The role of blinded interviews in the assessment of surgical residency candidates

Am J Surg. 2001 Aug;182(2):143-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(01)00668-7.

Abstract

Background: Interview assessments of surgical residency candidates may be biased by prior knowledge of objective data.

Methods: Each candidate (site 1: n = 88; site 2: n = 44) underwent two interviews, one by faculty members informed only of a candidate's medical school, the second with prior knowledge of the complete application. Interviewers (site 1: n = 28; site 2: n = 14) independently rated candidates overall and on nine qualitative characteristics.

Results: At site 1 only, overall ratings were significantly more favorable for unblinded than blinded interviews (23.0 +/- 17.7 versus 32.6 +/- 23.1, P < 0.01). Blinded and unblinded overall ratings correlated -0.01 (P = 0.90) and 0.31 (P = 0.05) at sites 1 and 2, respectively. At site 1 only, overall ratings correlated significantly with USMLE scores, but in opposite directions for blinded (r = 0.32, P = 0.003) versus unblinded interviews (r = -0.32, P = 0.003).

Conclusion: Interview assessments may be influenced by objective data, and faculty and program variables. The value of blinded interviewing may vary as a function of individual program characteristics.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Educational Measurement*
  • General Surgery / education*
  • Humans
  • Internship and Residency*
  • Interviews as Topic* / methods
  • Prospective Studies
  • Single-Blind Method