goal of practice. A Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment was used to adjust analysis of variance p values and account for multiple comparisons. Comparisons were considered statistically significant if the p values were
American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship Survey: Fellows Selection Criteria for Training Programs Jessica G. Shantha, M.D.*, Benjamin Shulman, B.A.†, Mithra Gonzalez, M.D.‡, Eric M. Hink, M.D.‡, and Vikram D. Durairaj, M.D., F.A.C.S.‡§ *Department of Ophthalmology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and Departments of †Biostatistics and Informatics, ‡Ophthalmology, and §Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
Purpose: To investigate the characteristics that American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellows seek in fellowship training programs. Methods: A 14-question anonymous SurveyMonkey survey was created for the 2011 to 2014 American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery graduates. The survey evaluated fellow demographics, the interview process, and qualities fellows seek in fellowship training programs. A Likert scale was used to rate different qualities (1: not important, 9: very important), and summary statistics are reported as overall means and standard deviations. Analysis of variance comparisons were made between the different Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellow graduate years, gender, and future practice goals. Results: In total, 87 surveys were e-mailed with 67 responses, a 77% response rate. The qualities with the highest mean were variety of surgical procedures (mean ± standard deviation: 8.6 ± 0.7), volume of procedures/surgeries (8.6 ± 0.7), personality of the program director (8.2 ± 1.3), and interview (7.7 ± 1.4). The characteristics that ranked the lowest in descending order were presence of a county hospital (5.1 ± 2.2), proximity to family (4.8 ± 2.7), didactics (4.7 ± 1.9), and benefits (4.4 ± 2.0). There was no statistically significant difference when comparing the groups according to gender and year of graduation. Fellows who want to pursue a career in academic medicine ranked academic fellowships higher in importance (8.0 ± 1.0) than those who wanted a career in private practice (5.3 ± 2.2). Conclusions: American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery fellows place an emphasis on surgical experience, the program director’s personality, and the interview process when ranking fellowship training programs. This information is valuable for program directors to better recruit fellows. (Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;29:428–430)
O
verall, there has been an increase in ophthalmology residents applying for fellowship training positions in retina,
Accepted for publication April 21, 2013. The authors have no financial or conflicts of interest to disclose. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Vikram D. Durairaj, M.D., f.a.c.s., Departments of Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology, University of Colorado, Denver, 1675 Aurora Ct, F-731, Aurora, CO 80045. E-mail: [email protected] DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0b013e31829a72a1
428
oculofacial plastics, and cornea/external diseases.1 Factors influencing ophthalmology residents pursuit of fellowship training include obtaining new skills, prestige, and becoming more marketable for jobs after completion of their specialized training.2 The American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) fellowship is one of many fellowships offered in ophthalmology, and it includes 2 years of training after completion of an ophthalmology residency, with programs recruiting fellows every other year. Previously, this match was part of the National Resident Matching Program, but it has recently joined the San Francisco Matching Program. During ASOPRS fellowship’s participation in the National Resident Matching Program, it was considered one of the most competitive fellowship matches. In 2009, in comparison with other fellowship matches, the ASOPRS fellowship match had the highest percentage of United States graduates matching (88%), the lowest first choice ranking rate among the applicants (22%), and one of the highest percentages of unmatched candidates (48.6%).3 In 2011, there were 45 certified applicants, with 22 matched applicants (49%) and 23 (51%) unmatched candidates.4 Due to the small number of programs and extremely competitive nature of the match, there is significant scrutiny of applicants by fellowship directors and preceptors and correspondingly of fellowship training positions by applicants.3 Given the rise in ophthalmology residents pursuing fellowship training, there is a curiosity about what characteristics program directors are looking for in potential candidates and what applicants seek in fellowship training programs. A survey of the ASOPRS program directors by Meyer and Dewan5 revealed that the most important factors in ASOPRS fellow selection are the interview process, the ability to work and communicate with others, and letters of recommendation from subspecialty faculty. There has not been a study of the characteristics that resident-applicants/fellows seek in ASOPRS fellowship training programs. This article highlights the characteristics in ASOPRS fellowship that are important to applicants and fellows. It gives ASOPRS program directors a better understanding of the applicants and the training aspects most valued by fellows-in-training.
METHODS A 14-question anonymous survey was created on SurveyMonkey that included questions about applicants/fellows demographic data, the ASOPRS interview process, and qualities applicants seek in fellowship training programs. The survey was modeled after surveys given
Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2013
Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2013
ASOPRS Fellowship Surgery: Fellows Selection Criteria
TABLE 1. Demographic data Variable
Percent
Sex Male Female Graduating class 2011 2012 2013 2014 Spouse Yes No Children Yes No Practice environment in 5 years Academic Private practice Private practice and academic No response
74.6 25.4 25.4 31.3 22.4 20.9 68.7 31.3 43.3 56.7 40.3 6.0 47.7 6.0
to pediatric surgery residents and general internal medicine fellows. When ranking different qualities of fellowship programs, a Likert scale was used with a range of 1 to 9 (1: not important, 9: very important). E-mail addresses were obtained from the ASOPRS database. The survey was sent to ophthalmology residents who have recently matched into a fellowship position (2014 graduates), first-year fellows (2013 graduates), second-year fellows (2012 graduates), and ASOPRS 2011 fellowship graduates. The surveys were administered from August to November 2011. Summary statistics were produced for demographic information on the survey respondents. The qualities that the respondents rated are summarized by means and standard deviations. Results are given as the overall means and standard deviations for the entire respondent population. Analysis of variance comparisons were made, categorizing the respondents into the different years of graduation, gender, and goal of practice. A Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment was used to adjust analysis of variance p values and account for multiple comparisons. Comparisons were considered statistically significant if the p values were
