Abstract

To the Editor: Wewould liketo thank Dr. Copenhaver and colleagues for their interest in our work and for their letter regarding our recently published study, Student Characteristics Associated with Successful Matching to a PGY-1 Residency Program. Our survey foundthat number of applications, number of interviews, pharmacy school GPA, and female gender were associated with a higher likelihood of matching to a residency for students at five different pharmacy schools across the United States. (1) Copenhaver and colleagues suggest that residency programs that focus only on objective data, including number of leadership positions and grade point average (GPA), may miss out on the valuable perspective that can be gleaned by looking at subjective data, including letters of intent and letters of recommendation. (2) We agree with these comments and feel that a wholistic approach, which takes into account subjective as well as objective information, is the best way to accurately and completely assess a candidate's fit for a particular residency program. Although our work was not intended to serve as guide for candidate selection, it did provide an interesting perspective on characteristics that were associated with matching from the students surveyed. The results of our survey found that higher GPA was associated with a higher likelihood of applying, getting an interview, and matching to a residency program. However, one can argue that the magnitude of the difference found (3.5 vs 3.7, delta of 0.2) was not educationally significant. Indeed, GPA is, in essence, a surrogate marker for candidate knowledge and aptitude, and there are inherent limitations in using it as such, as was discussed in our article. There seems to be inconsistency in the published literature regarding the value of GPA as a screening tool for pharmacy residency applicants. Some studies suggest that GPA is important, and others do not. In a recent survey, residency program directors (RPDs) appeared to place less emphasis on GPA than in the past. (3) Similarly, RPDs at large academic medical centers indicated that GPA was not among the most highly valued characteristics that programs used in screening tools in another survey study. (4) Another survey found that while only 13.4% of RPD respondents selected GPA as the most important selection criterion, 94.4% of these respondents use GPA as a selection criterion. (5) Although a specific GPA was not mentioned, a 2012 survey of RPDs noted that 98.9% of RPDs considered pharmacy school grades critically important when evaluating residency applicants. (6) A single site study spanning multiple years found that higher GPA was consistently associated with an increased likelihood of being invited for an onsite interview. (7) The disparity in the literature regarding the role of GPA in the screening and selection process may be explained by a number of factors, including differences in the volume of applicants, variations in screening tools used, changes in perspectives over time, or geographical differences in preferences for specific screening criteria. For example, as was noted in our discussion, our results may not be representative of all areas in the United States. Most of the pharmacy students that we surveyed were located in large, metropolitan areas with other pharmacy schools in the immediate area. Consequently, our survey respondents may have been applying to programs that receive a high volume of applications. It may be possible that residency programs located in areas with high competition for positions may be more willing to use quick and easy objective filters, such as GPA or number of leadership positions, to reduce what may seem an unmanageable number of applications. However, the characteristics of residency programs or RPDs as they relate to the choice and weight of residency application screening criteria have not been systematically studied. There remains a need for such research, so we can better mentor and guide our pharmacy students to succeed in the application, interview, and match process. …

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call