Ja. Delisa et al., FACTORS USED BY PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION RESIDENCY TRAINING DIRECTORS TO SELECT THEIR RESIDENTS, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation, 73(3), 1994, pp. 152-156
A 17-item questionnaire was designed to assess the relative importance
of various factors to physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) tra
ining directors when ranking PM&R resident applicants during the Natio
nal Resident Match. The questionnaire was sent to all PM&R residency t
raining directors. The recipients were asked to grade most selection f
actors based on a numerical scale: 1, unimportant; 2, some importance;
3, important; 4, very important; 5, critical. The specific factors ad
dressed in the questionnaire were: academic criteria, letters of recom
mendation, individual applicant characteristics and aspects of the int
erview process. Twelve yes-or-no questions were also designed to deter
mine the weight that residency training directors place on certain aca
demic criteria. A response rate of 88% (66/75) was obtained. The most
important academic criteria were grades in a PM&R clerkship in their f
acility (4.1 +/- 0.8), followed by grades in a PM&R clerkship in anoth
er facility (3.6 +/- 0.9). The most important letters of recommendatio
n were from a PM&R faculty member in the respondent's department (4.0
+/- 0.8), followed by the dean's letter (3.7 +/- 1.0) and the PM&R cha
irman's letter (3.7 +/- 1.0). The three most important applicant chara
cteristics evaluated during the interview were compatibility with the
program (4.4 +/- 0.8), the ability to articulate thoughts (4.2 +/- 0.8
) and the ability to work with the team (4.2 +/- 0.8). Most program di
rectors used multiple criteria to complete their rank list, but the mo
st important were based upon the interview (4.5 +/- 0.9), letters of r
ecommendation (3.7 +/- 0.9), medical school transcript (3.6 +/- 0.8) a
nd the dean's letter (3.6 +/- 1.1). Knowledge of the specialty, person
al statements and research interest were the least important candidate
criteria. The majority of respondents believed that clinical and prec
linical honor grades were more important than honor status on the Unit
ed States Medical Licensing Examination steps 1 and 2.