I found a couple pdf files on the nrmp website that were interesting. While we won't have super-detailed info until they release "Charting Outcomes in the Match," it seems that there are more SDNers this year who didn't match or who went relatively far down their ROL.
Here are the numbers
Here is the press release/summary
So, how do we determine the competitiveness of surgery this year? Is it by % spots filled by US Seniors? Match rate of US Seniors? Total spots filled? How about average Step 1 scores? It's hard to say. The national average on Step 1 has been creeping up as students figure out the test. When I was a student, the national average was 217. I think it's now around 222.
The senior students on SDN are not just unhappy in the surgery forum, but across the board. I just don't remember it being this bad over the last few years. However, 93.3% of US seniors matched this year, 82% in their top 3. That number (93%) has varied less than 1% in the last 5 years, despite an increasing number of outside applicants.
As for surgery, there were 1,262 US seniors for 1,077 spots (2006: 1522 for 1051). 895 matched for a match rate of 71%, but we have to assume that a small % of the unmatched went into other specialties like ortho, and had surgery as a backup.
Looking at table 7, there are less US seniors taking prelim surgery positions than in 2006-2008. The categorical spots were taken by 83% US seniors (table 8), the same as 4 years ago. The % of all US seniors going into surgery hasn't changed either, at 5.7-6.2% (highest in 2006).
So, are we seeing a real increase in competition? I don't know. My evidence is anecdotal, and I don't think anyone will argue that there's a sample bias here on SDN. Is it possible that there has been a trend of increased SDN use among marginal applicants? Maybe...if so I just accidentally gave you all the middle finger......but I doubt it.
The real explanation is pending the NRMP's future publications, but I think that there's really been a lot less change over the last 5 years than we think. We're just caught up in the cluster#$k and hysteria that is the NRMP match. When everything settles down, it will just be another pdf on their website, and won't differ much from the prior years.
What do you guys think?
Man, I just realized there's a typo in the title, which I can't change. That's going to drive me nuts.
Here are the numbers
Here is the press release/summary
So, how do we determine the competitiveness of surgery this year? Is it by % spots filled by US Seniors? Match rate of US Seniors? Total spots filled? How about average Step 1 scores? It's hard to say. The national average on Step 1 has been creeping up as students figure out the test. When I was a student, the national average was 217. I think it's now around 222.
The senior students on SDN are not just unhappy in the surgery forum, but across the board. I just don't remember it being this bad over the last few years. However, 93.3% of US seniors matched this year, 82% in their top 3. That number (93%) has varied less than 1% in the last 5 years, despite an increasing number of outside applicants.
As for surgery, there were 1,262 US seniors for 1,077 spots (2006: 1522 for 1051). 895 matched for a match rate of 71%, but we have to assume that a small % of the unmatched went into other specialties like ortho, and had surgery as a backup.
Looking at table 7, there are less US seniors taking prelim surgery positions than in 2006-2008. The categorical spots were taken by 83% US seniors (table 8), the same as 4 years ago. The % of all US seniors going into surgery hasn't changed either, at 5.7-6.2% (highest in 2006).
So, are we seeing a real increase in competition? I don't know. My evidence is anecdotal, and I don't think anyone will argue that there's a sample bias here on SDN. Is it possible that there has been a trend of increased SDN use among marginal applicants? Maybe...if so I just accidentally gave you all the middle finger......but I doubt it.
The real explanation is pending the NRMP's future publications, but I think that there's really been a lot less change over the last 5 years than we think. We're just caught up in the cluster#$k and hysteria that is the NRMP match. When everything settles down, it will just be another pdf on their website, and won't differ much from the prior years.
What do you guys think?
Man, I just realized there's a typo in the title, which I can't change. That's going to drive me nuts.
Last edited: