2025 Ophthalmology Data

[medschoolaspirant]

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TwoDogMed]

Accounting for those that got zero interviews, the actual match rate for MD and DO seniors are 68% and 27% respectively. I think Derm was 67% match rate this year for MD seniors. Ortho or ENT was slightly easier to match this year I think based on matching numbers. Why has ophthal gotten so popular in the past several years? Are competive applicants swithing from radiology due to AI, anesthisiology due CRNA, and EM due to overt supply and encroachment, etc..?

If it wasn't for the 20 DO positions, their match rate would be approaching zero since only 21 DOs matched out of 77 that applied.

 

[m1redsox]

Accounting for those that got zero interviews, the actual match rate for MD and DO seniors are 68% and 27% respectively. I think Derm was 67% match rate this year for MD seniors. Ortho or ENT was slightly easier to match this year I think based on matching numbers. Why has ophthal gotten so popular in the past several years? Are competive applicants swithing from radiology due to AI, anesthisiology due CRNA, and EM due to overt supply and encroachment, etc..?

If it wasn't for the 20 DO positions, their match rate would be approaching zero since only 21 DOs matched out of 77 that applied.

This is not completely true. The NRMP match rate does not account for those who got zero interviews in derm or ortho either. Those who register for NRMP at least received one interview in that specialty. If ERAS was posting these statistics instead of NRMP, then it could be comparable because ERAS has access to all applicants who applied.

 

[medschoolaspirant]

Ophthal getting more competitive for

1. Work life balance.
2. Getting to do combination of clinical and surgical both.
3. Demand is increasing with supply and demand in almost all geography. Sure some less and some more.
4. Long term financial reward is phenomenal, as only 18K ophthalmologist exist now in usa workforce. And by 2035, we will be short by over 5K eye surgeons for population to serve in usa.
5. Longer work life. Eye surgeon keeps doing surgery till late 60s.
6. No apparent encroachment risk for doing surgery.
7. If you decide to work for yourself, it’s relatively easier to set things up, compared to other speciality.

Basically this field is only speciality with so many benefits with no apparent future risk.

 

[RetinaDude]

I agree with a lot of what medschoolaspirant wrote above. Ophthalmology does off great work life balance but with a chance to do great surgeries and be paid very well. Some people are concerned about OD encroachment, but I’m. It so sure about how much of an impact this will have. In many areas, not only are the ophthalmology groups having difficulty recruiting new docs but the ODs are as well. I know multiple older ODs who would love to bring on fresh faces but can’t find anyone to buy their very profitable businesses or join as a future partner. You’d be surprised how lucrative some of theses OD practices are so they don’t need to add the stress of surgery and injections to their plates

 

[eyeeye_captain]

If it wasn't for the 20 DO positions, their match rate would be approaching zero since only 21 DOs matched out of 77 that applied.

It’s getting pretty tough out there for our DO colleagues. In the public spreadsheet, 13 out of the 20 DOs I found ended up at a historically DO program. One program shut down this year, and two more cut back to 1 resident per year, so they’re down to 6 out of the 15 pre-merger programs and may be trending towards 4.

 

[eyeeye_captain]

For the gray hairs like me, do you think your old application would let you match these days? Step 1 was my weak point, and that doesn’t matter anymore, so I think I could still manage to snag a spot.

 

[Slide]

For the gray hairs like me, do you think your old application would let you match these days? Step 1 was my weak point, and that doesn’t matter anymore, so I think I could still manage to snag a spot.

These days I don't know. Most applicants these days are highly qualified on paper, even the ones who get wait listed or are on a third list of invites, and I'm not at a highly ranked program. Now that Step 1 doesn't matter, applicants are adding more stuff to their application and eventually it becomes a blur.

 

[Slide]

Ophthal getting more competitive for

1. Work life balance.
2. Getting to do combination of clinical and surgical both.
3. Demand is increasing with supply and demand in almost all geography. Sure some less and some more.
4. Long term financial reward is phenomenal, as only 18K ophthalmologist exist now in usa workforce. And by 2035, we will be short by over 5K eye surgeons for population to serve in usa.
5. Longer work life. Eye surgeon keeps doing surgery till late 60s.
6. No apparent encroachment risk for doing surgery.
7. If you decide to work for yourself, it’s relatively easier to set things up, compared to other speciality.

Basically this field is only speciality with so many benefits with no apparent future risk.

Another thing is that we're one of the few fields that also have an escape hatch through reimbursement issues. Practices are starting to rely more on revenue not based on reimbursement, like MF-IOLs. Harder to do that as a general surgeon or neurosurgeon.

I also agree the encroachment issues may be a bit overblown surgically. Optometrists have had the capabilities to perform YAGs here but there's been very little appetite for doing so.

 

[eyeeye_captain]

These days I don't know. Most applicants these days are highly qualified on paper, even the ones who get wait listed or are on a third list of invites, and I'm not at a highly ranked program. Now that Step 1 doesn't matter, applicants are adding more stuff to their application and eventually it becomes a blur.

What’s helping them stand out now on paper, if anything? (Lurkers, I know you’re there.) Connections always help. Signals? Away rotators? Regionality? Snazzy headshot?

 

[m1redsox]

What’s helping them stand out now on paper, if anything? (Lurkers, I know you’re there.) Connections always help. Signals? Away rotators? Regionality? Snazzy headshot?

Step 2 score, research, LORs, grades, AOA, GHHS, away rotations, signals, regionality (for programs you don’t signal), interesting/well-written essays, good medical school, connections, mentors with connections, etc.

Not really reinventing the wheel or anything. Same stuff as before, just without step 1 and with signals, some schools may not have grades or AOA/GHHS, some applicants may not have taken step 2 (although this would be extremely ill advised).

The only thing that may not be a factor is the headshot haha. I believe programs are blinded to these until they choose to interview you.

 

[eyeeye_captain]

Step 2 score, research, LORs, grades, AOA, GHHS, away rotations, signals, regionality (for programs you don’t signal), interesting/well-written essays, good medical school, connections, mentors with connections, etc.

Not really reinventing the wheel or anything. Same stuff as before, just without step 2 and with signals, some schools may not have grades or AOA/GHHS, some applicants may not have taken step (although this would be extremely ill advised).

The only thing that may not be a factor is the headshot haha. I believe programs are blinded to these until they choose to interview you.

Agreed, I was asking Slide as someone who still reviews apps that all look the same. We all know the basics. Schools not having grades and no AOA etc. is nice and all for the students, but boy howdy does it make it hard to have some way to distinguish amongst the kids.

When I filtered in the past, the essay may be the most overrated thing around. Those things get skimmed at best with hundreds to plow through.

 

[medschoolaspirant]

I personally think, as most applicants are same on paper. It’s more so of who know who. And who has expressed interest, is the way program gives IV. So let’s say with exception of top 10 or top 20 program, it is all connections and expressing interest. So by default program pick home and away applicant for IV first. There you go, program fills, about 25-30 spots of IV (4 away rotators average per month for 6- 7 months and home students). Rest 30 goes with ones who signal with gate of step 2, class quartile, aoa etc… so all slots for IV gets filled by these 2 parameters only. No more need to read between blurry lines.

 

[m1redsox]

Agreed, I was asking Slide as someone who still reviews apps that all look the same. We all know the basics. Schools not having grades and no AOA etc. is nice and all for the students, but boy howdy does it make it hard to have some way to distinguish amongst the kids.

When I filtered in the past, the essay may be the most overrated thing around. Those things get skimmed at best with hundreds to plow through.

N=1, but I was a pretty mediocre applicant from a stats perspective (step score, research, no AOA, midtier MD school), but I exceeded the interview limit, and most interviewers mentioned how unique my essays were since they had spent all day reading generic ophtho ones that said “and when the surgeon took of the eye patch, the patient began to cry… and so did I. That’s how I knew I wanted ophtho.” haha. Obviously, most programs still didn’t interview me, but maybe I got the interviews from programs that did read the essays.

Also, again n=1, but I matched somewhere I had no connections to at all. Also, the stats from this year’s AUPO also said that only 65% of students matched at a program they signaled. Either this means that home programs and aways are telling applicants not to signal them (since they’ll get an interview anyways) or a third of applicants are still matching at programs without connections, likely a bit of both.

Additionally, I think 30 home/away rotators per program is pretty high. I would imagine only a handful of top tier programs have 30 away rotators. I bet it’s more like 10-15 combined between home and away students (judging by my home program, 2 aways, and my residency program).

 

[Gonio5]

Either this means that home programs and aways are telling applicants not to signal them (since they’ll get an interview anyways) or a third of applicants are still matching at programs without connections, likely a bit of both.

My home program interviewed me even though they had no intention of matching me.

The coordinator (program director's secretary) with a high school diploma hated me and she had immense power. She determined who was allowed to do the ophthalmology 4th year elective or at least when the med student could do it. If she hated you, she said she could not schedule your ophthalmology elective until around December! That way, you couldn't get any ophthalmology recommendation letters or say that you did an ophthalmology clerkship.

She did not successfully stop me from getting into ophthalmology. I just did a rotation elsewhere.

Additionally, I think 30 home/away rotators per program is pretty high. I would imagine only a handful of top tier programs have 30 away rotators. I bet it’s more like 10-15 combined between home and away students (judging by my home program, 2 aways, and my residency program).

I agree, about 10-15.

 

[Slide]

Agreed, I was asking Slide as someone who still reviews apps that all look the same. We all know the basics. Schools not having grades and no AOA etc. is nice and all for the students, but boy howdy does it make it hard to have some way to distinguish amongst the kids.

When I filtered in the past, the essay may be the most overrated thing around. Those things get skimmed at best with hundreds to plow through.

Agree, an essay may tilt one for an interview but it rarely gives you an edge once you interview.

It's coming down more to away rotations, who you know, and where you're from, other than Step 2. Grades maybe but even that is tough since it's more and more P/F or you get a general quartile. Ironically removing Step 1 has made the process more about connections and med school reputation. Step 1 has empirically proven itself at least a good selector of someone who can handle residency and pass boards - if you didn't do well, you had at least a chance to have a do-over with Step 2.

 

[mjohnsonets]

Agree, an essay may tilt one for an interview but it rarely gives you an edge once you interview.

It's coming down more to away rotations, who you know, and where you're from, other than Step 2. Grades maybe but even that is tough since it's more and more P/F or you get a general quartile. Ironically removing Step 1 has made the process more about connections and med school reputation. Step 1 has empirically proven itself at least a good selector of someone who can handle residency and pass boards - if you didn't do well, you had at least a chance to have a do-over with Step 2.

Reading through this thread, it seems like the application process has been gamified to produce the end result of getting into residency. Besides step 1, what else could be added, done, or blinded to find applicants who will be competent clinicians and surgeons and want to work hard after residency?

I say work hard after residency because the trend is working less not more and I doubt all those projections of surgeon shortages accounted for that.

For instance, I've noticed the ophthos I've worked with who have engineering backgrounds tend to be very highly regarded clinically and surgically. I've also noticed candidates from very small towns/area tend to stand out to me but that may be some self selection bias because I'm from one. First generation in family into medicine seems to stand out too.

 

[Slide]

Reading through this thread, it seems like the application process has been gamified to produce the end result of getting into residency. Besides step 1, what else could be added, done, or blinded to find applicants who will be competent clinicians and surgeons and want to work hard after residency?

I say work hard after residency because the trend is working less not more and I doubt all those projections of surgeon shortages accounted for that.

For instance, I've noticed the ophthos I've worked with who have engineering backgrounds tend to be very highly regarded clinically and surgically. I've also noticed candidates from very small towns/area tend to stand out to me but that may be some self selection bias because I'm from one. First generation in family into medicine seems to stand out too.

It's been an issue that has plagued residency selection committees forever. In the end you can't control what personality a person truly has and what happens during the four years. Some of the best residents I've had have been lower on the rank list and vice versa. There are other "soft-skill" tests that are out there like Casper that are being piloted to determine resident quality and character but even then any test can be gamed. My view isn't popular but the best way IMO is to actually hire people who specialize specifically in determining these things like they do at Wall Street firms; we physicians think we can do everything but in reality we aren't necessarily great judges of character nor have the time or want to learn how to do these things. Even then, I would suspect most candidates would do fine and it comes down to fit.

Unfortunately some residency PDs don't exactly think too long term - there's a focus on findings residents who will perform the scut work without question, learn quickly, and pass their boards/tests. After that the resident could be Dr. Death #2 but as long as they pass it's off their plate.