Abstract
Objective
To define applicant response to the preference signaling program and continuing virtual
aspects of the 2022 Urology Residency Match to guide future decisions surrounding
this process.
Methods
We emailed an anonymous, de-identified 20-question, multiple choice survey to all
applicants to our institution for the 2022 Urology Residency Match (RedCap). Where
appropriate, comparisons were made to already published data collected in an identical
manner from applicants to our institution for the 2021 Urology Residency Match.
Results
Of the 418 survey recipients, 155 (37%) responded to our survey. A majority of applicants
(83%) thought that preference signaling should remain in future years, and 66% of
applicants matched to a program to which they had signaled or where they completed
a subinternship. Geographic location of programs was ranked to have the highest impact
on choice of programs for preference signaling. Fifty-two percent of 2022 applicants
thought that interviews should remain virtual compared with 39% of 2021 applicants
(P = .03). Twenty-one percent of 2022 applicants agreed that pre/post-interview socials
were well-replicated virtually compared with 10% of 2021 applicants (P = .04).
Conclusion
A majority of urology applicants were satisfied with the preference signaling program,
suggesting that preference signaling should remain in future matches. A majority of
urology applicants now favor the virtual interview platform. While it is gaining greater
acceptance among applicants, the virtual platform generally still carries deficiencies.
Further research of the urology match process is necessary for continued optimization
of the program for all stakeholders.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to UrologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- The virtual urology residency match process: moving beyond the pandemic.Urology. 2021; 158: 33-38https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.06.038
Society of Academic Urologists. Society of academic urologists | preference signaling pilot. (n.d.). Retrieved from: https://sauweb.org/match-program/signaling.aspx. Accessed January 21, 2022
Society of Academic Urologists. Society of academic urologists | 2022 residency match changes. (n.d.). Retrieved from: https://sauweb.org/match-program/changes.aspx. Accessed January 21, 2022
- Improving the match: use of preference signaling to optimize the urology match interview process.Urology. 2021; 154: 57-61https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.01.042
- Preference signaling for the otolaryngology interview market.Laryngoscope. 2021; 131: E744-E745https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29151
- The financial burden of applying to urology residency in 2020.Urology. 2021; 154: 62-67https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.01.013
- The otolaryngology residency program preference signaling experience.Acad Med. 2021; (Ahead of Print)https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004441
- Preference signaling for competitive residency programs in the NRMP.J Grad Med Educ. 2019; 11: 733-734https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-19-00695.1
- A novel approach to the national resident matching program—the star system.JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018; 144: 397-398https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2018.0068
- A computer simulation model to analyze the application process for competitive residency programs.J Grad Med Educ. 2019; 11: 30-35https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-18-00397.1
American Urological Association. Urology residency matchstatistics. Retrieved from: https://www.auanet.org/education/auauniversity/for-residents/urology-and-specialty-matches/urology-match-results. Accessed May 2, 2022
- Capturing the perspective of prospective urology applicants: impacts of COVID-19 on medical education.Urology. 2020; 146: 36-42https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.027
- Urology residency applications in the COVID-19 era.Urology. 2020; (Published online)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.05.072
- The COVID-19 residency application cycle did not affect geographic dispersal patterns among applicants entering the urology match: a quantitative mapping study.Urology. 2021; 158: 26-32https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.05.093
- Applicants’ perspectives of the urology residency match process.Urol Pract. 2019; 6: 185-190https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urpr.2018.08.003
- Improving the residency program virtual open house experience: a survey of urology applicants.Urology. 2020; 146: 1-3https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.08.077
- The urology applicant: an analysis of contemporary urology residency candidates.Urology. 2018; 115: 51-58https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.10.065
- Digging into debt: the financial burden associated with the otolaryngology match.Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg (United States). 2017; 156: 1091-1096https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599816686538
- Survey of applicant experience and cost in the urology match: opportunities for reform.J Urol. 2015; 194: 1063-1067https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.04.074
- The urology match as a prisoner's dilemma: a game theory perspective.Urology. 2013; 82: 791-798https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.04.061
- Relationship between the number of residency applications and the yearly match rate: time to start thinking about an application limit?.J Grad Med Educ. 2015; 7: 81-85https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-14-00270.1
- Evaluating urology residency applications: what matters most and what comes next?.Curr Urol Rep. 2020; 21https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-020-00993-0
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 01, 2022
Accepted:
September 12,
2022
Received:
May 24,
2022
Footnotes
Financial disclosure: Steven J. Hudak is a paid consult for Boston Scientific Co.
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
