Medical Student Advising: Informed Individualized Advice Is the Key

Medical student advising during virtual residency recruitment: results of a national survey of internal medicine clerkship and sub-internship directors

INTRODUCTION

The residency application process is a critical time for medical students. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted changes to the residency recruitment procedures with the conversion of interviews to a virtual format. For medical school advisors guiding students on an all-virtual residency application process brought uncertainty to their advising practices. Thus, this study aimed to identify advising practices during the 2021 virtual application cycle.

METHODS

We administered an IRB-exempt national survey through the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine to 186 internal medicine core/co-/associate/assistant clerkship directors and sub-internship directors representing 140 Liaison Committee on Medical Education-accredited U.S./U.S.-territory-based medical schools in spring 2021. The 23-question survey was designed and pilot-tested by faculty-educators and leaders with expertise in undergraduate medical education. Data analysis included paired t- and z-tests and thematic analysis of open-ended questions.

RESULTS

The institutional response rate was 67% (93/140) and individual rate 55% (103/186). Half of the respondents felt prepared/very prepared (40% and 13% respectively) for their advising roles. Compared to pre-pandemic cycles, respondents advised a typical student in the middle-third of their class at their institution to apply to more residency programs (mean 24 programs vs 20, p < 0.001) and accept more interviews (mean 14 interviews vs 12, p < 0.001). Sixty-three percent (64/101) of respondents spent more time on student advising; 51% (51/101) reported more students asked them for informal advice. Fifty-nine percent (60/101) of respondents reported their advisees were able to assess a residency program 'somewhat well;' 31% (31/101) expressed that residency recruitment should remain entirely virtual in the future.

CONCLUSION

The transition to virtual residency recruitment due to COVID-19 prompted advising practices that may have contributed to application inflation and increased advising workload. Future studies should explore longitudinal outcomes of virtual interviews on student success to guide best practices in how to advise students during residency recruitment.

A Pilot Survey of Career and Professional Advising of Medical Schools in the United States

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Purpose: Scant information is available about the makeup of Career and Professional Advising systems, and who the advisors are in U.S. medical schools. We created a survey in 2019 and collated the responses to gain information about Advisors and advising systems. Materials and Methods: An 11 question survey was emailed to 72 U.S. medical schools, querying information about whether they had a Career and Professional Advising system and what is the construct of the system. Kruskal Wallis and Fisher's Exact tests were utilized for analysis. Results: 30/72 responses were received (41.67%). Educational backgrounds of advisors included: 27/30 (90%) by physicians; 7/30 (23.3%) by PhDs; 9/30 (30%) by Masters; 4/30 (13.3%) by others. AAMC Careers in Medicine curriculum was delivered in 23/30 (75.7%). Most advising systems were in Student Affairs (27/30, 90%), although only 20/30 (66.7%) reported to the Dean of Student Affairs. Conclusion: There was no unanimity in any of the responses to the 11 questions about who Career and Professional Advisors are, or how the systems are constructed. The closest to unanimity is that most medical schools have advising systems, that they are in Student Affairs departments, and that most advisors are physicians.

Twelve tips to facilitate the transition between research and clinical training in physician scientist education

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Medical scientist trainees who take extended scholarly time in the middle of their training experience challenges during transitions in training. As they complete their dissertation and re-enter the clinical years of medical school, there is marked by a loss of clinical knowledge and skills over a prolonged hiatus from medicine and mismatched expectations. We have developed a re-entry pathway including guidance, support, and a course to provide clinical skills and knowledge training to align expectations, dispel myths, and allow advanced planning to meet milestones. Students reporting satisfaction with their transition from PhD to MD3 and 90% of students reported that the pathway was valuable. We provide 12 tips on how to improve the transition from research to clinical training. Here we demonstrate that a planned pathway for the transition back to medical training can improve the student-mentor experience, reduce anxiety, and create a more seamless and successful transition.