Is There Bias in Virtual Interviews for Emergency Medicine Residency?

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Residency Admissions
• Interview Assessment

Background:

• The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of virtual interviews in residency programs.
• The impact of virtual versus in-person interview formats on applicant scoring remains unclear.
• Understanding format-based evaluation differences is crucial as programs offer both options.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate potential bias in residency applicant interview scores.
• To determine if interview format (virtual vs. in-person) influences applicant scores.

Main Methods:

• Retrospective analysis of two years (2023-2025) of residency applicant data from the Electronic Residency Application System.
• Comparison of baseline characteristics between virtual and in-person interviewed applicants.
• Linear regression analysis to identify predictors of interview scores, including interview format.

Main Results:

• A total of 241 applicants were analyzed (130 virtual, 111 in-person).
• Baseline characteristics were largely similar between groups, with minor differences in standardized letter of evaluation (SLOE) scores and state of residence.
• Interview format was not a significant predictor of interview score; Golden Humanism, Alpha Omega membership, female gender, and SLOE scores positively correlated with scores.

Conclusions:

• No significant difference in interview scores was observed between virtual and in-person formats when controlling for other variables.
• Applicant evaluation appears robust across both virtual and in-person interview modalities.
• These findings support the continued use of both interview formats without inherent scoring bias.