[2017-2018] Emergency Medicine Application Thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
7 invites with below average stats is amazing at this point.

Maybe the best test would be to cross-reference the 46 other programs you have applied to and see how many (or how few, for that matter) have sent invitations out at this point.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Members don't see this ad.
 
Also from CORDEM:

"Do keep in mind that most programs match out between #40-100 on their rank list. As a result, middle 1/3 and lower 1/3 rank estimates should be viewed as competitive applicants who will likely match (Question C2b)."

I'm sincerely surprised by this.

Yeah. Students who get middle 1/3 sloes and find out think they got a "red flag". In reality, that means you are in a very matchable spot, most programs go down into the middle area of their list. Does that happen every year? No, some years you have a great match and match all your spots higher up. And some years you go way down. But on average, I think the reality is most programs go somewhere into the middle range of their list on a yearly basis.
 
It was getting really toxic and vulgar in there. People cursing each other out, putting each other down, and just generally not behaving productively. It didn't seem like it was going to pull itself out of the nosedive, so I locked it down and deleted the raunchier material before it could get any worse. There's a comment about it at the top of the sheet directing applicants to post their legitimate questions and comments in this SDN thread, which has real moderators and is a generally better place for thoughtful discussion. Trolls are why we can't have nice things.

On the bright side, the spreadsheet has otherwise been a huge success and a great resource, so thanks to everyone who contributed positively!

So much for EM being chill. Gunners gonna ruin everything
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
It was getting really toxic and vulgar in there. People cursing each other out, putting each other down, and just generally not behaving productively. It didn't seem like it was going to pull itself out of the nosedive, so I locked it down and deleted the raunchier material before it could get any worse. There's a comment about it at the top of the sheet directing applicants to post their legitimate questions and comments in this SDN thread, which has real moderators and is a generally better place for thoughtful discussion. Trolls are why we can't have nice things.

On the bright side, the spreadsheet has otherwise been a huge success and a great resource, so thanks to everyone who contributed positively!

So much for EM being chill. Gunners gonna ruin everything
 
So much for EM being chill. Gunners gonna ruin everything

It really didn't have the "feel" of being a gunner issue, lol, more like a 4chan issue. EM is still chill. But some anonymous people on the internet still gravitate toward being obnoxious.
 
the spreadsheet feeds nicely into my neurotic tendencies :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Well 7 invites are not bad. I only have two. I have 7 others from a different specialty

So 7 invites total (1 from home, 1 from away that I did while rotating). Nothing in the last week. Nothing from programs in my region and, from the spreadsheet, they’ve already sent out at least 1 round of invites.
I know my stats are below average and didn’t apply to any reach programs, programs out west or in NE. The first 2 weeks, I got an invite every few days. Now, crickets.
Starting to get worried. I’ve double and triple checked my app to make sure it was complete. I applied to 53 programs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hey everyone... longtime listener, firsttime caller. Feeling pretty anxious over here. Not usually one for stats, but I've applied to 52 programs and have received 1 interview, 4 rejections, and 2 waitlists, so thought I'd make a post.

Stats: MD, 250s step 1, 240s step 2, top quintile, MSPE w/ only positive comments, 3 SLOEs (high/high/satisfactory although w/ very positive comments and was assured a "strong" SLOE from each), AOA (although elections were last week so only recently updated ERAS), SVI 20, no red flags that I know of

I've already interviewed at my home institution and my two aways, but the fact that my application has been out for over a month with only 1 offer has me antsy af, so over the weekend I applied to 24 more (76 total)... My advisor told me 30 programs would be more than enough, but that's seeming to be not the case. Should I go for even more? Send out LOIs? Keep waiting? Any advice would be helpful. Thanks guys.
 
Hey everyone... longtime listener, firsttime caller. Feeling pretty anxious over here. Not usually one for stats, but I've applied to 52 programs and have received 1 interview, 4 rejections, and 2 waitlists, so thought I'd make a post.

Stats: MD, 250s step 1, 240s step 2, top quintile, MSPE w/ only positive comments, 3 SLOEs (high/high/satisfactory although w/ very positive comments and was assured a "strong" SLOE from each), AOA (although elections were last week so only recently updated ERAS), SVI 20, no red flags that I know of

I've already interviewed at my home institution and my two aways, but the fact that my application has been out for over a month with only 1 offer has me antsy af, so over the weekend I applied to 24 more (76 total)... My advisor told me 30 programs would be more than enough, but that's seeming to be not the case. Should I go for even more? Send out LOIs? Keep waiting? Any advice would be helpful. Thanks guys.

Well, its crazy you only got 3 interviews unless there is something on your app that you are unaware of. It is still early, and I'm sure more will come. It's also possible you are getting screened out geographically if you are applying all over the place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Well, its crazy you only got 3 interviews unless there is something on your app that you are unaware of. It is still early, and I'm sure more will come. It's also possible you are getting screened out geographically if you are applying all over the place.
How many is a good # to have at this point? Getting antsy here.
 
Well, its crazy you only got 3 interviews unless there is something on your app that you are unaware of. It is still early, and I'm sure more will come. It's also possible you are getting screened out geographically if you are applying all over the place.

Appreciate the response! I've actually only "received" one interview, since I interviewed at the 3 places at which I rotated while I was rotating there.

When I met with my home PD/advisor they said I was "in the upper portion of the middle tier" of applicants so I'd assume if there was something I didn't know about in my app they would've told me, and I'd be upfront in this post if I knew of anything.

I am applying all over, however, I did aways on both coasts and am from Midwest so thought that might make that okay... Maybe I was wrong? Got another rejection while typing this (5, now). Anything I should do as of right now?
 
Appreciate the response! I've actually only "received" one interview, since I interviewed at the 3 places at which I rotated while I was rotating there.

When I met with my home PD/advisor they said I was "in the upper portion of the middle tier" of applicants so I'd assume if there was something I didn't know about in my app they would've told me, and I'd be upfront in this post if I knew of anything.

I am applying all over, however, I did aways on both coasts and am from Midwest so thought that might make that okay... Maybe I was wrong? Got another rejection while typing this (5, now). Anything I should do as of right now?

In ERAS, you can only geographically filter by two things that I know of. Permanent address listed in ERAS and medical school location. So doing a rotation in say, New York, isn't going to get you included in filters for NY programs. Geographic filters make it really tough for applicants applying all over the place.

You could consider emailing the program coordinator at some of the places you were really interested in, that you think you have a reasonable shot at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How many is a good # to have at this point? Getting antsy here.

I mean, the goal should be to get to at least 10, but I don't think anyone knows exactly how many you should have at any exact moment in time. I think if I was sitting on 5-6, I wouldn't be too concerned, knowing that some are going to still trickle in, that emails may still net me 1 or 2, and that cancellations could still net an interview or two.

An idea for those people tracking interview #s on SDN in the future would be to take specific dates every two weeks through maybe December and have students report how many interviews they have at that point and average the data together. That way people each year would know if they are on track, below the mean, etc. Would take a ton of work probably, but would be helpful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
In ERAS, you can only geographically filter by two things that I know of. Permanent address listed in ERAS and medical school location. So doing a rotation in say, New York, isn't going to get you included in filters for NY programs. Geographic filters make it really tough for applicants applying all over the place.

You could consider emailing the program coordinator at some of the places you were really interested in, that you think you have a reasonable shot at.

Thanks for that! Really appreciating the advice. I'm assuming that means you don't think it's too early to send these emails? And should I send them slightly more broadly (ie, to all of the California programs I applied to) than to just a "handful" since I applied all over?
 
I mean, the goal should be to get to at least 10, but I don't think anyone knows exactly how many you should have at any exact moment in time. I think if I was sitting on 5-6, I wouldn't be too concerned, knowing that some are going to still trickle in, that emails may still net me 1 or 2, and that cancellations could still net an interview or two.

An idea for those people tracking interview #s on SDN in the future would be to take specific dates every two weeks through maybe December and have students report how many interviews they have at that point and average the data together. That way people each year would know if they are on track, below the mean, etc. Would take a ton of work probably, but would be helpful.
Indeed. I would like to think that PDs just meet up with a giant dart board with random first and last names - shoot a couple darts and see which applicants they will interview.
 
Thanks for that! Really appreciating the advice. I'm assuming that means you don't think it's too early to send these emails? And should I send them slightly more broadly (ie, to all of the California programs I applied to) than to just a "handful" since I applied all over?

I'd start out first with the programs you really want to end up at. Send an email that is specific to that program rather than an obvious cut and paste job, let them know why you are interested. It's way to early to freak out and email 100 programs. I've been getting emails from people for at least two weeks now. People are freaking out earlier and earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'd start out first with the programs you really want to end up at. Send an email that is specific to that program rather than an obvious cut and paste job, let them know why you are interested. It's way to early to freak out and email 100 programs. I've been getting emails from people for at least two weeks now. People are freaking out earlier and earlier.
Thanks so much! Anything else you can think of please don't hesitate to let me know.
 
Indeed. I would like to think that PDs just meet up with a giant dart board with random first and last names - shoot a couple darts and see which applicants they will interview.

Nope. We use a modified version of a "jump to conclusions mat".

For anyone not old enough to remember what that is:

 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Nope. We use a modified version of a "jump to conclusions mat".

For anyone not old enough to remember what that is:


That's the worst idea I've ever heard in my life Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hey everyone, fellow applicant in this crazy pool. I'm a bit different then other applicants though.

I'm a TRI, I applied surgery last year and did not match. I am doing my intern year through my school (osteopathic).

No gaps in my education, no discipline actions on my application.
Comlex 596 and 606
Good LORs
2 SLOEs
Strong program director letter that went out today.
Lots of experience on application.

I have had 2 interviews, and I have over 70 applications out (the bulk sent out around September 16th, the rest going on until October 10th).

I am worried about not matching, as is my husband to be. I have depression and it has been spiking bad lately, despite trying to be optimistic. Each day gets harder and harder for me, and thankfully I have a good support network helping me through.

I hear mixed things, from its too early to worry to your dream is over and you are doomed.

Insight would be appreciated, for both my husband to be and I. At this point, each day I am alive is considered a blessing.

I want this to be over...
 
Hey everyone, fellow applicant in this crazy pool. I'm a bit different then other applicants though.

I'm a TRI, I applied surgery last year and did not match. I am doing my intern year through my school (osteopathic).

No gaps in my education, no discipline actions on my application.
Comlex 596 and 606
Good LORs
2 SLOEs
Strong program director letter that went out today.
Lots of experience on application.

I have had 2 interviews, and I have over 70 applications out (the bulk sent out around September 16th, the rest going on until October 10th).

I am worried about not matching, as is my husband to be. I have depression and it has been spiking bad lately, despite trying to be optimistic. Each day gets harder and harder for me, and thankfully I have a good support network helping me through.

I hear mixed things, from its too early to worry to your dream is over and you are doomed.

Insight would be appreciated, for both my husband to be and I. At this point, each day I am alive is considered a blessing.

I want this to be over...

Were the SLOEs from 4th year? Why did you get SLOEs if applying to surgery? What made you change from wanting to do Surgery to EM? Lots of questions here from a program leadership standpoint.

Also, feel free to contact me via PM if you don't feel comfortable discussing some of the application details out in the open. I'm happy to try and help. That goes for anyone on here, as always.
 
In ERAS, you can only geographically filter by two things that I know of. Permanent address listed in ERAS and medical school location. So doing a rotation in say, New York, isn't going to get you included in filters for NY programs. Geographic filters make it really tough for applicants applying all over the place.

You could consider emailing the program coordinator at some of the places you were really interested in, that you think you have a reasonable shot at.

Hmm. Just anecdotally, I'm not entirely 100% sure all programs automatically sort out by geography. I'm Cali born and raised, my permanent address and school are both Cali (granted I guess I can't comment on the Cali schools). Have had no problems getting invite from other regions, despite my 230s step 1 score. My app would make me believe they are more holistic.....
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I'm not entirely 100% sure they really sort out by geography. I'm Cali born and raised, my permanent address and school are both Cali (granted I guess I can't comment on the Cali schools). Have had no problems getting invite from other regions, despite my 230s step 1 score. My app would make me believe they are more holistic.....

Anecdotal.
 
Anecdotal.

Fair. I guess what I'm saying is, I don't think the filter is as ubiquitous as one would be lead to believe. I absolutely agree there is likely a regional bias given the fact that folks tend to stay where they grew up and trained, but what I'm saying I don't think programs off the bat filter you out based on where you live and don't even look at your apps otherwise until after. If that were the case, my app would have not been looked at. That's what I'm getting at.
 
Hmm. I'm not entirely 100% sure they really sort out by geography. I'm Cali born and raised, my permanent address and school are both Cali (granted I guess I can't comment on the Cali schools). Have had no problems getting invite from other regions, despite my 230s step 1 score. My app would make me believe they are more holistic.....
Programs love having Cali schools on their resident roster.
 
Programs love having Cali schools on their resident roster.

Really? I did not in any way realize that. It's not like I go to a big name Cali school. I actually thought it would hurt me like med school apps did! The whole problem of too many of us Californians and folks not trusting that we would be happy to leave....
 
Earlier post w/ stats is below. I'm now getting a vibe I have a less-than-desirable SLOE. Over the last week, I have gone from original 52 programs mainly in PNW, CA, CO, Chi, TX, NY, Carolinas, FL, to >100 programs all over, including addition of home region states, w/ still just 1 non-rotation invite. I don't think I can imagine myself doing anything but EM in medicine, so meeting w/ an advisor today to discuss potentially doing law school now instead of residency as a backup plan, unless anyone has any other job ideas for resident MDs that might be interesting for an EM hopeful, and/or means of improving my chances.
Hey everyone... longtime listener, firsttime caller. Feeling pretty anxious over here. Not usually one for stats, but I've applied to 52 programs and have received 1 interview, 4 rejections, and 2 waitlists, so thought I'd make a post.

Stats: MD, 250s step 1, 240s step 2, top quintile, MSPE w/ only positive comments, 3 SLOEs (high/high/satisfactory although w/ very positive comments and was assured a "strong" SLOE from each), AOA (although elections were last week so only recently updated ERAS), SVI 20, no red flags that I know of

I've already interviewed at my home institution and my two aways, but the fact that my application has been out for over a month with only 1 offer has me antsy af, so over the weekend I applied to 24 more (76 total)... My advisor told me 30 programs would be more than enough, but that's seeming to be not the case. Should I go for even more? Send out LOIs? Keep waiting? Any advice would be helpful. Thanks guys.
 
Earlier post w/ stats is below. I'm now getting a vibe I have a less-than-desirable SLOE. Over the last week, I have gone from original 52 programs mainly in PNW, CA, CO, Chi, TX, NY, Carolinas, FL, to >100 programs all over, including addition of home region states, w/ still just 1 non-rotation invite. I don't think I can imagine myself doing anything but EM in medicine, so meeting w/ an advisor today to discuss potentially doing law school now instead of residency as a backup plan, unless anyone has any other job ideas for resident MDs that might be interesting for an EM hopeful, and/or means of improving my chances.

Dude... it's way too early for that. Plus, worst case, you soap into a prelim year and reapply.
 
Dude... it's way too early for that. Plus, worst case, you soap into a prelim year and reapply.
Thanks for the response. I've heard that it's too early from others, too, but I don't understand how that's true w/ the 2016 PD survey showing 58% of interview invites going out in Oct, 10% prior to Oct, and only 32% for Nov-Jan combined and my current status w./ 1 invite, 7 rejections, 2 waitlists.
 
Thanks for the response. I've heard that it's too early from others, too, but I don't understand how that's true w/ the 2016 PD survey showing 58% of interview invites going out in Oct, 10% prior to Oct, and only 32% for Nov-Jan combined and my current status w./ 1 invite, 7 rejections, 2 waitlists.

I think those are initial invites which may not include sending out invites after an applicant turns them down.
 
Earlier post w/ stats is below. I'm now getting a vibe I have a less-than-desirable SLOE. Over the last week, I have gone from original 52 programs mainly in PNW, CA, CO, Chi, TX, NY, Carolinas, FL, to >100 programs all over, including addition of home region states, w/ still just 1 non-rotation invite. I don't think I can imagine myself doing anything but EM in medicine, so meeting w/ an advisor today to discuss potentially doing law school now instead of residency as a backup plan, unless anyone has any other job ideas for resident MDs that might be interesting for an EM hopeful, and/or means of improving my chances.

1. I agree with above posters that it's way too early for this line of thinking.
2. Why Law school of all things?! You'll still get an MD after all this why not use that degree for consulting etc?
 
1. I agree with above posters that it's way too early for this line of thinking.
2. Why Law school of all things?! You'll still get an MD after all this why not use that degree for consulting etc?
I don't know. I'm grasping at straws. I've tried imagining myself in any other specialty and I just can't. I put 110% into each and every shift in my aways and got great written and oral feedback. Just feeling so blindsided... that one letter can invalidate 4 years of hard work on AOA, ECs, Steps, etc.
 
I don't know. I'm grasping at straws. I've tried imagining myself in any other specialty and I just can't. I put 110% into each and every shift in my aways and got great written and oral feedback. Just feeling so blindsided... that one letter can invalidate 4 years of hard work on AOA, ECs, Steps, etc.

No it doesn't. By virtue SOMEBODY has to be in the bottom 3rd. In fact 33% of EM applicants. But 95% of us match somewhere.
 
No it doesn't. By virtue SOMEBODY has to be in the bottom 3rd. In fact 33% of EM applicants. But 95% of us match somewhere.
You're probably right but I don't think schools actually follow the distributions of the SLOEs categories. One program literally told me we don't give bottom 1/3s. So it's not as clear as you're making it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You're probably right but I don't think schools actually follow the distributions of the SLOEs categories. One program literally told me we don't give bottom 1/3s. So it's not as clear as you're making it.

That's true too. But how many schools do that? A handful? Or 1/3? 1/2?
The more prestigious the institution, the more likely they are to stick to keeping an equal distribution. So if OP rotated at a strong institution, other schools may take that into account. We can only speculate and i was trying to make him feel a little better.
 
The more prestigious the institution, the more likely they are to stick to keeping an equal distribution. So if OP rotated at a strong institution, other schools may take that into account. We can only speculate and i was trying to make him feel a little better.
This isn't true at all. I've heard of multiple 'prestigious institutions' that don't stick to the distributions at all, they are either score very favorably or are impossible to impress.

This is the main reason why people freak out about EM every single year. The most important part of our application (SLOEs) is completely invisible to us. You can make up for a poor Step 1 score, you can make up for bad preclinical grades, you can't make up for a bad SLOE that you likely have no idea that it's bad.

People will continue to overapply in EM until something changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This isn't true at all. I've heard of multiple 'prestigious institutions' that don't stick to the distributions at all, they are either score very favorably or are impossible to impress.

This is the main reason why people freak out about EM every single year. The most important part of our application (SLOEs) is completely invisible to us. You can make up for a poor Step 1 score, you can make up for bad preclinical grades, you can't make up for a bad SLOE that you likely have no idea that it's bad.

People will continue to overapply in EM until something changes.

I really like the idea of a true wave system:

1) Every program reviews applications for x weeks, decides on invite/wait list/reject. Then on say, October 15th, EVERY program emails EVERY applicant to either invite them to interview, to wait list, or to reject them. Then applicants have 2 weeks to schedule and reject interview offers. Applicants at this point can send out letters of interest to programs they really care about, but were not invited to yet.

2) Programs then have an additional 2 weeks to plan out their next invitations/wait list/rejections, so, on November 15th, EVERY program emails EVERY remaining applicant to either invite them to interview, to continue to wait list, or to reject them.

3) Repeat for one more wave on December 15th.

4) After 3 full waves of this process, invitations/wait lists/rejections can be free form and programs are free to send invitations or rejections in any manner they see fit.

Ideally we could cap applicants to holding 15-20 scheduled interviews at a time (exception for people couple's matching should be made). So if you have 20 interviews scheduled and the 2nd wave comes in and you receive 10 more interviews, you have 2 weeks to decide which 10 to cancel. People will still over-apply, but it will force a uniform, synchronized system to alleviate the difficulties and anxiety for both parties. Those with very few interviews initially should hopefully receive a generous amount in the 2nd and 3rd wave, with the free form interviews afterward allowing for additional last minute shuffling and new interviews.
 
This isn't true at all. I've heard of multiple 'prestigious institutions' that don't stick to the distributions at all, they are either score very favorably or are impossible to impress.

This is the main reason why people freak out about EM every single year. The most important part of our application (SLOEs) is completely invisible to us. You can make up for a poor Step 1 score, you can make up for bad preclinical grades, you can't make up for a bad SLOE that you likely have no idea that it's bad.

People will continue to overapply in EM until something changes.

Preach.

CORD has implicitly decided that a confidential SLOE is a valuable enough tool that it's worth suffering through the mass overapplying that results.

But then you see PDs bemoan the consequences - "Oh, we get a thousand ERAS applications, there's no way to screen these appropriately so we have to filter by location and Step score. And there's no way to filter by location of SLOE writer, so we either have to check for that manually or say 'sorry, applicant, I know you wanted to express interest in our region by doing a nearby Away, but it's just Too Much Work.'"

Each student has an AAMC ID. Tie that ID to the SLOE. Make the SLOEs visible to the students, but explicitly mandate that students submit all of their SLOEs. Since SLOEs are generated from the CORD website, they can set up a directory that lets programs plug in the AAMC ID and see how many SLOEs that student is supposed to have so they can tell if one is being omitted. This is the best weapon against the problem of overapplying.
 
I really like the idea of a true wave system:

1) Every program reviews applications for x weeks, decides on invite/wait list/reject. Then on say, October 15th, EVERY program emails EVERY applicant to either invite them to interview, to wait list, or to reject them. Then applicants have 2 weeks to schedule and reject interview offers. Applicants at this point can send out letters of interest to programs they really care about, but were not invited to yet.

2) Programs then have an additional 2 weeks to plan out their next invitations/wait list/rejections, so, on November 15th, EVERY program emails EVERY remaining applicant to either invite them to interview, to continue to wait list, or to reject them.

3) Repeat for one more wave on December 15th.

4) After 3 full waves of this process, invitations/wait lists/rejections can be free form and programs are free to send invitations or rejections in any manner they see fit.

Ideally we could cap applicants to holding 15-20 scheduled interviews at a time (exception for people couple's matching should be made). So if you have 20 interviews scheduled and the 2nd wave comes in and you receive 10 more interviews, you have 2 weeks to decide which 10 to cancel. People will still over-apply, but it will force a uniform, synchronized system to alleviate the difficulties and anxiety for both parties. Those with very few interviews initially should hopefully receive a generous amount in the 2nd and 3rd wave, with the free form interviews afterward allowing for additional last minute shuffling and new interviews.


Ooooh I like this game.

How about, when students apply, they submit a rank order list of all the places they're applying to. When programs select students to interview, they submit a rank order list of their preferred interviewees. ERAS runs an NRMP match algorithm/Gale-Shapley algorithm to pair students up to programs for interviews, and limit students to a total of 20 (with an exception for couples, sure). And then students are asked to cut out at least 5 interviews. And programs can then do the free-for-all, inviting whoever's left, up to a max of 15 interviews - hell, a max of 12 is probably fine, but I don't want students to veto this so I'll be generous and say 15.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You can also standardize the interview scheduling program. Go with interview broker. Max you can schedule is 12-15.
On ERAS/NRMP, have a #1 "token" that you send out 2 weeks before rank lists are due, so the program knows you're not bull****tiing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
SLOES arent going to change. Students aren't in the drivers seat to demand change. I understand the system is frustrating and I get it that it is nerve wracking. But it it is very unlikely to change.

That being said, it would be great if SLOEs and ERAS were more integrated. Ability to filter by SLOE scores or more importantly, SLOE location, would be great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'm only a 3rd year but what I've learned is any mistake you make in a rotation is irredeemable, regardless of how well you do in other areas. On my first rotation I was a bit unconfident during the 1st 2 weeks and even though I was very confident according to the preceptor for the remaining 4 weeks (he told me), it was still written in my eval that I was not confident. And what sucks is if they are going through some hard time in their life (divorce, financial issues) they will take it out on you (learned this in my second rotation). I wish the system was more objective based on exam scores.. it's unfair that this 250+ guy is getting ****ed whereas some slacker with below average scores who just had a good preceptor is winning the interview lottery.

Luckily, for EM rotations you get a bunch of people evaluating you so it would have to be a really bad mistake to sink you. Also, people in EM know how important evaluations are, and generally treat them accordingly. Attendings and residents in other specialties generally have much less idea of how evaluations affect students.
 
I wish the system was more objective based on exam scores.. it's unfair that this 250+ guy is getting ****ed whereas some slacker with below average scores who just had a good preceptor is winning the interview lottery.

I think you may have a misguided view of what makes a good Emergency Medicine physician. It isn't board scores. I've had phenomenal residents who could run circles around their peers who tested poorly on standardized exams. I've never really seen a correlation between exam scores and student/resident performance clinically. They probably do predict board success rate in the future, but other than that, they don't tell you who is going to make a good EM resident clinically.

Its completely fair if someone gets a 250 on step 1 and stinks at working in the ED to not match in EM. Successfully taking the USMLE exam and practicing Emergency Medicine are two very different skill sets. If anything, I think its unfair that there are absolute standout students who perform great in the ED but can't get interviews because of their board scores.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
I've had phenomenal residents who could run circles around their peers who tested poorly on standardized exams.
I think you have that backwards - this statement implies that residents with poorer board scores are also clinically worse, and the opposite - high schoolers, high clinical performance.
 
I think you have that backwards - this statement implies that residents with poorer board scores are also clinically worse, and the opposite - high schoolers, high clinical performance.

It's a sentence parsing issue. Read it as, "I've had phenomenal residents (who could run circles around their peers) who tested poorly on standardized exams."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top