Radiology residency programs could potentially lose quality prospective residents because their websites don’t contain enough information, according to a new study published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology.

“Because program websites are often the most convenient or only resource prospective residents have in deciding whether or not to apply to the program, and because the content of a website has been demonstrated to be important to applicants, the completeness of the website is critical for programs to remain competitive for applicants, particularly with a decline since 2009 in applications to radiology resident programs,” wrote lead author David Hansberry, MD, PhD, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia, and colleagues.

Researchers analyzed more than 150 residency program websites, seeing if they provide potential prospects with information about things such as the application process, benefits, training and faculty leadership.

Only 12 of the websites had at least 80 percent of the 19 criteria studied by researchers. Forty-one websites listed less than 50 percent of the criteria. Program websites ranged from having three to 18 of the 19 criteria. Larger radiology residency program websites included an average of 12 criteria, while smaller program websites included only 11 criteria researched.

Based on geographic location, programs based in the Midwest included the most criteria, averaging 12.1, Northeastern programs had an average of 11.8 criteria, the South had an average of 11.3 criteria, and the West had an average of 10.6 criteria included on website programs.

“Important information for prospective residents, including basic benefits and specific information on selection criteria, is frequently omitted from websites, which leaves curious applicants with insufficient material to gauge interest in a program,” the authors wrote. “The lack of information may also force applicants to apply more broadly to residency programs and makes it significantly more difficult to determine clear differences between programs in areas that residents value.”

The authors added that there are obviously other factors that help applicants make their final decision, but a helpful website is part of how programs promote themselves and should be taken seriously.

“Although previous studies have shown that prospective radiology resident applicants are influenced by intangibles like current resident satisfaction and academic reputation, they have also shown that applicants are influenced by the educational curriculum, clinical training, program resources, research opportunities, and quality of faculty,” Hansberry et al. concluded. “Therefore, it is imperative to provide online resources for prospective candidates in an attempt for residency programs to remain competitive in recruiting high-quality U.S. medical student graduates.”