2014 post-certification deadline rank list thread

[Opira]

Seems like it’s a tradition on SDN to post the rank lists after the certification deadline. It looks fun and I'm also eager to know how everyone else had done their rank lists!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ipharmacy]

Mine is --

1. Northwestern
2. UIC
3. MGH
4. UChicago
5. Rush
6. Madison
7. Indiana
8. MCW

 

[applepro1]

Here is mine!!!

1. Cleveland Clinic
2. UVA
3. Wake Forest
4. MUSC
5. USF
6. Indiana
7. Medical College of Georgia
8. Iowa
9. Kansas
10. Arkansas

 

[SteinUmStein]

Great list applepro. Bravo on Cleveland Clinic as your #1, I was hugely impressed as well when I interviewed and expect big things from their program in the coming years.

 

[lucas_psych]

Finalized!

1) Longwood
2) Stanford
3) UCSF
4) MGH
5) UCLA - Semel

 

[RandyMarsh2014]

Finalized!

1) Longwood
2) Stanford
3) USCF
4) MGH
5) UCLA - Semel

Wow, you ranked only 5 programs? Mad props, lol.

 

[milmd]

1)LIJ
2)Univ of Rochester
3)Emory
4)SUNY Upstate
5)AE-Montefiore
6)BIMC
7)Morehouse
8)Greenville Health
9)Rutgers -New Brunswich
10)SUNY Stony Brook
11)Maimonides

 

[lucas_psych]

Wow, you ranked only 5 programs? Mad props, lol.

Ha, thanks. I was informed by my school that that was enough. So we shall see...

 

[RandyMarsh2014]

My list was kind of all over the place, but I wanted to check out various places throughout the country. A lot of my list was also based on prior experiences at some of these places/geographic preferences. Otherwise, I probably would have ranked a little differently. My list also shifted quite a bit until I finally hit that certify button yesterday... I am not a superstar SDNer by any means, and I'd be happy to train at any of these places honestly.

1. U Chicago
2. Ohio State
3. Tufts
4. Case
5. Rush
6. University of Florida
7. MCW
8. UAB
9. UCLA – SFV
10. Upstate
11. MCG
12. LSU - NO

Congrats on finalizing everything, and best luck to everyone on Match Day!

 

[SteinUmStein]

Quick note: the bottom half of my list is 99% geography, I would love to train at any of these places but I have some family-related limitations. UPMC and Cincinnati in particular blew me away but their corresponding locales just don't work for a number of reasons.

1. Michigan
2. Barnes-Jewish (WashU)
3. Iowa
4. UW-Madison
5. Cleveland Clinic
6. Case Western
7. Cincinnati
8. UPMC/WPIC

 

[Journey Gestalt]

Glad that rankings are finally over with! Here is mine ~

Main factors that I considered:

a) Location (NY for hubby's job)
b) Transportation (whether I will need a car or not)
c) Program Qualities (research, residents, overall feel)
d) Work-Life Balance/Program Intensity

Rankings:

1) Albert Einstein/Montefiore
2) St. Luke's-Roosevelt
3) Beth Israel Medical Center
4) University of Pennsylvania
5) North Shore LIJ
6) Thomas Jefferson
7) Boston University
8) Tufts Medical Center
9) University of Maryland
10) Temple University
11) Georgetown
12) Zecret Home Institution

 

[MedJosh]

***

 

[Nasrudin]

Finalized!

1) Longwood
2) Stanford
3) UCSF
4) MGH
5) UCLA - Semel

Damn. That's gangster.

 

[vistaril]

Ha, thanks. I was informed by my school that that was enough. So we shall see...

Im sure it is....but why only rank 5? Im guessing you interviewed at more than 5(right?), so by not ranking a 6th you are basically saying you would rather sit at home and play xbox(or do something else that isn't start psych residency) rather than go to whatever program would have been 6 and 7 on your list. And that's pretty stupid imo.

Who says "UCLA is good enough for me to go to at 5, but if I have to go to UCLA-Harbor or UCSD I'd rather just pass and play xbox for a year"? Not to mention that on the 0.1% chance you don't match at any of those 5 this year, you probably won't next year either as a repeat applicant, so.....

I'm sure that(especially by psych standards) you are a super-duper candidate and have grades and scores and evals that I could never, but I just don't understand the reasoning here. If there is only a 0.1% chance you don't match at 1-5, what's the harm of adding a sixth or seventh? After all, there is only a 1 in a 1000 chance you actually have to go there!

So if the expected happens and you go where you want to go, no harm in adding even more backups. But if the very unexpected happens, are honestly saying that you would rather sit out a year than go to another UCLA program, Washington, UCSD, or whatever other program would have been 6/7 on your list? C'mon....I don't buy that for a second. As for SOAP, my guess is that the 6/7th program that would be on your list is a heck of a lot more attractive(as perceived by you) than what you would have a shot to get in the SOAP. So that's even more illogical than preferring to sit out a year.

 

[vistaril]

Damn. That's gangster.

no, it's stupid. There is very little chance I will get in a serious wreck on my 2 mile drive to work tomorrow, but I'm still going to put my seat belt on....despite the fact that in all likelihood I won't need it.

 

[Psychotic]

Im sure it is....but why only rank 5? Im guessing you interviewed at more than 5(right?), so by not ranking a 6th you are basically saying you would rather sit at home and play xbox(or do something else that isn't start psych residency) rather than go to whatever program would have been 6 and 7 on your list. And that's pretty stupid imo.

Who says "UCLA is good enough for me to go to at 5, but if I have to go to UCLA-Harbor or UCSD I'd rather just pass and play xbox for a year"? Not to mention that on the 0.1% chance you don't match at any of those 5 this year, you probably won't next year either as a repeat applicant, so.....

I'm sure that(especially by psych standards) you are a super-duper candidate and have grades and scores and evals that I could never, but I just don't understand the reasoning here. If there is only a 0.1% chance you don't match at 1-5, what's the harm of adding a sixth or seventh? After all, there is only a 1 in a 1000 chance you actually have to go there!

So if the expected happens and you go where you want to go, no harm in adding even more backups. But if the very unexpected happens, are honestly saying that you would rather sit out a year than go to another UCLA program, Washington, UCSD, or whatever other program would have been 6/7 on your list? C'mon....I don't buy that for a second. As for SOAP, my guess is that the 6/7th program that would be on your list is a heck of a lot more attractive(as perceived by you) than what you would have a shot to get in the SOAP. So that's even more illogical than preferring to sit out a year.

I agree, especially considering the programs on that list.

OP: did you only interview at 5? Or what programs did you opt to not rank?

Hell, I ranked all 12 programs I interviewed at, and even though I would not be thrilled with the bottom 2 or 3, they still beat the hell out of SOAPing...

 

[lucas_psych]

no, it's stupid. There is very little chance I will get in a serious wreck on my 2 mile drive to work tomorrow, but I'm still going to put my seat belt on....despite the fact that in all likelihood I won't need it.

What a negative Nancy.. You don't even know me or my background. Bully.

 

[MedJosh]

I've been told by the advisors at my school that I shouldn't rank any place I wouldn't live. I applied to 10 places got 10 interviews went on 9 and 4 of the places I wouldn't want to train at either due to location or I didn't like the program (utsw, mayo, denver, kc) so I was left with 5 places to rank.

 

[lucas_psych]

If one of the 5 programs was your home institution, and they tell you that you basically are guaranteed a spot, and the PD of your program advises you to go to 3 or 4 other interviews just for comparison sake, you would probably listen to him/her.

 

[Leo Aquarius]

I put my faith in Lucas-psych and believe he/she will do just fine. Someone who interviews at those caliber of institutions knows what they're doing. I interviewed at most on your list and was basically told the same thing by my psych program director. Don't sweat it.

Let's keep seeing more rank lists peoples...

 

[vistaril]

What a negative Nancy.. You don't even know me or my background. Bully.

it doesn't matter what your background is. The fact you didn't get that from my original post is quite telling. Even if you are literally the most outstanding applicant in the entire country this year and have a 99.9999999999999% to match at one of those 5 places, it still doesn't make any sense not to add a couple more(assuming you interviewed at more than 5). Why? Because there is NO DOWNSIDE. you have to click a button. That's it. If you had to pay even 20 bucks to add another program, maybe I would agree that skipping #6 is reasonable.

Maybe there is something you aren't telling us.....like you did interview at 6 programs and at one program you ran into an ex who was the love of your life who cheated on you.......and you found out she is a current intern there. Something crazy like that. But my guess is you are just too vain to put a #6 down because you feel you don't need to. Which is the stupid part. Even if you are really the special snowflake you think you are and have a 99.999999999999999999% chance to go to those places, it is still stupid not to add another program or two.

 

[vistaril]

If one of the 5 programs was your home institution, and they tell you that you basically are guaranteed a spot, and the PD of your program advises you to go to 3 or 4 other interviews just for comparison sake, you would probably listen to him/her.

well that's obviously different. If you only went to 4 other interviews(and then could only rank 5 programs max), you obviously can't rank anymore than that. I never disagreed with the amount of interviews you went on. What would be stupid is to go to 6-7 good programs and only rank 5 of them.

 

[Nasrudin]

no, it's stupid. There is very little chance I will get in a serious wreck on my 2 mile drive to work tomorrow, but I'm still going to put my seat belt on....despite the fact that in all likelihood I won't need it.

You take principled stances on matters of zero importance and slither at the foot of the quintessential. Thus, as always, your opinion isn't worth my urine.

 

[lucas_psych]

well that's obviously different. If you only went to 4 other interviews(and then could only rank 5 programs max), you obviously can't rank anymore than that. I never disagreed with the amount of interviews you went on. What would be stupid is to go to 6-7 good programs and only rank 5 of them.

I only went to 5. School PD told me to go to 3 or 4 others, but I was a gunner and went to 4.

 

[Psychotic]

If one of the 5 programs was your home institution, and they tell you that you basically are guaranteed a spot, and the PD of your program advises you to go to 3 or 4 other interviews just for comparison sake, you would probably listen to him/her.

As RR used to say about the Russkies, trust but verify.

Sure, I would be flattered by the PD, but I have a far more cynical view of this process, especially the black box that is the Match computer algorithm. Whatever that bad boy spits out is your result. There are no do overs, no investigations, no corrections. And I flat out don't trust the black box, and I don't trust the participants pulling the levers on the program side of the equation, either.

My #1 PD told me I was in like Flynn. I still ranked the other 11...

 

[lucas_psych]

You take principled stances on matters of zero importance and slither at the foot of the quintessential. Thus, as always, your opinion isn't worth my urine.

I think everyone in this forum feels this way. Thank you Nasrudin.

 

[crunchytoast]

lucas_psych, I'm behind you. I can think of several downsides to ranking more programs: for example, the emotional toll of worrying that you might end up at your #6 or #7 (if you hated the programs and cringe at the thought of matching at 6 or 7). march 21 will be here in no time, but next few weeks will also feel like forever.

 

[vistaril]

You take principled stances on matters of zero importance and slither at the foot of the quintessential. Thus, as always, your opinion isn't worth my urine.

I'm not sure who you are in this forum, so I'll just leave it at that. I would come up with a similar vulgar comment about you, but I have no idea who you are. Or what you have posted in the past.

To recap, a new poster came in and posted a short rank list. I was just using that as a way to point out that it makes no sense to *not* rank good programs one interviewed at, regardless of how likely it is to match at the one listed. That is a point I'll stand by. Now it turns out that Lucas only interviewed at 5, which would make this point inapplicable to the situation. Which is fine- I certainly don't regret making the assumption that he interviewed at more than 5. Much better to make such assumptions in a forum like this than annoyingly preface comments or ask a preliminary line of questioning before getting to the main point.

 

[lucas_psych]

lucas_psych, I'm behind you. I can think of several downsides to ranking more programs: for example, the emotional toll of worrying that you might end up at your #6 or #7 (if you hated the programs and cringe at the thought of matching at 6 or 7). march 21 will be here in no time, but next few weeks will also feel like forever.

Thanks crunchytoast. Btw, I like my toast crunchy. Like Leo Aquarius said, let's keep seeing more rank lists...

 

[vistaril]

lucas_psych, I'm behind you. I can think of several downsides to ranking more programs: for example, the emotional toll of worrying that you might end up at your #6 or #7 (if you hated the programs and cringe at the thought of matching at 6 or 7). march 21 will be here in no time, but next few weeks will also feel like forever.

well that's not his situation, but as I wrote earlier this point is ridiculous.......

let's see:

the emotional toll of worrying that you might end up at your #6 or 7 vs.........the emotional toll of having to SOAP?

anyone who thinks the latter is preferable must be smoking crack. It's not like you somehow have a better chance to match 1-5 if you don't include a 6.

The worst case scenario for any applicant is to rank one more program or to SOAP. I have a hard time believing that anyone would rather SOAP(or sit out a year) than go to their #6 program.

 

[Leo Aquarius]

Well folks, lets try to find an agreeable approach so we can move on:

In general, it's extremely advisable to rank a few backup programs where you feel you have a solid chance of matching even if you don't want to go there. The SOAP is a terrible thing to have to face, and a friend of mine who matched to her LAST ranked program (25th on her list) ended up really liking it. You may end up liking programs you don't like initially. Keep that in mind.

However, for select applicants they can go ahead and rank only places they want to attend if they have a virtual guarantee* from their home institution AND are very strong on paper and in person. This is the minority keep in mind.

* (Programs are not allowed to guarantee a spot, but they have ways to tell you they want you no matter what. You'll know it when you see it.)

 

[Mistuda]

Here is my rank list:

1) UIC
2) UNC
3) MUSC
4) HSS
5) UF
6) Wake Forest
7) Temple
8) Drexel
9) Tufts

Would be happy at most of these programs, especially top 3.

 

[splik]

i ranked 6 out of the 8 programs i interviewed at because i didn't want to match at those programs. i don't regret it. i wouldn't have regretted if i hadn't matched either.

 

[vistaril]

However, for select applicants they can go ahead and rank only places they want to attend if they have a virtual guarantee* from their home institution AND are very strong on paper and in person. This is the minority keep in mind.
quote]

this is a completely illogical statement. It is completely irrelevant how great or poor a candidate is in this equation. I don't know why you are hung up on this. It doesn't matter if a person has a 99.9999999999999999999999999999% chance to match at their top whatever or a 75% chance of doing so.

the only question that matters is the following: Would the person rather SOAP or go to the program they are considering leaving off? Now how the 99.999999999999999999999% applicant does differ from the 75% applicant is that the weaker applicant's decision to leave programs off is far more likely to be consequential. But that fact doesn't change the basic logic behind the decision for either. several references have been made to what top applicants 'can' do......this is silly because it implies that there is something to be gained by not ranking an extra program.

For the top applicant in my hypo, there is a 99.9999999999999999999% chance the decision to rank another program will be completely neutral(nothing gained or lost) and a 0.00000000000001% chance that the decision to rank another program will be positive(matching at that program rather than Soaping)

It's not a hard concept people.

 

[vistaril]

i ranked 6 out of the 8 programs i interviewed at because i didn't want to match at those programs. i don't regret it. i wouldn't have regretted if i hadn't matched either.

you would have preferred to sit out a year or SOAP over going to those 2 programs? I don't think that is common. I mean ever for very good candidates the SOAP still has very poor outcomes.

 

[shan564]

 

[shan564]

I love forming opinions about people based on their rank lists. Maybe I should have been a psychoanalyst. I'm having fun looking at these lists and trying to use them to extrapolate what things are important to the person who made them.

 

[vistaril]

there is no trolling here. The fact is that of the 15-20k American medical students this year applying for the match, I bet there will be at least one very strong candidate who doesn't match(probably not in psych but in something) who could have added another program or two they:

- interviewed at
- didn't dislike(but liked much less than their higher ranked programs)

And they will regret not doing so.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

To recap, a new poster came in and posted a short rank list. I was just using that as a way to point out that it makes no sense to *not* rank good programs one interviewed at, regardless of how likely it is to match at the one listed. ....

Doing so in the least subtle, most judgmental way possible--thus transforming a thread which has nothing to do with you into one that, once again, is all about you.

 

[vistaril]

Doing so in the least subtle, most judgmental way possible--thus transforming a thread which has nothing to do with you into one that, once again, is all about you.

not interested in making it about me. There were a few things posted which I felt deserved a response. people can still post their rank list in the midst of that.

 

[pisekar]

my list;

1)UTSW Dallas
2)John Peter Smith
3)Texas A&M
4)Baylor
5)UT Houston
6)UMass
7)Rosalind Franklin
8)Saint Louis

Good luck to everybody!

 

[WolverineDoc13]

Okay, call me paranoid, but I've been staying tight-lipped throughout the interview season until today. Blame the NSA, lol! (And I have interview reviews that I owe SDN, which will be placed in the correct thread shortly.)

I chose my list based on location (only applied east coast, but loved new haven), psychotherapy training, and (most important) my gut:

1.) Yale
2.) NYU
3.) Penn
4.) Cornell
5.) BIMC
6.) LIJ
7.) Mount Sinai
8.) Einstein-Monte

Some may wonder why Sinai was ranked so low. That's mainly because I liked BIMC and LIJ much more on my interview days. (I really liked LIJ's new PD). Sinai was great, but didn't stand out in the long haul for me, while I practically fantasized about zucker-hillside hospital post interview. (I love free-standing psych hospitals.)

 

[WolverineDoc13]

my list;

1)UTSW Dallas
2)John Peter Smith
3)Texas A&M
4)Program X- It is a secret
5)UT Houston
6)UMass
7)Rosalind Franklin
8)Saint Louis

Good luck to everybody!

Why a secret? I'm curious.

 

[Anduin]

The main criteria that went into making my list = location, work/life balance, & resident happiness

edited

 

[StECT]

You take principled stances on matters of zero importance and slither at the foot of the quintessential. Thus, as always, your opinion isn't worth my urine.

Congratulations on successfully trolling the troll!

 

[StECT]

Despite having to skip over vistaril's posts, this is indeed a fun thread! Here's mine:

1. MUSC
2. UCSD
3. UNC
4. Stanford
5. UW Seattle
6. UCLA Harbor
7. UC Irvine
8. USC-LAC
9. Loma Linda
10. OHSU

In case you're wondering, the Carolinas are where my fiance's family live and where he'd love to go.

 

[shinystar2014]

My list:

1. Harvard Longwood
2. Hopkins
3. UW
4. Yale
5. Northwestern
6. Stanford
7. Mt. Sinai
8. University of Maryland
9. Brown
10. Emory
11. Einstein Montefiore
12. Jefferson

Goes to show that it's impossible to predict what you will like. Two of my top 5 were programs I didn't even initially consider applying to!

Best of luck everyone!!

 

[FrasierMD]

Congrats everyone!

1. Yale
2.MGH
3. Longwood
4. UCSF
5. Columbia
6. UPenn
7. Cambridge
8. Pitt WPIC
9. Hopkins

 

[285963]

Interesting to see the spread. So far a good number of Yale's for #1.

1. WPIC Pitt
2. Brown
3. UPenn
4. UMich
5. UW
6. Mount Sinai
7. CHA
8. Longwood
9. Yale
10. SUNY Upstate

Good luck everyone!

 

[Psychotic]

Not enough examples yet, but the average or median number of ranks seems lower on average than last year where it seemed like there were a ton of lists with 12+ programs (attributable perhaps to the SDN self selection bias skew) - IIRC a bunch in the high teens and over 20 ranks. A couple of outliers have been posted here on the low side; two with just 5, which, IMHO seems unnecessarily risky no matter how qualified an applicant is or what his home program said to him, but whatever...to each his own. The takeaway for any applicants in subsequent cycles should be that 8 to 12 programs is a pretty safe range for most people; this is supported by the NRMP outcomes statistics, too.

These lists do make for entertaining reading, but I still don't get much out of them for my own purposes. But I do enjoy the voyeuristic aspect...so keep posting them!