[2016-2017] Official Interview Thread
Started by doggydog
No. In past years it has meant that you have a roughly 95% of matching. Where you match on your list is an entirely different story.
I think this is where confusion is stemming from:
Charting Outcomes has specialty specific data and gives an overall match rate, but doesn't break it down by applicants' rank choice.
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-US-Allopathic-Seniors-2016.pdf
The Main Match Results and Data has statistics for matching top first, second, third choice, etc. but is not specialty specific.
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Main-Match-Results-and-Data-2016.pdf
This number seems like extrapolation from the overall match data, not specific to EM, hence my original statement. I assume that PDs may have other data that would point to how EM applicants do specifically, but I personally have not seen that data.
Charting Outcomes has specialty specific data and gives an overall match rate, but doesn't break it down by applicants' rank choice.
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-US-Allopathic-Seniors-2016.pdf
The Main Match Results and Data has statistics for matching top first, second, third choice, etc. but is not specialty specific.
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Main-Match-Results-and-Data-2016.pdf
This number seems like extrapolation from the overall match data, not specific to EM, hence my original statement. I assume that PDs may have other data that would point to how EM applicants do specifically, but I personally have not seen that data.
Yeah, I can't think of why your number of ranks would have a real correlation with matching to one of your top three.
I could absolutely see there being a correlation there. The more ranks you have, the more likely you are to be a competitive applicant and match somewhere in your top 3.
I can see both sides of the argument. Having a lot of ranks probably means your a competitive applicant, but given that we "need" more ranks to have a solid chance at matching, it seems likely that we would also fall out of our top 3 ranks.
I think it's largely conjecture, but like I said, I haven't seen/found data that is field specific. EBM (evidence based matching)? haha
I think it's largely conjecture, but like I said, I haven't seen/found data that is field specific. EBM (evidence based matching)? haha
Anyone remember to ask Northwestern/UChicago about thank yous? Hoping I can avoid writing any haha
The PD and NU said he doesn't care, but if anything a brief email is fine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Wouldn't this read the same as if you rank [3] places you have a 95% chance of matching in your top top 3"... why would anything you did in spots 4-10 of ROL have any baring on what happens 1-3 statistically.
A person could write, "Applicants who are able to rank 10 places have a 95% of chance of matching in the top 3 places they actually rank." Seems clear enough to me that that's the point the person is making with this post.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Seems like 15 this year is the magic number
Why so many?
How do we have a magic number already?
Isn't that usually concluded from retrospective data?
Has anyone interviewed with Vanderbilt yet? I just saw that there are 7 (seven!) interviews that day. How intense are they exactly? Geeze I'm used to 4 interviews in a day, max. 7 seems absurd!
Correct. 6yearmedstud's comment makes absolutely zero sense.
+Hofstra Northwell. Another round
All of mine have been 5 or 6. Seven doesn't seem odd or excessive. They're probably short. You'll be fine.
+ SUNY Upstate (just got off the waitlist)
Last edited:
Presence resurrection.
Mid-December dates.
Mid-December dates.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Did everyone else who has applied to WVU and has not already received an interview get the waitlist email today? (Or is that a nil set on this site?)
I'm pretty skeptical of these "you're on the waitlist" emails when they don't seem to reject anyone and they don't offer you a concrete option to sign up for an actual waitlist. (But hey, it's better than a rejection!)
I'm pretty skeptical of these "you're on the waitlist" emails when they don't seem to reject anyone and they don't offer you a concrete option to sign up for an actual waitlist. (But hey, it's better than a rejection!)
Seems so quiet lately
Does anyone who has interviewed at UWisconsin know the hours of the interview day? My email says pre-social is 6-10 but doesn't specify about the interview day until 1 week before (which would be hard for travel plans)
On a similar note (long shot) anyone scheduled to interview at UWisconsin On 12/15 willing to swap with my spot on 12/1?
For what it's worth our interview day was 8:15 to roughly 3 p.m.
just sharing what I was told by some faculty
Dang guys, what's with the hostility? FWIW, they aren't wrong. While, yes, the magic number is obtained from retrospective data, we obviously use it prospectively hence people pushing to get to the 12 interview mark.
So if the "magic number" is the number of places one needs to rank to have a 100% chance at matching, then based on the most recent match data (see page 57 http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-US-Allopathic-Seniors-2016.pdf), the magic number is indeed 15.
At the same time, it looks like you still have a 97-98% probability of matching with 12 ranks. So basically what I'm insinuating is that it's 6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other.
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
I don't see any true hostility in those comments.
Me neither. It's us responding to a vague post that had zero explanation.
People don't have to go on 15 interviews.
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
has anyone heard from Kaiser SD in the past few weeks?
This is not true. By your definition, the magic number is 13, not 15. US allopathic seniors with both 13 and 15 ranks had 100% match success last year.
If your "magic number" definition is to have a number where you'll have a >99% chance of matching, the number is still 13. In fact if you rank 13 or more places as a US allopathic senior, your chances of matching would be 99.5% (657/660).
BTW, 14 ranks was 156/158 and 16 or more was 251/252.
Right, so when I tell a stranger they make "absolutely zero sense" and accuse someone's program leadership of not knowing how match data works I definitely mean it in a nice way. [emoji849]
Not trying to tone police here guys, I promise. It was just strange to me the reaction that a single comment got.
Alright, sounds good to me. Like I said in my last post, the bottom line is that it's still all the same.
Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile
If someone isn't making any sense, they should be told by someone. The alternative is to continue on, thinking you're correct when you're wrong. If someone has been told something by an authority figure and it still doesn't make sense, it behooves that person to know that their source may be unreliable. Noone directly attacked 6yearmedstud. I have absolutely no idea where your reaction is coming from.
Clueless faculty. These people tend to make terrible advisors. Don't mean to come off as hostile, but there are certainly applicants out there whose chances of matching are lowered thanks to their advisors' "advice"
Last edited:
Anybody interview at UT Southwestern? How was your interview? Would love to hear about any experiences there!
+Mayo. Still 2-3 dates open
OK, guys, I need some words of advice. I am freaking out. I have only gotten 1 interview (at my homes institution) and what seems to be a waitlist (I was informed that should there be a last minute cancellation, they will reach out to me personally to fill the spot) at my #1 choice. I have sent 125+ applications and have yet to hear back from 90+ programs. Words of advice?
I am thinking about reaching out to EACH of these programs (I know it's a lot, but I want to do everything I can) that have not responded to me and send them a personalized e-mail. What do you think I should include in the e-mail? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
I am thinking about reaching out to EACH of these programs (I know it's a lot, but I want to do everything I can) that have not responded to me and send them a personalized e-mail. What do you think I should include in the e-mail? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I sent a few emails of interest. Mostly I just introduced myself in the email, stated that I was sincerely interested in the program and pointed out one thing that the program had that really appealed to me due to 'Link in background information here'. That being said it will likely be very difficult to send an email like that to 50+ programs unless you actually have a really good reason that you are interested in all of those programs. If you have any new information, like a new sloe, highlight that as well.
Do it. I called a handful of places and it resulted in getting a couple interviews the next day. The email might take a little time cause so many people probably do it and PD's get 1000 emails a day.
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
Who did you call? The coordinator? I have like 3 programs I'm really hoping to hear back from
Apply to family.
Dropping 6 east coast schools right now. GL grabbing the spots
Does any one know if there are any spots left at Philly schools? (Drexel, Jeff, Einstein, Temple or UPenn)
Drexel looks full at moment.
Hey guys. Having A bit of an interview emergency. This might be a long shot, but can anyone who interviewed at UT Southwestern for EM please send me the exact location for where we meet at 715? I just realized (night before) that the email I was sent (I got sent a separate email than other students) mentioned an attachment that wasn't actually attached which is supposed to contain this information. I only know the address of the building but not the actual building or room number we are meeting in. I emailed the PC but I don't know if she'll see it before 715 when I'm supposed to be there. Please help if you can
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
