225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36332703)
1. Preference Signaling and Virtual Interviews: The New Urology Residency Match.
Carpinito GP; Badia RR; Khouri RK; Ganesan V; Kenigsberg AP; Hudak SJ; Lemack GE
Urology; 2023 Jan; 171():35-40. PubMed ID: 36332703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Virtual Urology Residency Match Process: Moving Beyond the Pandemic.
Carpinito GP; Khouri RK; Kenigsberg AP; Ganesan V; Kuprasertkul A; Caldwell KM; Hudak SJ; Lemack GE
Urology; 2021 Dec; 158():33-38. PubMed ID: 34280439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Preference Signaling in the 2022 Urology Residency Match - The Applicant Perspective.
Leopold Z; Rajagopalan A; Mikhail M; Lee G; Tabakin A; Park JH; Jang T; Elsamra SE; Singer EA
Urology; 2022 Dec; 170():33-37. PubMed ID: 36195167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Understanding the Urology Program Directors Perspective on the Current Resident Selection Process: The Society of Academic Urologists National Survey of Urology Program Directors.
Movassaghi M; Lemack GE; Badalato GM; Broderick G; Greene K; Ibeziako O; Mirza M; Murphy A; Thavaseelan S; Wolter C; Takacs E
J Surg Educ; 2023 Jun; 80(6):900-906. PubMed ID: 36914481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Finding the Next Resident Physicians in the COVID-19 Global Pandemic: An Applicant Survey on the 2020 Virtual Urology Residency Match.
Spencer E; Ambinder D; Christiano C; Phillips J; Choudhury M; Matthews G; Fullerton S; Dyer L; Zelkovic P; Eshghi M; Wong NC
Urology; 2021 Nov; 157():44-50. PubMed ID: 34284010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Diversity Attracts Diversity: 2023 AUA Match Results.
Rodriguez-Alvarez JS; Munoz-Lopez C; Khouri RK; Accioly JPE; Harwood S; Campbell SC; DeWitt-Foy ME
Urology; 2023 Oct; 180():21-27. PubMed ID: 37479144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Urology Residency Applications in the COVID-19 Era.
Kenigsberg AP; Khouri RK; Kuprasertkul A; Wong D; Ganesan V; Lemack GE
Urology; 2020 Sep; 143():55-61. PubMed ID: 32562774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Influencing Factors of Preference Signaling in the 2022 Urology Residency Match.
Kim JK; Morrison B; Bylund J; Rasper A; Dropkin BM
Urology; 2023 May; 175():35-41. PubMed ID: 36805414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Virtual "Matchmaking": Stakeholder Perspectives on the Future of the Urology Residency Match.
Warren CJ; Reitblat CR; Ferreri CA; Eyrich NW; Daignault-Newton S; Andino JJ; Sadeghi-Nejad H; Pruthi RS; Kraft KH
Urology; 2022 Jun; 164():11-17. PubMed ID: 35263640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Impact of Visiting Rotations on the Urology Residency Match: Insights and Perspectives From the 2021-2022 Applicants.
Movassaghi M; Gillespie A; Deibert CM; Jordan M; Lemack GE; Takacs E; Badalato GM
Urology; 2022 Dec; 170():38-45. PubMed ID: 36116560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Improving Applicant Satisfaction in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Matching: The Role of Preference Signaling.
Tamburini LM; Davey AP; Messina JC; Zeng F; Geaney LE
Iowa Orthop J; 2024; 44(1):11-15. PubMed ID: 38919355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Twitter and Instagram Use in the Urology Residency Application Process.
Carpinito GP; Caldwell KM; Kenigsberg AP; Ganesan V; Khouri RK; Kuprasertkul A; Hudak SJ; Lemack GE
Urology; 2022 Jan; 159():22-27. PubMed ID: 34637837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Preference Signaling Pilot in the Urology Match: Outcomes and Perceptions.
Traxel E; Richstone L; Brown J; Mirza M; Greene K; Thavaseelan S
Urology; 2022 Dec; 170():27-32. PubMed ID: 36115432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Applicant Perspectives of Virtual General Surgery Residency Interviews.
Finney N; Stopenski S; Smith BR
Am Surg; 2022 Oct; 88(10):2556-2560. PubMed ID: 35610972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Urology Match Process and the Limited Value of Post-Interview Communication for Program Directors.
Farber NJ; Neylan CJ; Srivastava A; Pandya SS; Kaplan A; Radadia KD; Singer EA; Elsamra SE
Urology; 2019 Jun; 128():23-30. PubMed ID: 30844386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Characterization of Applicant Preference Signals, Invitations for Interviews, and Inclusion on Match Lists for Residency Positions in Urology.
Grauer R; Ranti D; Greene K; Gorin MA; Menon M; Zorc S
JAMA Netw Open; 2023 Jan; 6(1):e2250974. PubMed ID: 36662528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Virtual Interactions and the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle in General Surgery: A Look Ahead.
DeLay TK; Singh NP; Duong TA; Rais-Bahrami S; King TW; Chen H; Corey BL
J Surg Res; 2022 Oct; 278():331-336. PubMed ID: 35659708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Perspectives of Residency Applicants and Program Directors on the Role of Social Media in the 2021 Urology Residency Match.
Heard JR; Wyant WA; Loeb S; Marcovich R; Dubin JM
Urology; 2022 Jun; 164():68-73. PubMed ID: 34606880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. General Surgery Residency Virtual Recruitment During the Pandemic: An Analysis of Applicant Surveys.
Vaysburg DM; Delman AM; Ammann AM; Turner KM; Winer LK; Sussman JJ; Makley AT; Goodman MD; Quillin RC; Van Haren RM
J Surg Res; 2023 Mar; 283():33-41. PubMed ID: 36368273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Improving the Residency Program Virtual Open House Experience: A Survey of Urology Applicants.
Jiang J; Key P; Deibert CM
Urology; 2020 Dec; 146():1-3. PubMed ID: 33049230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
