10 to 1

[amyl]

---

Members don't see this ad.

So all residency programs seem to interview about 10 applicants for each spot they have. at an interview another candidate told me that the acgme made them interview 10 applicants for each spot. he said they had to offer that many interviews but didn't have to hold that many interviews. does anyone know if this is true or not? 😕

 

[scotchnwater]

So all residency programs seem to interview about 10 applicants for each spot they have. at an interview another candidate told me that the acgme made them interview 10 applicants for each spot. he said they had to offer that many interviews but didn't have to hold that many interviews. does anyone know if this is true or not? 😕

I don't think this is true at all. For example, UCSF interviews (according to FREIDA) roughly 100 people for 24 spots. I would guess that most places do the 10 to 1 thing because data shows they need to interview that many people to fill (much as our data tells us to rank 10 programs to match).

Who knows though...maybe it is true...stranger things have happened.

 

[lord_jeebus]

When I was doing a rotation at UCSF I heard that they specifically were going against some sort of rule about how many people to interview, but didn't care.

 

[coprolalia]

Not true. A program can interview as many or as few applicants as it wants. But, the 10:1 ratio seems to be about the right amount to ensure an adequate sample size. Last year, we interviewed 10:1 (about 180 candidates), ranked about 140 of them, but only went down to about 45 on our rank list getting 8 of our top 15.

We pretty much know who likes us, and who we think also thinks they'd be a good fit after the interview. If you aren't interested in a program, it shows early and your enthusiasm wanes throughout the day. It's an imperfect system that, despite all its flaws, seems to actually work pretty well.

-copro

 

[flipcyde]

Not true. A program can interview as many or as few applicants as it wants. But, the 10:1 ratio seems to be about the right amount to ensure an adequate sample size. Last year, we interviewed 10:1 (about 180 candidates), ranked about 140 of them, but only went down to about 45 on our rank list getting 8 of our top 15.

We pretty much know who likes us, and who we think also thinks they'd be a good fit after the interview. If you aren't interested in a program, it shows early and your enthusiasm wanes throughout the day. It's an imperfect system that, despite all its flaws, seems to actually work pretty well.

-copro

I always wonder how programs can rank applicants from 1-140 when the interview season spans over 3 months. After each interview day, do programs tentatively assign applicants a number and your file gets shuffled up and down the list as more applicants interview?

 

[coprolalia]

I always wonder how programs can rank applicants from 1-140 when the interview season spans over 3 months. After each interview day, do programs tentatively assign applicants a number and your file gets shuffled up and down the list as more applicants interview?

I can only tell you the way we do it (which is the only exposure I've had, needless to say) and I've commented on this before.

We reshuffle the deck, so to speak, immediately after each interview. The candidate pool is essentially "ranked" based on that interview day, and that rank is then folded into the bigger overall list. So, if you show-up on a day that we're interview 10 people, you'll end-up first ranked based on those 10 people. This just makes the process of stratifying you in the bigger list easier. The first person on that day is then shuffled into the pile. The second person is then shuffled below that person, and so-on. If we don't like what you're "selling", you don't get into the "willing to purchase" pile. It's just that simple.

In the big pile, the top 20 (or so) are the real standouts and everyone remembers them. The next 40-50 are a blur, and the ones below that are basically the same candidate. If you show up (at least at our program), past cycles would say that you have about a 70-80% chance of getting ranked. If you get ranked, you gotta shot. Rarely, though, as I stated do we go below 50 in our rank list (and I can't remember the last time... maybe the mid '90s... when my PD said this happened... which was a year [or two] where we didn't even fill the program).

But, just remember that if you get an interview, it means you are good enough. We weed through literally hundreds and hundreds (over 800 this year, which was actually slightly down from last year believe it or not) of applications to come up with about 250-300 invites. Out of that number of invites, we get about a little more than half who actually ever show up in person.

It's just the way it works. Again, not perfect, but it's the system we have. I'd imagine that most other programs have a similar system, because this one is so efficient and works so well. At least we've done a really good job at picking the right people since I've been around.

-copro

 

[flipcyde]

I can only tell you the way we do it (which is the only exposure I've had, needless to say) and I've commented on this before.

We reshuffle the deck, so to speak, immediately after each interview. The candidate pool is essentially "ranked" based on that interview day, and that rank is then folded into the bigger overall list. So, if you show-up on a day that we're interview 10 people, you'll end-up first ranked based on those 10 people. This just makes the process of stratifying you in the bigger list easier. The first person on that day is then shuffled into the pile. The second person is then shuffled below that person, and so-on. If we don't like what you're "selling", you don't get into the "willing to purchase" pile. It's just that simple.

In the big pile, the top 20 (or so) are the real standouts and everyone remembers them. The next 40-50 are a blur, and the ones below that are basically the same candidate. If you show up (at least at our program), past cycles would say that you have about a 70-80% chance of getting ranked. If you get ranked, you gotta shot. Rarely, though, as I stated do we go below 50 in our rank list (and I can't remember the last time... maybe the mid '90s... when my PD said this happened... which was a year [or two] where we didn't even fill the program).

But, just remember that if you get an interview, it means you are good enough. We weed through literally hundreds and hundreds (over 800 this year, which was actually slightly down from last year believe it or not) of applications to come up with about 250-300 invites. Out of that number of invites, we get about a little more than half who actually ever show up in person.

It's just the way it works. Again, not perfect, but it's the system we have. I'd imagine that most other programs have a similar system, because this one is so efficient and works so well. At least we've done a really good job at picking the right people since I've been around.

-copro

Thanks for the quick reply, I was curious as how programs kept track of everyone. On another note, I guess those "I am planning to rank you number 1" correspondences that applicants write to programs don't really carry much weight at your program?

Thanks again, very informative post for all those anxiously waiting until match day 🙂

 

[coprolalia]

On another note, I guess those "I am planning to rank you number 1" correspondences that applicants write to programs don't really carry much weight at your program?

Still nice to hear, and (to be honest) may sway our PD, co-PD, and chair, who ultimately have final say. Just dunno. Don't see it that far.

I can tell you, though, that an email saying "I'm not planning on ranking you" will definitely move your name out of the pile. So, don't do something like that unless you're absolutely sure... or just a complete a-hole.

-copro

 

[ozzie20]

Thanks for the quick reply, I was curious as how programs kept track of everyone. On another note, I guess those "I am planning to rank you number 1" correspondences that applicants write to programs don't really carry much weight at your program?

Thanks again, very informative post for all those anxiously waiting until match day 🙂

Is this common practice to email the program and tell them where you're going to rank them, and is it common for the program to tell you where you will be ranked?

 

[Gas4Life]

Indiana interviews about three candidates per spot available. Words straight from the mouth of the current PD and the department chair (both) during my interview there. Programs can interview as few or as many as they desire.

 

[coprolalia]

Indiana interviews about three candidates per spot available. Words straight from the mouth of the current PD and the department chair (both) during my interview there. Programs can interview as few or as many as they desire.

Indiana is also quite incestuous. Look at the bulk of who fills their residency classes. Homegrowns.

-copro

 

[Gas4Life]

Indiana is also quite incestuous. Look at the bulk of who fills their residency classes. Homegrowns.

-copro

They have I think either 24 or 25 spots per year in CA-1 through CA-3. They also have I think three intern spots (full four years at IU). Again, words straight from the PD and Department Chair at my interview day were that they typically reserve about 8 or so spots per year (CA-1 through CA-3) for people NOT from IU. They interview about 25-30 non-IU folks every year. So being that they have an extremely large program and have about 8 spots held back for non-IU people, I think the odds of matching there are not bad at all. I certainly applied to and interviewed at several programs with less than 8 spots per year total and most of those programs interviewed 8-10 applicants per residency position. So considering that, my odds of matching at IU are actually much better than matching at some of the other smaller programs I applied to, even accounting for the fact that they accept a vast majority of IU people into their program. So, you have failed to crush my hope of matching into what I feel is one of the top programs in the entire country (if not THE top program). In fact, I actually think my chances of matching there are much higher than most of the other places I interviewed when you look at the numbers. They have eight spots and interviewed 25-30 people for those 8 specific spots. One particular other place I interviewed had only 6 spots total per year and interviewed about 75-80 people per their own admission. From pure percentages only, I have about 30% shot at IU versus about an 8% chance at the program with but 6 spots annually. In fact, I have much more respect for the way they conduct their entire interview process than anywhere else I applied/interviewed. It was unique and straight forward and I definitely felt like they were more in tune with their residents and actually cared about their residents unlike just about every other program I looked at. All the residents I talked with were super cool and seemed like they would be great to work with and learn from in the future. Very strong program with an excellent track record and a bright future, in a location that is second to none and with an incredibly diverse training experience in five top notch hospitals that cover the spectrum from private to county facilities. Also they have a top notch pediatric fellowship which I think I will probably be interested in if I am lucky enough to match there for residency.

IU is at the top of my rank order list. Actually, they are technically my top two with both categorical and advanced positions ranked one and two on my list. Keeping my fingers crossed hoping to match there.