A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Online Information Available to Prospective Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellowship Applicants

TL;DR

This study finds that FPRS fellowship websites and the AAFPRS Handbook lack key information for applicants, with private practice programs being especially underrepresented online.

Contribution

The study is the first to evaluate the availability and reliability of online information for FPRS fellowship applicants.

Findings

Program websites reported significantly fewer applicant-relevant criteria than the AAFPRS Handbook.

Private practice-based programs were less likely to have websites and reported fewer criteria than academic programs.

Websites more frequently included applicant-centered details like current fellows and placement data.

Abstract

Background

Otolaryngology residents seeking training in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery (FPRS) often rely on the internet to assess potential fellowship programs. Despite this, the availability and reliability of content provided on FPRS websites have not been assessed.

Methodology

In this cross-sectional study, the 2023 American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS) Handbook was used as a comprehensive registry of existing FPRS fellowship programs. All 65 listed programs (100%) were evaluated against 29 predefined criteria and compared with their associated program-created websites to assess the availability of applicant-relevant information. Descriptive analyses were used for categorical criteria, Fisher’s exact test was applied to compare website presence by program type, and Wilcoxon rank-sum testing was used for continuous measures of criteria reporting.

Results

Of the 65 FPRS fellowship programs listed, 43 (66.2%) had an associated program-created website. Overall, program-created websites reported significantly fewer applicant-relevant criteria than the AAFPRS Handbook, fulfilling an average of 9.8 of 29 criteria (33.9%) compared with 15.6 of 29 criteria (53.8%), respectively (p < 0.05). The AAFPRS Handbook provided more consistent reporting of core program characteristics, but did not include information on current fellows, fellowship graduates, the number of fellowship positions, interview details, or program coordinator contact information. In contrast, program-created websites more frequently reported applicant-centered information, including current fellows (44.2%), fellowship graduate placement (23.3%), and the number of fellowship positions (29.3%). In stratified analyses, university-affiliated programs were significantly more likely to maintain a program-created website than private practice-based programs (75.5% vs. 25.0%, p < 0.05). Among programs with websites, private practice-based fellowships reported substantially fewer applicant-relevant criteria than academic-affiliated programs (16.1% vs. 35.2% of the total criteria fulfilled, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

FPRS fellowship websites and data from the AAFPRS lack many key criteria valued by prospective applicants. Private practice-based fellowships are notably underrepresented online, which may limit applicants’ ability to gather information about programs outside of the academic arena.