Preference Signaling and Virtual Interviews: The New Urology Residency Match

OBJECTIVE To define applicant response to the preference signaling program and continuing virtual aspects of the 2022 Urology Residency Match to guide future decisions surrounding this process. METHODS We emailed an anonymous, de-identified 20-question, multiple choice survey to all applicants to our institution for the 2022 Urology Residency Match (RedCap). Where appropriate, compari-sons were made to already published data collected in an identical manner from applicants to our institution for the 2021 Urology Residency Match.RESULTS Of the 418 survey recipients, 155 (37%) responded to our survey. A majority of applicants (83%) thought that preference signaling should remain in future years, and 66% of applicants matched to a program to which they had signaled or where they completed a subinternship. Geographic location of programs was ranked to have the highest impact on choice of programs for preference signaling. Fifty-two percent of 2022 applicants thought that interviews should remain virtual com-pared with 39% of 2021 applicants (P = .03). Twenty-one percent of 2022 applicants agreed that pre/post-interview socials were well-replicated virtually compared with 10% of 2021 applicants (P = .04).CONCLUSION A majority of urology applicants were satisfied with the preference signaling program, suggesting that preference signaling should remain in future matches. A majority of urology applicants now favor the virtual interview platform. While it is gaining greater acceptance among applicants, the virtual platform generally still carries deficiencies. Further research of the urology match process is necessary for continued optimization of the program for all stakeholders. UROLOGY 171: 35 -40, 2023. (c) 2022 Elsevier Inc.