Assessing inclusivity from behind the screen: sexual and gender minority surgery residents’ experiences during virtual interviews
Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia
How they used Delve
Surgeon-educators at Albert Einstein Medical Center, the University of Louisville and collaborating institutions used Delve to manage and code 14 semistructured interviews with LGBTQ+ general surgery residents, double-coding every transcript across the study team in an inductive thematic analysis of how applicants judge program inclusivity during virtual residency interviews.
“Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analyzed using the Delve Qualitative Analysis Software. [...] All interview transcripts were de-identified and imported into Delve Qualitative Analysis Software (Delve, New York, NY) for data management and coding.”
- Field
- Surgical education; how sexual and gender minority general surgery residents judged program inclusivity during virtual residency interviews
- Data
- Fourteen 30-60 minute two-on-one semistructured interviews with post-graduate year 1-3 general surgery residents identifying as sexual or gender minorities, conducted over Microsoft Teams between August and November 2024
- Approach
- Inductive thematic analysis. Every member of the research team independently read four transcripts, the study team met to build a preliminary codebook, two investigators (CLB and AJJ) independently reviewed all transcripts to finalise it, and each transcript was then independently double-coded by two members of the study team, with new codes added iteratively. Codes were reviewed, refined and consolidated through team discussion to resolve discrepancies and reach consensus.
- Data types
- Interviews
Abstract
Purpose: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) applicants-who report higher rates of mistreatment in surgical training-face unique challenges when evaluating residency program inclusivity. This study explored LGBTQ+ surgery residents’ experiences assessing program climate during virtual interviews. Methods: From August to November 2024, 14 general surgery residents completed 2-on-1 semistructured interviews via Microsoft Teams. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analyzed using the Delve Qualitative Analysis Software. Using an inductive analytic approach was used to identify themes and subthemes. Results: Fourteen general surgery residents participated, with median age 30 [IQR, 29-31] years, and identified as male (n = 5), female (6), nonbinary (2). Sexual orientations included gay (5), lesbian (3), bisexual (2), and queer (3). Five majors themes described the unique concerns of LGBTQ+ applicants during the NRMP process: (1) location and community, (2) decisions surrounding disclosure of LGBTQ+ status, (3) limitations of virtual interviews in assessing inclusivity (4) need to evaluate programs through more informal cues and (5) expectations of program to demonstrate diversity, equity, and inclusion. Subthemes aligned with the distinct stages of the NRMP process-application, interviews, ranking, and program integration-illustrating how these factors influence applicants’ perceptions and decision-making. Conclusion: General Surgery applicants must consider multiple factors when evaluating residency programs. Our findings suggest that LGBTQ+ applicants face notable challenges when evaluating program inclusivity, particularly in the setting of virtual interviews, emphasizing the need for programs to more clearly demonstrate their culture and commitment to diversity.
Citation
Aryana J. Jones, Cody M Dalton, Ryan K. Shabahang, Mohsen Shabahang, Alessandra Landmann, Christie Buonpane (2026). Assessing inclusivity from behind the screen: sexual and gender minority surgery residents’ experiences during virtual interviews. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-10036093/v1