COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO METHODS FOR THE RANKING OF RESIDENCY APPLICANTS IN DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO METHODS FOR THE RANKING OF RESIDENCY APPLICANTS IN DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGYMichelle S. Collins, Anne M. Curtis, Keyonna C. Artis, Lawrence H. Staib and Jamal Bokhari. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yale University, School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.The introduction of inconsistencies and excessive subjectivity into the ranking of applicants for diagnostic radiology residency is commonplace and difficult to eliminate. We propose that the incorporation of a mathematical method, without subsequent subjective adjustment will reduce the most troubling problems encountered. We aim to evaluate this method as implemented by the selection committee for Yales Diagnostic Radiology Residency Program.Three rank order lists were complied over three years: A subjective list developed by committee consensus on appropriate rank for each applicant. A mathematical list made by applying an equation to individual rank lists maintained by interviewers, and a final rank list submitted to the NRMP, which was formed after comparison of the two aforementioned lists. Applicants with a significant discrepancy in rank on the subjective and mathematical lists were reassessed and reassigned if deemed necessary to form this final list.Over three years, 224 applicants were ranked in total, with 109 of those reevaluated (49%) and 24 ultimately reassigned (11%).As implied by the numbers of applicants reassigned, the mathematical method used in parallel with the subjective method has proven useful in reducing subjectivity and inconsistencies facilitating the creation of a more fair and accurate rank order list.