2010 program director survey

[echod]

---

Members don't see this ad.

In this survey, 244 for Step I and 253 for Step II are the scores that program directors said they would "almost always" invite for an interview. In your experience, is this true? Or is "almost always" more like "almost always if you also have good LOR+Honors?"

http://www.nrmp.org/data/programresultsbyspecialty2010v3.pdf

Pg. 155

 

[Gfunk6]

Well the problem is heterogeneity of applicants. You can't simply take one factor (like Step I scores) soley into consideration without looking at others.

More importantly, I think the take home point is what most PDs (>70%) considered relevant when choosing applicants for interviews:

1. Rad Onc specific LORs (85%)
2. Research (79%)
3. Personal Statement (76%)
4. Step I scores (73%)

This is the usual mantra that we always harp on.

 

[JumpingFrenchmn]

Interesting that LORs > Step I for selecting applicants to interview

 

[medgator]

Interesting that LORs > Step I for selecting applicants to interview

In a field like this, non-numeric factors count a lot more. A good paper or presentation at ASTRO on someone's CV will trump a generic 250 on Step I on another person's CV. LOR's fit into that "non-numeric" category. Rad Onc is a small field and people want to see your dedication to it via research endeavors and/or through being recommended by someone well-known in the field (who in many cases can end up being a research mentor or someone you spent a lot of time with in clinic, both of which are good activities to show your interest in the field).

 

[JackieG]

In a field like this, non-numeric factors count a lot more. A good paper or presentation at ASTRO on someone's CV will trump a generic 250 on Step I on another person's CV. LOR's fit into that "non-numeric" category. Rad Onc is a small field and people want to see your dedication to it via research endeavors and/or through being recommended by someone well-known in the field (who in many cases can end up being a research mentor or someone you spent a lot of time with in clinic, both of which are good activities to show your interest in the field).

So do you think that Rad onc unlike other specialty truly looks at the application in the entirety once the min step 1 score is meet? Do you think that PD will actually review the entire application thoroughly?

 

[Gfunk6]

So do you think that Rad onc unlike other specialty truly looks at the application in the entirety once the min step 1 score is meet? Do you think that PD will actually review the entire application thoroughly?

This is entirely program dependent. At UCSF, a committee of three individuals (two faculty + one PGY-3 resident) looks at every single application (> 200) without a Step I screen. These three score each applicant then generate a composite score and invite the top 10% (24 or so) for one of three interview days.

After the interview, the full committee (the three aforementioned individuals + all faculty interviewers, including Chair) meets and finalizes the rank list.

 

[medgator]

So do you think that Rad onc unlike other specialty truly looks at the application in the entirety once the min step 1 score is meet? Do you think that PD will actually review the entire application thoroughly?

I can't speak for every program, but I have heard via word of mouth that many have a min. step I score cutoff (like something arbitrary 225-230 etc) and everyone gets considered above that. Beyond that, it all comes down to research, LORs etc.