Panel interview for internal medicine residency selection: pros and cons.

Abstract

Selection of residents is an extremely important process for a residency program as it determines the quality of patient care as well as the academic and research progress of the program. Most studies have focused on the relationship between the national board exam scores, such as the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) and the subsequent clinical performance of the selected residents. However, a low to moderate correlation has been found between board scores and residency performance.1 Additionally other studies have assessed the residency program directors’ opinions about the relative importance of various selection strategies. They found the top three common selection elements were clerkship grades, reference letters, and the USMLE Step 1 scores.2 There is no consensus as to which selection strategy is the most useful in choosing the candidates. Thus, the existing selection process is not ideal and has many shortcomings. For instance, it may not give an accurate representation of the interviewee as a medical resident.3 Likewise, there may be a major reliance on one parameter, such as the USMLE scores. This may come at the expense of other parameters, such as the candidate’s communication skills, character, and professionalism.4 Also, there is inter- and intra-observer variability in rating the residency candidates. These shortcomings make the selection process subjective and unreliable, which should be avoided when making assessments.5 Adopting a new interview style During the 2015-2016 interview season, the University of Toledo Internal Medicine Residency Program introduced a panel-style interview. Previously, the residency program relied on one-on-one interviews with various faculty members to evaluate candidates. Changing the interview style allowed an opportunity for multiple interviewers (the panel) to evaluate a residency candidate. Our panel members consisted of the program director/associate program director, a faculty member, and the chief resident. Also, under the one-on-one interview format, it allowed the interviewer greater access to beforehand knowledge of the candidate, which was changed under the panel interview style. Instead, the interviewers were blinded to the objective criteria, such as USMLE scores. After completion of the interview, the panel members individually scored the residency candidate using various subjective elements, such as communication skills, teaching potential, and professionalism. Subsequently, these scores were used by the residency program to calculate the final rankings of all the candidates during the interview season.