Cross-Sectional Content Evaluation of Spinal Cord Injury Medicine Fellowship Websites.

Abstract

This study evaluated the quality and accessibility of the websites of the Spinal Cord Injury Medicine (SCIM) fellowship programs to identify potential areas for improvement for future applicants. Twenty-four SCIM fellowship program websites were analyzed based on 44 predetermined criteria: website accessibility, education, research, recruitment, and incentives. This study found that many evaluated websites needed more information on didactics, educational resources, evaluation criteria, call requirements, schedules, and expected caseloads, which could lead to an incomplete understanding of the fellowship program. Additionally, more information on education and research can be needed for applicants to adequately compare programs and make informed decisions about which programs to apply to. Information about the selection process, current board pass rates, mentorship opportunities, technology/simulation, and alumni was limited across several evaluated websites. Incentives, fellow wellness, and harassment policies were also found to be insufficient or absent. The study emphasizes that SCIM fellowship programs should provide comprehensive and accurate information on their websites to facilitate applicants in choosing the program that aligns best with their professional goals. Including detailed and accurate information regarding general program qualities, educational and research opportunities, recruitment, and incentive data will provide prospective applicants with a holistic understanding of the program. By providing detailed and transparent information on their websites, SCIM fellowships can attract more qualified applicants and enhance the applicant pool, ultimately improving the quality of their program.