Are the stats on the Derm Spreadsheets believable?

[PremedSurvivor]

I've been browsing the Derm Spreadsheets on SDN, looking at the stats of people who matched to see whether Derm is a realistic option for me. I have been very pleasantly surprised to see that a number of people with 230s/ 240s or even 0-1 clinical Honors said that they matched every year. On the other hand, I've come across threads where candidates with 260+ and AOA don't match.

How believable are these? Please don't misunderstand; I don't mean to come across as judgemental. Just surprised because it goes against the neurotic, Type-A stereotype that surrounds competitive residencies. Not saying you can get a 190 with no Hs and still get in, but it really does seem like multiple aspects of the application beyond stats are taken into account, which I didn't really use to believe.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DermBruh]

Is this a serious question? Of course there are people with 260+/AOA who don't match ever year. Many of them. Stats are becoming less and less important because so many people are applying 250+/AOA. Nobody cares that you have good boards and AOA because every other applicant has the same stats. Connections, away rotations, and research are by far the most important aspects to getting interviews.

 

[PremedSurvivor]

Is this a serious question? Of course there are people with 260+/AOA who don't match ever year. Many of them. Stats are becoming less and less important because so many people are applying 250+/AOA. Nobody cares that you have good boards and AOA because every other applicant has the same stats. Connections, away rotations, and research are by far the most important aspects to getting interviews.

Thanks for your reply. My point wasn't so much that 260+/AOAs aren't getting in, because I agree that once you break 250 that bumps in your score have minuscule value. I'm more surprised by the amount of of 230s, 240s, and 0-1Hs who are reporting having matched on the spreadsheets, and am wondering if it's realistic.

Interesting to learn how much of a role research, aways and connections play.

 

[19pieces19]

Interested as well. Is it actually realistic to match?

 

[samsunimomo]

Regardless of whether it is, you're still going to go for derm, right? So what's the point of asking a question that nobody (except for the actual people who posted those stats) will be able to answer?

 

[DermBruh]

Thanks for your reply. My point wasn't so much that 260+/AOAs aren't getting in, because I agree that once you break 250 that bumps in your score have minuscule value. I'm more surprised by the amount of of 230s, 240s, and 0-1Hs who are reporting having matched on the spreadsheets, and am wondering if it's realistic.

Interesting to learn how much of a role research, aways and connections play.

People with those stats match all the time. Thats what I'm trying to communicate. That stats don't matter very much. You need connections and exposure. A research year at a program that you have a connection to will benefit you far more than high stats.

 

[doctalaughs]

It depends on what you mean by “all the time.”

Sure, there are plenty of 230s and 240s that match but how many applied? Its not impossible to match with those scores but the scores still matter statistically.

Lets just pretend that 30% of those applicants match whereas 75% of those above 250 match (just making up these numbers although I suspect they are pretty close to the truth). There will still be a bunch of examples in the speadsheet, but less than 1/3 odds is pretty abysmal.

People assume if you don’t have 250+ it’s “impossible.” Thats not true- it’s just a lot riskier and maybe unwise.

 

[PremedSurvivor]

Regardless of whether it is, you're still going to go for derm, right? So what's the point of asking a question that nobody (except for the actual people who posted those stats) will be able to answer?

I'm posting because I'm not sure at which point you'd consider applying with a "back-up" specialty as well, which would consume a lot more time/effort; per the charting outcomes, seems people do it every year.

 

[DermBruh]

It depends on what you mean by “all the time.”

Sure, there are plenty of 230s and 240s that match but how many applied? Its not impossible to match with those scores but the scores still matter statistically.

Lets just pretend that 30% of those applicants match whereas 75% of those above 250 match (just making up these numbers although I suspect they are pretty close to the truth). There will still be a bunch of examples in the speadsheet, but less than 1/3 odds is pretty abysmal.

People assume if you don’t have 250+ it’s “impossible.” Thats not true- it’s just a lot riskier and maybe unwise.

All this information is available from NRMP Charting the Outcomes 2016.

As you can see. The match rate with a 221-230 was 65% which is actually higher than the 63% of 231-240 and 86% for 251-260. Is there a better chance to match overall with the higher scores? Sure. Statistics do matter. Just not nearly as much as you think.

 

[ERDOC555]

All this information is available from NRMP Charting the Outcomes 2016.

As you can see. The match rate with a 221-230 was 65% which is actually higher than the 63% of 231-240 and 86% for 251-260. Is there a better chance to match overall with the higher scores? Sure. Statistics do matter. Just not nearly as much as you think.

I think the lower end of the spectrum on charting outcomes is skewed. I believe certain data points are excluded such as not having enough contiguous ranks or not releasing your information to NRMP for their report. True match rate overall and for certain categories is likely to be lower than what is shown.

I'll bet that most people with 230s & lower 240s matching have some serious draws such as research, charisma, family ties, top school reputation, killer aways, that got them in. I've watched several 240s applicants not match the last few cycles because they had no other special aspects.