Awesome 2005 match stats...

Panacea Financial Contract Review
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
The most amazing thing I see is that someone with a Step 1 score of 251-260 failed to match.
 
Wow. This compilation of data is pretty detailed. Thanks for posting it.

It's interesting, I was under the misconception (based on what some faculty member at some interview told me) that in 2005 the number of U.S. seniors who applied to path exceeded the number of spots. Apparently, that was incorrect. I think I'm going to stop perpetuating that notion now as I was misinformed :laugh:

Not surprising though since that's always been the trend that the number of available residency spots far exceed the number of U.S. applicants. I guess pathology is still a "buyer's market" when it comes down to applications.

What was the number of spots available again? Something like 520? Kinda raises the question (perhaps rhetorical) of whether we're training too many residents on an annual basis.
 
Here's my question: Particularly with regard to the data relating to the length of the match list, the author suggests that an applicant consider apply to a "second choice" specialty if the first choice is very competitive.

Is this possible? I thought ranking in two different specialties was strickly verbotten.

What gives?

judd
 
I dunno, how can the pathology board scores be higher than such gunner fields as ortho and EM? And it is WAY higher than Ob and G-Surg....(see figure 5).

Holy cow, the AMG Path average board scores are 220, and 64% have publications? That seems high.

The number of slots is still WAY too high. I would like to see it near 200 or so nationwide.
 
juddson said:
Here's my question: Particularly with regard to the data relating to the length of the match list, the author suggests that an applicant consider apply to a "second choice" specialty if the first choice is very competitive.

Is this possible? I thought ranking in two different specialties was strickly verbotten.

What gives?

judd
Click to expand...
Actually judd, ranking two specialties simultaneously is totally legit. One guy who used to frequent these forums ranked rads and path programs and matched at his top choice which was rads. God bless his soul.

I know some other folks who ranked combos of specialties...for example,
Gen Surg / Uro
Derm / Path
Rads / Path
Rads / Gas
Gas / Medicine

It is possible...but if you do this, you better keep your mouf shut about this when you go to interviews. Also, you run the risk of screwing yourself if you interview at two different departments all in the same institution.
 
LADoc00 said:
I dunno, how can the pathology board scores be higher than such gunner fields as ortho and EM? And it is WAY higher than Ob and G-Surg....(see figure 5).

Holy cow, the AMG Path average board scores are 220, and 64% have publications? That seems high.

The number of slots is still WAY too high. I would like to see it near 200 or so nationwide.
Click to expand...
You know man, I remember looking at how the path applicants did in 2004 at my alma mater when I was starting out the application process. And lemme tell ya...there were some high board scores in there (we're talking 260's range)...granted I knew them both and one was a super gunner and the other was a mudphud. Both really smart guys.

It's weird, I remember when I started med school in the late 90's...everybody was saying how only a bunch of monkeys would go into fields like path or family practice. I'm sure you've heard the joke..."What do you call the person who finishes last in his medical school class?"...yeah that was the kind of talk that was going around then.

I can't explain the trend, to be honest. I can only say that the people who go into path aren't all a bunch of monkeys. You got a lot of smart people who go into path for whatever reason such as "oh I hate clinical medicine...I'm gonna do path." Of course, the "buyers market" aspect of path is quite attractive...imagine if you have sick board scores and you're AOA. You're a shoe-in anywhere...you get to pick where you want to go for the next few years of your life. You like living in the Bay Area? By all means!
 
AndyMilonakis said:
You know man, I remember looking at how the path applicants did in 2004 at my alma mater when I was starting out the application process. And lemme tell ya...there were some high board scores in there (we're talking 260's range)...granted I knew them both and one was a super gunner and the other was a mudphud. Both really smart guys.

It's weird, I remember when I started med school in the late 90's...everybody was saying how only a bunch of monkeys would go into fields like path or family practice. I'm sure you've heard the joke..."What do you call the person who finishes last in his medical school class?"...yeah that was the kind of talk that was going around then.

I can't explain the trend, to be honest. I can only say that the people who go into path aren't all a bunch of monkeys. You got a lot of smart people who go into path for whatever reason such as "oh I hate clinical medicine...I'm gonna do path." Of course, the "buyers market" aspect of path is quite attractive...imagine if you have sick board scores and you're AOA. You're a shoe-in anywhere...you get to pick where you want to go for the next few years of your life. You like living in the Bay Area? By all means!
Click to expand...

Of course going to SF for residency is cool, no doubt...it's the having to take a job in BFE nowhere afterward or take crap salary to live in the highest cost of living place in the US that bites.
 
LADoc00 said:
Of course going to SF for residency is cool, no doubt...it's the having to take a job in BFE nowhere afterward or take crap salary to live in the highest cost of living place in the US that bites.
Click to expand...
Well that's if you stay in the area right?

Man, I gotta admit...I so almost could've ended up there...had them #1 for a few weeks. 😀

See, that's twice now where I could've headed out west and I ended up not doing so.
 
AndyMilonakis said:
It is possible...but if you do this, you better keep your mouf shut about this when you go to interviews. Also, you run the risk of screwing yourself if you interview at two different departments all in the same institution.
Click to expand...

If what you say is true (and I have no reason to doubt it) that means, essentially, that one ought not apply to two different specialties within the same hospital. This kinda throws out location as an important variable.

Judd
 
juddson said:
If what you say is true (and I have no reason to doubt it) that means, essentially, that one ought not apply to two different specialties within the same hospital. This kinda throws out location as an important variable.

Judd
Click to expand...
Exxxxactly.

Or let's say you interview for Optho and Path at institution X. The interviews are 2 months apart.

Be clean shaven and wear contacts on your first interview at X.
Grow out a beard and wear glasses on your second interview at X.

There are ways around this, my man!
 
AndyMilonakis said:
Or let's say you interview for Optho and Path at institution X. The interviews are 2 months apart.

Be clean shaven and wear contacts on your first interview at X.
Grow out a beard and wear glasses on your second interview at X.

There are ways around this, my man!
Click to expand...
ERAS allows you only one photo though, Einstein.

btw Andy you mispeled the capital of Laos. It's Koala Lumper.
 
LADoc00 said:
I dunno, how can the pathology board scores be higher than such gunner fields as ortho and EM? And it is WAY higher than Ob and G-Surg....(see figure 5).

Holy cow, the AMG Path average board scores are 220, and 64% have publications? That seems high.
Click to expand...

A LOT of MD-PhDs and other very basic science-loving people go into path, so it makes sense that their Step I boards scores would be higher than more clinical specialties, and that they would be more interested in research (ie, publish more).

On the other hand, many of the AOA folks were probably junior AOA, and they may not have done as well on clinical rotations or Step II as the EM/Ortho/Surgery people, probably more due to lack of interest than anything else...
 
What is even more interesting are the "All OTher" results. I really would like to know what the people with less than 220 that matched plastics did to get the spot???? Or the Radiology ones that got less than 200. Or the Rad/Onc with less than 190????? Is that strange or is it just me?
 
Mixmaster said:
What is even more interesting are the "All OTher" results. I really would like to know what the people with less than 220 that matched plastics did to get the spot???? Or the Radiology ones that got less than 200. Or the Rad/Onc with less than 190????? Is that strange or is it just me?
Click to expand...

As always there a people with connections. These connections can either be b/c they spent years with a PD doing research or b/c their uncle/dad is the PD. Or it could be the fact that they are hot chicks and give good... :meanie:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WildWing
House Investigating the Match
Replies
11
Views
3K
abc123412
A
lizardsuck
Switching residencies after successful match
Replies
12
Views
2K
Pharaoh787
P
N
Which is the hardest to match?
Replies
8
Views
3K
irwarrior
I
Mr.Smile12
Understanding the Ranking and Matching Behaviors During the 2023 and 2024 General Surgery Match Cycles: A Program Signaling Approach
Replies
0
Views
468
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
C
withdraw from match?
Replies
12
Views
4K
Lost in Translation
Lost in Translation
Top