Frontiers in medicine · 2026
Saudi specialty certificate in endodontics: program directors perceptions of candidate selection.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
AlQahtani Ali Robaian, AlQahtani Yazeed, AlBader Shahad, AlShehri Abdullah, Abuelqomsan Mohammed A S, Abdulwahed Abdulaziz, AlMokhatieb Ahmed, Mirza Mubashir Baig
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Program Directors (PDs) evaluate a range of factors when selecting candidates. Understanding their perspectives may help applicants better prepare for the selection process. This study explored PDs' perspectives on selection criteria for the Saudi Specialty Certificate in Endodontics (SSE) program and examined whether these perspectives differed according to gender, experience, hospital setting, and geographic region.
METHODS: This study aimed at an attempted census of all identifiable current and former SSE PDs registered with SCFHS. A previously validated survey with 30 questions covering seven domains: GPA, Exams, Research, Services and Electives, Interview, Recommendations, and Miscellaneous was distributed to the PDs via the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) platform to ensure anonymity. Data collection spanned four months. Descriptive statistics, along with independent sample t-test and ANOVA, were used for analysis.
RESULTS: 32 PDs responded, yielding a response rate of 55.17%. Most PDs were current (53.1%), male (81.2%), from the central region (50%), affiliated with the Ministry of Health (34.4%), and had over three years of experience (43.8%). PDs prioritized the services and electives (mean 4.04 ± 0.87) and recommendations (mean 3.97 ± 0.60) domains. Key factors influencing these preferences included clinical competency and staff reputation (mean 4.37 ± 0.87), participation in endodontic electives (mean 4.28 ± 0.81), service residency experience (mean 4.28 ± 0.88), and professional attire (mean 4.28 ± 0.85), among others. Exams (mean 3.31 ± 1.02) and research (mean 3.40 ± 0.98) were less prioritized, mainly due to low emphasis on publication output (mean 2.96 ± 1.44). Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences across most subgroup comparisons. An exploratory difference was observed in the recommendation domain according to hospital setting (p = 0.034).
CONCLUSION: The PDs' reported priorities indicate that services and electives have the highest descriptive mean, with candidates' reputation and performance during that period being the most significant factors. Although opinions differed across hospital settings, the findings should be interpreted cautiously and considered exploratory.
METHODS: This study aimed at an attempted census of all identifiable current and former SSE PDs registered with SCFHS. A previously validated survey with 30 questions covering seven domains: GPA, Exams, Research, Services and Electives, Interview, Recommendations, and Miscellaneous was distributed to the PDs via the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) platform to ensure anonymity. Data collection spanned four months. Descriptive statistics, along with independent sample t-test and ANOVA, were used for analysis.
RESULTS: 32 PDs responded, yielding a response rate of 55.17%. Most PDs were current (53.1%), male (81.2%), from the central region (50%), affiliated with the Ministry of Health (34.4%), and had over three years of experience (43.8%). PDs prioritized the services and electives (mean 4.04 ± 0.87) and recommendations (mean 3.97 ± 0.60) domains. Key factors influencing these preferences included clinical competency and staff reputation (mean 4.37 ± 0.87), participation in endodontic electives (mean 4.28 ± 0.81), service residency experience (mean 4.28 ± 0.88), and professional attire (mean 4.28 ± 0.85), among others. Exams (mean 3.31 ± 1.02) and research (mean 3.40 ± 0.98) were less prioritized, mainly due to low emphasis on publication output (mean 2.96 ± 1.44). Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences across most subgroup comparisons. An exploratory difference was observed in the recommendation domain according to hospital setting (p = 0.034).
CONCLUSION: The PDs' reported priorities indicate that services and electives have the highest descriptive mean, with candidates' reputation and performance during that period being the most significant factors. Although opinions differed across hospital settings, the findings should be interpreted cautiously and considered exploratory.