Background: To the best of our knowledge, no study has compared the effect of using the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) on applicant pool characteristics for a new emergency medicine (EM) residency program.
Objective: We sought to compare applicants in an EM residency program's first year, in which the ERAS is not typically used, to applicants in year 2 (using ERAS).
Methods: We reviewed the applications to the new University of Utah EM residency program for the entering classes of 2005 (year 1) and 2006 (year 2).
Background: Because of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the Residency Review Committee (RRC) approval timelines, new residency programs cannot use Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) during their first year of applicants.
Aim: We sought to identify differences between program directors' subjective ratings of applicants from an emergency medicine (EM) residency program's first year (in which ERAS was not used) to their ratings of applicants the following year in which ERAS was used.
Method: The University of Utah Emergency Medicine Residency Program received approval from the ACGME in 2004.