Charting the Outcomes

[deleted547339]

Saw this in the anesthesia forum. Thought ya'll would be interested:

http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf

For matched US MDs:

11.9 ranks
230 step 1
243 step 2

Up from 2011:

10.8
223 step 1
234 step 2

Differences aren't huge when the average step scores increase a couple points a year

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Saw this in the anesthesia forum. Thought ya'll would be interested:

http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf

For matched US MDs:

11.9 ranks
230 step 1
243 step 2

90% prob of matching hits around 216. Not terrifying numbers.

 

[deleted547339]

90% prob of matching hits around 216. Not terrifying numbers.

Agreed. I think this flies in the face of everyone who says EM is getting terribly competitive. Appears to be right on par with IM and gen surg which seems about right.

 

[hoot504]

Agreed. I think this flies in the face of everyone who says EM is getting terribly competitive. Appears to be right on par with IM and gen surg which seems about right.

Also seems to contradict what some people say about a drastic surge in # of applicants. Went up less than 100. Applicant to position ratio still 1.2.

 

[link2swim06]

90% prob of matching hits around 216. Not terrifying numbers.

Ehhh but as always there are a lot of biases in this. If you don't have the scores to get 1 interview you are not included. Also the people sub 216 probably had something special (high step 2 score). You can't say if you get a 216 you have a 90% of matching. You can just say that subgroup had that match rate.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Ehhh but as always there are a lot of biases in this. If you don't have the scores to get 1 interview you are not included. Also the people sub 216 probably had something special (high step 2 score). You can't say if you get a 216 you have a 90% of matching. You can just say that subgroup had that match rate.

Of course. But when you factor in the other things, it's not terrifying. If you can't get a single interview, you must either be draped in red flags or have applied incredibly poorly in terms of breadth. Or both.

 

[@JackShephard]

Sounds good to me.

I could care less if my specialty is ultra competitive or the least competitive field.

It's a great specialty and that's enough for me.

 

[littlejuan]

Wow, tons of people ranked 16 or more. I wonder how that compares to previous years and if it just seemed way more competitive this past year because applicants were going on more interviews on average?

 

[hoot504]

Wow, tons of people ranked 16 or more. I wonder how that compares to previous years and if it just seemed way more competitive this past year because applicants were going on more interviews on average?

Good catch. In 2011 charting outcomes there were 109 who ranked 16 or more. In the 2014 match? 239! (2 of which didn't match)

Seems like a crazy jump to me.

 

[deleted547339]

Wow, tons of people ranked 16 or more. I wonder how that compares to previous years and if it just seemed way more competitive this past year because applicants were going on more interviews on average?

That doesn't mean it's more competitive. It means people THINK it's more competitive and are more neurotic. If 15 places won't take you, the 16th probably won't either.