Few data have been published regarding scoring tools for selection of postgraduate medical trainee candidates that have wide applicability.Objectives:
The authors present a novel scoring tool developed to assist postgraduate programs in generating an institution-specific rank list derived from selected elements of the U.S. Electronic Residency Application System (ERAS) application.Methods:
The authors developed and validated an ERAS and interview day scoring tool at five pulmonary and critical care fellowship programs: the ERAS Application Scoring Tool-Interview Scoring Tool. This scoring tool was then tested for intrarater correlation versus subjective rankings of ERAS applications. The process for development of the tool was performed at four other institutions, and it was performed alongside and compared with the “traditional” ranking methods at the five programs and compared with the submitted National Residency Match Program rank list.Results:
The ERAS Application Scoring Tool correlated highly with subjective faculty rankings at the primary institution (average Spearman's r = 0.77). The ERAS Application Scoring Tool-Interview Scoring Tool method correlated well with traditional ranking methodology at all five institutions (Spearman's r = 0.54, 0.65, 0.72, 0.77, and 0.84).Conclusions:
This study validates a process for selecting and weighting components of the ERAS application and interview day to create a customizable, institution-specific tool for ranking candidates to postgraduate medical education programs. This scoring system can be used in future studies to compare the outcomes of fellowship training.