2017-2018 Interview Thread -- Radiology

[DrfluffyMD]

UCSF resident lists are impressive but the PDs exaggerate even more (or people exaggerate their conversations with the PDs). Every class of UCSF rad onc residents except one has had a non-PhD: Previous Medical Residents | UCSF Department of Radiation Oncology I heard something similar about the PD of UCSF IM saying they only interview AOA's from top 30 medical schools. But at least a third of their residents are either not AOA or not from a top 30 school: UCSF | Department of Medicine | Residency Programs | Current Housestaff - Interns

Set up a crowdsourcing spreadsheet.

That conversation occurrd more than 7 years ago.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Cognovi]

That conversation occurrd more than 7 years ago.

Amazing, because the residents in classes of 2007 through 2010 were all MDs.

 

[DrfluffyMD]

Amazing, because the residents in classes of 2007 through 2010 were all MDs.

Amazing, more than 7 years ago translate specifically to 4 years window now? They have a specific preference for MD PhDs and were able to obtain such a class in the last 20 years. I spoke with the PD in one of those years. I prefer to not be more specific about this subject than this.

 

[Cognovi]

Amazing, more than 7 years ago translate specifically to 4 years window now? They have a specific preference for MD PhDs and were able to obtain such a class in the last 20 years. I spoke with the PD in one of those years. I prefer to not be more specific about this subject than this.

Actually my mistake, a 4 year window 7 years ago would be the graduating classes of 2011 through 2014, during which 4 of 13 residents were MD-only. Anyway, it should suffice to say that they have a preference for MDPhDs, but it would be intentionally deceiving for them to say they take only MDPhDs.

 

[knosway14]

This discussion has long since lost its usefulness for me but just to make it clear, I was not trying to debate competitiveness between programs. I was rather perplexed by the fact that some people take the ocassional fmg matching at a prestigious program as a synonym of low competitiveness (which may indeed make sense at lower and mid tier programs but not at other such as mgh). I really do not care which program is more prestigious or competitive than the other. ... not sure why this is so confusing?

Dude as a FMG as well...
1) the point was clear, he didnt mean than always FMG match means a non competitive or a bad program.
2) even not openly discussed a lot of people will look bad at programs than match FMGs a lot every year (it is what it is).
3) as a FMG as well i wish you the best and suggest you to focus on interviews and not take any forum really serious (specially negativity).

 

[radiosoda]

Dude as a FMG as well...
1) the point was clear, he didnt mean than always FMG match means a non competitive or a bad program.
2) even not openly discussed a lot of people will look bad at programs than match FMGs a lot every year (it is what it is).
3) as a FMG as well i wish you the best and suggest you to focus on interviews and not take any forum really serious (specially negativity).

You didn't get my point either, but I'm not trying to explain anymore. Good luck to you too!

 

[bradsof]

This discussion may not be useful to you as a FMG, but note that this is not the FMG interview thread. This is the rad interview thread. choosing the right program is one of the most pertinent discussion for students right now.

This discussion centers around the following FACT: match where you want to live.

Ok so let me sort out the various thread for you

Are FMG matching in a program occasionally suggest low competitiveness: depends on the program. Some huge programs offer strong training but are not the most competitive (Emory comes to mind), as a result they often match FMGs because they may have a hard time filling 17 people class with all AMG. This says nothing about their training (which is excellent). I remember radiologyPD said in their AMA that since their program is not very big, they typically do not rank FMG or DO high because doing so creates the perception of a noncompetitive program.

TLR: a program who has matched FMG may or may not be competitive. A program who had never matched FMG or DO even during the lean years is likely very competitive.

Prestiguous vs nonprestiguous programs: there are three elements to prestige: lay people, referal and other radiologists. Going to a program well known to radiologists help with jobs, going to a program well known to referals help with practice building, same with lay people.

For example, MIR is very well known and well regarded to a radiologist, but probably not considered to be top 5 by a referer or lay person. (Rads ranking: top 5-10, referer: top 10-20, lay people: 20-30, again just ballpark number to illustrate the concept). A medicine doc will think wash U is competitive but will not understand what MIR mean in radiology.

Take a different example: BWH IR: many IRs consider BWH to be not as strong as its name. However, DRs, referers and lay people all consider BWH to be a top 10 name. In this case the recognition pattern reverse from MIR.

So break down the prestige of programs where you interviewed using the three category above and think about what do you want to do. In general a good rep in the combination of all three is useful.

Patronizing IMGs?

 

[wallebergsyndrome]

hey everyone. I just want to ask is radio more competitive this year or is it just false rumours?.
thanks

 

[Doktaliz]

UCSD website says they send out interview invites at the end of November. Did anyone hear either way?

 

[SpartanWolverine]

hey everyone. I just want to ask is radio more competitive this year or is it just false rumours?.
thanks

Not false. Multiple PDs have commented on interviews that they have received a lot (~30% is the number some gave) more applications this year.

 

[wallebergsyndrome]

Not false. Multiple PDs have commented on interviews that they have received a lot (~30% is the number some gave) more applications this year.

any reason why the numbers went up this year? I was also told by one PD that this year is the last year and from next year IR and DR will be separate. If one takes DR he can't go into IR. is this true?

 

[DrfluffyMD]

any reason why the numbers went up this year? I was also told by one PD that this year is the last year and from next year IR and DR will be separate. If one takes DR he can't go into IR. is this true?

False

 

[Cognovi]

The average number of applications received by diagnostic radiology programs increased 8% from last year (539.0 vs 499.5). This increase is driven by an increase in number of applications to each program from US medical students (increase of 17% from last year: 391.4 vs 334.1). There are more US medical students applying to diagnostic radiology (12% more than last year: 1401 vs 1251) and the average US applicant is applying to more programs each (5% more than last year: 50.3 compared to 48.1).

This trend in DR is not driven by students interested in IR. The number of applicants to IR decreased this year from 406 to 396 US students and from 146 to 103 IMGs, a 10% decline in total. The IR programs won't perceive this decrease because each IR applicant is applying to slightly more programs this year compared to last.

Source: ERAS data, as of 10/15 of each application year

any reason why the numbers went up this year? I was also told by one PD that this year is the last year and from next year IR and DR will be separate. If one takes DR he can't go into IR. is this true?

IR fellowships will be replaced by so-called independent IR residencies and integrated IR/DR integrated residencies. A DR resident can still go into IR by either doing the ESIR pathway or doing an IR "residency" (essentially a two year fellowship that follows DR residency). This has no relationship with the fluctuation in application numbers to DR. Medical students will still apply to both DR and integrated IR/DR programs.

 

[ValleyRad2018]

Can’t argue with math. I hadn’t taken the time to look at the numbers, but I appreciate you doing so and your insight.

I think it would be helpful to know how many medical students applied to both DR/IR and how this number compares to last year in order to definitively say the trend in DR is not driven by students interested in IR.

Based on the numbers, IR seems to be a wash in terms of total applicants, but there may be an increasing inclination/recommendation to apply to both given the competitiveness of IR. Either way, it would help tease out the 8% in terms of "more students applying to DR" vs "more students applying to IR with a DR backup."

 

[Cognovi]

I think it would be helpful to know how many medical students applied to both DR/IR and how this number compares to last year in order to definitively say the trend in DR is not driven by students interested in IR.

Based on the numbers, IR seems to be a wash in terms of total applicants, but there may be an increasing inclination/recommendation to apply to both given the competitiveness of IR. Either way, it would help tease out the 8% in terms of "more students applying to DR" vs "more students applying to IR with a DR backup."

It is known, from NRMP match statistics, that nearly all those US MD applicants who ranked IR in 2017 also ranked another specialty. There were and are simply not enough IR spots for someone to safely apply IR-only. I would guess that most are applying DR, rather than or in addition to applying to something else like surgery. Therefore I don't think there is much room to increase in the proportion of IR applicants who are also applying DR.

 

[ValleyRad2018]

It is known, from NRMP match statistics, that nearly all those US MD applicants who ranked IR in 2017 also ranked another specialty. There were and are simply not enough IR spots for someone to safely apply IR-only. I would guess that most are applying DR, rather than or in addition to applying to something else like surgery. Therefore I don't think there is much room to increase in the proportion of IR applicants who are also applying DR.

Fair enough. Overall, the 8% increase does not seem as drastic as has been previously discussed on this forum. For some programs perhaps the increase in applications has been closer to 20%, but there's increased variability in terms of anecdotal evidence with applicants applying to more programs on average this year. I think the specific increase in the proportion of US medical students in the applicant pool is most consequential to the perceived (and real) increase in competitiveness (as you have noted).

I appreciate you gathering the information and your insightful posts.

 

[DrfluffyMD]

Fair enough. Overall, the 8% increase does not seem as drastic as has been previously discussed on this thread. For some programs perhaps the increase in applications has been closer to 20%, but there's increased variability in terms of anecdotal evidence with applicants applying to more programs on average this year.

I appreciate you gathering the information and your insightful posts.

Overall applicants from 1895 to 1980 for about a 10% increase. This is a significant increase.

 

[PENNYWISETHECLOWN]

Anyone here interviewed at rutgers new jersey and/or rwj ? Please PM me, i have a few questions! Thanks.

 

[orthogenes]

Still no word from Tripler? Do we know if the military match filled all their spots?

 

[stef.ver]

Hey does anyone know if lahey in MA is still interviewing? People have only reported December dates and I was wondering if they have offered anyone January dates.

 

[SpartanWolverine]

Hey does anyone know if lahey in MA is still interviewing? People have only reported December dates and I was wondering if they have offered anyone January dates.

The only dates I was made aware of were the weeks of:
Tuesday, November 14 – Friday, November 17, 2017
Tuesday, December 5 – Friday December 8, 2017

 

[aecmed69]

Does anyone know what happened to the spreadsheet?

 

[Rads18]

Are people considering Doximity when making rank lists? When someone says an interview as a top 20, is that according to Doximity? I feel like there are are some very large discrepancies in the rankings.

 

[SpartanWolverine]

I only consider their rankings superficially. I have it as a column in my spreadsheet but may have only used it once or twice to decide between some of the lower spots on my cursory rank list. For example I was completely up in the air for my 8th/9th rank (both advanced, both far from home, similar rotation structure, residents all seem happy, good fellowship list [aren't they all?], similar benefits, similar research environment, both very good in my subspecialty of interest, etc.). Only real difference is that they were 30-40 spots apart on the rankings so I took that into consideration.

 

[Rads4lyfe]

Are people considering Doximity when making rank lists? When someone says an interview as a top 20, is that according to Doximity? I feel like there are are some very large discrepancies in the rankings.

I think most people refer to doximity reputation rankings now. There were other various rank lists floating around a while back. I would take all rankings with a grain of salt though.

I'd say the top 10-20 programs are somewhat accurate. Most people would agree that MGH or JHU are top 10 programs. However, the difference between the 6th and 11th rank program is pretty subjective and probably doesn't matter. The further from the top you get, the less accurate the ranking becomes. I think past 20-30, it is unreliable.

 

[Cognovi]

The reason is it unreliable/inaccurate outside of the top is that the difference in votes between each rank is noisy. Doximity stopped releasing the raw vote count after its first year, which you can see below, presumably because you could see how it's silly to try to break the programs into stable and clean tiers outside the top handful. The way the survey worked is that people are asked to submit the names of the top 5 programs in their minds. You see in the results below that there's a jump after #3, then a blip after #5, then a gradual slide. If you compare to this year's results, three years later, you'll see the top 5 are the same, but then it's variable after that (#6 has dropped to #15, #7-10 have shuffled). Because the survey asks only for 5 nominations, you have to think, would a reasonable person in this specialty think so-and-so program ranked X is actually a top 5 program? I think once you get past #15, it strains credulity.

 

[nwalltheway]

Where did all the actual interview dates/ invites go? =(

 

[bradsof]

Hi, can anyone confirm if JHU actually sent rank-to-match emails. I find opposing comments in the spreadsheet... thanks

 

[BrCa10]

Hi everyone, I'm new to this place. I know this is an interview thread, but I am really hoping for some help regarding ranking radiology residency programs as well.

I have a particular concern about NYU affiliated Winthrop program, which was a recent change, as I understand, from just Winthrop. On one hand, it is now NYU affiliated, but on the other hand, there are several changes that are worrisome. One such concern is that the chair of radiology and several faculty members are leaving Winthrop since the merger, and now I hear that the PD is leaving too. I mean, I am sure they will hire new people, but If I rank this place, given that these are such new changes, I am unsure about what to expect in the immediate years that follow.

Has anyone gone through a similar process of transition/merger? How did it impact the education? How should I rank this program?

 

[wallebergsyndrome]

hey guys I received an email from a program through ERAS 2 months after my interview . It didn't state my name but said they were impressed with my credentials and are considering my application , I really liked the program .Is this personal or the program usually sends such emails to everyone?

 

[wallebergsyndrome]

its a program from south. I can't name it but the letter states that they like my credentials and my interest in Radiology . Since I had mentioned I was keen on doing IR they also mentioned that an eminent IR professor from Florida is the chairman and he liked my credentials. But the letter did nor state my name and it came with the heading post interview letter after 2 months through eras

 

[Elmer Hartman]

its a program from south. I can't name it but the letter states that they like my credentials and my interest in Radiology . Since I had mentioned I was keen on doing IR they also mentioned that an eminent IR professor from Florida is the chairman and he liked my credentials. But the letter did nor state my name and it came with the heading post interview letter after 2 months through eras

Sounds like the Tulane letter

 

[wallebergsyndrome]

Sounds like the Tulane letter

how do you know? yes Tulane. does it send out as a generic one to all candidates?

 

[blah2468]

With the increasing competitiveness, should I not even try for DR with a 485 COMLEX and 230 USMLE step 1?

 

[Derv]

With the increasing competitiveness, should I not even try for DR with a 485 COMLEX and 230 USMLE step 1?

You should definitely try. Apply very broadly. There are lots of programs out there that would consider you.

 

[yellowbluegreen]

Hey guys,

I'm looking to apply in 2019 and I was wondering as an Osteopathic student with a STEP 1 244 how many places should I be applying too? How many interviews is considered a good number? Any tips and advice would greatly be appreciated!

Thank you