How many interviews?

[Abby_Normal]

I suppose my topic heading is rather self-explanatory: How many interviews is a safe number? I've scheduled seven so far and I'm already having difficulty fitting some of them around each other, and there are still several programs I don't expect to hear back from until later in the month.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Yoyomama88]

4 ranks as a U.S. senior = 90 % chance of matching. 8 ranks as a U.S. Senior = closer to 100 % chance of matching.

 

[letsgomedical]

4 ranks as a U.S. senior = 90 % chance of matching. 8 ranks as a U.S. Senior = closer to 100 % chance of matching.

U.S senior including DO candidates too??

 

[hoodwinkd]

i remember being told US seniors was just allo grads and that DOs didn't count

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I don’t know that much about D.O. statistics, but if 4 is 90%, and 8 is 100% this will not change much no matter who you are. If you get 8 interviews, you are probably in. If you don’t match in 8, you will not match in 20. The truth is probably closer to; if you can get 8 interviews, you can probably get 50. If you can only get 4, go to all of them. No one interviews applicants we would not take. We just want the best we can get. If you get an interview, you are in the running. If you apply too high, you will know it because you don’t get invites. If you get invites over your limit, you threw your net too broadly and you should be kind and weed out some early and cancel so we can adjust. I’m beginning to understand this “local interest” thing better. Programs have limited capacity so they want to interview people who want to come. It really isn’t that mysterious. The getting into medical school process programs everyone into keeping all options open. This is psychiatry and you already got here. Just decide where you want to go and keep it in the single digits in terms of interviews and all will be fine. If you have the capacity to visit 20 places and you can get interviews at 20 programs, but you are just clogging the process. If anyone has not matched with more than 10 on their list it is because they come across as a complete ***** at interview despite good numbers and recomendations.

 

[Dharma]

i remember being told US seniors was just allo grads and that DOs didn't count

Interesting wording.

 

[MLT2MT2DO]

Interesting wording.

Come on Dharma

 

[Dharma]

Come on Dharma

Cranky morning.

 

[psychattending]

I don’t know that much about D.O. statistics, but if 4 is 90%, and 8 is 100% this will not change much no matter who you are. If you get 8 interviews, you are probably in. If you don’t match in 8, you will not match in 20. The truth is probably closer to; if you can get 8 interviews, you can probably get 50. If you can only get 4, go to all of them. No one interviews applicants we would not take. We just want the best we can get. If you get an interview, you are in the running. If you apply too high, you will know it because you don’t get invites. If you get invites over your limit, you threw your net too broadly and you should be kind and weed out some early and cancel so we can adjust. I’m beginning to understand this “local interest” thing better. Programs have limited capacity so they want to interview people who want to come. It really isn’t that mysterious. The getting into medical school process programs everyone into keeping all options open. This is psychiatry and you already got here. Just decide where you want to go and keep it in the single digits in terms of interviews and all will be fine. If you have the capacity to visit 20 places and you can get interviews at 20 programs, but you are just clogging the process. If anyone has not matched with more than 10 on their list it is because they come across as a complete ***** at interview despite good numbers and recomendations.

I would second this. Having done this for over 15 years, I have seen a slow but steady increase in the number of programs to which applicants apply. The number of applicants I now get is way over the number of interview slots that I can offer. The end result is that I have to decline interviews to a large number of applicants that are qualified to be here and might choose to come here if they could get an interview here. Unfortunately I can't always tell from an application who is really interested in me. Those that I would not have invited in the past, I still do not invite now.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

I would second this. Having done this for over 15 years, I have seen a slow but steady increase in the number of programs to which applicants apply. The number of applicants I now get is way over the number of interview slots that I can offer. The end result is that I have to decline interviews to a large number of applicants that are qualified to be here and might choose to come here if they could get an interview here. Unfortunately I can't always tell from an application who is really interested in me. Those that I would not have invited in the past, I still do not invite now.

+1

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

Not sure how we could impose some kind of cap on numbers of interviews applicants go to, but it would serve the greater good. Training directors are faced with cheapening the interview experience or be disadvantaged by not seeing some well qualified applicants. What used to be about 7 or 8 interviews per slot to be safe is now passing 10 and climbing. I’m sure there are geographic variations in these numbers, but even the most sought after programs are seeing people who are going to more than a dozen very strong programs. The application process was full of problems before the match, but we seem to have over corrected a bit. At least this is true in psychiatry.

 

[jakeislove]

Not sure how we could impose some kind of cap on numbers of interviews applicants go to, but it would serve the greater good. Training directors are faced with cheapening the interview experience or be disadvantaged by not seeing some well qualified applicants. What used to be about 7 or 8 interviews per slot to be safe is now passing 10 and climbing. I’m sure there are geographic variations in these numbers, but even the most sought after programs are seeing people who are going to more than a dozen very strong programs. The application process was full of problems before the match, but we seem to have over corrected a bit. At least this is true in psychiatry.

Do you feel the ACA has affected how students view psychiatry, in terms of lifestyle?

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

Don't know. No body's life has changed any among psychiatrists I know.

 

[psychattending]

Not sure how we could impose some kind of cap on numbers of interviews applicants go to, but it would serve the greater good. Training directors are faced with cheapening the interview experience or be disadvantaged by not seeing some well qualified applicants. What used to be about 7 or 8 interviews per slot to be safe is now passing 10 and climbing. I’m sure there are geographic variations in these numbers, but even the most sought after programs are seeing people who are going to more than a dozen very strong programs. The application process was full of problems before the match, but we seem to have over corrected a bit. At least this is true in psychiatry.

Yep, I see people who would definitely be in the top 10% of anyone's list and who interview at 15-20 places because they are scared they won't match. When I put on my medical student advisor's hat, I try to steer the medical students in the right direction but sometimes I am arguing against the Dean who wants everybody to apply to tons of schools so that there are no unmatched people.

I don't think there should be caps as there as some applicants that will need to see a lot of schools in order to insure that at the end of the Match they have found a slot. In the pre-ERAS era, I think the hassle of obtaining and filling out applications for each program help cut down on the # of programs each applicant applied to as the amount of time (probably 1-2 hours for just filling out the paperwork) forced the applicant to really assess how much they were really interested in a program. Now to apply to a program an applicant probably has to spend less than 1 minute.

 

[HarryMTieboutMD]

I can definitely understand the angst and frustration from program directors, but the system has created an indelible impression on the applicant. I think that most people who choose psychiatry do so because of their experience in medical school (in addition to those who wanted to do it from the beginning and the MDPhDs who are interested in neuroscience research), but for the average average applicant (middle of class, ~225 step 1 score), an added perk is being able to train at an institution that might be otherwise a reach in even a slightly more competitive specialty like internal medicine.

Thus, the applicant wants to ensure that he or she gets into the best place possible, and despite what the numbers say, the Match is a computer system and thus is imperfect (though I still think it is a great system for the purpose it serves), and the applicant feels compelled, to over-apply, NOT SIMPLY TO MATCH but to match at the BEST PLACE POSSIBLE.

For example, the afore mentioned applicant realizes that he/she is a competitive candidate for psychiatry, and based on past numbers, the Dean of Students at his/her medical school suggests that he/she might be able to obtain an elite residency. The applicant wants to go to the best place possible. Not wanting to miss out, the applicant can easily apply to 30 programs

1. Tier 1 (Unlikely but still possible): MGH, Columbia, UCSF, UCLA NPI
2. Tier 2 (Definitely within the realm of possibility): Cornell, NYU, Sinai, Pitt, Penn, Yale, Longwood, CHA, Hopkins, Emory, UTSW, Duke, UNC, MUSC, Wash U, Michigan, Northwestern, Stanford, UCSD, UCLA Harbor, Univ Washington
3. Others that are on the rise and probably as good as or better than some of the tier 2 programs: Vanderbilt, UChicago, UIC
4. Handful of others for geographic/family reasons

 

[Extralong]

I can definitely understand the angst and frustration from program directors, but the system has created an indelible impression on the applicant. I think that most people who choose psychiatry do so because of their experience in medical school (in addition to those who wanted to do it from the beginning and the MDPhDs who are interested in neuroscience research), but for the average average applicant (middle of class, ~225 step 1 score), an added perk is being able to train at an institution that might be otherwise a reach in even a slightly more competitive specialty like internal medicine.

Thus, the applicant wants to ensure that he or she gets into the best place possible, and despite what the numbers say, the Match is a computer system and thus is imperfect (though I still think it is a great system for the purpose it serves), and the applicant feels compelled, to over-apply, NOT SIMPLY TO MATCH but to match at the BEST PLACE POSSIBLE.

For example, the afore mentioned applicant realizes that he/she is a competitive candidate for psychiatry, and based on past numbers, the Dean of Students at his/her medical school suggests that he/she might be able to obtain an elite residency. The applicant wants to go to the best place possible. Not wanting to miss out, the applicant can easily apply to 30 programs

1. Tier 1 (Unlikely but still possible): MGH, Columbia, UCSF, UCLA NPI
2. Tier 2 (Definitely within the realm of possibility): Cornell, NYU, Sinai, Pitt, Penn, Yale, Longwood, CHA, Hopkins, Emory, UTSW, Duke, UNC, MUSC, Wash U, Michigan, Northwestern, Stanford, UCSD, UCLA Harbor, Univ Washington
3. Others that are on the rise and probably as good as or better than some of the tier 2 programs: Vanderbilt, UChicago, UIC
4. Handful of others for geographic/family reasons

I don't get it, why do people worry about tiering places and discussing about ranking them before they even interview at those places? Does that mean even though you might not like the place, and its an absolutely ****hole, you will still want to go there because you decided it was tier one? Apply obviously to what you know and heard and what you think fits, but tier them after the interview. If you don't get an interview move on. Lastly, applying to 30 programs is ludicrous! Seriously! Its because the ******ed tiering system, people start assuming they have to apply to ****load of programs. Why is Columbia teired higher then Penn, or pItt, or yale, or why is Vanderbilt is teir 3, Lol. (note, I don't go to any of those programs) Regardless, apply based on what you want, not what Dean of Students tells you because of your step scores, damn that annoys me sooo much. Okay, thats it for my rant..for now.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I think we may have become lost without clarifying the difference between applying and interviewing. Applying broadly is a good strategy and can help weaker applicants. Interviewing at more than 10 programs isn’t really going improve anyone’s chances and is a waste of everyone’s time. I mean really, does anyone really have the capacity to be interested in more than 10 places? If you apply to 30 places and you get 27 interviews, you have already won this game. Go ahead and trim it down. I’m just trying to imagine what kind of applicant could manage to get a dozen interviews and yet manage to be at the bottom of a dozen rank lists. I guess this would be someone good on paper, and dreadful on interview.

So if you know you come across a jerk, interview at 20+ places, otherwise you don’t need to.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

... I guess this would be someone good on paper, and dreadful on interview.

So if you know you come across a jerk, interview at 20+ places, otherwise you don’t need to.

As one of my friends is fond of saying, "The common factor in all of my failed relationships is me".

 

[whopper]

My advice is approach this like you're approaching a college application. You can apply to too many, and get too many interviews --> robbing you a lot of time and money to travel.

Please be warned, however, that it's better to over-do it than under-do it. I would've rather a person had a few extra interviews than not get into any place at all. You'll lose a year, and when you re-apply you could look like damaged goods for not getting in the first time around.

 

[Abby_Normal]

At this point I have seven interviews, all at top- and mid- tier academic programs. Is this enough to be safe? Four more haven't said either way yet.

I readily admit that I'm in a slightly paranoid mood because I just received my first out-right rejection during this process.

 

[whopper]

Can't say if your safe based on the amount of data you've given. If top places gave you an interview you most definitely look good on paper. Problem is for all I know you're the world's worst interviewer.

Don't let the rejection screw with your mind. If you did something to mess up the interview learn from it. Otherwise move on. The interview process, from a scientific standpoint has no merit.

 

[Abby_Normal]

Can't say if your safe based on the amount of data you've given. If top places gave you an interview you most definitely look good on paper. Problem is for all I know you're the world's worst interviewer.

Don't let the rejection screw with your mind. If you did something to mess up the interview learn from it. Otherwise move on. The process, from a scientific standpoint has no merit.

I'm a US MD student. STEP 1 230s, STEP 2 240s, upper 1/2 to 1/3 of my class (the ranking is very cryptic, so I'm not sure, but definitely upper half), honors/high pass on all but two rotations with honors in all psych rotations, LOR from a competitive program, lots of leadership, some volunteering, some research.

I think the main thing I've learned is, when you're told during clerkship orientation, "We offer interviews to all our rotators," don't believe it. Ordinarily I wouldn't be so concerned by one rejection--I didn't go into this expecting an interview at every program I apply to--except, given that background...

 

[EpiIV]

Regardless of specialty, the dean at our school tells everyone to interview at 12 programs because he states "The lowest I've seen an applicant match was her 11th rank. I've seen applicants not match, but never any that had ranked at least 11 programs. So rank 12 just to be safe." Of course, this isn't psych. This is everyone, including super competitive ROAD specialties.

My psych program director rolled her eyes and told me to rank 6-8 if I wanted to be conservative. But it's well known that our program is happy to take their own students, so I applied broadly among programs I felt would be a stretch for me. On my interviews so far, I've been told by two interviewers (from different schools) to pay attention to my rank list and to be very thoughtful about my top 2 programs, and maybe the third. People in psych don't usually have to go far down the list.

That being said, I don't think that your applicant who interviews at 10+ programs is afraid that they wont match. It's because we're picky, and we value intangibles in our future homes, like personality and resident happiness. There are just some things you can't get through a website, especially if it's a hard to navigate website.

 

[letsgomedical]

Regardless of specialty, the dean at our school tells everyone to interview at 12 programs because he states "The lowest I've seen an applicant match was her 11th rank. I've seen applicants not match, but never any that had ranked at least 11 programs. So rank 12 just to be safe." Of course, this isn't psych. This is everyone, including super competitive ROAD specialties.

My psych program director rolled her eyes and told me to rank 6-8 if I wanted to be conservative. But it's well known that our program is happy to take their own students, so I applied broadly among programs I felt would be a stretch for me. On my interviews so far, I've been told by two interviewers (from different schools) to pay attention to my rank list and to be very thoughtful about my top 2 programs, and maybe the third. People in psych don't usually have to go far down the list.

That being said, I don't think that your applicant who interviews at 10+ programs is afraid that they wont match. It's because we're picky, and we value intangibles in our future homes, like personality and resident happiness. There are just some things you can't get through a website, especially if it's a hard to navigate website.

I hope this applies to DO candidates too...
I know a DO student who interviewed at 14 Places and didn't match. He was going for Acgme ER. I'm not sure if it was because he was going for ER or if it was because he was a DO

 

[EpiIV]

I hope this applies to DO candidates too...
I know a DO student who interviewed at 14 Places and didn't match. He was going for Acgme ER. I'm not sure if it was because he was going for ER or if it was because he was a DO

I'm not sure. I'm allo.