Search

Objective: There are few published accounts of the obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) specialty-specific experience with a formal signaling program. Prior studies examining other medical specialties' experiences with signaling are quantitative, having not examined the complexity of the residency applicant experience by directly engaging applicants; therefore, this study aimed to describe the lived experiences of OBGYN residency applicants who employed a formal signaling program during the 2022-2023 residency application cycle to assist and guide future residency applicants., Design: A phenomenological approach was chosen to prescribe a common meaning for OBGYN residency applicants' experiences. purposeful sampling was employed to ensure racial, ethnic, and institutional geographic diversity in participant representation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually between April and May 2023., Results: Twenty-five OBGYN residency applicants participated. Fourteen identified as underrepresented in medicine. Four themes emerged: non-uniform decision-making processes, inconsistent guidance, mental health effect, and signaling reflections. Some themes had associated subthemes. Critical aspects of the applicants' journey were revealed, including decision-making dynamics and reliance on trusted advisors. Applicants described tensions and complexities when navigating signaling strategy in relation to abortion education opportunities in a post-Dobbs era. They also conveyed concerns about inconsistencies in signaling guidance, the emotional toll on well-being, and persistent inequities in the application process. They ultimately made recommendations for future directions, including suggestions for more robust advising and improved signaling execution., Conclusions: This study offers a comprehensive exploration of the experiences of OBGYN residency applicants with formal program signaling. To ensure equity and transparency in the residency application process, it is crucial to not only provide OBGYN residency applicants with clear guidance on signaling, but also encourage a standardized approach for its utilization by residency programs., (Copyright © 2024 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: State-specific abortion restrictions currently affect the training of approximately 44% of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residents in the US. Examination of where future trainees apply for residency is important., Objective: To assess changes in the percentage of applicants to OBGYN residency programs by state based on abortion restrictions in place after the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (hereafter, Dobbs v Jackson) US Supreme Court decision and examine whether applicants' preference for programs, as suggested by the distribution of application signals that express higher interest, was associated with abortion bans., Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study used anonymized data for all applicants to OBGYN residency programs in the US during September and October from 2019 to 2023. Data were obtained from the Association of American Medical Colleges Electronic Residency Application Service., Exposures: Applications and program preference signals sent to OBGYN residency programs, analyzed by applicants' self-reported demographics., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was differences in the percentage of unique applicants to OBGYN residency programs from 2019 to 2023, with programs categorized by state-based abortion restrictions after the Dobbs v Jackson decision. Secondary outcomes included the distribution of program signals by state abortion ban status., Results: A total of 2463 applicants (2104 [85.4%] women) who applied to OBGYN programs for the 2023 residency match cycle were the focal sample of this study. While overall applicant numbers remained stable between 2019 and 2023, the number of applicants differed significantly by state abortion ban status in the 2022 (F2,1087 = 10.82; P < .001) and the 2023 (F2,1087 = 14.31; P < .001) match cycles. There were no differences in the number of signals received by programs in states with bans after controlling for known covariates such as number of applications received and program size, and there were no differences in the percentage of signals sent by out-of-state applicants to programs in states with different abortion laws than their home states (F2,268 = 2.41; P = .09)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, there was a small but statistically significant decrease in the number of applicants to OBGYN residency programs in states with abortion bans in 2023 compared with 2022. However, applicant signaling data did not vary by states' abortion ban status. While OBGYN residency programs almost completely filled in 2023, continued monitoring for the potential consequences of state abortion bans for OBGYN training is needed.

In the setting of long-standing structural racism in health care, it is imperative to highlight inequities in the medical school-to-residency transition. In obstetrics and gynecology, the percentage of Black residents has decreased in the past decade. The etiology for this troubling decrease is unknown, but racial and ethnic biases inherent in key residency application metrics are finally being recognized, while the use of these metrics to filter applicants is increasing. Now is the time for action and for transformational change to rectify the factors that are detrimentally affecting the racial diversity of our residents. This will benefit our patients and learners with equitable health care and better outcomes., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Holistic review of residency applications is touted as the gold standard for selection, yet vast application numbers leave programs reliant on screening using filters such as United States Medical Licensing Examination scores that do not reliably predict resident performance and may threaten diversity. Applicants struggle to identify which programs to apply to, and devote attention to these processes throughout most of the fourth year, distracting from their clinical education. In this perspective, educators across the undergraduate and graduate medical education continuum propose new models for student-program compatibility based on design thinking sessions with stakeholders in obstetrics and gynecology education from a broad range of training environments. First, we describe a framework for applicant-program compatibility based on applicant priorities and program offerings, including clinical training, academic training, practice setting, residency culture, personal life, and professional goals. Second, a conceptual model for applicant screening based on metrics, experiences, attributes, and alignment with program priorities is presented that might facilitate holistic review. We call for design and validation of novel metrics, such as situational judgment tests for professionalism. Together, these steps could improve the transparency, efficiency and fidelity of the residency application process. The models presented can be adapted to the priorities and values of other specialties., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure John L. Dalrymple disclosed that he is on the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics Board of Directors. David Marzano disclosed that he has served on the ACOG Simulation Working Group, APGO Board of Directors, and the APGO Testing and Assessment Committee, and received reimbursement for travel for all three activities. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to identify the empirical processes and evidence that expert surgical teachers use to determine whether to take over certain steps or entrust the resident with autonomy to proceed during an operation., Background: Assessing real-time entrustability is inherent in attending surgeons' determinations of residents' intraoperative autonomy in the operating room. To promote residents' autonomy, it is necessary to understand how attending surgeons evaluate residents' performance and support opportunities for independent practice based on the assessment of their entrustability., Methods: We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 43 expert surgical teachers from 21 institutions across 4 regions of the United States, using purposeful and snowball sampling. Participants represented a range of program types, program size, and clinical expertise. We applied the Framework Method of content analysis to iteratively analyze interview transcripts and identify emergent themes., Results: We identified a 3-phase process used by most expert surgical teachers in determining whether to take over intraoperatively or entrust the resident to proceed, including 1) monitoring performance and "red flags," 2) assessing entrustability, and 3) granting autonomy. Factors associated with individual surgeons (eg, level of comfort, experience, leadership role) and the context (eg, patient safety, case, and time) influenced expert surgical teachers' determinations of entrustability and residents' final autonomy., Conclusion: Expert surgical teachers' 3-phase process of decisions on take-over provides a potential framework that may help surgeons identify appropriate opportunities to develop residents' progressive autonomy by engaging the resident in the determination of entrustability before deciding to take over.

Objective: To identify entrustment evidence used by expert gynecologic surgical teachers to determine obstetrics and gynecology residents' level of autonomy in the operating room., Methods: A qualitative interview study was undertaken from March to November 2016. Four selection criteria were used to define and purposefully sample expert gynecologic surgical teachers across the United States to represent all four geographic regions. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We applied the Framework Method of content analysis. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed and emergent themes identified., Results: Twenty-seven expert gynecologic surgical teachers from 15 institutions across the United States participated in 30-minute interviews. We identified four domains of entrustment evidence (resident characteristics, medical knowledge, technical performance, and "beyond current surgical case") commonly reported by expert gynecologic surgical teachers to determine residents' autonomy as well as the particular evidence associated with expert gynecologic surgical teachers' determination of resident autonomy at two decision-making points (surgical time-out and taking over certain intraoperative steps) in the operating room. Onsite direct observation and conversation were two common methods used by expert gynecologic surgical teachers to obtain this evidence., Conclusion: Entrustment evidence from resident characteristics, medical knowledge, and technical performance domains and from "beyond current surgical case" was commonly used by expert gynecologic surgical teachers to determine residents' autonomy. Our findings provide a potential framework for designing educational interventions that aim to increase residents' readiness for autonomy and entrustment in the operating room.