• J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. · May 2003

    Comparative Study

    Applicants' opinions about the selection process for oral and maxillofacial surgery programs.

    • Robert D Marciani, Timothy A Smith, and Lisa J Heaton.
    • Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0558, USA. marciard@ucmail.uc.edu
    • J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2003 May 1;61(5):608-14.

    PurposeThis study was conducted to investigate the characteristics of and opinions about the selection process of applicants to residency programs in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS) in the year 2000. The current investigation paralleled a survey completed in the 1970s, with additional questions to assess contemporary curriculum and surgical training evolution. Differences from the previous (1976) survey, a profile of applicants in 2000, and characteristics of OMS residency programs that applicants view as attractive are discussed.Subjects And MethodsQuestionnaires were sent to 307 applicants to OMS residency programs registered in the dental matching program. To provide a more direct comparison of the study completed in 1977, the current questionnaire used the original survey as a model. It was divided into 6 sections: general information, information from the formal application and letters of recommendation, the interview, the selection process, the characteristics applicants were seeking in a program, and a retrospective review of programs visited.ResultsIn this study, 118 responses were received, representing 38% of the total. Respondents were predominately men (86%) and single, and attended dental school in all regions of the United States and the world. Respondents listed geographic location (65%) and national reputation (58%) as important factors for selecting programs to which to apply. Many respondents felt that a previous dental internship (85%), national board scores (83%), and class rank (79%) would be considered important in screening applicants for interview. A program's reputation, personalities of residents and attending staff, and clinical material were ranked as important factors contributing to program selection. Fifty-three of the 79 successful applicants reported that they were matched with their first-choice institution. Sixty percent of programs were considered worthy of revisiting by the respondents.ConclusionsRespondents in 2000 had more knowledge of the selection process before interviewing and submitted 2 times the number of applications than applicants in 1977. When selecting programs to which to apply, current applicants were less influenced by geographic location and the recommendations of other dentists. Applicants were attracted to programs that they perceive to have a good reputation and abundant clinical material. Residencies that convey a friendly atmosphere, favorable interpersonal skills of enrolled residents, and appealing personalities of the faculty were more attractive to candidates.Copyright 2003 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.