Dataset Information

An Examination of Standardized Letters of Recommendation Rating Scales Among Neurosurgical Residency Candidates During the 2020-2021 Application Cycle.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Letters of recommendation (LORs) are historically an important, though subjective, component of the neurosurgery residency application process. Standardized LORs (SLORs) were introduced during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. The intent of SLORs is to allow objective comparison of applicants and to reduce bias.

Objective

To examine the utility of SLORs during this application cycle. We hypothesized that "grade inflation" and poor inter-rater reliability, as described by other specialties using SLORs, would limit the utility of SLORs in their current form.

Methods

This cross-sectional study analyzed all SLORs submitted to a single neurosurgery residency program over the 2020 to 2021 cycle. Data from 7 competency domains and the overall rating were recorded and stratified by academic category of letter writer. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using Krippendorff's alpha.

Results

One or more SLORs was submitted as part of 298 of 393 applications (76%). Approximately 58.3% of letters written by neurosurgery chairpersons rated a given applicant as being within the top 5% across all competencies. Approximately 44.4% of program director letters similarly rated applicants as amongst the top 5%, while 73.2% and 81.4% of letters by other neurosurgeons and general surgery evaluators, respectively, rated applicants in the top 5%. Inter-rater reliability was poor (<0.33) in all rating categories, including overall (α = 0.18).

Conclusion

The utility of the first iteration of SLORs in neurosurgery applications is undermined by significant "grade inflation" and poor inter-rater reliability. Improvements are necessary for SLORs if they are to provide meaningful information in future application cycles.

SUBMITTER: Feldman MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8600167 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An Examination of Standardized Letters of Recommendation Rating Scales Among Neurosurgical Residency Candidates During the 2020-2021 Application Cycle.

Feldman Michael J MJ Ortiz Alexander V AV Roth Steven G SG Dambrino Robert J RJ Yengo-Kahn Aaron M AM Chitale Rohan V RV Chambless Lola B LB

Neurosurgery 20211101 6

<h4>Background</h4>Letters of recommendation (LORs) are historically an important, though subjective, component of the neurosurgery residency application process. Standardized LORs (SLORs) were introduced during the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. The intent of SLORs is to allow objective comparison of applicants and to reduce bias.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine the utility of SLORs during this application cycle. We hypothesized that "grade inflation" and poor inter-rater reliability, as described ...[more]

PMID: 34624075

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: This survey aims to identify the relative value and the critical components of anesthesiology letters of recommendation(LORs) from the perspective of Program Directors (PDs) and Associate/Assistant Program Directors (APDs). Knowledge and insights originating from this survey might add to the understanding of the anesthesiology residency selection process and mitigate unintended linguistic biases.Methodology: Anonymous online surveys were sent to anesthesiology PDs/APDs from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited anesthesiology residency Programs in the USA (US), as listed on the ACGME website and the American Medical Association Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database (AMA FREIDA) Residency Program Database. The survey authors were blinded to the identity of the respondents.Results: 62 out of 183 (33.8%) invited anesthesiology PDs/APDs completed the survey anonymously. In our survey, LORs are reported as more important in granting an interview than in making the rank list. 64% of respondents prefer narrative LORs. 77.4% of respondents look for specific keywords in LORs. Keywords such as 'top % of students' and 'we are recruiting this candidate' indicate a strong letter of recommendation while keywords such as 'I recommend to your program' or non-superlative descriptions indicate a weak letter of recommendation. Other key components of LORs include the specialty of the letter-writer, according to 84% of respondents, with anesthesiology as the most valuable specialty. Although narrative LORs are preferred, 55.1% of respondents are not satisfied with the content of narrative LORs.Conclusion: LORs containing specific keywords play an important role in the application to anesthesiology residency, particularly when submitted by an anesthesiologist. While narrative LORs are still the preferred format, most of our respondents feel they need improvements. The authors suggest specific LOR improvements including creating formalized LOR training, adding a style guide, and applying comparative scales, with standardized vocabulary in the narrative LOR.

Project description:IntroductionThe persistent lack of racial and ethnic diversity within the field of otolaryngology calls for an analysis of potential bias within the residency application system. Letters of recommendation (LORs) and personal statements (PSs) are the most important subjective application constituents. This subjectivity predisposes these components to implicit bias. In applications to various surgical subspecialties, prior linguistic studies assessing bias in reviews of LOR show race-based differences. Thus far, racial and ethnic linguistic differences in LORs for otolaryngology applicants have not been analyzed in the literature.MethodsLORs and PSs were abstracted from otolaryngology - head and neck surgery applications in the Electronic Residency Application Service for the 2019-20 and 2020-21 application cycles. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count 2015 was used for quantitative analysis of emotional, cognitive, and structural components of written text.ResultsRace-pair analysis of the 2019-2021 application cycles revealed higher mean "teaching" scores for LORs for Asian, black, Hispanic, and white applicants when compared to applicants who self-identified as Other. White applicants had lower scores for the terms "research" and "analytic" when compared to Asian and black applicants, respectively. Analysis of PSs revealed greater scores for an "authentic" writing style for white versus Asian applicants. White applicants were found to have higher scores for "tone" compared to black applicants.ConclusionMinor racial and ethnic language differences exist in both LORs and PSs. A statistically significant difference was observed among LORs, with the "teaching" term used more frequently for Asian, black, Hispanic, and white applicants compared to self-identified Other individuals. For PSs, statistically significant differences were observed among white applicants, who wrote about themselves using more "authentic" language when compared with Asian applicants and who also had higher scores for "tone" compared to black applicants. Although these differences were statistically significant, the practical impact of the variances is likely small.

Project description:BackgroundLetters of recommendation are considered one of the most important factors for whether an applicant is selected for an interview for orthopaedic surgery residency programs. Language differences in letters describing men versus women candidates may create differential perceptions by gender. Given the gender imbalance in orthopaedic surgery, we sought to determine whether there are differences in the language of letters of recommendation by applicant gender.Questions/purposes(1) Are there differences in word count and word categories in letters of recommendation describing women and men applicants, regardless of author gender? (2) Is author gender associated with word category differences in letters of recommendation? (3) Do authors of different academic rank use different words to describe women versus men applicants?MethodsUsing a linguistic analysis in a retrospective study, we analyzed all letters of recommendation (2834 letters) written for all 738 applicants with completed Electronic Residency Application Service applications submitted to the Johns Hopkins Orthopaedic Surgery Residency program during the 2018 to 2019 cycle to determine differences in word category use among applicants by gender, authors by gender, and authors by academic rank. Thirty nine validated word categories from the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count dictionary along with seven additional word categories from previous publications were used in this analysis. The occurrence of words in each word category was divided by the number of words in the letter to obtain a word frequency for each letter. We calculated the mean word category frequency across all letters and analyzed means using non-parametric tests. For comparison of two groups, a p value threshold of 0.05 was used. For comparison of multiple groups, the Bonferroni correction was used to calculate an adjusted p value (p = 0.00058).ResultsLetters of recommendation for women applicants were slightly longer compared with those for men applicants (366 ± 188 versus 339 ± 199 words; p = 0.003). When comparing word category differences by applicant gender, letters for women applicants had slightly more "achieve" words (0.036 ± 0.015 versus 0.035 ± 0.018; p < 0.0001). Letters for men had more use of their first name (0.016 ± 0.013 versus 0.014 ± 0.009; p < 0.0001), and more "young" words (0.001 ± 0.003 versus 0.000 ± 0.001; p < 0.0001) than letters for women applicants. These differences were very small as each 0.001 difference in mean word frequency was equivalent to one more additional word from the word category appearing when comparing three letters for women to three letters for men. For differences in letters by author gender, there were no word category differences between men and women authors. Finally, when looking at author academic rank, letters for men applicants written by professors had slightly more "research" terms (0.011 ± 0.010) than letters written by associate professors (0.010 ± 0.010) or faculty of other rank (0.009 ± 0.011; p < 0.0001), a finding not observed in letters written for women.ConclusionsAlthough there were some minor differences favoring women, language in letters of recommendation to an academic orthopaedic surgery residency program were overall similar between men and women applicants.Clinical relevanceGiven the similarity in language between men and women applicants, increasing women applicants may be a more important factor in addressing the gender gap in orthopaedics.

Dataset Information

An Examination of Standardized Letters of Recommendation Rating Scales Among Neurosurgical Residency Candidates During the 2020-2021 Application Cycle.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

An Examination of Standardized Letters of Recommendation Rating Scales Among Neurosurgical Residency Candidates During the 2020-2021 Application Cycle.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets