There's something very odd about this whole process. I think my post will help people applying next year.
I applied to the Air Force match this year. Before we ranked our programs/specialties, we received a list of the projected number of spots for each field.
When the final results came out, however, there were some significant discrepancies between the spots they actually had and what they projected. In short, the board changed their mind in a few months.
This, I believe, can significantly affect results in the competitive fields. It's difficult (and painful) enough to apply to one specialty. Many people who apply to ENT or neurosurgery apply to general surgery as a backup, just as many who apply to rad onc have internal med as a backup. In the Air Force, you're allowed to apply to two specialties. So I wonder if these 'second choice's are included in the applicant pool. And what if a good applicant doesn't get ENT, but gets general surgery? Interesting how they would tabulate that...
The other major issue is self-selection. I know someone who would love to do EM, but with a little research knew it would be an impossibility in the Air Force (but had good chances as a civilian). It's quite possible in the small, competitive fields it's somewhat well known that the chances are slim, and some applicants competitive for a civilian spot in the real world will not even apply. So I'm very hesitant to say it's a 'good' year for neurosurgery or urology, particularly since they early match and usually require audition rotations at BOTH military and civilian hospitals.
From a personal standpoint, I was told that the Air Force didn't have enough
competitive applicants for their projected general surgery spots. Oddly, there were some angry applicants because civilian institutions offered them interviews, but the AF deemed them 'non-competitive' for their standards. I hope I misheard this over the phone, since it sounds so bizarre. In any case, there were less spots than they projected. They just did what they wanted.
Finally, there's the rollercoaster of projections. This year there were 4 radiology spots in the AF. Apparently, one year, they overdid and had >10 spots. Overkill. So maybe this is a sign that next year there will be hardly any radiology spots.
So I guess the take home message is you can't trust projections if you're applying next year, and in the military
everything (except some primary care) is competitive. Be very proactive (i.e. annoying) and try to find the real projections. Hands-on fields like OB/Gyn (one of the easiest in the civ world) and anesthesia are hard to enter in the military. Other fields are simply hard because there are so few positions. I wouldn't be optimistic about getting the lone rad onc spot next year; it's a serious gamble. Even those fields with less applicants (i.e. peds) could become very hard next year as they contract the spots offered. And there will also be former GMOs entering the race.
Just got the new PPT with the Army match rates for 2007. Here's the breakdown. The number in parenthesis is the number of available spots. The second number is the number of applicants per spot.
EM (26) 1.23
FM (43) 0.80
Gen Surg (29) 1.10
Neurosurg (2) 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Urology (7) 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!
IM (50) 1.06
Neuro (5) 0.60
Child neuro (1) 0
OBGYN (15) 1.13
Ortho (19) 1.95
ENT (6) 4 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Path (6) 0.5
Peds (26) 0.88
Psych (14) 1.07
IM/Psych (2) 1.5
Prelim aerospace (2) 0.5
Prelim anesthesia (12) 1.42
Prelim derm (7) 1.29
Prelim optho (7) 1.14
Prelim PM&R (3) 2
Prelim preventive med (3) 0.67
Prelim radiology (15) 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Prelim rad onc (1) 0 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Looks like it was a good year to apply for rads, derm, urology, neurosurg, and rad onc.
Not so good a year for ENT and ortho.
I wonder why no interest in rad onc this year??? Looks like traditionally there have been 2 applicants per year for the one spot at WRAMC.