4.5 Article

Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship applicant selection and ranking: A survey of Society of Surgical Oncology programs

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 127, Issue 1, Pages 34-39

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jso.27101

Keywords

breast surgery; Breast Oncology Fellowship; fellowship match

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the admission process of breast surgical oncology fellowship programs. The results showed that most programs have minimum score and publication requirements before inviting applicants for interviews. In the post-interview rank list, the applicant's interview performance, interpersonal skills, and letters of recommendation were the most important factors.
Background and Objectives In 2003, the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) initiated a breast surgical oncology fellowship, which has now grown to 60 SSO accredited programs as of 2021. Limited knowledge exists on the traits of successful applicants and the factors influencing the rank list. Methods A web-based, anonymous survey was sent to all SSO Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship program directors. The survey consisted of 26 questions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses and evaluate impact on applicant interview and rank list. Results Thirty-four programs (57% response rate) completed the survey. Programs received an average of 70 applications and granted 24 interviews. Most programs reported a minimum ABSITE cut-off score (n = 28, 82%) and a defined publication requirement (n = 22, 65%), including a first-author requirement (n = 18, 53%) to extend an invitation to interview. For postinterview rank, applicant interpersonal skills were highly valued. The interview was the most important aspect for the rank list. Conclusions Many programs have ABSITE and publication thresholds before offering an interview. Upon receiving interview invitation, the applicant's interview performance, interpersonal skills, and letters of recommendation were the most important aspect in rank list decision making.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available