2018 Charting Outcomes released

[Rads4lyfe]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Some interesting data. Thought it would be interesting to discuss.

2018 Charting Outcomes for US Allopathic Seniors
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Seniors.pdf

2018 Charting Outcomes for US Osteopathic Seniors
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Osteo.pdf

and just for comparison:

2016 Charting Outcomes for US Allopathic Seniors
https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-US-Allopathic-Seniors-2016.pdf

2016 Charting Outcomes for US Osteopathic Seniors
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-US-Osteopathic-2016.pdf

 

[ssj4vinh]

Thanks for posting this. What is the likely explanation for there being 14 US MD applicants with Step 1 of 241-260+ who went unmatched this year compared to the 2 applicants in 2016? Is radiology just that more competitive now?

 

[Warderino92]

Thanks for posting this. What is the likely explanation for there being 14 US MD applicants with Step 1 of 241-260+ who went unmatched this year compared to the 2 applicants in 2016? Is radiology just that more competitive now?

Could be that they were too blatant about wanting IR or bust in their interviews.

 

[Cognovi]

Could be that they were too blatant about wanting IR or bust in their interviews.

They would only be included in the above statistic if their number one rank was a DR program. Someone who ranks a DR program number 1 is not of the philosophy "IR or bust."

Charting Outcomes separates applicants by preferred specialty. The specialty of the top ranked program is the preferred specialty.

 

[Cognovi]

Thanks for posting this. What is the likely explanation for there being 14 US MD applicants with Step 1 of 241-260+ who went unmatched this year compared to the 2 applicants in 2016? Is radiology just that more competitive now?

Yes, DR is just that more competitive, as evidenced by an increase in the ratio of applicants who prefer the specialty (whose number 1 rank is a DR program) to available positions.
DR 2016: 1.05 (0.63 US seniors + 0.42 others).
DR 2018: 1.17 (0.70 US seniors + 0.47 others)

The increase in competitiveness is manifest in a decline in match rate (again, for those US seniors who rank a DR programs as #1):
DR 2016: 98%
DR 2018: 89%

As you noted, based on the logistic regressions presented in Charting Outcomes, the chance of matching to DR for an applicant who preferred DR and scored 240 on Step 1 has slightly decreased:
DR 2016: 99%
DR 2018: 95%

 

[qxrt]

Back when I was a 4th year med student already matched into DR and planning to go IR, I rotated in pathology (this was back before IR became relatively well-known and popular). The pathology attending asked me what my Step 1 score was, then told me I was wasting my score on DR and asked why I wasn't going into plastic surgery or something.

Fast forward to now; with how the IR/DR match went this year, I don't think I could have even matched into IR/DR had I been applying this past cycle. I think I understand now what those old fogey attendings meant when they say that they wouldn't have been able to get into med school had they been applying nowadays.

 

[Radology]

Except those old fogey attendings would have been subject to the same study resources that recent years have that’s contributed to test score inflation

It’s not like current generations are so much more intelligent, they just have so many more prep options

 

[irwarrior]

Number of US Seniors per position is interesting stat.

The ratio >1 include

Neurosurgery 1.04
Plastic surgery 1.08
Orthopedic surgery 1.13
Interventional Radiology 1.51

The lower ratios include
Pathology 0.37
Internal Medicine 0.43
Family practice 0.45

Diagnostic radiology. 0.70 with 8 programs below it in ratio and 13 programs above it.