"best of luck with your future career"

[Bold]

So what does it mean when a program says in a personalized post- interview note "best of luck during this interview season and with your future career in family medicine"? Are they implying that I did poorly during the interview and they will never see me again, or am I reading too much into this?

I had an interview not too long ago which I'm not sure if it went well. The pd sent me an email with the above-mentioned "best of luck" tag and when I sent her A personalized thank you note in return, again I got the "best of luck" plug. Just wondering if I should be concerned that they won't rank me. Maybe I'm being too paranoid. Thanks for your thoughts and comments.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PMPMD]

So what does it mean when a program says in a personalized post- interview note "best of luck during this interview season and with your future career in family medicine"? Are they implying that I did poorly during the interview and they will never see me again, or am I reading too much into this?

I had an interview not too long ago which I'm not sure if it went well. The pd sent me an email with the above-mentioned "best of luck" tag and when I sent her A personalized thank you note in return, again I got the "best of luck" plug. Just wondering if I should be concerned that they won't rank me. Maybe I'm being too paranoid. Thanks for your thoughts and comments.

Yes, I think the interview season paranoia is getting to you. I also read into things people said when I was in your position. I really would not read into that statement too much.

I'm assuming that you're applying for Family Med. If you're applying for neurosurg, then yes, be paranoid.

 

[Law2Doc]

So what does it mean when a program says in a personalized post- interview note "best of luck during this interview season and with your future career in family medicine"? Are they implying that I did poorly during the interview and they will never see me again, or am I reading too much into this?

I had an interview not too long ago which I'm not sure if it went well. The pd sent me an email with the above-mentioned "best of luck" tag and when I sent her A personalized thank you note in return, again I got the "best of luck" plug. Just wondering if I should be concerned that they won't rank me. Maybe I'm being too paranoid. Thanks for your thoughts and comments.

You are reading way too much into it. Much like the folks who get a response from a PD saying "I enjoyed meeting you" probably shouldn't read much into that either. These are simply correspondence niceties. Many people will send letters that they enjoyed meeting with you and that they wish you luck. They often mean both or neither.

 

[mlw03]

Agree with the others. The only words on either side that have any meaning are "I am ranking your program #1 on my rank list" (from the applicant) and "You are ranked to match" (by the program). And even the "you are RtM" may mean 1) you are within out our top 20 and we have 20 positions or 2) you are in our top 40 and most years we go to #40 to fill our 20 spots. Just gotta wait until March to see what happens. Don't make yourself nuts for the next 3.5 months.

 

[turkeyjerky]

Agree with the others. The only words on either side that have any meaning are "I am ranking your program #1 on my rank list" (from the applicant) and "You are ranked to match" (by the program). And even the "you are RtM" may mean 1) you are within out our top 20 and we have 20 positions or 2) you are in our top 40 and most years we go to #40 to fill our 20 spots. Just gotta wait until March to see what happens. Don't make yourself nuts for the next 3.5 months.

Personally, I wouldn't put any stock in either of those phrases. At the heart of it, people really are scum.

 

[PMPMD]

Personally, I wouldn't put any stock in either of those phrases. At the heart of it, people really are scum.

Yup. I was on our adcom last year and had applicants who insisted they were ranking our program #1, and on match day, surprise! they went elsewhere. And I'm sure there are tons of applicants who have been burned as well. Don't believe it 'til you get the letter on match day.

 

[Law2Doc]

Hmm...does the adcom generally view this as (1) the applicant is scum or (2) the applicant had emergent circumstances or an impulsive change of heart in the nick of time?

While there may be those who end up ranking the program below where they stated, is it true that in general (>50%) people really do rank your program #1 (or high enough to match) in the end?

And does your adcom let the bad apples spoil the bunch...not believing those genuinely with their heart set on your program (including for important family reasons)? 😳

Along the same vein, do they try to gauge who is bluffing versus who is genuinely planning to rank them #1?

I think a lot of PDs do play by the rules, and expect people to stand by their words, and if you say you are going to rank a program #1, something you aren't even obligated to say, and then you don't, then you are playing games and have a big integrity problem, and are not someone the program needed anyhow. I think scum is too strong a word, but yes some do find it repugnant. There are very good med schools some PDs won't even look at applicants from anymore because they have been burned by too many folks from there in the past, so yes, there is some bad apple taint, but not quite the kind you describe. By doing this, you probably screw over your alma mater more than yourself, but don't kid yourself that it is all part of the game.

 

[PMPMD]

Hmm...does the adcom generally view this as (1) the applicant is scum or (2) the applicant had emergent circumstances or an impulsive change of heart in the nick of time?

While there may be those who end up ranking the program below where they stated, is it true that in general (>50%) people really do rank your program #1 (or high enough to match) in the end?

And does your adcom let the bad apples spoil the bunch...not believing those genuinely with their heart set on your program (including for important family reasons)? 😳

Along the same vein, do they try to gauge who is bluffing versus who is genuinely planning to rank them #1?

That was my first year on the residency adcom. I participated in my med school's adcom but wasn't privy to the ranking meetings ("the war room"). This is how I took it: no one on either side should put any stock in any verbal statements related to the ranking process. People on both sides are skilled at "playing the game," and will say anything to get their way. It might be a minority of "bad apples" on both sides, but the bad apples are largely indistinguishable from the good ones.

 

[PMPMD]

Hmm...does the adcom generally view this as (1) the applicant is scum or (2) the applicant had emergent circumstances or an impulsive change of heart in the nick of time?

Neither. I view it as people "playing the game."

While there may be those who end up ranking the program below where they stated, is it true that in general (>50%) people really do rank your program #1 (or high enough to match) in the end?

Most applicants never say "I'm ranking your program #1". There are much more subtle ways of stating this.

And does your adcom let the bad apples spoil the bunch...not believing those genuinely with their heart set on your program (including for important family reasons)? 😳

I can't speak for the adcom as a whole, just myself. I'm not saying I will never consider an applicants situation, but I will be more dubious and scrutinize them a little more closely. I also got burned by numerous people with family situations, fiancees, etc.

Along the same vein, do they try to gauge who is bluffing versus who is genuinely planning to rank them #1?

If you're a human lie detector (like DeNiro in Meet the Parents) you could have a promising future in adcoms. I have a decent BS meter, but some people are just good liars.

 

[PMPMD]

Huh? I have never been on an adcom, but I am pretty sure almost every applicant sends a letter of intent to their #1 choice, almost always stating just that very explicitly. If the applicant did not state that to your adcom, then they simply were not planning on ranking your program #1. There are no subtle ways of stating that and my understanding is that PDs who receive such subtle statements knew that their program was not #1 because applicants will always spell it out for their actual #1 choice. Of course, I could be wrong.



Fair enough. But it is possible, even likely, for an honest applicant to have family situations applicable to more than one program. When you say you scrutinize them more closely, what exactly does this entail and does it improve your ability to select those who actually love your program?

Letters of intent are not binding contracts. The problem isn't applicants who send these letters to their #1, it's applicants who also send these to other programs on their list.

 

[HumbleMD]

Letters of intent are not binding contracts. The problem isn't applicants who send these letters to their #1, it's applicants who also send these to other programs on their list.

But the NRMP match rules are, and explicitly lying is verbotten. A program at our school was wronged by an applicant who had a chairman's phonecall informing a #1 spot, ranked the applicant to match and on match day, and surprise, the applicant matched elsewhere.

Our PD was WAY pissed about it, called the chair and the dean of the applicant's school, called te program they matched to, and has explicitly stated that the lying applicant will never get a fellowship or job at our institution, and will be wary of interviewing future applicants from the liar's institution

There's skirting around the truth, blowing smoke up someone's ass, and then there's explicityly saying someone is ranked to match or a program is #1 in a ROL. If an explicit statement like that isn't true, even in the match, then this whole process is garbage and even more of a sham than I thought it was. (On a side-note, I don't see how a program telling me I'm RTM would alter my ROL).

 

[Law2Doc]

But the NRMP match rules are, and explicitly lying is verbotten. A program at our school was wronged by an applicant who had a chairman's phonecall informing a #1 spot, ranked the applicant to match and on match day, and surprise, the applicant matched elsewhere.

Our PD was WAY pissed about it, called the chair and the dean of the applicant's school, called te program they matched to, and has explicitly stated that the lying applicant will never get a fellowship or job at our institution, and will be wary of interviewing future applicants from the liar's institution

There's skirting around the truth, blowing smoke up someone's ass, and then there's explicityly saying someone is ranked to match or a program is #1 in a ROL. If an explicit statement like that isn't true, even in the match, then this whole process is garbage and even more of a sham than I thought it was. (On a side-note, I don't see how a program telling me I'm RTM would alter my ROL).

Lying is not really something the NRMP can enforce against. For all they know you may have considered every program you applied to to be your number one choice at one point, and subsequently changed your mind. It's really an integrity problem. Programs can fight this by doing what you describe and making sure that folks who violate their words burn bridges. But not everyone goes on to fellowship, and usually programs don't remember the specifics 3-5 years down the road when folks are interviewing for fellowships anyhow. Still, you can always tell a program you liked them and plan to rank them highly and not go down the specific number path.

 

[dynx]

Agree with the others. The only words on either side that have any meaning are "I am ranking your program #1 on my rank list" (from the applicant) and "You are ranked to match" (by the program). And even the "you are RtM" may mean 1) you are within out our top 20 and we have 20 positions or 2) you are in our top 40 and most years we go to #40 to fill our 20 spots. Just gotta wait until March to see what happens. Don't make yourself nuts for the next 3.5 months.

I got one from the program's lawyer saying I was to stay at least 300 yards from the PD and the grounds of the hospital. They even took the time to get it signed by a judge and personally delivered to me. The guy said "you've been served". It was like some sort of production. Is this a good sign? happened to anyone else? I'm thinking they want to keep me away since I'll be spending so much time there in the future, smart if you think about it.

 

[mlw03]

Kinda depressing that in what is supposed to be a relatively "noble" field we have so much lying and dishonesty. Please feel free to laugh hysterically at my belief that medicine is (or at least should be) a noble field.

 

[peppy]

Yup. I was on our adcom last year and had applicants who insisted they were ranking our program #1, and on match day, surprise! they went elsewhere. And I'm sure there are tons of applicants who have been burned as well. Don't believe it 'til you get the letter on match day.

Yeah, the PDs do this too. There is a program director in my specialty who is famous for telling pretty much everyone that interviews there that they are going to be "ranked highly".
I was told by a PD that it was "pretty much up to [me]" if I wanted to go there and didn't match there. Others have been told things that were even more explicitly misleading.

 

[PMPMD]

Kinda depressing that in what is supposed to be a relatively "noble" field we have so much lying and dishonesty. Please feel free to laugh hysterically at my belief that medicine is (or at least should be) a noble field.

Honesty should be part of professionalism - something every physician has. And most of those involved display this; this thread seems based on a minority (in my experience anyway).

 

[DocKSV]

Although I think I know the answer to this, but I got this email from a PD a few days after interviewing at my #1 program. I would generally dismiss it as a standardized email, however it was a little specific, including the names of the people I interviewed with.

"xxxx-
I wanted to thank you again for visiting our categorical Internal Medicine program at xxx College of Medicine on Friday. I must say that Drs. xxx and zzz were clearly impressed by their interviews with you. Both came to me with exceptionally supportive comments and gave you great recommendations. I hope that you found your time here to be both informative and enjoyable and that we were able to impress on you the benefits of training with us at xxx.

Best wishes for the rest of the interview season. Please feel free to contact me at any time if I can be of assistance."

I also got a note from one of my interviewers who said "I think you will be a great fit here."

I guess I just want it to mean more than it really may since it is from my #1.

 

[PMPMD]

Although I think I know the answer to this, but I got this email from a PD a few days after interviewing at my #1 program. I would generally dismiss it as a standardized email, however it was a little specific, including the names of the people I interviewed with.

"xxxx-
I wanted to thank you again for visiting our categorical Internal Medicine program at xxx College of Medicine on Friday. I must say that Drs. xxx and zzz were clearly impressed by their interviews with you. Both came to me with exceptionally supportive comments and gave you great recommendations. I hope that you found your time here to be both informative and enjoyable and that we were able to impress on you the benefits of training with us at xxx.

Best wishes for the rest of the interview season. Please feel free to contact me at any time if I can be of assistance."

I also got a note from one of my interviewers who said "I think you will be a great fit here."

I guess I just want it to mean more than it really may since it is from my #1.

I wouldn't read too much into this either way. It was a positive email, but it's not like PDs are going to write you overly exuberant emails, even if they loved you. Honestly, the range of emotions I displayed in interviews or other communications with applicants wasn't all that huge. Even to the candidates I voted DNR (do not rank) I was still polite. With the candidates I thought were top picks, I was probably a little friendlier, but it's not like I was doing cartwheels.

I think the fact that you got a note from another interviewer is much more positive. This is the problem with 4th year - you have too much time to analyze every communication (or lack thereof) from programs.

 

[HumbleMD]

I guess I just want it to mean more than it really may since it is from my #1.

Yep. There's rank to match, and there's everything else. This is everything else. It's also WAY too early for a program to have their final list.

 

[koc123]

Although I think I know the answer to this, but I got this email from a PD a few days after interviewing at my #1 program. I would generally dismiss it as a standardized email, however it was a little specific, including the names of the people I interviewed with.

"xxxx-
I wanted to thank you again for visiting our categorical Internal Medicine program at xxx College of Medicine on Friday. I must say that Drs. xxx and zzz were clearly impressed by their interviews with you. Both came to me with exceptionally supportive comments and gave you great recommendations. I hope that you found your time here to be both informative and enjoyable and that we were able to impress on you the benefits of training with us at xxx.

Best wishes for the rest of the interview season. Please feel free to contact me at any time if I can be of assistance."

I also got a note from one of my interviewers who said "I think you will be a great fit here."

I guess I just want it to mean more than it really may since it is from my #1.

Not to say anything, but wouldn't it be easy to just cut and paste the different interviewers names to different applicants to make it sound personal? Honestly, the rest of the email was rather generic without any specifics.

 

[mcl]

I think it's time for my first appeal to NOT let any correspondence or phone calls you receive (or don't receive) have undue influence on your final rank order decision. Rank where YOU want to go highest--not where you think you're likely to be matched based on emails, phone calls, winks and nudges.

 

[PMPMD]

I think it's time for my first appeal to NOT let any correspondence or phone calls you receive (or don't receive) have undue influence on your final rank order decision. Rank where YOU want to go highest--not where you think you're likely to be matched based on emails, phone calls, winks and nudges.

👍👍

 

[mcl]

From a strictly logical point of view, this makes sense as the algorithm is set up that way.

That said, is it reasonable to think that this courtship from a PD implies that should one end up at the program, they would be treated well (to the style to which the have become accustomed)? Since treatment of residents is a potentially major factor in ranking programs, this throws a monkey wrench into the strictly logical approach...right? 😱

You will be treated well if the program in general treats their residents well. The best way to determine this is to attend whatever social function is offered and a) ask the residents how well they think they are treated, and b) observe how the residents interact with one another--it's often a microcosm of the department's dynamic. Pay attention to your gut instincts to help you determine whether what you're told ("Yes, we're all treated like valued colleagues and family members") meshes with what you see and hear.

But on the whole, no, you shoulding expect any type of special treatment for matching with a program even if they are strongly recruiting you.

 

[HumbleMD]

From a strictly logical point of view, this makes sense as the algorithm is set up that way.

That said, is it reasonable to think that this courtship from a PD implies that should one end up at the program, they would be treated well (to the style to which the have become accustomed)? Since treatment of residents is a potentially major factor in ranking programs, this throws a monkey wrench into the strictly logical approach...right? 😱

SRSLY? What style are you accustomed to? I think that a cryptic email from a PD has a positive predictive value about as high as these guys:

I think the only thing that modifies the ROL logic (certainly not a monkey wrench) is that telling a program they're #1 may increase your rank on their list ever so slightly. This might have choosing a, say, #2 program as #1 if you think you wouldn't have a shot at either one otherwise.

 

[HumbleMD]

Haha...you're right, of course, if it's just a cryptic e-mail.

I was thinking more along the lines of what happened at one of my interviews, in which the PD was very clearly smitten with me. He remarked on specifics in my letters, specifics on my clinical performance, specifics of my PS, starting joking around with me about sports, and one of the fellow interviewers mentioned they should just take me right then to the PD because of an answer I had given. The PD was super excited (sitting on edge of his seat, smiling from ear to ear almost the whole interview, commented on my suit, did not want interview to end, etc.) and I felt quite loved. The other interviewers followed suit, but the PD was the most extreme example.

In such a case, although them ranking me highly should not change my ROL, them treating me very well may change my list. I do think that said treatment would be transferred to residency training since it is only human nature to preferentially treat your top recruitment picks. Of course, I could be wrong and this reasoning was contravened by mcl above.

Getting along with the PD is a great reason to rank someone highly. I didn't like one at an interview and am ranking them lower because of it. This isn't changing the logic of the ROL whatsoever, it's just ranking based on many program factors, the PD being one of them.

At the same time, I'm risk averse, so a "super friendly" PD isn't a sign of a favorable position until they send me a "super friendly" email saying I'm ranked to match.

 

[HumbleMD]

He was just impressed with my professional qualifications and his behavior reflected it, which I would assume is a standard recruitment tactic. Since I was not sure how to interpret it at the time, I asked my fellow interviewees about their interview experience and it was quite different.

Oh wow, you're that person on interview day.