Table 1 Characteristics of included studies
From: Video-based interviewing in medicine: a scoping review
Author | Year published | Title | City, country | Discipline of authors | Format of study | Sample size | Purpose of interview | Study design | Match cycle | Intervention | Comparator | Replacement for face-to-face interview or adjunct? | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of interviewers | Number of applicants | ||||||||||||
Winfield-Dial et al. | 2018 | Demographic differences between high and low scorers on the standardized video interview | Chicago, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 1440 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Winfield-Dial et al. | 2018 | Applicant attitudes towards the standardized video interview—an interim analysis | Chicago, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 80 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Humbert et al. | 2018 | Correlation of the standard video interview score with an established application review process | Indiana, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 964 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Naemi et al. | 2019 | Examining the relationship between the AAMC standardized video interview and step 2 CS subscores | Washington, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 2201 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2017 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Chukwumah et al. | 2010 | The use of remote computer audio-video processing to conduct surgical fellowship interviews of deployed physicians | Cleveland, USA | General surgery | Abstract | None | 26 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2011 | Skype panel interview | None | Replacement |
Chandler et al. | 2019 | Efficacy of videoconference interviews in the pediatric surgery match | Florida, USA | Pediatric surgery | Journal article | 3 | 20 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2017 | Videoconference interview | Initial virtual interview followed by face-to-face interview | Adjunct |
Chung et al. | 2019 | How well does the standardized video interview score correlate with traditional interview performance? | New York, USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 321 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | Face-to-face panel interview | Adjunct |
Brietkpof et al. | 2018 | One-way video interviewing as a method to augment the residency application | Minnesota, USA | Obstetrics and gynecology and orthopedic surgery | Abstract | None | 57 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2017 | One-way video interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Adjunct |
Tiller at al. | 2013 | Internet-based multiple mini-interviews for candidate selection for graduate entry programs | Sydney, Australia | Faculty of medicine | Journal article | 78 | 999 | Students applying to medical or dental school | Cohort study | 2009 - 2011 | Skype multiple mini-interviews | Face-to-face multiple mini-interview | Replacement |
Brietkpof et al. | 2019 | Use of asynchronous video interviews for selecting obstetrics and gynecology residents. | Minnesota, USA | Obstetrics/gynecology | Journal article | None | 219 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 - 2019 | Asynchronous video interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Adjunct |
Daram et al. | 2014 | Interview from anywhere: feasibility and utility of web-based videoconference interviews in the gastroenterology fellowship selection process | Mississippi, USA | Gastroenterology | Journal article | None | 16 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2013 | Facetime panel interview | Face-to-face interview | Adjunct |
Deiorio et al. | 2019 | Applicant reactions to the AAMC standardized video interview during the 2018 application cycle | United States | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 3532 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized Video Interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Hakes et al. | 2018 | Communication and professionalism: comparing standardized video interview scores to faculty gestalt | Wisconsin, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 65 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized Video Interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Edje et al. | 2013 | Using Skype as an alternative for residency selection interviews | Ohio, USA | Family medicine | Journal article | 11 | 19 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cohort study | 2012 | Skype panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Adjunct |
Egan et al. | 2019 | Standardized video interviews do not correlate to US medical licensing examination step 1 and step 2 scores | New York, USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 1329 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Gallahue at al. | 2019 | The AAMC standardized video interview: reactions and use by residency programs during the 2018 application cycle | USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | 125 | 3532 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Healy et al. | 2017 | Videoconference interviews for an adult reconstruction fellowship: lessons learned | Massachusetts, USA | Orthopedic surgery | Journal article | Not reported | 47 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2015 - 2017 | Skype panel interview | None | Replacement |
Hopson et al. | 2019 | Comparison of the standardized video interview and interview assessments of professionalism and interpersonal communication skills in emergency medicine | USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | 151 | 773 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Hopson et al. | 2019 | The AAMC standardized video interview and the electronic standardized letter of evaluation in emergency medicine: a comparison of performance characteristics | USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 2884 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Husain et al. | 2019 | The standardized video interview: how does it affect the likelihood to invite for a residency interview? | USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 1424 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Lewis et al. | 2018 | Standardized video interview scores do not correlate with attending evaluations | Massachusetts, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 24 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Willis et al. | 2018 | Are standardized video interview scores predictive of interview performance? | New York, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 57 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross--sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Bowers et al. | 2019 | Standard video interview scores and applicant position on residency program list: a correlation study | Ohio, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 1003 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Hall et al. | 2018 | Standard video interview score does not correlate with medical student communication skills | Massachusetts, USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 19 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
McHugh et al. | 2019 | Do standardized or traditional interview questions correlate with the standardized video interview? | USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 98 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cohort study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Staicu et al. | 2015 | FaceTime face-off: evaluation of video conferencing as a novel pre-interview screen for a PGY-1 pharmacy residency | New York, USA | Pharmacy | Abstract | None | 23 | Pharmacy students applying to pharmacy residency | Cross-sectional study | 2015 | Skype/FaceTime panel interview | None | Adjunct |
Temple et al. | 2014 | Streamlining the residency interview process using web-based teleconferencing | Cleveland, USA | Pharmacy | Journal article | None | 24 | Pharmacy students applying to pharmacy residency | Cross-sectional study | 2013 | Skype panel interview | None | Adjunct |
Hall et al. | 2019 | Standardized video interview scores correlate poorly with faculty and patient ratings | Massachusetts, USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | 58 | 36 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Ballejos et al. | 2018 | An equivalence study of interview platform: does videoconference technology impact medical school acceptance rates of different groups? | New Mexico, USA | Family medicine/emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 752 | Students applying to medical school | Quasi-experimental study | 2014 - 2016 | Skype panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Replacement |
Bird et al. | 2019 | Innovation in residency selection: the AAMC standardized video interview | USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 4387 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2017 - 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Schnapp et al. | 2019 | Assessing residency applicants’ communication and professionalism: standardized video interview scores compared to faculty gestalt | Wisconsin, USA | Emergency medicine | Journal article | None | 125 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Shah et al. | 2018 | The standardized video interview: how well does the SVI score correlate with traditional interview performance? | UA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 97 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | Face-to-face panel interview | Adjunct |
Shah et al. | 2012 | Randomized evaluation of a web-based interview process for urology resident selection | New Mexico, USA | Urology | Journal article | 6 | 33 | Medical school students applying to residency | Randomized trial | 2011 | Skype panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Replacement |
Vadi et al. | 2016 | Comparison of web-based and face-to-face interviews for application to an anesthesiology training program: a pilot study | California | Anesthesia | Journal article | None | 169 | Medical school students applying to residency | Quasi-experimental study | 2015 | Skype/FaceTime panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Replacement |
Krauss et al. | 2018 | Correlation between emergency medicine residency applicant’s standardized video interview scores and US medical licensing examination results | USA | Emergency medicine | Abstract | None | 1329 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2018 | Standardized video interview (SVI) | None | Adjunct |
Williams et al. | 2015 | Videoconference interviewing: tips for success | Arizona, USA | Internal medicine | Journal article | None | 6 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2014 | Skype panel interview | None | Replacement |
Molina et al. | 2020 | Virtual interviews for the complex general surgical oncology fellowship: the Dana-Farber/Partners Experience | Boston, USA | Complex general surgical oncology | Journal article | Not reported | Not reported | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2020 | Zoom panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Replacement |
Sripad | 2020 | Videoconference interviews for female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery fellowship during a pandemic: the candidate experience | Rhode Island, USA | Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery | Abstract | None | 14 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2020 | Zoom panel interview | None | Replacement |
Nutter et al. | 2020 | Perception of candidates and faculty on maternal fetal medicine fellowship videoconference interviewing | Texas, USA | Maternal fetal medicine | Abstract | Not reported | 14 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2018-2019 | Videoconference panel interview | None | Replacement |
McAteer et al. | 2020 | Videoconference interviews: a timely primary care residency selection approach | New York, USA | Family medicine | Journal article | Not reported | 39 | Medical school students applying to residency | Cross-sectional study | 2011-2020 | Skype panel interview | None | Adjunct |
Majumder et al. | 2020 | Initial experience with a virtual platform for advanced gastrointestinal minimally invasive surgery fellowship interviews | Missouri, USA | Advanced gastrointestinal minimally invasive surgery | Journal article | 7 | 17 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2019-2020 | Zoom panel interview | None | Replacement |
Grova et al. | 2020 | Direct comparison of in-person versus virtual interviews for complex general surgical oncology fellowship in the COVID-19 era | North Carolina, USA | Complex general surgical oncology | Journal article | None | 23 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cohort study | 2020 | Zoom panel interview | Face-to-face panel interview | Replacement |
Vining et al. | 2020 | Virtual surgical fellowship recruitment during COVID-19 and its implications for resident/fellow recruitment in the future | Illinois, USA | Complex general surgical oncology | Journal article | 12 | 16 | Residents applying to fellowships | Cross-sectional study | 2020 | Zoom panel interview | None | Replacement |
Author | Interview information | Methods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Description | Platform | Pre-interview information | Number of interviewers | Primary outcomes | Secondary outcomes | Type of analysis | |
Winfield-Dial et al. | SVI | N/A | Demographic (sex, race/ethnicity, medical school type, age, and step 1 score) differences between those that scored high vs. low on the SVI | None | Quantitative: chi-squared test | ||
Winfield-Dial et al. | SVI | N/A | Survey responses on applicants’ thoughts on the added value of the SVI | None | Quantitative: descriptive | ||
Humbert et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between internally developed composite score and SVI score | Correlation between internally developed composite score and SVI score with whether an interview was offered | Quantitative: Pearson correlation, point-biserial correlations | ||
Naemi et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI score and step 2 CS exam subscores (CIS, SEP, ICE) | None | Quantitative: Pearson correlation | ||
Chukwumah et al. | One videoconference interview (no further details provided) | Skype | None | Not reported | None | None | None |
Chandler et al. | Three 20-min interviews; applicants were ranked by each faculty before and after the virtual interview, and all applicants were invited for a face-to-face interview | Skype | Prior to interview, applicants were sent a detailed information packet outlining the fellowship program, instructions on how to set up a Skype account, and were asked to create their accounts 2 weeks prior | 3 different faculty members | 15 question survey for applicants and 8 question survey for faculty to assess perceptions regarding ease and convenience of virtual interview, ability to represent oneself, decision if the program and/or applicant is the right fit, and utility as a screening tool and/or substitute for on-site interview | Movement on pre-virtual interview rank list to post-virtual interview rank list; cost to applicants from interview process | Quantitative: descriptive, Student’s t-test, Fisher’s exact test |
Chung et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI score and traditional interview score | Variance of traditional interview score with SVI subgroup scores (6–11, 12–17, 18–23, 24–30) | Quantitative: linear regression, ANOVA | ||
Brietkpof et al. | One-way video interview with 3 questions and max. 3 min per questions | Not reported | None | N/A (videos were reviewed and scored independently by 2 reviewers using a standardized 5-point scale) | Correlation between one-way video interview scores and in-person interview scores | Applicant satisfaction with one-way video interview | Quantitative: correlation, descriptive |
Tiller at al. | 7-min questions with 2-min change over time; candidates were on their own laptop; interviewers rotated through 9 computer stations in a large room; 5 administrative staff and two IT staff; candidate reads the first line of scenario out loud to confirm they received the correct prompt | Skype | All applicants started with a meeting with IT 30 min prior to ensure good connectivity | One interviewer per station | Equivalence between in-person and online MMI (based on applicant scores) | Reliability, feasibility, acceptability, and cost-effectiveness of virtual MMI | Quantitative: descriptive, ANOVA, Levene’s statistic |
Brietkpof et al. | Three questions that were developed after a pilot with medical students; applicants were able to view each question for 2 min prior to starting their recording of their answers (3-min response time per questions); applicants were allowed to re-record their answers once if desired | Montage Talent | None | N/A | Does video interviewing improve the overall pool of candidates as measured by higher in-person interview scores? | Applicant experience captured by survey | Quantitative: descriptive; two-tailed t-test, chi-squared test, Pearson correlation, Spearman rank correlation |
Daram et al. | One video interview | Facetime | None | 1 | Survey responses on whether the virtual interview met their expectations | Costs associated with interview process | Quantitative: descriptive |
Deiorio et al. | SVI | N/A | Survey responses on applicants’ preparation for the SVI and reactions to the procedural aspects of SVI | Survey responses on applicants’ perceptions of the SVI experience and future of the selection process | Quantitative: descriptive | ||
Hakes et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI scores and faculty gestalt scores | None | Quantitative: Pearson correlation | ||
Edje et al. | Three sequential, 25-min interviews | Skype | None | 2 | Cost savings with Skype interview | Survey responses on applicants’ and interviewers’ perspectives on Skype interview | Quantitative: descriptive |
Egan et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and step 1 and step 2 CK scores | Correlation between SVI and step 2 CS scores | Quantitative: linear regression, Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U-test | ||
Gallahue at al. | SVI | N/A | Survey responses of program directors' perceptions on SVI | Number of views of each SVI by the program | Quantitative: descriptive, Cohen’s h-test, t-tests | ||
Healy et al. | One 15–20 min interview | Skype | Video tour of facility | 2–3 | Survey responses of applicants’ experience with videoconference interview | Faculty opinions | Quantitative: descriptive |
Hopson et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and interviewer-scored professionalism and interpersonal communication skills | Correlation of SVI and rank list; influence of gender on assessment of professionalism/interpersonal communication skills | Quantitative: ANOVA, t-tests | ||
Hopson et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between electronic standardized letter of evaluation (eSLOE) and SVI | Correlation between eSLOE/SVI on rotation grades, USMLE scores, honor society memberships | Quantitative: Spearman rank correlations, point-biserial correlations, Pearson correlations, Cohen’s d | ||
Husain et al. | SVI | N/A | Likelihood to invite for interview (LTI) pre-SVI score reviewed, post-SVI score reviewed, and post-SVI video viewed | Subgroup analysis by USMLE score and SVI score | Quantitative: t-test, ANOVA, linear regression | ||
Lewis et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI scores and attending evaluations of professionalism and patient care/communication performance during EM clerkship | None | Quantitative: Spearman rank correlations | ||
Willis et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI score and interview score | None | Quantitative: Spearman rank correlations | ||
Bowers et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI score and position on rank list | None | Quantitative: correlation | ||
Hall et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and patient assessment of communication (communication assessment tool) | None | Quantitative: Spearman’s rank correlation | ||
McHugh et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between traditional interview score, standardized interview score, and SVI score | None | Quantitative: descriptive, ANOVA | ||
Staicu et al. | One 15-min interview with five behavioral-based questions | Skype or FaceTime | None | 3 (residency director, coordinator, and a preceptor) | Technical issues, number invited for on-site interview | None | Quantitative: descriptive |
Temple et al. | One 20-minu interview; 5 behavioral-based questions; candidates had 5 min to ask questions; total possible score of 30 | Skype or FaceTime | None | 2 (clinical pharmacy specialists or administrator) | Description of interview conduct, financial costs, and time spent | None | Quantitative: descriptive |
Hall et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and faculty evaluations on professionalism and patient care/communication | Correlation between SVI and patient reported communication skills (CAT) | Quantitative: Spearman’s rank correlation | ||
Ballejos et al. | One-on-one semi-structured 30–60 min interview | Skype | None | 1 | Medical school acceptance rate using videoconference vs. face-to-face interview | Impact of socioeconomic status, self-identified disadvantaged category on acceptance rate | Quantitative: descriptive, t-test, chi-squared test |
Bird et al. | SVI | N/A | Demographic differences in SVI score | Correlations between SVI scores and other measures (USMLE step scores, honor society memberships, etc.) | Quantitative: descriptive, rater reliability, t-test, Pearson correlation, point-biserial correlations, Cohen’s d | ||
Schnapp et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and faculty gestalt score | Correlation between overall interview score and SVI | Quantitative: Spearman’s rank correlation | ||
Shah et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between SVI and in-person interview scores | None | Quantitative: inear regression | ||
Shah et al. | One-on-one 15-min interviews | Skype | Video tour of facilities; opportunity to ask residents questions; brief Skype test call to coordinator 1 week before interview | 3–6 different faculty | Survey responses of applicant/faculty perspectives on effectiveness of web-based interview | Comparison of rank list position between web-based versus on-site interview; financial cost; educational cost | Quantitative: descriptive, Mann-Whitney U-test, Fisher’s exact test |
Vadi et al. | Three/four 10-min interviews with faculty | FaceTime or Skype | Audio/video version of program overview; video tour of medical center and surrounding communities; google hangout session with current residents; option to schedule an on-campus department tour | 6 faculty (number of interviews per interview not clear) | Proportion of applicants selected via face-to-face vs. web-based interview | Survey responses of applicants’ perspectives of web-based interview | Quantitative: Shapiro-Wilk test, t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, chi-square test, Wald test |
Krauss et al. | SVI | N/A | Correlation between USMLE scores and SVI scores | None | Quantitative: linear regression, Kruskal-Wallis test | ||
Williams et al. | One 30-min interview | Skype | Virtual tour with commentary by chief residents; electronic brochures; resident contact info provided | 4 (program director, associate program director, and 2 chief residents) | Survey responses from applicants about their experience | None | Quantitative: descriptive |
Molina et al. | Five 15-min interviews using break out rooms on Zoom. Program coordinator moved applicants/faculty between breakout rooms on Zoom | Zoom | 30-min general overview provided by program director; semi-structured fellow’s “room” where current fellows showed a pre-recorded virtual tour of the hospitals, presentation on research opportunities, and topics of interest to prospective fellows | 2–4 faculty interviewers per interview “room” | Survey responses from applicants on conduct of the virtual interview compared to those from previous year on conduct of face-to-face interview | Survey responses from faculty on conduct of virtual interview | Quantitative: descriptive |
Sripad | One 30-min interview | Zoom | Option to meet current fellows during an informal videoconference the night prior to their interview; applicants were sent a 15-min information video about the program; 15-min introductory presentation by program director on interview day | 2–4 faculty/fellows | Survey responses from applicants on their experience | None | Quantitative: descriptive |
Nutter et al. | One panel interview | Not reported | Prior to interviews, candidates were provided with a link to a PowerPoint presentation and virtual campus tour; candidates were offered contact information for additional questions and to visit campus at their leisure | Five interviewers | Survey responses of applicants | Survey responses of interviewers | Quantitative: descriptive, student t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test |
McAteer et al. | One-on-one panel interview | Skype | None | 1 | Cost and time savings with virtual interview | Survey responses of applicants and faculty | Quantitative: descriptive |
Majumder et al. | One-on-one panel interviews | Zoom | Presentation overview of the program; orientation to Zoom and the use of breakout rooms; informal breakout room with current fellows | 5–7 different faculty | Survey responses of applicants’ perspectives on the feasibility, appropriateness, and acceptability of virtual interview process | Survey responses of faculty's perspective of virtual interview process | Quantitative: descriptive |
Grova et al. | Twelve one-on-one panel interviews | Zoom | Videoconference information session by program director; breakout room for informal interactions with fellows/faculty | 12 different faculty members | Survey responses of applicants’ perspective of the interview experience | None | Quantitative: descriptive, t-tests |
Vining et al. | Five panel interviews: 10 min with program director, 15 min with institutional leader, three 30-min interviews with faculty | Zoom | Optional session for applicants to get an overview of the program from program director and to meet staff members who would be points of contact for technical difficulties | Program director, institutional leads and three different faculties (total of 13 faculty members participated) | Survey responses from applicants | Survey responses from faculty | Quantitative: descriptive |