Fellowship Applicants Research Articles

Analysis of musculoskeletal radiology fellowship websites.

Due to the relative lack of standardization in the fellowship application processes for musculoskeletal radiology, program websites are of paramount importance as application resources. This study evaluates the comprehensiveness of these websites and the potential effects of program ACGME accreditation, region, and size on website comprehensiveness. The websites of musculoskeletal fellowship programs listed on the Society of Skeletal Radiology website were assigned a validated comprehensiveness score based on the presence of 19 specific informative components pertaining to the program's characteristics. The correlations of comprehensiveness scores with program ACGME accreditation, region, and size were evaluated. A total of 90 musculoskeletal radiology fellowship program websites were reviewed, yielding a mean comprehensiveness score of 55.1% (10.5 out of 19 criteria). Only 3 of the 19 criteria-application information (88.9%), stand-alone webpage (87.8%), and affiliated hospital information (84.4%)-were present in more than 80% of all websites. Eleven criteria, most notably away rotation information (6.7% presence) and case log (0.0% presence), were absent from at least 50% of all websites. Program ACGME accreditation was correlated with significantly higher website comprehensiveness scores compared with non-accreditation (p = 0.087). There is lack of sufficient, useful information and standardization on the websites of MSK fellowship programs throughout the country. According to our review and analysis, addition of specific information regarding each fellowship program and implementing some type of standardization may optimize fellowship matching for both applicants and the programs.

Medicare Compensation Rates for Hand and Shoulder/Elbow Surgery by Operative Time: A Comparative Analysis.

There is a high demand for shoulder/elbow experience among hand-fellowship trainees due to the perception that this exposure will improve their professional "marketability" in a subspecialty they perceive as having higher compensation. Using Medicare data, we investigated the most common surgeries from these fields and determined which have the highest compensation [work relative value unit (wRVU), payment, charge, and reimbursement (payment-to-charge percentage] rates per operative time. We then determined whether the overall non-weighted and weighted (by surgical frequency/volume) compensation rates of shoulder/elbow surgery are greater than that of hand surgery. Among 30 shoulder/elbow procedures, arthroplasty and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair had the highest payment and wRVU assignments. Among 83 hand procedures, upper-extremity flaps, carpal stabilization, distal radius open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), both-bone ORIF, and interposition arthroplasty had the greatest wRVU assignments with correspondingly high payments. A non-weighted comparison of the two subspecialties showed that hand surgery has a higher mean payment/min ($10.46±3.22 vs. $7.52±2.89), charge/min ($51.02±17.11 vs. $41.96±11.32), and reimbursement (21±4.7% vs. 18±5.1%) compared with shoulder/elbow surgery (all, P<0.01). Non-weighted mean wRVUs/min were similar (0.12±0.03 vs. 0.13±0.03, P = 0.12). When weighted by procedure frequency, hand surgery had greater wRVUs/min (0.15±0.036 vs. 0.13±0.032), payments/min ($14.17±4.50 vs. $6.97±2.26), charges/min ($75.68±30.47 vs. $42.61±7.83), and reimbursement (20±5.0% vs. 17±6.0%) (all, P<0.01). According to Medicare compensation, and when weighted by procedure frequency, hand procedures are associated with greater overall mean wRVUs/min, payments/min, charges/min, and reimbursement compared with shoulder and elbow procedures. Hand-surgery fellowship applicants should be aware that subspecialty compensation is complex in nature but should seek shoulder/elbow elective experience to acquire an additional surgical skill-set as opposed to primarily monetary reason.

Prospects of a Fellowship Match for Abdominal Imaging: A National Survey by the Society of Abdominal Radiology.

After the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments timeline and guidelines were released for the 2021 through 2022 fellowship application cycle, the Society of Abdominal Radiology conducted a survey of residents, fellows, and abdominal imaging fellowship program directors (PDs) to assess stakeholders' perceptions of changes in the fellowship application process. Eligible study participants included fellowship PDs of all US abdominal imaging programs and Society of Abdominal Radiology members-in-training. A questionnaire was developed by content and survey experts, pilot-tested, and administered from August to October2019. Survey response rates were 51.4% among PDs (54 of 103) and 24.2% among trainees (67 of 279), with an overall response rate of 31.8%. Attitudes regarding the abdominal imaging fellowship application process were overall similar between PDs and trainees, including expressed support for a common application. Although trainees and PDs agreed that the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments 2021 through 2022 cycle timeline is preferable to the prior unstructured system, only 42.4% of PDs and 40.7% of trainees supported moving to a formal match, with a significant number of respondents undecided. Both PDs and trainees favored timing fellowship interviews during the fall of the third year of residency (R3 year), with a 1- to 2-month buffer between the start of interviews and offers. PDs and trainees demonstrate similar attitudes in support of the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments 2021 through 2022 cycle timeline and a common abdominal imaging fellowship application. Shifting the interview season from winter to fall of R3 year could be considered to meet the preferences of PDs and trainees alike. Moving to a formal match remains controversial.

3:00 PM Abstract No. 208 Demographic trends in female interventional radiology trainees with the advent of the integrated interventional radiology residency

Interventional radiology (IR) is among the medical specialties with the lowest level of female representation. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in gender representation in the IR training pool since the advent of the integrated IR residency in 2015-2018. Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) data were reviewed from 2015-2018 for IR residency and Vascular and IR fellowship applicant data. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Data Resource Book records were reviewed from 2015-2018 for active IR resident and fellow data. The American Medical Association’s (AMA) FRIEDA online database was reviewed for current IR residency and fellowship statistics. The Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) 2018 registry data were reviewed for current SIR membership data. Chi-square analysis was used to compare the proportion of female IR trainees between application cycles. Since 2010, female trainees constitute 44% of all residents across specialties. Female IR fellows in training constituted only 8% (23/275) of all IR trainees in 2015-2016. In the 2017 application cycle, 23% (247/1062) of integrated IR applicants were female, with similar strong interest at 19% (99/522) in the 2018 cycle. Traditional IR fellowship female applicants were lower at 12% throughout that period. In the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 academic years, 15% (2/13) and 13% (8/60) of integrated IR residents were female, respectively (χ2: 0.039, P = 0.843). Currently, 18% (41/224) of integrated IR residents are female, representing a near doubling of female IR trainees. This is compared to the 2018 total active SIR female membership of 9% (319/3622), female resident membership of 17% (131/793), and female medical student membership of 25% (389/1573). There is a significant under-representation of females in the IR physician workforce. Concurrent with the advent of the integrated IR residency, however, there is an increasing female constituency, at the medical student, IR applicant, and IR resident levels.Tabled 1YearIR Residency ApplicantsVascular and IR FellowsIntegrated IR ResidentsTotal Female IR Trainees2015-2016Data unavailable23/275 (8%)None23/275 (8%)2016-2017Data unavailable46/284 (16%)2/13 (15%)48/297 (16%)2017-2018247/1062 (23%)39/290 (13%)8/60 (13%)47/350 (13%)2018-201999/522 (19%)21/222 (10%)41/224 (18%)62/446 (14%) Open table in a new tab

Building a Career in Cardiovascular Research: A Conversation With Barbara Casadei, MD, DPhil.

Building a Career in Cardiovascular Research: A Conversation With Barbara Casadei, MD, DPhil.

2019 musculoskeletal radiology fellowship match process: initial experiences and lessons learned.

To present the 2019 Musculoskeletal (MSK) fellowship Match information most useful to MSK fellowship programs and sections in hopes of optimizing the fellowship application and selection process for MSK fellowship applicants and training programs. We performed a mixed method analysis to gain a better understanding of the 2019 MSK Fellowship Match process. First, we distributed a ten-question survey to the fellowship leadership from the 78 US fellowship programs registered with the Society of Skeletal Radiology. Second, we collected and reviewed NRMP Match data that were distributed on Match Day. We received completed surveys from 37 (45.7%) programs. Thirty-three (89.2%) of the responding programs identified themselves as academic, 3 (8.1%) as hybrid, and 1 (2.7%) as private practice. On average, programs interviewed 15.4 applicants over the interview session, with a range between 2 and 40. There was an average of 2.7 (range 1-8) open positions per fellowship and 1.2 (range 0-4) internal candidates per program. Each program interviewed 5.8 applicants per open position (range 1-24). There were a total of 81 certified MSK fellowship programs and 204 available positions in these programs. Twenty-four programs (29.6%) did not fill all positions resulting in a total of 36 unfilled positions (17.6%). The percentage of MSK unfilled programs, unfilled positions, and unmatched applicants were comparable to the Breast Imaging and Neuroradiology subspecialty matches. The MSK Fellowship Match was a success with high match rates for applicants and programs. Most importantly, the Match allowed programs to make more informed decisions on their fellowship training opportunities.

Emerging Subspecialties in Neurology: Sleep medicine fellowship after child neurology residency.

Pediatric sleep medicine is a multidisciplinary field specializing in the diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of sleep disorders in childhood. Child neurology residency training provides highly desired skills keenly applicable for a prospective sleep medicine fellowship applicant. A fundamental neurophysiology background helps foster an advanced proficiency in the scoring and interpretation of overnight polysomnography and multiple sleep latency tests (MSLTs). Attuned skills in differentiating complex paroxysmal movements are key to distinguishing parasomnias from nocturnal seizures. The clinical evaluation for developmental delay is augmented by learning and applying the normative developmental milestones of sleep in evaluating the sleepy, or sleepless, child. Herein the authors provide an overview of pediatric sleep medicine as it relates to the child neurology trainee seeking subspecialty fellowship opportunities.

We were winning

In response to the growing need for vascular surgeons and the decreasing interest in vascular surgery fellowships, the first vascular surgery integrated residencies (VSIRs) were started with six male residents in 2007. The impact of this new training paradigm was seen rather quickly and dramatically. The program was incredibly popular and competitive. Compared with the traditional 5 + 2 fellowship applicants, the VSIR applicants seemed to be more qualified (increased number of additional degrees and publications as well as top quartile performance).

Predicting Quality of Clinical Performance From Cardiology Fellowship Applications.

Variables in cardiology fellowship applications have not been objectively analyzed against applicants' subsequent clinical performance. We investigated possible correlations in a retrospective cohort study of 65 cardiology fellows at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minn) who began 2 years of clinical training from July 2007 through July 2013. Application variables included the strength of comparative statements in recommendation letters and the authors' academic ranks, membership status in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society, awards earned, volunteer activities, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, advanced degrees, publications, and completion of a residency program ranked in the top 6 in the United States. The outcome was clinical performance as measured by a mean of faculty evaluation scores during clinical training. The overall mean evaluation score was 4.07 ± 0.18 (scale, 1-5). After multivariable analysis, evaluation scores were associated with Alpha Omega Alpha designation (β=0.13; 95% CI, 0.01-0.25; P=0.03), residency program reputation (β=0.13; 95% CI, 0.05-0.21; P=0.004), and strength of comparative statements in recommendation letters (β=0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.15; P=0.02), particularly in letters from residency program directors (β=0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.08; P=0.009). Objective factors to consider in the cardiology fellowship application include Alpha Omega Alpha membership, residency program reputation, and comparative statements from residency program directors.

General Surgery Resident Use of Electronic Resources: 15 Minutes a Day

General surgery resident performance on the American Board of Surgery In-Service Training Exam (ABSITE) has been used to predict American Board of Surgery (ABS) passage rates, selection for remediation programs, and ranking of fellowship applicants. We sought to identify electronic resource study habits of general surgery residents associated with successful test scores. A single-institution, retrospective review of general surgery resident use of 2 electronic study resources, Surgical Council on Resident Education (SCORE) and TrueLearn (TL), were evaluated for the 7 months before the 2019 ABSITE. Metrics included TL question performance, SCORE use, and a survey about other reading sources. These metrics were evaluated in 3 ABSITE percentile groupings: ≥80th, 31st to 79th, and ≤30th. The ≥80th and 31st to 79th percentile groups scored higher on TL questions, at 69% and 67.7%, respectively, compared with 61.4% for the ≤30th percentile group (p < 0.03). The ≥80th percentile group spent on average 14.6 minutes/day on SCORE compared with 5.0 minutes/day and 4.7 minutes/day for the 31st to 79th and ≤30th percentile groups, respectively (p < 0.04). The ≥80th percentile group spent 34.8 minutes/session (77 sessions) compared with 19.2 minutes/session (49 sessions) and 20.7 minutes/session (43 sessions) in the 31st to 79th and ≤30th percentile groups, respectively (p= 0.009). Our nomogram incorporates time spent accessing an electronic content-based resource, SCORE, and performance on an electronic question-based resource as a novel method to provide individualized feedback and predict future ABSITE performance.

Fellowship Candidate Factors Considered by Program Directors.

The neuroradiology fellowship match has been in existence for about 20 years. However, the elements by which neuroradiology fellowship program directors evaluate candidates have not been clearly elucidated. We sought to identify the factors that program directors use to rank neuroradiology fellowship applicants. An anonymous Qualtrics online five-question survey about educational credentials, personal traits, extracurricular activities, and demographic characteristics was sent to 72 neuroradiology program directors in April 2019. Each question required ranking of 10 factors based on different characteristics of fellowship candidates. Items included gender, nationality, US Medical Licensing Examination scores, internal applicants, work and research experience, recommendation letters, residency program, medical school attended, and visa status. Program directors had the ability to list any new characteristics that were not included in the survey. In all, 68 of 72 (94.4%) neuroradiology programs responded to the survey. The most important criteria by which candidates were assessed were (1) residency program attended for educational credential, (2) personality as assessed by faculty at interviews for candidate personal traits, (3) research performed for candidate's extracurricular activities, and (4) likelihood of coming to or previous experience in the fellowship geographic area. Neuroradiology program directors independently stressed residency program attended, personality assessed during the interview by faculty, internal candidate status, letters of recommendation, and research activities as their top five criteria in ranking the candidates. Multiple factors are weighed by neuroradiology fellowship program directors in selecting fellows, but recent experiences in residency, research, and faculty interactions are prioritized. Internal candidates have an advantage for remaining as fellows within their residency programs.

ANALYSIS OF THE VITREORETINAL SURGICAL FELLOWSHIP APPLICANT POOL: Publication Misrepresentations and Predictors of Future Academic Output.

To evaluate characteristics associated with misrepresentation of publication record, future career placement, and subsequent academic output among vitreoretinal surgical fellowship applicants. A retrospective review of 337 vitreoretinal surgical applicants between 2015 and 2018 was conducted. Publications reported in the applications were verified using PubMed, Google, and Google Scholar. Applications were considered misrepresented if there was no record of the publication or if there was an inconsistency in authorship. Applicants were followed after graduation and their employment position and postgraduation publications were recorded. The main outcome measures were the number of unverifiable publications, postfellowship job placement, and postgraduate peer-reviewed publications. Of the 377 applicants, 309 (82.0%) listed peer-reviewed publications. Of those with a publication, 32 (10.4%) had misrepresentations. A reported desire to pursue an academic career was associated with a future career in academic medicine, whereas Alpha Omega Alpha status was correlated with a future career in private practice. Alpha Omega Alpha status, a reported desire to pursue an academic career, and the number of peer-reviewed publications before fellowship were positively correlated with higher numbers of peer-reviewed publications after fellowship. Unverifiable authorship among vitreoretinal surgical fellowship applicants is significant, affecting nearly one in 10 applicants with peer-reviewed publications. A reported desire to pursue academic medicine as listed on the fellowship application is a useful indicator for a future career in academics, and for increased number of peer-reviewed publications after fellowship.

Increased average number of medical publications per interviewee from 2009 to 2018: a study of 100 interviewees to an academic gastroenterology fellowship program

BackgroundGastroenterology fellowship candidates may strive to improve their qualifications for this extremely competitive fellowship.ObjectiveTo analyze whether extreme competitiveness of gastroenterology fellowship positions has affected fellowship interview selection by statistically analyzing 13 parameters of interviewees to identify statistically significant time changes during last 10 years.MethodsRetrospective time-trend-analyses (performed 2018) on thirteen prospectively-obtained-parameters of 47 interviewees (2009–2011) vs. 53 interviewees (2016–2018) for gastroenterology fellowship. SETTING: William-Beaumont-Hospital, Royal-Oak: academic fully-accredited gastroenterology fellowship, teaching hospital of Oakland-University-William-Beaumont-School-of-Medicine, tertiary-care hospital, GI fellowship since 1973.ResultsStatistically significant increases occurred from 2009 to 2011 vs. 2016–2018 in number of publications, including mean number of: abstracts (1.69 ± 0.37 vs. 7.54 ± 1.16, p < 0.0001); peer-reviewed articles (1.48 ± 0.30 vs. 6.13 ± 1.29, p < 0.0001); and total publications (3.17 ± 0.48 vs. 12.76 ± 1.99, p < 0.0001). Increased publications were associated with graduating from foreign medical schools (correlation coefficient = 0.26, p = .03), and were, surprisingly, correlated with lower letters-of-recommendation-scores (Kruskal-Wallis-statistic = 5.82, p = .002). USMLE-Step-1 scores significantly increased from 2009 to 2011 to 2016–2018 (235 ± 14.1 vs. 244.9 ± 13.5, p = 0.001) (previously reported finding). Nine other parameters did not significantly change with time.ConclusionsCurrent report of >four-fold-increase in publications by gastroenterology fellowship interviewees at one academic-medical-center is novel. Increased focus on scholarship by applicants may be explained by their having only three parameters to improve their credentials during residency: publications, letters-of-recommendation, and honors awarded during residency (other parameters determined before residency and immutable). Current findings may benefit medical residents/medical-residency-program-directors by focusing more on publications for applications. Association between research productivity and medical promotions likely strongly motivates medical research of residents and may motivate academic faculty. Increased exposure to research/publications may improve the clinical acumen of GI fellowship applicants by enhancing their skills in critically reading the medical literature.

Strategic planning for research grant applications.

I am honored to receive the 2019 ASCB Public Service Award. It has been a true privilege to work with the cell biology community; I thank them for their collegiality in their interactions with me over the years. In this essay I offer some perspectives on constructing goals and strategy for research grant and fellowship applications in basic cell biology. They are based on my observations as a program officer for grants and applications in cell biology in the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) from 1991 to 2019.

Editors' note: Neurology residency training in 2017: A survey of preparation, perspectives, and plans

In their survey of graduating adult and child neurology residents from 2017, Mahajan and colleagues reported on the subjective lack of preparation of graduating trainees as they take on fellowship or junior faculty roles. Among these findings, although more respondents in 2017 felt prepared to address managerial tasks (e.g., billing and malpractice) than in previous years, fewer than 40% felt knowledgeable about billing, coding, contract negotiations, malpractice insurance, or RVUs. Furthermore, among the adult neurology respondents, 54% felt that the fellowship application process began too early, with 46% feeling as if their limited outpatient exposure negatively affected the fellowship decision-making process. In response, Drs. Ratliff and Shanker reference similar pressures placed on orthopedic surgery residents as they embark on their own journeys into fellowship. Because 87% of neurology residents prefer fellowship applications to start in the second half of the PGY3 year or even later, it would be better to delay the application process until this time in order for residents to make the most informed decision about their future careers. As Dr. Mahajan points out, the process of mandating a single “match day” is challenging because of the differences in neurology fellowship offerings. Nonetheless, some date late in the PGY3 year could be suggested by our organizations as the earliest date a program director can make an offer. This may allow for more outpatient exposure, so our trainees can make a more informed career decision. In their survey of graduating adult and child neurology residents from 2017, Mahajan and colleagues reported on the subjective lack of preparation of graduating trainees as they take on fellowship or junior faculty roles. Among these findings, although more respondents in 2017 felt prepared to address managerial tasks (e.g., billing and malpractice) than in previous years, fewer than 40% felt knowledgeable about billing, coding, contract negotiations, malpractice insurance, or RVUs. Furthermore, among the adult neurology respondents, 54% felt that the fellowship application process began too early, with 46% feeling as if their limited outpatient exposure negatively affected the fellowship decision-making process. In response, Drs. Ratliff and Shanker reference similar pressures placed on orthopedic surgery residents as they embark on their own journeys into fellowship. Because 87% of neurology residents prefer fellowship applications to start in the second half of the PGY3 year or even later, it would be better to delay the application process until this time in order for residents to make the most informed decision about their future careers. As Dr. Mahajan points out, the process of mandating a single “match day” is challenging because of the differences in neurology fellowship offerings. Nonetheless, some date late in the PGY3 year could be suggested by our organizations as the earliest date a program director can make an offer. This may allow for more outpatient exposure, so our trainees can make a more informed career decision.

Editors' note: Surgery and risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome: A French nationwide epidemiologic study

In their retrospective, nationwide, case-crossover study of more than 8,000 cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) (2009–2014), Rudant et al. reported on the association between surgery and postoperative risk of GBS. The authors found a significant 53% higher odds of postoperative GBS in the 60 days following any surgery (adjusted OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.25–1.88), although this may be driven in part by orthopedic and gastrointestinal surgeries. Also interesting was the observation that (generally) longer procedures were associated with a greater probability of postoperative GBS (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.48–3.34 for surgeries lasting ≥120 minutes vs no surgery). Although the mechanism by which surgery mediates this risk remains unclear, Dr. Steiner suggests that the type of anesthesia (epidural vs general) may play a role. Citing earlier literature, Dr. Steiner notes that a substantial proportion of patients had undergone epidural anesthesia before the onset of GBS. Dr. Steiner suggests that local damage from the anesthetic agent or reagent may have contributed to nerve root injury and/or inflammation. Unfortunately, anesthetic technique is not documented in the claims data of the present investigation. Therefore, the investigators are unable to comment on whether epidural anesthesia may have played a role in the development of GBS in their nationwide data set. In their survey of graduating adult and child neurology residents from 2017, Mahajan and colleagues reported on the subjective lack of preparation of graduating trainees as they take on fellowship or junior faculty roles. Among these findings, although more respondents in 2017 felt prepared to address managerial tasks (e.g., billing and malpractice) than in previous years, fewer than 40% felt knowledgeable about billing, coding, contract negotiations, malpractice insurance, or RVUs. Furthermore, among the adult neurology respondents, 54% felt that the fellowship application process began too early, with 46% feeling as if their limited outpatient exposure negatively affected the fellowship decision-making process. In response, Drs. Ratliff and Shanker reference similar pressures placed on orthopedic surgery residents as they embark on their own journeys into fellowship. Because 87% of neurology residents prefer fellowship applications to start in the second half of the PGY3 year or even later, it would be better to delay the application process until this time in order for residents to make the most informed decision about their future careers. As Dr. Mahajan points out, the process of mandating a single “match day” is challenging because of the differences in neurology fellowship offerings. Nonetheless, some date late in the PGY3 year could be suggested by our organizations as the earliest date a program director can make an offer. This may allow for more outpatient exposure, so our trainees can make a more informed career decision.

Evaluation of Cardiothoracic Surgery Residency and Fellowship Program Websites

BackgroundThe internet is a valuable resource for residency and fellowship applicants when deciding where to apply or interview, yet program websites have shown critical deficiencies in accessibility and content. No analysis of cardiothoracic surgery program websites has been performed. MethodsOnline databases and Google were used to identify integrated, 4 + 3, and traditional cardiothoracic surgery residency and fellowship programs. The accessibility of websites from each of these sources was assessed and the presence or absence of content that may be relevant to applicants was evaluated by two reviewers. ResultsEighty-nine active programs were identified and 86 had functional websites. Website content and accessibility were overall suboptimal in all 86 of these programs. Google was the most reliable means of accessing a program's website. Fifty percent of integrated program websites and 60% of traditional fellowship websites contained less than half of the content assessed. Information on 4 + 3 programs was extremely limited. ConclusionsDespite the value that a program's website could provide to applicants when making decisions during the application process, cardiothoracic surgery residency and fellowship websites remain difficult to access and are not uniformly providing information that may be important. Improving cardiothoracic website accessibility and content may have implications for attracting the most competitive applicants while limiting the financial and scheduling demands associated with the interview process. Creation of a current database containing standardized information relevant to applicants may improve applicants' ability to form an impression of a program before scheduling an interview.

The Fellowship Race: AAN Proposes New Timeline for Neurology Fellowship Applications

The Fellowship Race: AAN Proposes New Timeline for Neurology Fellowship Applications

YI03.02 How to Apply for International Fellowship?

International fellowship to pursue further training is an important part of career development for junior clinicians and investigators. International fellowship will not only increase the clinical and/or research skill of the fellow, it also offers an important opportunity to establish interaction network with senior investigators and peer young investigators across the world. When applying for international fellowship, several aspects should be considered: (1) choosing the field for further training, (2) application procedure, and (3) funding availability. The choice of field for further training will largely determine the future career of the candidate and should be in line with one’s scientific or career passion and clinical/research interest. Prior experience with a role model and mentorship during earlier formative years usually has great influence on one’s decision to pursue career choice. Fellowship training can be limited to clinical only, research only or combined clinical and research training; the latter for a candidate who wishes to pursue clinician-scientist career. Once a decision to pursue further training is made, the candidate should look for fellowship opportunities. This is often through discussion with local mentors or colleagues with prior international fellowship experience, or via familiarity with potential mentors who have published extensively in the area of candidate’s interest or have lectured at international meetings. On-line searches for institutions with established fellowship program may also be useful, but many training programs may not be openly advertised, thus personal approaches and recommendations are often more fruitful. Writing an application letter that demonstrates strong background, qualification, prior track record, commitment and clear post-fellowship career pathway are key elements to win an opportunity for further interview. Availability of secured partial/full funding from local Institution or independent funding agency is a great asset for an application. While one year fellowship that involves only clinical training may be sufficient, training that involves laboratory research will usually require a minimum of 2 years tenure, as the latter usually requires more time to accomplish specific research projects. In such case, preliminary data obtained during first fellowship year may greatly contribute to applications for fellowship offered by international societies (e.g., IASLC, ASCO, AACR) or funding agencies. Training, career development, fellowship fund

Collaborative and multidisciplinary approach to the REI fellowship application

To describe the development and implementation of a Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI) fellowship program and the process of attaining initial accreditation, with a focus on the multidisciplinary collaborative effort of the OB/GYN department, GME committee, and affiliated programs. Descriptive study at an academic medical center. This is a descriptive study completed at an academic institution that evaluates the critical aspects of establishing an REI fellowship program. We specifically explored how to utilize the broad network of interdisciplinary opportunities already established at our institution to provide a collaborative, inclusive learning environment for fellow trainees. REI sub-specialists are expected to master the medical knowledge and surgical procedures involved with all aspects of reproductive health, including care for infertile women and couples, disorders that threaten fertility such as cancer and systemic disease, pediatric and adolescent gynecologic care, and fertility preservation. When designing our fellowship program, we built upon the multidisciplinary strengths of our institution by consulting with other departments and divisions. Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Male Infertility, Endocrinology, Pediatric Endocrinology, and Genetics – disciplines that encompass the broad aspects of our field – have partnered to educate our fellows and actively participated in developing the curriculum. The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research provides methodological, step-wise classes on study design and research, and a thorough biostatistics course for fellow learners. This research-oriented environment is committed to giving fellows the tools to conduct well-designed and meaningful basic, translational, and clinical studies. The process of building our program highlighted the collaborative nature of existing programs, and establishing an REI fellowship became a natural extension for our department. The multidisciplinary nature of the fellowship reflects the ever-expanding horizons of our specialty, equipping our fellows with strong exposure to all aspects of reproductive health both in and out of the division. Our new program was granted two fellows each year. This descriptive study emphasizes the need for a collaborative effort in the accreditation of a new fellowship program. Utilizing existing institutional resources and designing a fellowship program with input from all teams that will comprise the fellows’ education fosters an environment for individual and group learning, opportunities for sharing clinical information between divisions, as well as collaborative research that will support the training of future leaders and advancement of the field. We hope that other programs that are considering establishing a training program will use this model, taking advantage of existing opportunities at their institutions.