SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Every newly hired staff member will affect hundreds of patient outcomes as well as the success of the team at large. An interview determines the applicant's values and identifies if he/she is congruent to the professional practice environment.
The authors examine the algorithm used by the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) in its centralized matching of applicants to U.S. residency programs ("the Match"). Their goal is to evaluate the current NRMP matching algorithm to determine whether it still fulfills its intended purpose adequately and whether changes could be made that would improve the Match. They describe the basic NRMP algorithm and many of the variations of the matching process ("match variations") incorporated over the last 20 years to meet participants' requirements. An overview of the current state of the theory of preference matching is presented, including descriptions of the characteristics of stable matches in general, program-optimal and applicant-optimal matchings, and strategies for formulating preference lists. The characteristics of the current NRMP algorithm are then compared with the theoretical findings. Research conducted long after the original NRMP algorithm was devised has shown that an algorithm that produces stable matches is the best approach for matching applicants to positions. In the absence of requirements to satisfy match variations, the NRMP's deferred-acceptance algorithm produces a program-optimal stable match. When match variations, such as those handled by the NRMP, must be introduced, it is possible that no stable matching exists, and the resulting matching produced by the NRMP algorithm may not be program-optimal. The question of program-optimal versus applicant-optimal matchings is discussed. Theoretical and empirical evidence currently available suggest that differences between these two kinds of matchings are likely to be small. However, further tests and research are needed to assess the real differences in the results produced by different stable matching algorithms that produce program-optimal or applicant-optimal stable matches.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Research involving NHS patients or premises must have approval of the local research ethical committee (LREC). Allow plenty of time for your application to be processed--find out about dates for submitting applications and the time taken to reach a decision. Follow any written LREC guidelines closely and complete any local forms in full. When making your application, put yourself in the place of your subjects; would you be willing to do what you are asking of them? Make sure that all the relevant questionnaires, letters and other documents accompany your application. If you are asked to attend a meeting, find out in advance what is expected of you.
1. Employers have many regulations to follow in relation to ADA compliance. 2. Health inquiries are acceptable post-offer and prior to the start of work. Inquiries must be the same for all employees in a job category. 3. Health inquiries conducted after employment commences have to be based on business necessity.
At times, as for example when candlelight flickers on bottle and glasses, it is not unpleasant to look into a pair of warm and friendly eyes and respond to the words "Tell me about yourself." Completing a curriculum vitae (CV), however, is a less attractive proposition, especially when applying for an appointment. Even those who are fond of talking about themselves can find it difficult. Some find it embarrassing. Some, judging from the poorly presented data which frequently accompany applications even for senior posts, are unaware of the important part the CV plays in the selection process.
Deciding which candidate to appoint requires considerable discussion and skill. Giving feedback to the unsuccessful candidate should be carefully considered.
Findings based on recent research are presented to support the universal use of tests measuring general mental ability (GMA) and the Big Five personality factor of conscientiousness to evaluate applicants for all medical practice and health care system clerical, nursing, and office management positions. Widely validated measures of both of these factors are identified. These findings simplify the process of identifying employment methods for jobs in medical practices. This research also suggests that for some jobs, Work Samples, Structured Interviews, or other Big Five personality factors may add some incremental validity to the GMA + Conscientiousness combination. This should be determined based on job analysis.
PURPOSE: A descriptive study of bibliographic misrepresentations by applicants to medical school faculty positions. METHOD: The authors reviewed 250 1995 faculty applicant bibliographies from eight medical institutions, representing six medical specialities. Using computerized library database searches or direct retrieval, they evaluated the legitimacy of each journal, abstract, and book citation. The authors classified and tabulated the following discrepancies as misrepresentations: (1) citing a nonexistent article in an existent source, (2) claiming authorship on an article that did not list the applicant as an author, and (3) altering authorship order to enhance the applicant's position. RESULTS: The authors found 56 misrepresented citations among 2,149 verified articles (2.6%). These misrepresentations were distributed among 39 applicants (15.6%; 95% CI, 11.5% to 20.9%); 11 of whom (4.4%) had multiple discrepancies. Sixty-eight percent of all misrepresentations were due to discrepancies in authorship order, while journal citations constituted the most frequent source of misrepresentation (77%). CONCLUSIONS: Misrepresentation of bibliographic citations does exist among medical school faculty applicants. One possible solution to this problem would be to require applicants to document their bibliographic citations.
This study explored the influence of applicants' perceived apprehension during communication on self-reported argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness in selection interviews. One week prior to selection interviews with corporate interviewers, 51 college students who were actively seeking career-oriented employment completed a questionnaire on their situational apprehension, trait argumentativeness, and trait verbal aggressiveness. The major findings were that (a) Trait Argumentativeness was significantly and negatively correlated with Trait Verbal Aggressiveness; (b) Apprehension was significantly and positively correlated with Trait Verbal Aggressiveness; (c) Apprehension was significantly and negatively correlated with Trait Argumentativeness; and (d) descriptive statistics indicated applicants experienced high Apprehension before the interviews.
Dentists applying to a specialist training programme often receive conflicting advice over what to put in their curriculum vitae (CV). We conducted a survey of the Training Programme Directors of the dental specialties to determine what aspects of CV content and presentation styles are considered important. This has allowed us to construct guidelines for what to put in a CV. Recently, structured application forms have become increasingly popular and may be a more objective way to carry out the shortlisting process. The guidelines presented could also be used as a framework for medical personnel departments if structured application forms eventually replace the CV.
Many authors have attempted to determine predictors for success within a residency program. There is very little agreement about what is useful. We hypothesized that our residency selection process is effective in determining which resident applicants would be most likely to excel in our program. To test this hypothesis, we reviewed the scores that applicants received after their interview day to determine if there was a correlation with any measures used to evaluate residents once they entered residency training. Our results determined that the score given to an applicant fails to correlate with any of the areas that are evaluated throughout their residency. The only statistically significant correlation was between the scores assigned by the selection committee to applicants and the applicant scores on their first year in training examination. We concluded that our residency selection process score does not accurately predict which applicants will excel in our program.
The purpose of the current study was to examine the interobserver reliability of a scoring system designed to objectify the screening of orthopaedic residency applications. Forty residency applications were selected randomly from those received in 1998 and were scored independently by six observers. The scoring system used included objective and subjective elements. Weights were assigned to individual data elements based on the results of a previous investigation. Interobserver reliability was calculated using an intraclass correlation coefficient. The overall reliability of the scoring system revealed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.80. The intraclass correlation coefficients for individual elements in the scoring system ranged from 0.28 to 0.98. The intraclass correlation coefficient was high for elements that were numeric, but was low for elements that were more subjective. Observers thought the scoring form was easy to complete but found some of the subjective data elements difficult to score. No benchmarks exist by which to define an acceptable intraclass correlation coefficient of a scoring model for resident applicants. Even with the use of careful definitions, raters had poor reliability in scoring elements such as letters of recommendation and personal statements. The results of the current study indicate that one score of objective data elements is adequate to screen a residency application for these elements. Programs screening applicants based on subjective elements, however, should be aware that great interobserver variability exists in the interpretation of those elements.
OBJECTIVES: Studies have shown erroneous claims of authorship by medical students applying for residency. Authors have hypothesized that investigation of advanced degrees, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status, and peer-reviewed publications all show important rates of inaccuracy. METHODS: A retrospective review of all applicants offered an interview for the authors' emergency medicine (EM) residency (entering class of 2002), excluding foreign medical graduates and current residents, was conducted. After verifying peer-reviewed publications by MEDLINE search and journal review, errors were tabulated as follows: reference not found, not referenced as an abstract, incorrect author list, or clerical error. AOA status was verified by the AOA organization. Advanced degrees were verified by the awarding institutions. RESULTS: Of 194 applications screened (58.3% of applications), 21 (10.8%) were excluded (9 foreign medical graduates, 12 current residents). Multiple inaccuracies on a single application were counted separately. Of the 173 remaining applications, 23 (13.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 8.8% to 19.5%) had at least one misrepresentation and seven of 173 (4.0%; 95% CI = 1.8% to 8.5%) had two or more. Authorship of at least one peer-reviewed article was claimed by 47 of 173 (27.2%), with ten of 47 (21.3%; 95% CI = 11.2% to 36.1%) having one inaccuracy and six of 47 (12.8%, 95% CI = 5.3% to 26.4%) having two or more. AOA membership was claimed by 14 applicants (8.1%), but five claims (35.7%, 95% CI = 14.0% to 64.4%) were inaccurate. Advanced degrees were claimed by 15 (8.7%); four (26.7%, 95% CI = 8.9% to 55.2%) were in error. CONCLUSIONS: Applications for EM residency contain frequent inaccuracies in publications listed, AOA status, and advanced degrees. Careful review of applications is necessary to ensure appropriate credit is given for claims of these types.
This article provides an overview of the grant application during the review process. Three levels of review occur once a grant is submitted-administrative, scientific, and programmatic. The purposes of each level of review are different, but the overall goal for the funding agency is to fund grant applications that address important research topics, are scientifically meritorious, and assist the agency in meeting their goals and objectives.
In the early 1900s, competition among hospitals for interns and among medical students for good internships led to increasingly early offers of internships to students. By the 1940s, appointments were often made as early as the beginning of the junior year of medical school. Hospitals thus had little information about students' performance, and students frequently had to make a final decision to accept or reject an offer without knowing which other offers might be forthcoming. From 1945 through 1951, efforts were made to enforce a uniform date for accepting offers. However, students were still faced with offers having very short deadlines, compelling them to accept or reject offers without knowing what other offers might be forthcoming. Hospitals often had to scramble for available students, since if an offer was rejected, it was often too late for them to reach their next preferred candidate. A centralized clearinghouse was thus developed as a way of alleviating this chaos and allowing a larger role to the preferences of both students and hospitals. This evolved into the current matching program, whose algorithm continues to be updated to take account of changing needs of applicants, such as growth in the number of couples who seek 2 positions in the same vicinity.
This study compared the Personality Assessment Inventory and MMPI-168 profiles of 9 law enforcement applicants with published MMPI profiles to provide concurrent validation for the use of the Personality Assessment Inventory to assess personality pathology of peace officer applicants. The sample showed subclinical elevations of the Positive Impression and Treatment Rejection scales on the Personality Assessment Inventory and subclinical elevations on the MMPI validity scales of Lie and Correction and the clinical scales of Psychopathic Deviate and Hypomania. The applicants' mean MMPI profile provided concurrent validation for the use of the Personality Assessment Inventory in this decision on fitness to serve.
Although truthfulness and honesty have long been considered fundamental values within the medical profession, lying and deception have become standard practices within medicine's resident-selection process. Dishonesty is incorporated into and encouraged during this process, and there is little need for medical students and other participants to reflect upon their actions. This essay, which won the $1500 first prize in CMAJs 1996 Logie Medical Ethics Essay Contest, looks at the serious consequences of this lying and deception. Dr. Tara Young discusses the moral dilemma applicants for residencies face during their final year of undergraduate training.
OBJECTIVES: To determine which components of a residency Web site (RWS) are important to residency applicants. METHODS: The authors performed a cross-sectional observational study of residency applicants. All applicants were invited to participate and were provided with a nine-question survey. Applicants were asked questions regarding the importance and impact of RWSs on the residency application process. They were also asked to rate items regarding content and aesthetics, and then rank all items in order of importance. Descriptive statistics are reported. Rank-order displays were determined using the Condorcet choice method. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-eight (82%) of the applicants responded to the survey. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents reported that information provided in an RWS influenced their decision to apply to a particular program (41% decided not to apply to at least one program based on the quality of its RWS). Applicants believed that presentation of the residency curriculum was most important. Information about the hospital and its affiliates, faculty and resident information, and research activities followed in the rank order. Least important to applicants were the aesthetic quality of the site, faculty/resident photographs, and educational resource materials. The authors report additional areas of content that applicants thought would be useful to view. CONCLUSIONS: The content, and not necessarily the aesthetic quality, of an RWS is important to residency applicants. The residency program Web site would seem to be an important factor in the applicant's decision to apply. The applicant's perspective provides training program directors and administrators with focused direction in Web site development or for upgrading existing RWSs for use by future applicants.