Exploring Characteristics of Academic General Surgery Residency Applicants: A Group Concept-Mapping Approach.

Objective: Holistic review, which emphasizes qualitative attributes over objective measures, has been proposed as a method for selecting candidates for surgical residency in order to improve diversity in graduate medical education, and, ultimately, the field of surgery. This study seeks to articulate desirable traits of applicants as a first-step in standardizing the holistic review process.

Design: Using Group Concept Mapping, a web-based mixed-methods participatory research methodology, residency selection committee members were asked to 1) list desirable characteristics of applicants, 2) group these into categories, 3) rate their importance to academic/clinical success on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all important, 5 = extremely important), and 4) rate the degree to which each characteristic is feasible to assess on a 3-point Likert scale (1 = not at all feasible, 3 = very feasible). Grouped characteristics submitted to hierarchical cluster analysis depicted committee's consensus about desirable qualities/criteria for applicants. Bivariate scatter-plots and pattern-matching graphics demonstrated which of these criteria were most important and reliably assessed.

Setting: A single academic general surgery residency training program in Western Pennsylvania.

Participants: Members of the selection committee for the UPMC General Surgery Residency program who had participated in at least 1 prior cycle of applicant selection.

Results: Desirable characteristics of highly qualified applicants into an academic general surgery residency were clustered into domains of 1) scholarly work and research, 2) grades/formal assessments, 3) program fit, 4) behavioral assets, and 5) aspiration. Behavioral assets, which was felt to be the most important to clinical and academic success were considered to be the least feasible to reliably assess. Within this domain, initiative, being self-motivated, intellectual curiosity, work ethic, communication skills, maturity and self-awareness, and thoughtfulness were viewed as most frequently reliably assessed from the application and interview process.

Conclusions: High quality applicants possess several behavioral assets that faculty deem are important to academic and clinical success. Adapting validated metrics for assessing these assets, may provide a solution for addressing subjectivity and other challenges scrutinized by critics of holistic review.