Factors Important to Students in Selecting a Resdency Program

In 1988, 6.312 residency programs filled 17,621 of their 20,292 available house officer positions through the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP). The function of the NRMP is to match medical students with residency programs based on ranking lists submitted by both matriculating seniors and residency program directors. While program directors have substantial experience in evaluating medical students, matriculating seniors have essentially no experience in evaluating residency programs. Nevertheless, by midwinter of their senior year, students are required to submit a ranking list of residency programs for which they wish to be considered. The ranking list reflects the factors that the applicant considers important when assessing a training program; the student's priorities are the result of conversations with program faculty, residents, and other students, and reference to various printed materials. While much has been written on the residency selection process, a limited number of studies have focused on applicants' priorities in ranking programs. Decker and Cohen' studied selection factors by surveying a large number of residency applicants to a single training program. Results indicated that four factors significantly influenced the rankings reported by prospective residents: (1) extensive responsibility for patients; (2) the program's being based in a municipal hospital; (3) low socioeconomic status of the patients; and H) personal considerations. Factors such as workload, on-site experience, ancillary staff, physical plant, elective opportunities, and supervision were not found to influence ranking significantly.

 

Eagleson and Tobetic' surveyed medical students at Warne State University who intended to participate in a family practice residency program. Important selection factors identified included (1) the house officers' satisfaction with the program; (2) students' impressions of house officer quality; their impressions of the residency director; and (3) the pro· gram's geographic location. Financial concerns and university affiliations were not found to influence program ranking significantly. Similar results have been reported by DiTomasso and colleagues,' who surveyed 830 family practice residents during their internship. Weissman and Bashook' studied the program-selection priorities of psychiatry house officers and found the program structure and for· mat to be the priority for 43% of those surveyed. Sledge and col· leagues· found geographic location, clinical training, experience, and general impression to be important selection factors, as reported by a group of psychiatry interns.

 

 The current investigation was undertaken to examine students' priorities when ranking residency programs. While previous studies of this subject have provided valuable information, they have been limited by including only selection factors in a single specialty or at a single residency program.