The Society of Academic Urologists did not make a recommendation for in-person versus virtual interviews for the 2025 urology match cycle.

Urology applicants for the 2025 match cycle were surveyed on their opinions of in-person versus virtual interviews both pre- and postmatch cycle.

Perceived quality of clinical training and geographical location were important factors that applicants valued in constructing a rank list.

Programs offering virtual only interview options were not perceived more negatively by applicants.

Applicants felt that program culture was best assessed with in person interviews and traveling to meet residents/faculty in person was important.

Applicants found the cost of interviewing to be substantial and strongly valued travel vouchers to cover the cost of travel to in-person interviews.

The Society of Academic Urologists (SAU) made no definitive recommendation on interview format for the 2025 urology match. The purpose of this study was to survey applicants for this cycle regarding preferences and perceptions related to interview format.

As part of a prospective assessment, surveys were administered to all applicants to our urology residency program for the 2025 cycle, both before interview and following the match process. Applicants answered a series of multiple-choice and rank choice questions and rated agreement for a series of statements.

Total 274 applicants received both surveys, with 142 (51.8%) completing the preinterview survey and 25 (9.1%) completing the postmatch survey. Applicants prioritized perceived quality of clinical training and geographical location when ranking institutions. If programs offered only virtual interviews, most respondents strongly disagreed that this resulted in a negative perception on pre- and postmatch (60%; 44%) surveys. Most strongly agreed on pre- and postmatch surveys that program culture was perceived better by in-person interviews (51%; 68%) and felt that traveling to meet residents/faculty in person was important (45%; 68%).

Geographic location, quality of clinical training, and program ‘‘culture’’ are characteristics reportedly valued by residency applicants. Applicants for 2025 did not perceive programs offering only virtual interviews more negatively and found the cost of interviewing to be substantial. However, they found value with the in-person interaction with residents and faculty at the program location.

Residency

Match

Urology

Survey

Interview

Society of Academic Urologists

© 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association of Program Directors in Surgery.