*** 2021-2022 MD/PhD cycle - Questions, Comments, and other things ***

[Aspiring MD-PhD]

Here are my recommendation:
Now - Submit AMCAS application to at least 1 school (and no more than 10), request all transcripts, and request all LORs
2 weeks after your application has verified, add another 10 schools...
4 weeks after your application has verified, add another 10 schools (if needed)...

This way, you effectively stagger your secondary applications with no significant impact on your likelihood of success.

Verification takes 4-6 weeks. It can't happen if your transcripts are not available. LORs must be available for your application review.
Once verified, adding another school appears in the Inbox of the school within 24 hours.

If you are waiting for a MCAT score, you can apply to a single school. Then depending upon the score, you can construct a list upwards or downwards in ranking as you assess. Waiting to submit is typically not a good option as the late verification process might impact your chances with a decent 512 score.

PM me if needed.

Hi @Fencer , I was just wondering if your recommendation applies only for those who submitted their AMCAS application very early or for somewhat later in the cycle too? It looks like my application will probably get verified next week. Do you think staggering secondaries is still reasonable to do at this point in time?

I unfortunately haven't gotten to pre-writing any secondaries yet, although I will definitely try to start doing so this week. I am thinking of trying to submit half my secondaries in early-mid August and the other half around mid-late August. Does that sound like a reasonable plan to you? Are there cons to staggering that I should be aware of? (What's the typical range of lag times between adding a program on AMCAS and receiving a secondary?)

Thank you in advance!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Fencer]

Perhaps rather than spacing them every 2 weeks, you do it every 1 week. Admission committees have started the review of applications.

 

[Aspiring MD-PhD]

Perhaps rather than spacing them every 2 weeks, you do it every 1 week. Admission committees have started the review of applications.

I see, thank you for the info and advice! I will try my best to prewrite and submit as soon as I can

 

[deleted728364]

What percent of applicants are usually complete (secondaries) in July / August / September / etc. for MSTP?

Hi @Fencer, could you comment on the percent of complete applications your program gets now/mid-July vs mid-August vs mid-September?

(Edit - in a normal/not covid-delayed cycle)

 

[Fencer]

Mid-July - Total applications ~40%, verified ~20%
July 31 - Total applications ~50%, verified ~35%
Mid-Aug - Total applications ~60%, verified ~50%
Aug 31 - Total applications ~ 70%, verified ~60%
Mid Sep - Total applications ~80%, verified ~75%
Sep 30 - Total applications ~85%, verified ~80%

Overall, the numbers are consistent in the past 4 cycles, which allows us to project our total number of applicants.

 

[VaultArmitage]

@Fencer If I'm understanding your post correctly what you're saying is that at this point 50% of total MD/PhD applications have been turned in but only 35% of total MD/PhD applications have been verified?

 

[deleted728364]

Mid-July - Total applications ~40%, verified ~20%
July 31 - Total applications ~50%, verified ~35%
Mid-Aug - Total applications ~60%, verified ~50%
Aug 31 - Total applications ~ 70%, verified ~60%
Mid Sep - Total applications ~80%, verified ~75%
Sep 30 - Total applications ~85%, verified ~80%

Overall, the numbers are consistent in the past 4 cycles, which allows us to project our total number of applicants.

Thank you for the detailed info!

 

[Fencer]

@Fencer If I'm understanding your post correctly what you're saying is that at this point 50% of total MD/PhD applications have been turned in but only 35% of total MD/PhD applications have been verified?

Correct... all percentages are approximate from the final TOTAL number of the cycle. Not 50% x 35%... Now, I don't have data on complete with all LORs. In general, I only forward applications with ALL or at least meaningful LORs (i.e. Research Advisors) for committee review.

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

Mid-July - Total applications ~40%, verified ~20%
July 31 - Total applications ~50%, verified ~35%
Mid-Aug - Total applications ~60%, verified ~50%
Aug 31 - Total applications ~ 70%, verified ~60%
Mid Sep - Total applications ~80%, verified ~75%
Sep 30 - Total applications ~85%, verified ~80%

Overall, the numbers are consistent in the past 4 cycles, which allows us to project our total number of applicants.

Given how much timing and early application matters for admissions, this is astounding to learn that early submissions are actually such a minority. Further still that a full 15% are applying in the last 2 weeks.

Do you happen to have any data correlating AMCAS verification timing with chances of acceptance? I am curious to see the extent that timing of application has on chances for success.

 

[applicant20212022]

Are admissions standards different depending on how far out of college you are, e.g. traditional vs. gap year(s)?

 

[Fencer]

There is a lot of anecdotical data of late-submitting applicants with reasonable numbers not getting in. You diminish your chances as you are competing for less interview slots. If you review older threads, you will see my advice to applicants who had lists of just "dream/top 20" institutions while having lesser benchmarks than the averages for those schools. In October, at least a dozen (or two) of these applicants end up applying to my program. Some are stellar (but couldn't entice enough invites from Ivy programs). The issue is that by then, I only have left about a quarter of interview slots.

Regarding the question of non-traditional, we place a lot of emphasis on what have you done with your opportunities from the time that you made the decision of pursuing this career pathway. Each applicant is then placed on Invite, High Hold, Hold, or Reject folders. Applicants are re-reviewed multiple times as we send our monthly invite list.

 

[deleted728364]

There is a lot of anecdotical data of late-submitting applicants with reasonable numbers not getting in. You diminish your chances as you are competing for less interview slots. If you review older threads, you will see my advice to applicants who had lists of just "dream/top 20" institutions while having lesser benchmarks than the averages for those schools. In October, at least a dozen (or two) of these applicants end up applying to my program. Some ats ofre stellar (but couldn't entice enough invites from Ivy programs). The issue is that by then, I only have left about a quarter of interview slots.

Regarding the question of non-traditional, we place a lot of emphasis on what have you done with your opportunities from the time that you made the decision of pursuing this career pathway. Each applicant is then placed on Invite, High Hold, Hold, or Reject folders. Applicants are re-reviewed multiple times as we send our monthly invite list.

Would you say that complete date is something that can hurt you but not necessarily help you? In other words - is getting an interview when only 10% of applications are complete substantially easier than getting an interview when 50% of applications are complete?

I get that this is contrary to the general advice of "apply as early as possible", but just curious.

 

[Fencer]

This actually support the idea of applying as early as possible, when 100% of interview slots are available as compared to late (by deadline) when <25% of interview slots are available.

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

@Fencer to clarify on a comment you made earlier, do PDs select for interviews, or if an invite has been sent has an application already been preliminarily screened by the admissions committee?

 

[Fencer]

PDs are speakers for the committee, but NOT the Admissions Committee. Often, we are voting members (not all PDs are), but it is the Admissions Committee who makes selections for invites, acceptances, hold, waitlists, and rejections. For the most part, PDs are advocates for all applicants and trainees. However, every program has a limited number of training and interview slots.

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

PDs are speakers for the committee, but NOT the Admissions Committee. Often, we are voting members (not all PDs are), but it is the Admissions Committee who makes selections for invites, acceptances, hold, waitlists, and rejections. For the most part, PDs are advocates for all applicants and trainees. However, every program has a limited number of training and interview slots.

Thank you for the clarification. Also wanted to know if you had any advice for preparation of Chalk talks? Thus far, I’ve only scheduled to do a practice run with some fellow applicants and one of my former PI’s, but do you happen to have any tips on how to best structure or practice with them?

 

[Peritus_Medicus]

Hello! I have just finished all of my secondaries. While I completely understand that there are no guarantees, does anyone know the average timeline for receiving a MD/PhD interview invite? Have committees started reviewing candidates?
Thank you!

 

[Fencer]

If you see threads from prior cycles, there is no specific timeline. Some applicants are complete in July and get invited until late January/Feb (last interview dates), while others get invited within few weeks. The key aspect is that you want to have by early October (late Sept) at least 3-4 invites, if you don't, it means that you applied too high (too many dream programs).

 

[skeeter11]

If you see threads from prior cycles, there is no specific timeline. Some applicants are complete in July and get invited until late January/Feb (last interview dates), while others get invited within few weeks. The key aspect is that you want to have by early October (late Sept) at least 3-4 invites, if you don't, it means that you applied too high (too many dream programs).

if there is no timeline, how can you expect a certain number of IIs by a certain date?

 

[toofastdan]

Not sure if this helps, but a few people on the physician scientists discord were wondering the same thing. It caused me to dig through the old interview invite threads on SDN (not a good choice for personal sanity).

I graphed the density of interview invite dates:

I also made one big, ugly graph with every single school represented.

Most programs have a broad range of interview invite dates. Some programs (UWashington, Tri-I, Zucker Hofstra/Northwell) send out interviews early, while some send out interviews late (Mayo Clinic). Also, even though this data isn't shown, the time between completing the secondary and getting an invite varies from person to person. Some people get an invite in the "first wave", while others have to wait a few more months, despite completing the secondary around the same time.

Lastly, keep in mind that this data is exclusively from SDN posts, which has a ton of response bias.

 

[toofastdan]

After a few people asked me about this, here is the wait time between completing a secondary and getting an invite to interview. There are multiple factors contributing to this, including when a secondary is submitted (early vs late in cycle).

This data combines the past 3 years of invites posted on SDN (response bias warning again). MD/PhD programs are sorted top to bottom by increasing interquartile range for wait time between secondary completion and interview invite.

Edit: these images are quite big and SDN is making them blurry... maybe I'll post a link one day to all the raw files.

 

[Fencer]

Please note that this a relatively biased crowd... I know that based upon my interviewees who are SDN posters, along with the hard AAMC acceptance data. There were a total of just over 2000 MD/PhD acceptances in the 2020 and 2021 cycles (each one w > 2000). You can easily estimate that SDN posters are a group of high achievers. @toofastdan could also plot the percentages of those given to SDN posters. The national MD/PhD acceptance timeline is slightly bi-modal with a initial peak in December, and a higher peak in February as programs complete interviews.

 

[applicant20212022]

To what degree are non-research letters helpful for MSTP?

 

[Fencer]

Some of them speak about the character and work ethic of the applicant, or their compassion and empathy in clinical scenarios. Once again, we are evaluating potential physician-scientists (with emphasis on the latter). Helpful, but won't make up for a poor research advisor letter.

 

[baz2020]

One of the secondaries I am working on right now asks me to disclose all other programs I am applying to. Would it be unwise to leave this unanswered? I am not sure I want my amount of applications to be viewed as a sign of interest.

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

One of the secondaries I am working on right now asks me to disclose all other programs I am applying to. Would it be unwise to leave this unanswered? I am not sure I want my amount of applications to be viewed as a sign of interest.

I would at least list schools of a similar rank within a close proximity geography wise if not every school. I think they understand this is a numbers game and applying to more is beneficial, but to what extent you put thought into your list I am unsure how that is evaluated. I cannot imagine they see a large list and feel like just another buckshot in your shotgunning.

 

[applicant20212022]

@Fencer , @Maebea : In that case, would only submitting research letters be fine, if they're all very strong + meet the letter number requirements? My non-research letter might take a while to get in and want to be fully complete ASAP. Thanks!

 

[Fencer]

LORs from research advisors are the most critical. You could limit to them, particularly if a committee letter will take some time. Check with AMCAS regarding their policies on adding late LORs.

 

[applicant20212022]

How do MD/PhD programs view CASPer? Additionally, do schools see your exact score or your quartile (e.g. 3rd quartile vs. 71st percentile)?

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

How do MD/PhD programs view CASPer? Additionally, do schools see your exact score or your quartile (e.g. 3rd quartile vs. 71st percentile)?

Listening to a seminar given by admissions committees for Texas schools, the general consensus seems to be it does not carry much weight yet as it is still in the study phase, however this varies by program. They do however get a score - a z-score as well as a raw score both of which can be used to compare percentile across all applicants and across different groups of applicants. Similar to how you might see where you fall on various distributions on the LM calculator

 

[Fencer]

We are only looking at them... because Texas SOMs are in the bandwagon. Texas MD PhD directors are collaborating. For people who grew up speaking another language/culture, it means even less. Having said that, we need to justify several of the qualities that it supposed to be measuring to the SOM Ad Comm as we present a candidate close to the bottom of the scale for an acceptance, as compared to someone in the middle or top of the scale.

 

[baz2020]

Looking through the Univ of Maryland MSTP website Requirements & Eligibility | University of Maryland School of Medicine

they say "The average number of research hours of applicants interviewed in the 2021 cycle is: 9,165 hours"

Can that even be accurate?

 

[JoaoMoutinho]

Looking through the Univ of Maryland MSTP website Requirements & Eligibility | University of Maryland School of Medicine

they say "The average number of research hours of applicants interviewed in the 2021 cycle is: over 9,000 hours"

Can that even be accurate?

What?! 9000?? There's no way that can be right!

 

[VaultArmitage]

@Fencer My summer research position turned into an offer to continue during the Fall/Winter. It's a fairly well-known computational lab and the research I'm doing is directly related to the research I want to pursue during my PhD.

Is this worthy of an update letter? Is it too early in the cycle to even be considering that? If it helps the lab is at a school I am applying to.

 

[Fencer]

Perhaps, inform that particular school. Others, I will wait until your PI is able to write a strong LOR, which will need to be email via "BCC" to PDs of schools that you are considering. It possibly would be stronger closer to late Fall when the PI might indicate plans for publications. Think about maximum impact for your update.

 

[baz2020]

So I have a general question, hoping someone can provide some insight. I guess I don't really know how the admissions process works in general. I've noticed that some people have been getting rejections or IIs at schools I also applied to. Even though I had an earlier completion date, I have not heard anything. Is this a good sign or a bad sign? Do they not review the applications in order? Isn't that the whole point of applying early though?

It is my understanding that each school does things a bit differently. Some may review in order (which i think is uncommon) others/most stratify apps how they see fit. For some that could be higher stats others that could be mission fit or some combination of both. Applying early just ensures that you will likely be reviewed at some point before all interview slots are filled and then it becomes more competitive. I’d say not hearing anything doesn’t really mean much one way or the other, it could mean they are looking more into your app, or it could mean they haven’t sent rejections our, or maybe the reviewers for you were just a bit slower. Try not stress too much about others! I know im guilty of it too though lmao

 

[microbezzzz]

After a few people asked me about this, here is the wait time between completing a secondary and getting an invite to interview. There are multiple factors contributing to this, including when a secondary is submitted (early vs late in cycle).

This data combines the past 3 years of invites posted on SDN (response bias warning again). MD/PhD programs are sorted top to bottom by increasing interquartile range for wait time between secondary completion and interview invite.

Edit: these images are quite big and SDN is making them blurry... maybe I'll post a link one day to all the raw files.

View attachment 341697

What are the numbers along the X-axis?

 

[toofastdan]

What are the numbers along the X-axis?

The x-axis on that graph is the wait time between completing a secondary and hearing back from a program for an interview invite. There are lots of factors that go into this, like the time of year you complete the secondary. Also, programs can choose to send out interviews to applicants in a different order than when they were complete. Most of the time there is lots of variability, with some exceptions like University of Washington, UT San Antonio, and Weill Cornell, who are more consistent. On the other graphs, the tick labels "months" represent the beginning of each month (ex: September = September 1st).

Here's a google folder with all three images I posted with better quality.

For the past 3 application cycles, there were about 70 individual SDN users who posted on the interview invite forum. This represents only about 4% of the total applicant pool. Given that SDN is infested with gunners, tryhards, and overqualified applicants, the response bias here is huge.

 

[microbezzzz]

The x-axis on that graph is the wait time between completing a secondary and hearing back from a program for an interview invite. There are lots of factors that go into this, like the time of year you complete the secondary. Also, programs can choose to send out interviews to applicants in a different order than when they were complete. Most of the time there is lots of variability, with some exceptions like University of Washington, UT San Antonio, and Weill Cornell, who are more consistent. On the other graphs, the tick labels "months" represent the beginning of each month (ex: September = September 1st).

Here's a google folder with all three images I posted with better quality.

For the past 3 application cycles, there were about 70 individual SDN users who posted on the interview invite forum. This represents only about 4% of the total applicant pool. Given that SDN is infested with gunners, tryhards, and overqualified applicants, the response bias here is huge.

You're a hero. Thanks. These are really interesting data. Crazy to think about waiting >150 days for an invite.

 

[Fencer]

This is the graph from @toofastdan for Interview Invites with an arrow added for today's date. For some application cycles, the moment for re-evaluation of success is TODAY, but in 2020-21 (the only cycle with COVID across all phases), that moment was shifted a little to perhaps Sept.15 or Oct. 1. Programs have now adapted and are likely to revert to timelines from prior cycles. Bottom line, please notice that in the prior 2 cycles at least 1/3 of interview slots were given prior to that Sept. 1. If you wait to re-assess until October, it might be too late to give you a great opportunity to rebound. Face the facts (brutal facts - read about the Stockdale Paradox), and grab the horns of the bull so that you can direct the blows...

So how many invites is enough? If you consider each interview as an independent variable occurrence (they are clearly not) with a 25-50% chance for acceptance, your aim for an application cycle to earn at least 5 or 6 interview offers, and allow you to walk through the park enjoying the views (with minimal pressure). If you have at the moment, 2 or 3 invites, you are on-track... Now, you need to give committees at least 4-6 weeks from verification (check LORs are available too) to receive a prelim evaluation. If you haven't received an invite, perhaps you applied to too many "dream" programs, and you need to add additional schools before it is too late. Some schools look at the application and send rejections at this point; some just leave them in the pile waiting to see who else apply.

This application cycle (2021-22) seems as competitive as prior cycles, or even more. Today, the national AMCAS report opened up and showed 1409 MD/PhD applications. Last application cycle (2020-21), we had the most ever number of MD/PhD applicants at 2067. The cycle has not yet been completed and certified but it should be soon. On 09/01/2020, we had 1309 MD/PhD applications, thus, we currently have 100 more applications (7.6%) than last year at this point.

I plan to go on vacation for a couple of weeks and will try to answer PMs as quickly as I can.

 

[skeeter11]

Is it even worthwhile to add schools this late? What about the extreme sample bias of the SDN data?

 

[Fencer]

It isn't too late at this moment... Keep in mind that some schools "truly" process application until all LORs have been uploaded, while some proceed with review when still missing one or two (but have some significant - research) LORs. If you are verified, your application is added in a few moments or at worst after the overnight sync. The committee will then need to read the application and make a determination... This is why I make this post today. To make you self-reflect of where you are...

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

I shared this over on the main pre-Allo forum but wanted to share it here as well so no one is left behind:

Practice Interview Random Schedule Generator

 

[deleted728364]

Hi @Fencer, what proportion of IIs (relative to last year’s total) have been sent out from your program at this point?

 

[Fencer]

Same proportion than past 3 years. We have only invited 3/8 groups, and our next release is until the end of the month. We have modified a little our processes and have created a post-review bucket of "Likely to Interview"(LTI). At the moment, there are more interview slots than applicants in this basket. What we are doing different this time is that we are releasing invitations to interview at the end of every month, and assemble a group out of this bucket. Ad Com members review completed applications in clusters during 2 weeks. After review and discussion, we fill up several buckets including LTI before end of the month to allow us then pick and release another group for offers to interview.

 

[deleted728364]

🙏 thank you for your transparency!

 

[TNF-α]

Any advice for how to practice/prepare for interviews and MMI?

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

Any advice for how to practice/prepare for interviews and MMI?

See if the school you have an interview at has any pre-interview prep process where you can practice with a current student. Only 1 of mine has so far, but really worth a shot/super helpful. Also, just reach out to other current applicants to see if you can find a group that wants to do interview practice. Have seen it work with up to 16 people in one group doing organized interview practice that has become a routine thing.

To practice on your own, try reading through your secondaries and then re-tell the story on voice-to-text. This will force you to properly annunciate and practice an already well-crafted narrative. That way the story is already built, and you are telling it “new” so it doesn’t sound rehearsed but is still a tried-and-true story.

For MMIs, these scenarios are helpful:

Ethics in Medicine | UW Department of Bioethics & Humanities

Also, videos 5,6,7 of this series

Playlist from STX MSTP

 

[Fencer]

I think that you are referring to this Playlist:
....https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMk5wMUUdum_TpJhdBh68SVsaKzVEsbmR
you need to copy and paste eliminating the first few characters prior to "https"

 

[MD-PhD-NonTrad]

I think that you are referring to this Playlist:
....https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMk5wMUUdum_TpJhdBh68SVsaKzVEsbmR
you need to copy and paste eliminating the first few characters prior to "https"

Thank you, yes this playlist. How interesting that the SDN UI automatically extracts the media element of the first video in the playlist as opposed to indicating it is in fact a playlist.