A Clinical Informatics Program Directors' Proposal to the American Board of Preventive Medicine

Creation and Evaluation of a Clinical Informatics Match: Initial Findings

BACKGROUND

Clinical Informatics (CI) fellowship programs utilize the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) to gather applications but until recently used an American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) member-developed, simultaneous offer-acceptance process to match fellowship applicants to programs. In 2021, program directors collaborated with the AMIA to develop a new match to improve the process.

OBJECTIVE

Describe the results of the first 2 years of the match and address opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

We obtained applicant data for fellowship applicants in 2021 and 2022 from the ERAS and match data for the same years from the AMIA. We analyzed our data using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

There were 159 unique applicants over the 2-year period. Applicants submitted 2,178 applications with a median of 10 per applicant (interquartile range [IQR] 3-20). One hundred and four applicants (65.4%) participated in the match and ranked a median of seven programs (2-12). Forty-two programs in 2021 and 47 programs in 2022 offered a combined total 153 positions in the match. Participating programs ranked a median of eight applicants per year (IQR 5-11). Of participating applicants, 95 (91.3%) successfully matched and of those 66 (69.5%) received their top choice. Thirty-two programs (76.2%) matched at least one candidate in 2021 and 33 programs (70.2%) matched at least one candidate in 2022. In both years, 24 programs filled all available slots (57.1% in 2021 and 51.1% in 2022).

CONCLUSION

Applicants were extremely successful in the new match, which successfully addressed most of the challenges of the simultaneous offer-acceptance process identified by program directors. However, applicant attrition resulted in a quarter of programs going unmatched. Although many programs still filled slots outside the match, fellowship slots may remain unfilled while the CI practice pathway remains open.

Applied Clinical Informatics Journal: A Brief History

In 2009, Schattauer Verlag in Stuttgart, Germany first published the Applied Clinical Informatics (ACI) Journal. ACI has served since its inception as an official journal of the International Medical Informatics Association. Later, the American Medical Informatics Association and the European Federation for Medical Informatics named ACI as an official journal. This manuscript describes the history of the journal from its inception to present day including publication measures, challenges, and successes.

Cytopathology fellowship recruitment: Has the time come to consider a unified approach?

INTRODUCTION

Cytopathology (CYP) fellowship training is a critical component of maintaining a skilled group of cytopathologists. For years, the recruitment process for CYP fellowship programs has remained unchanged, with individual programs outlining their own requirements and timeline, and applicants bearing the cost of travel and dealing with the variable processes outlined by individual programs. However, there has been renewed interest in analyzing the recruitment process for CYP fellowships to look for areas of potential improvement and uniformity.

METHODS

With the goal of gauging the interest of CYP fellowship program directors (PDs) in a more unified approach to recruitment or a formal match process, the ASC Cytopathology Program Directors Committee (CPDC) surveyed PDs via SurveyMonkey and organized special webinars with polling over a 4-year time frame (2017-2021), and examined Qualtrics survey data collected by the American Board of Pathology (ABPath) in 2020.

RESULTS

The response rate for PDs was greatest in a formal survey by the ABPath (66 respondents; 71% of PDs) conducted in 2020, and lower for an ASC survey in 2021 (61 respondents, 66% of PDs) and 2017 (19 respondents; 21% of PDs) and two recent ASC webinars (10 and 26 respondents; 11% and 28% of PDs). Support for a fellowship match process varied from 29% to 77%, respondent uncertainty ranged from 13% to 50%, and a lack of support ranged from 10% to 60%. In aggregate, approximately 56% of respondents would be in favor of a more standardized process. Recently, after hearing about other fellowships experimenting with a standardized process, the interest in a unified approach doubled from approximately 29% to 60%, and the percentage of PDs with uncertainty decreased from 50% to 26%. In the most recent follow up survey, interest reached the highest level of 77% among PDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Herein we present several years of feedback from the CYP fellowship PD community regarding a more standardized approach to CYP fellowship recruitment, culminating in the latest survey with 77% of CYP fellowship PDs expressing interest. Thus, details about what a unified timeframe may look like for CYP fellowships is presented to show how this may improve the recruitment process for the mutual benefit for programs and applicants.