Chances at Top Tiered Programs

[medicineluva]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Wondering what my chances are at TOP tiered IM programs (MGH, BWH, Hopkins, UCSF, etc).

Stats:
MedSchool: Top 10
1st year: Pass (there is no H/HP/P at my school)
2nd year: Pass
Step 1: 260
3rd year: Pass
4th year: Pass
Research: 1 publication (co-author) cards, 2 first author poster presentation cards (one at a nationally recognized meeting), 1st author abstract (cards), 1st author publication pending cards, working on another project if data comes back conclusive will possibly have another 1st author pub (cards)
LOR: moderate to very strong

Downside to application:
- will not get AOA probably
- pass/fail school

Please give me whatever insight you guys have at the TOP programs...should I take a year off for additional research? How can I improve my application within the next 6 months?

Career goals:interventional cardiology academics (thus shooting for MGH/BWH/UCSF)

Thanks in advance for any advice!

 

[disorder]

Wondering what my chances are at TOP tiered IM programs (MGH, BWH, Hopkins, UCSF, etc).

Stats:
MedSchool: Top 10
1st year: Pass (there is no H/HP/P at my school)
2nd year: Pass
Step 1: 260
3rd year: Pass
4th year: Pass
Research: 1 publication (co-author) cards, 2 first author poster presentation cards (one at a nationally recognized meeting), 1st author abstract (cards), 1st author publication pending cards, working on another project if data comes back conclusive will possibly have another 1st author pub (cards)
LOR: moderate to very strong

Downside to application:
- will not get AOA probably
- pass/fail school

Please give me whatever insight you guys have at the TOP programs...should I take a year off for additional research? How can I improve my application within the next 6 months?

Career goals:interventional cardiology academics (thus shooting for MGH/BWH/UCSF)

Thanks in advance for any advice!

honestly, no one has a crystal ball... and if anything this year has shown that it is increasingly hard to predict where one might or might not get interviews AND where one might or might not match after that interview.

i think after looking at the match thread and looking at the match lists, i think pedigree plays a much more important role than i (we?) realized and if you aren't, then it's an uphill battle. (JHU taking on 10+ of their own?!)

bottom line: don't freak out. don't take a year off. you're at a top 10 school. look at your match list and see where fellow students matched to give yourself an idea if your school "feeds" into these places, which it likely does. take step 2 early and do just as well as step 1 (gamble, though, with maybe limited utility). also, if you don't have the EC's to go along with your app, you might be severely limiting yourself and lacking that "X" factor that many programs at the top oh so desire. regardless, you should get 1-2 interviews from those top tier places in your current state.

 

[DrSnips]

Wondering what my chances are at TOP tiered IM programs (MGH, BWH, Hopkins, UCSF, etc).

Stats:
MedSchool: Top 10
1st year: Pass (there is no H/HP/P at my school)
2nd year: Pass
Step 1: 260
3rd year: Pass
4th year: Pass
Research: 1 publication (co-author) cards, 2 first author poster presentation cards (one at a nationally recognized meeting), 1st author abstract (cards), 1st author publication pending cards, working on another project if data comes back conclusive will possibly have another 1st author pub (cards)
LOR: moderate to very strong

Downside to application:
- will not get AOA probably
- pass/fail school

Please give me whatever insight you guys have at the TOP programs...should I take a year off for additional research? How can I improve my application within the next 6 months?

Career goals:interventional cardiology academics (thus shooting for MGH/BWH/UCSF)

Thanks in advance for any advice!

Your school is pass/fail during the clinical years? Wow. Anyway, coming from a top 10 school with such a strong step 1 should put you in the running for the elite top tiers. Just from my observations of what people have said on the results forum, it seems that not having AOA virtually destroys your chances when coming from a low-ranked med school, but simply makes you less competitive from a top 10 or 20 school. How is AOA determined at your gradeless school? If there is still a way to get it, you should focus on that.

I think your research looks good, I doubt a year off to do research will help you. The people who get spots over you aren't going to all have much higher boards or much more research. They are going to have something special about their app that is difficult to replicate (unusual prior work experience, research with a field leader, invented the shake weight, etc.) Quality over quantity.

As for LORs, it sounds like you already have at least two and have gotten to see them. If so, I would ditch the one you said was "moderate" and try to get another awesome one from your medicine subI. Do try to have 3 letters on hand, as a couple places require 3 + chairman's letter instead of the usual 2 + chairman's (Hopkins comes to mind).

Good luck.

 

[tech2doc]

Wondering what my chances are at TOP tiered IM programs (MGH, BWH, Hopkins, UCSF, etc).

Stats:
MedSchool: Top 10
1st year: Pass (there is no H/HP/P at my school)
2nd year: Pass
Step 1: 260
3rd year: Pass
4th year: Pass
Research: 1 publication (co-author) cards, 2 first author poster presentation cards (one at a nationally recognized meeting), 1st author abstract (cards), 1st author publication pending cards, working on another project if data comes back conclusive will possibly have another 1st author pub (cards)
LOR: moderate to very strong

Downside to application:
- will not get AOA probably
- pass/fail school

Please give me whatever insight you guys have at the TOP programs...should I take a year off for additional research? How can I improve my application within the next 6 months?

Career goals:interventional cardiology academics (thus shooting for MGH/BWH/UCSF)

Thanks in advance for any advice!

It sounds like you have just as good a shot as anyone! Like it's been said in here many times, though, there's really not any clear cut science on who gets invites and who doesn't. I had similar research but a lower step 1 than you and went to a less prestigious school, and I received invites from two of the big four (MGH, UCSF).

I wouldn't advise taking a year off for research just to make you more competitive. The only reason to take a year off is if it's something in which you are truly interested. Otherwise, just keep on being a rockstar!

 

[235009]

Wondering what my chances are at TOP tiered IM programs (MGH, BWH, Hopkins, UCSF, etc).

Stats:
MedSchool: Top 10
1st year: Pass (there is no H/HP/P at my school)
2nd year: Pass
Step 1: 260
3rd year: Pass
4th year: Pass
Research: 1 publication (co-author) cards, 2 first author poster presentation cards (one at a nationally recognized meeting), 1st author abstract (cards), 1st author publication pending cards, working on another project if data comes back conclusive will possibly have another 1st author pub (cards)
LOR: moderate to very strong

Downside to application:
- will not get AOA probably
- pass/fail school

Please give me whatever insight you guys have at the TOP programs...should I take a year off for additional research? How can I improve my application within the next 6 months?

Career goals:interventional cardiology academics (thus shooting for MGH/BWH/UCSF)

Thanks in advance for any advice!

1. you don't need to go to MGH/BWH/UCSF to do academic interventional cards ....anywhere in the top ~20 would be perfectly fine

2. you're coming from a top 10 school...if you look at the match lists from top 10 schools (i've seen stanford's and UPenn's posted here but i'm sure you can see your school's) even the average IM applicant goes to a competitive top IM program so being from a top 10 school helps you enormously. add to that the fact that your step 1 score will get you consideration at any program.

3. don't nitpick. as i mentioned in #1 you can get to where you want from any top 20 school so don't go crazy if you get interviews from columbia/penn/BID and not MGH/BWH/UCSF ...they're all essentially the same

4. apply broadly, don't limit yourself geographically

 

[medicineluva]

Thanks everyone for the responses!

Looking at my schools match list this year were alot of UCSF and Stanford, so I think may have a pretty good shot at UCSF hopefully...

Yes my school is pass/fail...the way they determine AOA? they don't tell us haha...well you know they generally say, they look at the whole application, etc

regards to continue being a rockstar...i'm not so sure about that but i'll try haha i sure feel like an idiot while on clinicals

Of course your right...I don't need to go to those top programs MGH/BWH/UCSF to do academic cards...i'll definitely apply broadly...i'd just like to do what is in my power to increase the likelihood of matching into those places is all...

again, thank you all for the encouragement and advice!

 

[kjamess]

your best shot is your home program (assuming you do well in your IM clerkship/subi), so if that includes any of the big 4, you should be a shoe in. Otherwise, you should have a decent shot but definitely no guarantees.

 

[darkelven29]

Okay I'm going to guess you go to Yale? They are Pass/Fail all 4 years. Enormous reputation behind you.

Obviously you are a shoe in the Yale New Haven program, but will also get almost all invites from Michigan, WashU, UWash, UTSW, Vandy, Mayo, Pittsburgh, Emory, Cornell, Mt. Sinai, NYU, and Univ. of Chicago/Northwestern. You will probably get some invites from Columbia, Duke, UCLA, BIDMC, Stanford, Hopkins (tougher), Penn (tougher), and MGH (liberal in invites but tough to match). UCSF/Brigham, most difficult. Did I forget any top tier programs?

It's impossible to predict exactly which ones you'll get. But you'll get at least 10 and be ranked to match at a number of them.

 

[kjamess]

Okay I'm going to guess you go to Yale? They are Pass/Fail all 4 years. Enormous reputation behind you.

Obviously you are a shoe in the Yale New Haven program, but will also get almost all invites from Michigan, WashU, UWash, UTSW, Vandy, Mayo, Pittsburgh, Emory, Cornell, Mt. Sinai, NYU, and Univ. of Chicago/Northwestern. You will probably get some invites from Columbia, Duke, UCLA, BIDMC, Stanford, Hopkins (tougher), Penn (tougher), and MGH (liberal in invites but tough to match). UCSF/Brigham, most difficult. Did I forget any top tier programs?

It's impossible to predict exactly which ones you'll get. But you'll get at least 10 and be ranked to match at a number of them.

I'm pretty sure they have clinical grades.

 

[sluggs]

Okay I'm going to guess you go to Yale? They are Pass/Fail all 4 years. Enormous reputation behind you.

Obviously you are a shoe in the Yale New Haven program, but will also get almost all invites from Michigan, WashU, UWash, UTSW, Vandy, Mayo, Pittsburgh, Emory, Cornell, Mt. Sinai, NYU, and Univ. of Chicago/Northwestern. You will probably get some invites from Columbia, Duke, UCLA, BIDMC, Stanford, Hopkins (tougher), Penn (tougher), and MGH (liberal in invites but tough to match). UCSF/Brigham, most difficult. Did I forget any top tier programs?

It's impossible to predict exactly which ones you'll get. But you'll get at least 10 and be ranked to match at a number of them.

Gotta call you out on Pitt being a top program. It is good and all, but not in the league with the others for IM

 

[darkelven29]

Really? My interviewer at Yale said they are completely P/F, because "they don't believe in grades, rather constructive feedback." And the interviewer is primarily in medical education, but then again Yale student has to verify that.

Other than weaker ICU experiences as a resident (fellow-run) and possibly weaker caliber of residents, Pitt seemed pretty impressive to me. Same tier as Emory, Mayo, and NYU in terms of residency reputation (very different style though).

 

[adele87]

.

 

[Trogghunter]

Gotta call you out on Pitt being a top program. It is good and all, but not in the league with the others for IM

Agree....my step dad went there for IM residency. He doesn't speak so highly of it, though he is brilliant...has many leather bound books.

 

[darkelven29]

Yale has clinical grades - H/HP/P/F.

So my interviewer lied. Good thing I matched somewhere else.
But coming from any top 10 med school with those stats, you'll get great interviews, good luck!

 

[disorder]

OP likely goes to UCLA from previous posts.

 

[ArcGurren]

Honestly, if you want to match well into subspecialty, most middle-tier programs will give you a good shot at it and help you match a good academic subspecialty position in most fields. I think SDN tends to skew the perception of the match to people who don't post here as frequently (fwiw I matched to a top-middle tier institution for IM - recognizable but not one of the "big names" so frequently quoted here, and i'm happy with it).

Just wanted to put that out there for anyone lurking who might be too afraid to ask questions but might feel embarrassed for whatever reason.

And OP, nobody can really define whether you'll get top tier interviews from every place or few places. I got interviews from a couple of top tier places I didn't think I would get from, and I didn't get interviews from some of the top tier places either. I think your med school rank/reputation does help (for whatever stupid reason) and being AOA would be a plus but isn't a make it/break it deal.

 

[HoldTheCoffee]

The process is pretty difficult to predict, I think that it'd be wise to just apply broadly and see how it goes. Who knows, maybe you'll get interviews at all of the "top 10" (whatever those are) or maybe you won't. The good news is that there are actually a lot of good IM programs out there, even if they don't have the name punching-power of say, a MGH or a JHU. When I was looking at fellowship match lists at various programs, the one thing that struck me is that even most solidly "mid-tier" places would occasionally send candidates to some top-notch places for fellowship. I suspect that a great performance at any solid academic place will still keep you in the running for many fellowships.

 

[medicineluva]

Thank you all for the replies.

Of Course I will apply broadly! Just wanted to see if I was competitive for these top programs, or if I should brace myself for a rude awakening haha (like if those getting into top programs have MD/PHD, etc)

I knew little about the IM match stuff, because most of my classmates I converse with are doing other specialities so was kind of lost.

 

[235009]

Honestly, if you want to match well into subspecialty, most middle-tier programs will give you a good shot at it and help you match a good academic subspecialty position in most fields. I think SDN tends to skew the perception of the match to people who don't post here as frequently (fwiw I matched to a top-middle tier institution for IM - recognizable but not one of the "big names" so frequently quoted here, and i'm happy with it).

Just wanted to put that out there for anyone lurking who might be too afraid to ask questions but might feel embarrassed for whatever reason.

If you haven't posted your match here then you're part of the problem.

If you have posted anonymously then kudos.

 

[compaq7]

If you are a UCLA student... UCLA does have grades, P/F and Letter of Distinction (LOD) which ends up being de facto honors. Get an LOD in your medicine rotation and you're golden, if you don't it'll be harder but not impossible. Either way you will match a top program.
If your goal truly is Interventional Cards, your performance and research during residency will be more important than if you're applying from an elite vs top-middle tier residency.

 

[Syncity]

If you haven't posted your match here then you're part of the problem.

If you have posted anonymously then kudos.

Your own match experience is conspicuously absent, Skin MD, as is the information regarding how 'dangerously misleading' the advice given on the WAMC thread was. Didn't you say that you were going to support your criticisms of those who were good enough to take their time and give advice with hard evidence after the match?

 

[235009]

Your own match experience is conspicuously absent, Skin MD, as is the information regarding how 'dangerously misleading' the advice given on the WAMC thread was. Didn't you say that you were going to support your criticisms of those who were good enough to take their time and give advice with hard evidence after the match?

My experience is posted there anonymously. I feel like the comments in that thread support my assertions enough that I didn't need to rehash my feud with a mod because he was obviously taking it way too personally. Specifically the results are clear that school reputation and class rank/AOA is crucial and that chances can't be judged solely based on step 1 score as was being done. It just really irked me that a poster from a low ranked school in the fourth quartile was being mislead into thinking he didnt need to apply to mid-tiers because he was a shoe-in for a top tier school with a 240+ on step 1. I think the message has already resonated as the data is resounding.

Anyway I would urge everyone who took part in the process this year to post in that thread... You can easily do so anonymously under an assumed name or by PMing gutonc. Real data is way more helpful than anyone's musings to future applicants.

 

[LovelyBRass]

I don't know why people are jumping on Skin when he/she was the first person to say Step 1 doesn't matter nearly as much as pedigree and AOA. Everyone here seems to be converted.

 

[kjamess]

I don't know why people are jumping on Skin when he/she was the first person to say Step 1 doesn't matter nearly as much as pedigree and AOA. Everyone here seems to be converted.

Um, this is no secret. Anyone who bothered to look at previous match or WAMC threads wouldve came to the same conclusion.

 

[LovelyBRass]

Um, this is no secret. Anyone who bothered to look at previous match or WAMC threads wouldve came to the same conclusion.

Then I guess no one looked this year.

As long as we are in agreement that Step 1 score just isn't going to lift you up as much as the impression we may have gotten in this year's WAMC.

 

[kjamess]

Then I guess no one looked this year.

As long as we are in agreement that Step 1 score just isn't going to lift you up as much as the impression we may have gotten in this year's WAMC.

Well I made reference to it here. I havent been to this yrs WAMC thread in a while so I dont remember what was or wasnt said about step scores.

 

[LovelyBRass]

Well I made reference to it here. I havent been to this yrs WAMC thread in a while so I dont remember what was or wasnt said about step scores.

Then I'm not sure why you're jumping in to this thread. It's sort of the crux.

In any case, you wrote that after interviews were over - after the ROLs were due in fact. Not very insightful at that point.

 

[kjamess]

Then I'm not sure why you're jumping in to this thread. It's sort of the crux.

In any case, you wrote that after interviews were over - after the ROLs were due in fact. Not very insightful at that point.

I "jumped" into this thread because of your ridiculous suggestion that skin was the first person to somehow come to the conclusion that boards scores arent the end all be all. Again, there have been multiple threads in the past that have described this before--I guess Im the only one who knows how to use the search function. And no, it wasnt meant to be insightful, I was just stating what I thought was common knowledge.

 

[Syncity]

Then I'm not sure why you're jumping in to this thread. It's sort of the crux.

In any case, you wrote that after interviews were over - after the ROLs were due in fact. Not very insightful at that point.

Based on the earlier thread, I was expecting some major revelation from SkinMD as to how the advice given on the WAMC thread was dangerous, pointing to cases where the advice given by Gutonc etc. had caused major harm, possibly using graphs he had made in the interim to illustrate his findings. Instead, all I've witnessed is SkinMD pointing to the Universally-accepted consensus that Step scores are not the be-all and end-all. I'm thoroughly disappointed.

For the record, a quick perusal of the WAMC thread clearly demonstrates that no advice was given based solely on Step scores. While the phrase "with your scores...." appears in abundance, I can't see a single instance where Gutonc or others based their advice on Step scores alone. Furthermore, I have yet to see anyone come out and say that Gutonc was way off (which is human).

 

[LovelyBRass]

I "jumped" into this thread because of your ridiculous suggestion that skin was the first person to somehow come to the conclusion that boards scores arent the end all be all. Again, there have been multiple threads in the past that have described this before--I guess Im the only one who knows how to use the search function. And no, it wasnt meant to be insightful, I was just stating what I thought was common knowledge.

I can't believe how personally you're taking this. You weren't exactly around earlier in the season when all of this was getting thrown around. Just calm down.

Based on the earlier thread, I was expecting some major revelation from SkinMD as to how the advice given on the WAMC thread was dangerous, pointing to cases where the advice given by Gutonc etc. had caused major harm, possibly using graphs he had made in the interim to illustrate his findings. Instead, all I've witnessed is SkinMD pointing to the Universally-accepted consensus that Step scores are not the be-all and end-all. I'm thoroughly disappointed.

For the record, a quick perusal of the WAMC thread clearly demonstrates that no advice was given based solely on Step scores. While the phrase "with your scores...." appears in abundance, I can't see a single instance where Gutonc or others based their advice on Step scores alone. Furthermore, I have yet to see anyone come out and say that Gutonc was way off (which is human).

ugh i started to compile a list of posts and match results (post-match boredom is a gift and a curse) but i just can't bring myself to post other people's wamc-match combo to prove they're disappointing.

 

[235009]

Based on the earlier thread, I was expecting some major revelation from SkinMD as to how the advice given on the WAMC thread was dangerous, pointing to cases where the advice given by Gutonc etc. had caused major harm, possibly using graphs he had made in the interim to illustrate his findings. Instead, all I've witnessed is SkinMD pointing to the Universally-accepted consensus that Step scores are not the be-all and end-all. I'm thoroughly disappointed.

For the record, a quick perusal of the WAMC thread clearly demonstrates that no advice was given based solely on Step scores. While the phrase "with your scores...." appears in abundance, I can't see a single instance where Gutonc or others based their advice on Step scores alone. Furthermore, I have yet to see anyone come out and say that Gutonc was way off (which is human).

Since you guys are insisting we rehash this here...

this is the exchange i was referring to....
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=12985656&postcount=248
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=12985711&postcount=249
...which struck a cord with me because there are many similarities between me and that poster

so as you can see, based solely on step scores of > 240 and > 250, this sdn expert who supposedly knows how to use the search function and has been participating in threads for years and should be aware of this common knowledge you reference makes two absolutely ridiculous assertions:

I see a grand total of 4 reaches on your list (I don't have to list them...you should be smart enough to figure them out). You'll get most/all of the interviews you want and will likely match in your Top 3.

...i count at least 9 reaches in that person's list given that he is at a "mid-tier" school and in the bottom half of the class

...then in reference to BU, Tufts, Brown, Jefferson, GW, and Georgetown, all very solid mid and upper-mid tier university programs which are the poster's best chance he says

And applying to these programs is a waste of your dad's money:

...not only is he implying that these programs safeties (which of course they aren't) he is ridiculing the poster for even considering applying to these outstanding programs. thankfully the poster didn't take this terrible advice and applied to these places anyway so i don't have graphs and visuals showing how taking this advice was a disaster but it certainly could've been if the poster believed the advice from this SDN "expert".

finally, the reason why there aren't that many more examples is because the vast majority of people posting on the WAMC thread come in 2 varieties:
1. AOA/top of the class/Top school with great board scores to whom even a premed can give good advice. it really means nothing when the guy with a 250 and AOA from a top 10 school comes back praising the advice he got in the WAMC thread. doesn't take any experience to reassure this guy that he'll be fine and will likely match at a top program.
2. DO/IMG who we all know have a tough time in the match and need to apply broadly

anyway, i hope the other contributors to the WAMC thread don't take offense to this... i think their advice was measured and appropriate. i also hope others will start contributing to the forum to get more diversification of opinions and as a counterbalance to the bad advice that will inevitably pop up. i know i plan on contributing (under a different alias as i will be retiring this one soon).

 

[kjamess]

I can't believe how personally you're taking this. You weren't exactly around earlier in the season when all of this was getting thrown around. Just calm down.

lol taking what personally? I simply replied to one your statements. It's not my fault that your effort to white knight didnt really land.

 

[Syncity]

I can't believe how personally you're taking this. You weren't exactly around earlier in the season when all of this was getting thrown around. Just calm down.



ugh i started to compile a list of posts and match results (post-match boredom is a gift and a curse) but i just can't bring myself to post other people's wamc-match combo to prove they're disappointing.

Regarding your last point - I think this is a very interesting idea, and one I thought of myself in the past. It would be absolutely unbelievable if we could collect information from a cohort of individuals who matched to respective programs to try and gauge the respective competitiveness of these programs.

This could take the form of the Interviews thread which was posted, whereby we lay out all the universities, followed by a line under each one including: School/AOA/grades/Steps/ECs + research.

I see uptake being a major issue and people wishing to preserve their identity would need to post to someone else who would, in turn, have an awful lot of work inputting the data. Furthermore, the likelihood is that the numbers responding for the respective programs would be so low that it would give us no clear indication about the competitiveness of the program and may create the inverse effect of putting good candidates off mid-lower tier program (e.g. if someone with very high scores, etc. matches a mid-to-lower tier program).

 

[LovelyBRass]

Regarding your last point - I think this is a very interesting idea, and one I thought of myself in the past. It would be absolutely unbelievable if we could collect information from a cohort of individuals who matched to respective programs to try and gauge the respective competitiveness of these programs.

This could take the form of the Interviews thread which was posted, whereby we lay out all the universities, followed by a line under each one including: School/AOA/grades/Steps/ECs + research.

I see uptake being a major issue and people wishing to preserve their identity would need to post to someone else who would, in turn, have an awful lot of work inputting the data. Furthermore, the likelihood is that the numbers responding for the respective programs would be so low that it would give us no clear indication about the competitiveness of the program and may create the inverse effect of putting good candidates off mid-lower tier program (e.g. if someone with very high scores, etc. matches a mid-to-lower tier program).

i don't know if you're kidding or not but i've said that! http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?p=13399534#post13399534

ok not quite but similar

and yes it would be near impossible lol

 

[Syncity]

i don't know if you're kidding or not but i've said that! http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?p=13399534#post13399534

ok not quite but similar

and yes it would be near impossible lol

Ha - I didn't spot that!

I'll see how feedback is here. If it's positive and people are willing, I'll set up the thread. It's nearly impossible to gauge the competitiveness of a lot of programs and this would certainly help. All I know from my extensive reading of SDN is that I'm not applying to UCSF.

 

[Danbo1957]

Specifically the results are clear that school reputation and class rank/AOA is crucial and that chances can't be judged solely based on step 1 score as was being done. It just really irked me that a poster from a low ranked school in the fourth quartile was being mislead into thinking he didnt need to apply to mid-tiers because he was a shoe-in for a top tier school with a 240+ on step 1. I think the message has already resonated as the data is resounding.

Fourth quartiles with ~240 Step 1 from lower ranked med-schools do need to think mid-tier at best, as they are in a kind of "no-man's-land" concerning the numbers (and they'd better really wow' em at interviews). Frankly, at our "upper-mid tier" IM residency we eliminate any consideration of fourth quartiles, regardless of anything else-- we mostly accept top half from any school now.

 

[LovelyBRass]

Ha - I didn't spot that!

I'll see how feedback is here. If it's positive and people are willing, I'll set up the thread. It's nearly impossible to gauge the competitiveness of a lot of programs and this would certainly help. All I know from my extensive reading of SDN is that I'm not applying to UCSF.

Haha don't sell yourself short already!

But yeah... I didn't apply to the super-duper uber programs, thought I would regret "limiting my options," realized they wouldn't take a whiff at my app lol

Sorry, what was this thread about again?

Anyway, it'd be great if we could get a large enough n!

 

[LovelyBRass]

Fourth quartiles with ~240 Step 1 from lower ranked med-schools do need to think mid-tier at best, as they are in a kind of "no-man's-land" concerning the numbers (and they'd better really wow' em at interviews). Frankly, at our "upper-mid tier" IM residency we eliminate any consideration of fourth quartiles, regardless of anything else-- we mostly accept top half from any school now.

Thanks for this. Just wondering, does "any school" refer only to USMD school or to DO/foreign as well?

 

[whoknows2012]

SkinMD most of what you're saying is right and I agree, however, I was top 40% not bottom half. I was in the 2nd quintile. I however got great interviews, no top tiers or reaches but matched my #1. Moral of the story, AOA and school pedigree all the way, but I'm
Very happy

 

[235009]

SkinMD most of what you're saying is right and I agree, however, I was top 40% not bottom half. I was in the 2nd quintile. I however got great interviews, no top tiers or reaches but matched my #1. Moral of the story, AOA and school pedigree all the way, but I'm
Very happy

Oh, sorry. Your initial post said 4th. Either way the advice that was given was inappropriate for someone in the second or the fourth quintile.

Congrats on an excellent match ...i saw your post in the outcomes thread.

 

[whoknows2012]

Yup I meant 2nd quintile no worries. I agree it wasn't great advice. Had I dropped those 5-6 programs i would have had like 7 interviews. So ya I kinda needed those. Truth is I think between my lack of pubs with no AOA and no masters or mph or phd, coming from a low/mid tier school, my fate was decided long before interviews went out. My ego took much needed hit and I come out the other end humbled , and as happy as I could be with where I matched. Thanks for the well wishes!

Btw hope the match went well for you to, as I cannot tell how well you did since you posted anonymous 😉

 

[235009]

Yup I meant 2nd quintile no worries. I agree it wasn't great advice. Had I dropped those 5-6 programs i would have had like 7 interviews. So ya I kinda needed those. Truth is I think between my lack of pubs with no AOA and no masters or mph or phd, coming from a low/mid tier school, my fate was decided long before interviews went out. My ego took much needed hit and I come out the other end humbled , and as happy as I could be with where I matched. Thanks for the well wishes!

Btw hope the match went well for you to, as I cannot tell how well you did since you posted anonymous 😉

I PMed you

the degree and pubs probably wouldn't have made a difference without a better class rank and/or AOA.

 

[ArcGurren]

If you haven't posted your match here then you're part of the problem.

If you have posted anonymously then kudos.

I posted anonymously - PM me for details.