May 2007
Volume 48, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2007
Who Is the Ideal Candidate for Anterior Segment Fellowships?
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • J. E. Kempton
    Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  • N. Afshari
    Ophthalmology, Duke University Eye Center, Durham, North Carolina
  • M. B. Shields
    Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  • R. A. Adelman
    Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships J.E. Kempton, None; N. Afshari, None; M.B. Shields, None; R.A. Adelman, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2007, Vol.48, 4707. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      J. E. Kempton, N. Afshari, M. B. Shields, R. A. Adelman; Who Is the Ideal Candidate for Anterior Segment Fellowships?. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):4707.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose:: To determine which criteria are important and used by glaucoma and cornea and external disease fellowship directors in their selection of fellows.

Methods:: A questionnaire, consisting of sixteen selection criteria, was sent to fellowship directors at 50 glaucoma and 60 cornea and external disease programs in the United States and Canada listed in the San Francisco Matching Program. The directors were asked to prioritize selection criteria on a scale of 1 to 9 and to write-in additional criteria they considered to be most important in the selection process. In addition, the directors for the cornea and external disease programs were asked if they favored ACGME accreditation in their respective fields.

Results:: Forty-four glaucoma and 51 cornea and external disease program directors responded (88% and 85%, respectively). The applicant’s ability to work and communicate with colleagues and patients received the highest priority in the glaucoma group (8.48) and the impression gained in the interview was the most important to the cornea and external disease directors (8.44). Whether an applicant had a PhD or MPH or other advanced degrees were the least important in both subspecialties. The most important criteria in the write-in responses was letters of recommendation and calls from colleagues in glaucoma (27.3%) and the interview process in cornea and external disease (26%). Regarding ACGME accreditation, 25.5% of cornea and external disease directors were in favor, 66.7% were against, and 7.8% were undecided.

Conclusions:: The applicant’s ability to work and communicate with colleagues and patients, the interview process, and recommendations from colleagues were the highest criteria for selection of anterior segment fellows. There continues to be a split regarding ACGME Accreditation for cornea and external disease directors.

Keywords: clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: health care delivery/economics/manpower • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques • cornea: clinical science 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×