Program's list

[PCT]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I know it varies from program to program, but in general, how low/far down does a upper tier school go down its list to match for its residents (assuming it accepts between 6-7 residents)?

 

[toxic-megacolon]

I know it varies from program to program, but in general, how low/far down does a upper tier school go down its list to match for its residents (assuming it accepts between 6-7 residents)?

At UCSD they told us they went down to 15 for a program of 6. Ouch.

 

[footcramp]

I've heard one "upper tier" program interviews about 100, ranks about 60, goes down to 30, for around 5-6 spots.

 

[Dr. V]

It depends on the program and the year.

Popular programs don't have to go down too far, and some years get their exact match and only go down to the number of spots they have (got their top 5 to fill their 5 spots)

Unpopular programs may have to go down to 20-30 just to match 3.

Those same programs that matched exactly last year may have to go down 10 to get 5 next year.

It's something that I would think would be very hard to predict.

 

[BTS]

Something to remember - sometimes programs will "game the system" (ie - rate applicants that they know want to match with them highly) so that they can say that they don't go far down the list. I'm NOT accusing the abovementioned program of this, but it does happen. Not sure what the advantage is other than being able to say how sweet they are.

 

[AllThumbs]

The tit-for-tat #1 game is what the match is designed to avoid. I think it unreasonable that programs want to add another layer of difficulty to an already muddy situation. Furthermore, I have heard the horror stories from my friends in previous classes who have received these calls, one was from a chairman at a very prestigeous program a week before rank lists went out. Promises were made and then my firend lands himself in his #4 spot. Now he is a fine surgical resident and it probably doesn't really matter; nonetheless, it never should have happen. I guess the take home message is assume everyone is lying even if they call you and send you chocolates and flowers on Valentine's Day.

 

[kaos]

Is this whole programs-calling-candidates thing a common phenomenon? I haven't heard of anyone in my class getting calls, let alone getting them myself.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Is this whole programs-calling-candidates thing a common phenomenon? I haven't heard of anyone in my class getting calls, let alone getting them myself.

No - they are not common. Some will get emails, some letters, and some calls; most will get nothing from programs, even places that really like them.

I can imagine a very competitive applicant who seems a bit "on the fence" might get a call from a lesser known program, in hopes that they will be ranked higher. But its not commonplace for most applicants and shouldn't be taken as a measure of your application's worthiness.

 

[NJA61479]

My program on the west coast receives 600-800 applications, interviews about 80 for 7 spots and never has to go below 30, and rarely even 20.

 

[SLUser11]

My program on the west coast receives 600-800 applications, interviews about 80 for 7 spots and never has to go below 30, and rarely even 20.

Oh yeah? Well, MY program receives 2,000 applications, interviews 10, and only has to go down to #4 to fill our 6 spots.

My lame humor aside, I remember several programs (including the one I'm now at) brag about only having to go to #9 for 6, or I think Mizzou said they went to #4 for 3.....but you have to remember that this means very little about the program's quality, just how they play the game. Unfortunately, it is bragging rights, and I think it does affect their ROL.

 

[AllThumbs]

I have said this before, but I still don't understand why this benefits the programs. It is in their best interests to rank according to who they want, hope for the best, and tell whomever cares that they went to #6 for 4 spots. From their angle, it seems they are sacrificing qualtity in their residency pool for the sake of bragging rights which have no real way of ever being verified.

 

[Chinnychin]

That's an interesting point. A classmate of mine got a call a few weeks ago she described as going like this (location changed for privacy purposes):

PD: "I just wanted to call you to let you know that we're very interested in you, and if you choose to rank us #1, we would expect to see you here next year."

Student: "Well thank you. I really liked your program a lot, and you'll definitely be very high on my list."

PD: "So . . . does that mean we can expect you to be moving to Miami soon?"

Student: ". . . Yes. Yes it does."

PD: "Great, then we'll see you next year!"

She was a little confused about the call, and wasn't sure if the PD was fishing for a firm committment to rank them #1. Fortunately for her, this was her first choice program. The whole thing lent credence in my mind to the idea that the programs might "pad" their choices this way to ensure that they don't have to rank too far down the list.

This is actually a match violation on the program's part-they are basically asking how she is going to rank them-and it does not have to be explictly worded "how are you ranking us". Implied questioning that is obvious such as above is a clear violation-I am shocked programs do this considering the penalty is like 3 years without being able to use the match-yikes.

On an off note-Why do programs like to say they only went to number 10 for example on the rank list? I mean who gets that info-As applicants we all would love to know that info yet we cannot get our hands on it-nobody who wants it seems to be able to get it-so why does a school value having that so much if nobody really sees it.

If it were published than that would say a lot about a program that fills easily each year in their top 10 because something must be good about the program people would think if it fills that quickly-Maybe true maybe not but nonetheless people would think like that. However if nobody sees than what is the point?

 

[boston]

The whole programs bragging about not having to go far down on their ROL begs the question of why a particular program feels it's necessary to do so -- is it because they can't stand on their own reputation alone? I have never heard of any true powerhouse programs bragging about this...

 

[MS3er]

My interpretation when programs said this was less that they were bragging but more that they were subtly trying to say "we're the type of place where if you take an interest in us we'll take an interest in you." I mean statistically speaking it just seems very unlikely that unless a program was a huge powerhouse that they would only need 5 or 6 spots to fill 4 or whatever unless they knew beforehand that the applicants they were ranking in their top spots were also ranking them #1.

Oh, boston i sent you a private msg..thanks

 

[dynx]

The whole programs bragging about not having to go far down on their ROL begs the question of why a particular program feels it's necessary to do so -- is it because they can't stand on their own reputation alone? I have never heard of any true powerhouse programs bragging about this...

I agree with you for big programs. I disagree for programs with 3 or less residents. In a small program having one person that matched there as a backup and is unhappy can really make for a crappy situation.

 

[IFNgamma]

PDs and chairs like to brag about how they don't have to gone down very far on the ROL when they see each other at conferences, this is what one PD told me at an interview.

so it seems like it means nothing except for bragging and feeling good about one's own program.

 

[Neurotica]

to those are questioning why programs would care about saying how high up on their lists they had to go to fill spots (other than to brag or whatever), one program director told me that, at one point, the funding to various departments in their hospital was actually determined in part by how successful they were in getting their top candidates.