several CHOP alums in the audience, Tyler … congrats and good luck!

I will be monitoring the chat during the presentation and attempting to answer some questions in real time and/or bringing them to our presenters for discussion now or at a subsequent Q&A session.

I would feel awful if someone wanted to come visit us and we had no plan to rank them.

Timing would be an issue as well in Colorado

Assuming the start of the season is the same as last year, we would also have difficulty getting a rank list in by the 1st week of Feb.

I like this hybrid option. But I do worry about the type of money and benefits that programs will throw out for recruitment - travel, lodging, gifts, etc. I think APPD needs to be very specific to applicants and programs about how money can be spent by programs.

Would you think that programs would limit the number of people that could 'look' at their program? I am wondering how we should structure that time wihtout really being able to anticipate how many/who might come.

^that issue makes me wonder about a tiered interview system where there is an initial virtual interview followed by an in person opportunity if invited? Could you create a system to limit programs that applicants can visit (say 5) so there is more equity in ability to visit programs

Is this just for residency, or would this be a potential for fellowship programs as well? Or would it be tested with residency first?

My concern about having an optional in-person option is that the applicants who are more financially secure, will have an advantage. This is potentially an equity problem still, in my opinion.

Vanderbilt interviews until the end of January- so issue for us too

Also concern for those applying to > 15 places, how do they fit all those visits in?

Would you have any recommendations for visiting medical students? It seems like another transportation cost to visit a program in person if they have already rotated with us

Totally understand - I was trying to wrap my brain around how that would work too :)

Recruiting to Birmingham, especially URiM applicants, is extremely difficult without applicants meeting our people and seeing our community.

UC Irvine here. Agree with timing. We interview to mid Jan, so Feb is a quick turnaround. Could match day be pushed later if there is a push for this hybrid?

On the other end, how do we ensure the time is meaningful when we are showcasing our programs before interviews start, ie, open houses? In speaking to a number of students this year, they felt zoom fatigue before interviews had even started. Between the offerings from FuturePedsRes and individual offerings from programs, students were overwhelmed with the number of virtual sessions they wanted to attend/felt they should attend (optional can feel mandatory in many situations).

I think it's a valuable idea. From my advising perspective, I know students would appreciate the opportunity and we could likely submit our list earlier.

Are we inviting them or is this an opportunity?

I don't believe bias could be 100% eliminated for those who elected not to visit in person, either because of prohibitive cost or otherwise.

Would we be able to break the time by region so they may come to the area anyway and it wouldn't cost anything additional?

@ Rebecca Swan - the plan had been for this not to be by invitation

if you limit the number of places students can travel to, that potentially limits the inequity, i.e. if they can only visit 0-3 that is *less* inequity than 0-20

Not in favor of "inviting"

I was not envisioning an invite system

Sounds like that number has increased since COVID?

I like the idea of pushing match day by a couple of weeks. I like the hybrid option since we are one of the institutions that is more impressive in person:) Since it would be after our ranking is submitted, it takes away the issue of un-leveling the playing field.

I like the hybrid option but am also curious how many students would actually do a second look as the pressure is off since the programs rank list would also be submitted. Is there a way to survey students and see? Getting a rank list in order by feb 1 would be difficult but not impossible at UCSF

we are not planning on inviting it would be optional...

Many applicants asked me to visit - felt bad denying. Have to find away to allow them to visit

Would there be specific dates for second looks? Or based on applicant availability as drop-in second looks? How can we keep this consistent across programs?

I like the idea...I invision more of an open house..maybe a 2 or 3 of them so it wouldn't be too time consuming for the current residents/faculty etc

I think this would be very helpful for our applicants! Thank you for considering and pushing for this option.

I really like the idea of a hybrid option (without invitations). Pushing the dates a bit later would make that easier, but we could make adjustments for early February. Boundaries on program expenditures would be helpful but I'm not sure it's possible in reality.

Thanks for so thoughtfully exploring the options!

@ Bridget Voigt that is a nice idea - very similar to the way colleges do it!

This is what we had proposed as a group GME activity- open house at the University of Vermont for this past year but then our institution didn't allow any visitors.

Have some Virtual interview days and some IN-Person interview days.Offer the applicants to ether interview virtually or in person.

Should we consider offering open house type visits in Summer /Fall prior to interviews? travel in Winter can be more difficult ( road conditions, flights)

Can you give us the link for the data in the chat?

That's interesting Suzanne. A prelook almost. Also not required but for the benefit of the applicant.

Suzanne, love that idea! Put the experience BEFORE the interview invites

Great idea Suzanne!

@ Jennifer Trainor: For the AAMC data we will provide the links in the slides which we can share.

Also love that!

And a prelook-- the residents aren't as tired yet from the year :)

Thank you @Rachel Thompson

@suzanne, wont that give the impression that attendance in that prelook event would give them advantage in receiving an invitation?

ERAS hadn’t changed their application since 1996…the supplemental application is meant to help prioritize which activities they find most important and why (rather than the list of 20 most applicants include)

I agree that timing of the "prelook" would be very nice for resident morale. However, I agree with Ashley and wonder whether applicants would feel that they had to attend to show their interest since it would be done prior to the program submitting their rank list.

Displaying "no information" indicates that the student does not want to be in your region, given the other potential options that are available.

"what is most meaningful activity?" is typically my first interview question … very intuitive upgrade to application

@Steve Brennan - yes, this is correct. You will know that they have opted a geographic preference but not including your region.

If an applicant is applying to more than 1 specialty, they could signal up to 5 programs for each specialty?

How do you recommend not letting signaling knowledge roll into rank meetings? That could be tricky if same ERAS reviewers are on your selection/rank committee as well.

@Sylvia Yeh - that is a good question which we can clarify. Not all specialties are doing signaling this year, I will find the link with which specialties are opting in

Programs then do not share the signaling information with the interviewers?

Yes, signaling and geographic preferencing could easily find their way into ranking meetings

@Sylvia, each specialhttps://students-residents.aamc.org/applying-residencies-eras/supplemental-eras-application-eras-2023-cyclety is different in how many signals they have.

@Jodi Leonard - this has indeed been a point of important conversation, but programs should be mindful that students have not yet interviewed when they signal and so their interest in a program may have changed dramatically by the time of rank lists so as to potentially not be relevant any more.

@Sylvia - https://students-residents.aamc.org/applying-residencies-eras/supplemental-eras-application-eras-2023-cycle. Each specialty is a bit different in how many signals they will accept

I repeat regularly throughout our rank day that it really doesn't matter whether they want to come to our program. What matters is whether we want them. we will find out whether they want us on rank day

@Michelle Barnes - the goal is that the signal be an “ask” of a program to do a more holistic review of their application and not be conveyed down the line.

*on Match day

@rachel thank you!

Will supplemental app be incorporated into the ERAS application? (not a second/separate app?)

are there screen shots from participating programs last season about what these 3 elements look like?

@Jodi Leonard - at present the deadline for the supplemental application is due earlier than ERAS (around 7-10days). Whether it will subsequently be incorporated may be determined after this pilot phase.

my wife and I couples matched … the program that we were most excited about before interviews is the program that we ultimately ranked last

will we have to choose to participate in each of the 3 parts individually? or is it participate in all 3 or none?

there are a lot of geographic preferences. Why not list the actual preference? I am 100 miles from the next region to the West and 150 miles from the next region to the south. If someone choses those and not exactly my region I would find that a positive.

would a video upload be more useful than another written application? In the video we could ask them to answer the question" My ideal program would offer...XYZ ( large, vs small, location, special interests).

Will the students have to go through the signaling process? Will the programs know if the students chose to do it or not? Like will we know if they signaled but just didn't signal our program, or if they chose not to signal?

What are the contents within the supplemental application? Will those be program-specific?

@Bridget Voigt - we have proposed your question about how the opt in process works and awaiting a clarification

I can see signaling being useful but I do worry that students will feel that if they do not signal a program perceived to be particularly competitive/with high reputation, they feel they will be excluded from an interview. they will feel pressure to signal their reach programs

Although this info creeping into the rank list is a risk, I think that risk already exists when applicants email us saying, “You are my top choice” - so this shouldn’t be any more difficult to mitigate.

Yes - exactly what Dr. Dell is saying! 😅

So, then circling back to the Prelook. Doesn't that almost seem like a "Signal" and maybe we are okay with the influence that it might have on the program to do a more holistic review of the applicants who came to your program for a prelook.

completely agree this could be incredibly useful and advisors will need good faculty development

Our message from recent years, only apply to 15 programs unless you have exceptional circumstances doesn't seem to have been heeded by the vast majority of students.

How do we make progress on that.

Our program already has 2 supplemental questions to help us with our holistic review. It is my understanding that the supplemental application is set and cannot be individualized to the program. Is this correct?

Can we limit the number of applications that students are allowed ? example: each student can apply to max 15 programs. Some are applying to 30!

@Michelle, applicants can choose to participate in signaling or not…though most did in the pilots

@Carol Okada - this is correct. The questions in the supplemental application are set but rather broad. There will definitely be programs whose individual supplemental questions may be similar to what can be covered on the supplemental app. As advisors, we are certainly worried about the potential for an exhausting application process if students have supplemental applications to each individual program, so hopefully we can find a balance between the two.

Do we limit who attends these student virtual cafes to only students? So that they feel comfortable asking the questions without PDs and selection committee folks on the calls?

@Suzanne. AAMC/ERAS looked at what would happen to students with application limits. There was a significant disadvantage for IMGs.

@Suzanne, trying to get the number of apps down….currently 43/American MD student, 45/DO, and 80/IMG…have advised no more than 20/MD student and 25/DO students with no red flags.

What does "'universal invite" mean?

Do the applicants only submit the supplemental application to the programs they signal? or are the processes separate for the applicant?

We are also saving the chat and any questions not addressed we will be doing our best to circle back.

@Sylvia - some specialties send all their invites out on the same date

The “universal invite” would align us with other residency programs that have either one or a few set dates at which interview offers are released

Has there been any move toward standardize the LORs like has been done by our EM colleagues?

*standardizing

@Sam - will allow Mike Dell to respond specifically to this - however we feel there are needs in pediatrics that don’t quite fit into the super standardized letter that the EM programs use, but more guidelines for useful content.

@Michelle - programs will receive the supplemental application even for those students who don't signal you

Please submit questions/comments for future discussion to:https://forms.gle/cWTE6YKvZZWowKwP6

Regarding student only-session, our regional webinars have time with program leadership but also a dedicated student and resident only time to ask questions freely.

i like the idea of standardized letters.

My sense is that a "universal invite" date would disadvantage the smaller programs, or programs that would otherwise not get a lot of signals. We do rolling invites based on how many people accept in prior rounds as its hard to know who is really interested and not sure how the signaling will change that

@ Sam Zhao … we have a working group looking at rec's for LORs. Unlikely to be standardized, but optimistic about creating guidelines that will improve quality of letters from department and from general faculty

No option for rolling interview invites?

@ sylvia - agree!

will we have annual opt in for these 3 elements? we try them all this year but for our small program, supplemental wasnt helpful but signal was, etc... can we choose in the future?

@Michael Dell - thank you! I hate dinging an applicant just because of a poorly written LOR which could be more indicative of the letter writer’s skills than the applicant's

Are the Fellowship Programs going to be following this process beginning with the July Interview Season?

agreed, Sam

Small programs also get 2000+ applications

Smaller programs often have less staff to review the applications so enough time is also important

that makes much more sense

I appreciate that distinction!

hope to see some of you in Denver!

Yes, looking forward to meeting and seeing many of you this weekend!

No mater how all of these components roll out, it will take our teams more time, as we navigate a revised system. Let's give ourselves that time and grace to figure this out. :)

any feedback/research on satisfaction/surprises from residents who matched after virtual interview only?

I agree with the rolling option. I believe Ob-Gyn has waitlist as an option, and those are rolling thereafter. So if after the first (and second) dates, the applicant can be waitlisted so that those programs can still invite applicants later, rather than reject everyone not invited upfront.

This was a great conversation!

There is a great LEARN Study going on right now!

Thalamus recently shared some interesting data on the universal invite dates... (specifically the peak of OB release).. It ended up not being as equitable as one would think - applicants used multiple devices/people to log in. those with edu emails vs com emails took longer to load the systems. Also time zone issues/fairness. they recommended waves.

thanks everyone-- this is great!

Please submit questions/comments for future discussion to:https://forms.gle/cWTE6YKvZZWowKwP6

thank you!