MD & DO Co’22 ERAS Panic Thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members do not see this ad.
Ah, yes, I check out this thread and I quickly confirm that we are, in fact, still on the "Every day is the dumbest possible day so far in the history of medical education" timeline. So sorry to you guys for that dumb stuff that apparently no one even thought about before implementing.
 
Last edited:
The issue is they are in too deep to pull it back now. This will hurt people matching their top spots based on a dumb experiment
 
So I am going to dual apply to IM and FM but I'm trying to finalize around how many programs to apply for each. I am a DO student with step 1 of just under 220 and level 1/2 >500 (~40th percentile). Using residency explorer and based on just the step 1 I am at the 50th percentile for most of the FM programs and around 25th percentile for half and 50th percentile for half of the IM programs I've looked at. I am not too picky about where I end up and don't have any desire for academic programs.

My thoughts right now are to apply to 20 FM and 30-40 IM. If I need to apply to more I can do it but I would like to keep my budget down if possible.

Edit: Holy crap, I can't believe I made this account nearly 14 years ago.
 
kamakazi5 said:
So I am going to dual apply to IM and FM but I'm trying to finalize around how many programs to apply for each. I am a DO student with step 1 of just under 220 and level 1/2 >500 (~40th percentile). Using residency explorer and based on just the step 1 I am at the 50th percentile for most of the FM programs and around 25th percentile for half and 50th percentile for half of the IM programs I've looked at. I am not too picky about where I end up and don't have any desire for academic programs.

My thoughts right now are to apply to 20 FM and 30-40 IM. If I need to apply to more I can do it but I would like to keep my budget down if possible.

Edit: Holy crap, I can't believe I made this account nearly 14 years ago.
Click to expand...
Repost this in Eternal IM WAMC thread they will be more help
 
Chelsea FC said:
The issue is they are in too deep to pull it back now. This will hurt people matching their top spots based on a dumb experiment
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced it's guaranteed to hurt people. The process is reaching a critical failure point, we need to do something. If a program has 40 interview spots and now gets 800 applications, how are they supposed to know who is really interested and who is just applying widely?

Although one way to look at it is that it doesn't matter. If I were to pick 40 people completely randomly and then fill in the match, the program is happy, and students are mostly happy since by the time we reach the match you're no longer thinking about programs where you didn't get an interview.

Programs are being deluged with applications, it's a ton more work to sort through them, for the same result (i.e. number of filled positions) in the end. If we could find a way to get everyone to decrease the number of apps submitted (unlikely voluntarily since this is a classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, could be forced through an application cap) the situation would be better for most. Signals are a way to (theoretically) thread the needle -- applicants can still apply to as many places as they want, programs will still need to review all apps (since the number of signals for most programs won't be enough), applicants with a clear interest in a specific area or program will be able to make that known, programs can enrich their interview pool with people who are more interested.

All changes to any system create new winners and losers. Some people may be hurt by a signaling system. Candidates who over-estimate their competitiveness and use their signals to programs that won't consider them, for example.
 
Longtime lurker here: Is ERAS like AMCAS was where I need to include all of my undergrad experience, or do I just include where I graduated from with my bachelor's? I took some college classes through a concurrent enrollment program while in high school then transferred those classes to the university I eventually graduated from. The concurrent enrollment courses weren't anything super significant by any means and I feel silly mentioning that university on this application because the classes were such a long time ago/not super impactful. What does the SDN world think? Thanks!
 
JPFC said:
Longtime lurker here: Is ERAS like AMCAS was where I need to include all of my undergrad experience, or do I just include where I graduated from with my bachelor's? I took some college classes through a concurrent enrollment program while in high school then transferred those classes to the university I eventually graduated from. The concurrent enrollment courses weren't anything super significant by any means and I feel silly mentioning that university on this application because the classes were such a long time ago/not super impactful. What does the SDN world think? Thanks!
Click to expand...
I doubt it matters a whole lot whether you include all the institutions where you did your undergrad or not. Unless it is to show your ties to a certain location.
 
Last edited:
NotAProgDirector said:
I'm not convinced it's guaranteed to hurt people. The process is reaching a critical failure point, we need to do something. If a program has 40 interview spots and now gets 800 applications, how are they supposed to know who is really interested and who is just applying widely?

Although one way to look at it is that it doesn't matter. If I were to pick 40 people completely randomly and then fill in the match, the program is happy, and students are mostly happy since by the time we reach the match you're no longer thinking about programs where you didn't get an interview.

Programs are being deluged with applications, it's a ton more work to sort through them, for the same result (i.e. number of filled positions) in the end. If we could find a way to get everyone to decrease the number of apps submitted (unlikely voluntarily since this is a classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, could be forced through an application cap) the situation would be better for most. Signals are a way to (theoretically) thread the needle -- applicants can still apply to as many places as they want, programs will still need to review all apps (since the number of signals for most programs won't be enough), applicants with a clear interest in a specific area or program will be able to make that known, programs can enrich their interview pool with people who are more interested.

All changes to any system create new winners and losers. Some people may be hurt by a signaling system. Candidates who over-estimate their competitiveness and use their signals to programs that won't consider them, for example.
Click to expand...
App caps are inevitable and are the best solution. Yes there will be people hurt by this but other approaches still remain suboptimal. The signaling thing just looks like a desperate attempt to avoid caps
 
NotAProgDirector said:
I'm not convinced it's guaranteed to hurt people. The process is reaching a critical failure point, we need to do something. If a program has 40 interview spots and now gets 800 applications, how are they supposed to know who is really interested and who is just applying widely?

Although one way to look at it is that it doesn't matter. If I were to pick 40 people completely randomly and then fill in the match, the program is happy, and students are mostly happy since by the time we reach the match you're no longer thinking about programs where you didn't get an interview.

Programs are being deluged with applications, it's a ton more work to sort through them, for the same result (i.e. number of filled positions) in the end. If we could find a way to get everyone to decrease the number of apps submitted (unlikely voluntarily since this is a classic example of the Prisoner's dilemma, could be forced through an application cap) the situation would be better for most. Signals are a way to (theoretically) thread the needle -- applicants can still apply to as many places as they want, programs will still need to review all apps (since the number of signals for most programs won't be enough), applicants with a clear interest in a specific area or program will be able to make that known, programs can enrich their interview pool with people who are more interested.

All changes to any system create new winners and losers. Some people may be hurt by a signaling system. Candidates who over-estimate their competitiveness and use their signals to programs that won't consider them, for example.
Click to expand...
I know that programs want people who are really interested and all... but in reality, does this make any sort of meaningful difference? I will be happy to go wherever I go. I will be happy to have a job and pay off my debt. I will be happy that somebody gave me a chance to do what I want to do for the rest of my life. Does it really matter so much to programs that their program may be somewhere I've never heard of before in a state I've never lived? It sure doesn't to me - I plan to give my 100% and work hard no matter where I land, and be really grateful to be there tbh. I get that programs have to have some way to stratify people, but the really interested in the program part annoys the ever living crud out of me.

Not directed at you per se, but just the whole process in general. It's annoying to have to basically memorize a million program's websites pre-interview, should I land one, and consider personalizing the personal statements I write to every program out of my region or somewhere I've never lived or worked just to show I'm "interested." I want to match. I promise I will happily go to ANY program anywhere on my list, since the alternative is not being a doctor.


I also think signaling also hurts anyone overly worried about not matching. Since there are so few signals available, if you want to put a guarantee you interview everywhere you signal, the best way would be to shoot low and signal places that might think you're too high tier for them... and anyone who takes that strategy might match worse than they would have without signals.
 
The problem isn't that people won't be happy where they end up. It's that it's possible (or even likely) that programs could end up interviewing lots of people needlessly. Imagine a middle of the road program. They have 10 spots. They get 300 applications - a mix of top performers, middle of the road candidates, and weaker applicants. The program is planning on inviting 80 people to interview -- an 8:1 ratio. It's possible that the program could do so and end up at the bottom of their rank list, or in SOAP. Trust me, this has happened at some point to every program (ignoring top programs). If 100 of the 300 applicants are a top performer, I can't invite them all -- I can only invite ~20 of them. If I filled my entire 80 spots with them, I'd probably be unfilled because they will have many other choices. My program is probably lower on their interest list. So how do I pick which 20 of the 100 to invite? That's the challenge here.

Whether this signaling will help or not is anyone's guess. If none of those 100 top candidates signals, what would this program do? Invite none of them? Pick 20 anyway?

Increasing interviews would be another solution -- but the time/money/resources are limited, there's only so many interviews we can do.

The key problem here is that programs receive more qualified candidate applications than they can handle. Ultimately we make decisions based upon really small issues -- has the applicant ever been in our area (which may not matter at all), does their prior research mesh with what we can offer (they may be uninterested in continuing the same research), reading letters of recommendation for small differences (this LOR says the student is "excellent", perhaps that means they're not as good because other letters from other writers say "outstanding"), etc.

Regarding the number of signals, it was kept low to avoid it turning into an app cap. Give applicants 15 signals and you'll never get an interview from programs you have not signaled. With only 5, (most) programs won't be able to interview only those whom have signaled.

Any change to the application process will help some and hurt others. Theoretically, signaling helps those applicants who have some clear idea when applying which programs they might be most interested in. Applicants whom are truly undecided would probably be best picking some programs to signal anyway.
 
NotAProgDirector said:
The problem isn't that people won't be happy where they end up. It's that it's possible (or even likely) that programs could end up interviewing lots of people needlessly. Imagine a middle of the road program. They have 10 spots. They get 300 applications - a mix of top performers, middle of the road candidates, and weaker applicants. The program is planning on inviting 80 people to interview -- an 8:1 ratio. It's possible that the program could do so and end up at the bottom of their rank list, or in SOAP. Trust me, this has happened at some point to every program (ignoring top programs). If 100 of the 300 applicants are a top performer, I can't invite them all -- I can only invite ~20 of them. If I filled my entire 80 spots with them, I'd probably be unfilled because they will have many other choices. My program is probably lower on their interest list. So how do I pick which 20 of the 100 to invite? That's the challenge here.

Whether this signaling will help or not is anyone's guess. If none of those 100 top candidates signals, what would this program do? Invite none of them? Pick 20 anyway?

Increasing interviews would be another solution -- but the time/money/resources are limited, there's only so many interviews we can do.

The key problem here is that programs receive more qualified candidate applications than they can handle. Ultimately we make decisions based upon really small issues -- has the applicant ever been in our area (which may not matter at all), does their prior research mesh with what we can offer (they may be uninterested in continuing the same research), reading letters of recommendation for small differences (this LOR says the student is "excellent", perhaps that means they're not as good because other letters from other writers say "outstanding"), etc.

Regarding the number of signals, it was kept low to avoid it turning into an app cap. Give applicants 15 signals and you'll never get an interview from programs you have not signaled. With only 5, (most) programs won't be able to interview only those whom have signaled.

Any change to the application process will help some and hurt others. Theoretically, signaling helps those applicants who have some clear idea when applying which programs they might be most interested in. Applicants whom are truly undecided would probably be best picking some programs to signal anyway.
Click to expand...
App caps are unavoidable and we need to accept and prepare for that reality rather than adding absurdly complicated hoops just to avoid facing that reality
 
The option that few people are discussing is transparency.

Programs and people actually being transparent.

That will never fly for a lot of reasons, but primarily because the "good old boy" network requires some sort of cover in order to operate.
 
Can you “assign” a LOR to a program if that letter hasn’t been uploaded by the writer yet?
 
Looking for some advice on number of programs to apply to. Applying for FM, couples matching with OB.

US MD
Step 1: mid 240s
Step 2: high 250s
Honors x5
High Pass x2
No research/publications
Nominated for AOA (should find out later this week)
Solid work/volunteer experiences.

My partner is planning on applying to ~70 programs, primarily west coast. Both of us want to match on the west coast but would go east if that means staying together. Both have received verbal commitments from home program (I know this isn't anything to depend on but we both have very good reputations in our home institution) but are leaning towards wanting to train away from home.

I was advised by faculty to apply to around 100 programs (!!!), with increased ratios (about 2FM:1OB) in places like LA, SD, SF, PDX, SEA which are ideal west coast locations for us. Ratio in less desirable east coast locations is 1FM:1OB. Is it crazy to apply to triple digits with my stats?

If it matters she is competitive for OB, good stats, GHHS, and great CV/research/extracurriculars.
 
saffe94 said:
Looking for some advice on number of programs to apply to. Applying for FM, couples matching with OB.

US MD
Step 1: mid 240s
Step 2: high 250s
Honors x5
High Pass x2
No research/publications
Nominated for AOA (should find out later this week)
Solid work/volunteer experiences.

My partner is planning on applying to ~70 programs, primarily west coast. Both of us want to match on the west coast but would go east if that means staying together. Both have received verbal commitments from home program (I know this isn't anything to depend on but we both have very good reputations in our home institution) but are leaning towards wanting to train away from home.

I was advised by faculty to apply to around 100 programs (!!!), with increased ratios (about 2FM:1OB) in places like LA, SD, SF, PDX, SEA which are ideal west coast locations for us. Ratio in less desirable east coast locations is 1FM:1OB. Is it crazy to apply to triple digits with my stats?

If it matters she is competitive for OB, good stats, GHHS, and great CV/research/extracurriculars.
Click to expand...
This sounds like bad advice hah. I couples matched and my fiancé applied FM. I applied to around 70 rads programs and she applied 30 FM. Of those thirty she got 20+ interviews with a lower step 1 and similar step 2 to you. We applied mainly west coast as well and interviewed in many of the cities you mentioned
 
redsox93 said:
This sounds like bad advice hah. I couples matched and my fiancé applied FM. I applied to around 70 rads programs and she applied 30 FM. Of those thirty she got 20+ interviews with a lower step 1 and similar step 2 to you. We applied mainly west coast as well and interviewed in many of the cities you mentioned
Click to expand...
If you applied to 70 and she only applied to 30 how did you approach the possibility that you ended up in different parts of the country? Or was that just a risk you went in knowing you'd have to take?

Also go sox :-(
 
redsox93 said:
This sounds like bad advice hah. I couples matched and my fiancé applied FM. I applied to around 70 rads programs and she applied 30 FM. Of those thirty she got 20+ interviews with a lower step 1 and similar step 2 to you. We applied mainly west coast as well and interviewed in many of the cities you mentioned
Click to expand...
how many interviews did you get relative to her with your 70 rads apps?
 
saffe94 said:
If you applied to 70 and she only applied to 30 how did you approach the possibility that you ended up in different parts of the country? Or was that just a risk you went in knowing you'd have to take?

Also go sox :-(
Click to expand...
They could have also applied to programs in the same geographical area (West vs Midwest vs East vs South) that are within driving distance from each other.
 
saffe94 said:
If you applied to 70 and she only applied to 30 how did you approach the possibility that you ended up in different parts of the country? Or was that just a risk you went in knowing you'd have to take?

Also go sox :-(
Click to expand...
We had a bunch of combos at the end of rank list with us ending up on the other side of the country from each other. But those were down past the 100th rank for us. The majority of our interviews were west coast so we prioritized every combo of west coast options with same program>city>state>region. There’s a rank list generator thing we used that you can set your max distance between cities and it generates all of your combos for you I’ll try to find it.
 
How many programs are fellow couples match applicants applying to? Im applying DR. If I were applying normally, I would have done ~60 DR and 20-25 prelim/TY. Issue is my partner only took COMLEX and has below average boards scores so she is applying across the country (applying IM), especially to DO-friendly programs. And since our first priority is to match close to each other, I have added a lot of programs I wouldn't have. Right now, I'm at ~110 DR, ~15 prelims, and ~25 TYs. I feel like this is overdoing it but I dont know how else I can keep doors open in regions my partner might get IVs.

Overall, I'm a good applicant to DR. STEP1 ~ 250 STEP 2 >260. Mostly clinical honors. A few pubs. Not AOA. Low-tier med MD school.
My partner has both COMLEX <500. No honors (but her school only does top 10% honors and there is no high pass).

We're both from Northeast though my partner has ties to Southwest and FL.
 
For the supplemental app top 5 experiences, did you guys listed experiences that were listed ln your ERAS app? Or does this 5 experiences supposed to be different from the ones Ive already listed?
 
BeroPR said:
For the supplemental app top 5 experiences, did you guys listed experiences that were listed ln your ERAS app? Or does this 5 experiences supposed to be different from the ones Ive already listed?
Click to expand...
I think 3 were the same and then I added some that were off-app that I thought were a little more about who I am as a person vs. what I've done/accomplished.

What I learned in med school applications is that it is better to be noted/unique than to be strong but forgettable.
 
Lawpy said:
App caps are unavoidable and we need to accept and prepare for that reality rather than adding absurdly complicated hoops just to avoid facing that reality
Click to expand...

Disagree that application caps are unavoidable, I don't think they will ever be implemented. Think about the amount of money these organizations would lose by restricting the amount of applications.
 
CyrusHabs7695 said:
Disagree that application caps are unavoidable, I don't think they will ever be implemented. Think about the amount of money these organizations would lose by restricting the amount of applications.
Click to expand...
I didn't think CS will be permanently cancelled yet here we are. There will be a lot of pressure to enforce the app caps.
 
Eventually the whole process will be too much of a PITA for faculty and they will threaten to leave the ERAS/NRMP
 
Lawpy said:
I didn't think CS will be permanently cancelled yet here we are. There will be a lot of pressure to enforce the app caps.
Click to expand...
Permanently until the invent a new clinical exam. You just know these organizations will never pass up on a chance to make money off of students.
 
Ganon said:
Eventually the whole process will be too much of a PITA for faculty and they will threaten to leave the ERAS/NRMP
Click to expand...
That'd be bad because the pre-Match era nearly a century ago was a disaster that led to the creation of the Match. It'll be a lot lot worse if programs threaten to (or actually) leave NRMP.
 
BeroPR said:
For the supplemental app top 5 experiences, did you guys listed experiences that were listed ln your ERAS app? Or does this 5 experiences supposed to be different from the ones Ive already listed?
Click to expand...
mine were all on my app. how many meaningful experiences could i possibly have? I only put 4 because I spent a ton of time on those four during med school instead of having a ****ton of meaningless experiences. my other experiences were just fluff really
 
DrStephenStrange said:
There is widespread opposition against PE too, yet the NBOME just refuses to permanently get rid of it in the name of "patient safety". I guess we'll see.
Click to expand...
Yeah idk what the NBOME is doing. I just think the NBME isn't interested in getting more backlash for creating a CS-like exam but *shrug*
 
CyrusHabs7695 said:
Disagree that application caps are unavoidable, I don't think they will ever be implemented. Think about the amount of money these organizations would lose by restricting the amount of applications.
Click to expand...

I mean they would probably just increase the cost of each application. This isn't an unavoidable revenue loss on the part of the NRMP
 
Im trying to find where it was talked about, but not sure if it was this thread or a different one:

What was the consensus on putting sub-internships under the experiences category? I am a DO so most rotations were with community docs, but I have 3 sub-I’s with residency programs. Itll be later in the year so I cant get a letter of rec so I am wondering if its worth adding to my application, especially considering I have a very average application. If it helps, I am applying family med.
 
Cranjis McBasketball said:
Im trying to find where it was talked about, but not sure if it was this thread or a different one:

What was the consensus on putting sub-internships under the experiences category? I am a DO so most rotations were with community docs, but I have 3 sub-I’s with residency programs. Itll be later in the year so I cant get a letter of rec so I am wondering if its worth adding to my application, especially considering I have a very average application. If it helps, I am applying family med.
Click to expand...
forums.studentdoctor.net

Listing Away rotations/Sub-I in ERAS

Would it be appropriate to list my two away/Sub-internships in ERAS? If so, under what category should I list them (volunteer, work, etc.)? I am a DO student and have confirmed that my MSPE or transcript will NOT reflect that I participated in these sub-internships.
forums.studentdoctor.net forums.studentdoctor.net
 
Rant time: do people read through 4th year comments (that are not sub-I comments) on your MSPE? I just got back my grade for this 4th year elective I took last month. All the clinics were unfortunately on Zoom due to COVID and I basically just shadowed for the month because of that. The only "real" thing I did was do a presentation at the end. So the only way to show interest was to ask questions between patients. Fast forward to today, where one attending writes on my eval "More confidence. In spite of having good understanding of what is needed, she will still ask for clarification at times." Whyyyyy...had great eval comments all through third and fourth year up until this point.

Wanting to do peds by the way.
 
iwanttobelieve said:
Rant time: do people read through 4th year comments (that are not sub-I comments) on your MSPE? I just got back my grade for this 4th year elective I took last month. All the clinics were unfortunately on Zoom due to COVID and I basically just shadowed for the month because of that. The only "real" thing I did was do a presentation at the end. So the only way to show interest was to ask questions between patients. Fast forward to today, where one attending writes on my eval "More confidence. In spite of having good understanding of what is needed, she will still ask for clarification at times." Whyyyyy...had great eval comments all through third and fourth year up until this point.

Wanting to do peds by the way.
Click to expand...
Whyyyyy do people do this? It’s like they completely forget what their comments can mean. Tbf I don’t know if that even matters, but I know it would bother me too.
 
iwanttobelieve said:
Rant time: do people read through 4th year comments (that are not sub-I comments) on your MSPE? I just got back my grade for this 4th year elective I took last month. All the clinics were unfortunately on Zoom due to COVID and I basically just shadowed for the month because of that. The only "real" thing I did was do a presentation at the end. So the only way to show interest was to ask questions between patients. Fast forward to today, where one attending writes on my eval "More confidence. In spite of having good understanding of what is needed, she will still ask for clarification at times." Whyyyyy...had great eval comments all through third and fourth year up until this point.

Wanting to do peds by the way.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t worry about it! At this point; It’s not going on you mspe I assume so I’d drink a glass of wine or beer, talk some crap on them to your friends, and chalk it up to having the bad luck of being assigned a bad educator
 
hiiiiiiiiiii said:
I wouldn’t worry about it! At this point; It’s not going on you mspe I assume so I’d drink a glass of wine or beer, talk some crap on them to your friends, and chalk it up to having the bad luck of being assigned a bad educator
Click to expand...
I don't know if OP is at an MD school or not, but I've heard many of not all MD schools do include 4th year grades and comments and upcoming rotations as well on their MSPEs
 
DrStephenStrange said:
I don't know if OP is at an MD school or not, but I've heard many of not all MD schools do include 4th year grades and comments and upcoming rotations as well on their MSPEs
Click to expand...
Hmmm yeah I don't know much about DO schools. I guess my experience is just an n=1 then; but my letter from an MD program only included up to M3 performance/comments and my transcripts only have my first 2 rotations for M4 year, unless the student personally requests that an updated transcript be sent
 
So I think our school (MD) said if any additional evals come in before the MSPE is sent out, they’ll show up. However, I think my transcript is already ordered and doesn’t have this grade.
 
So for the supplemental, we've decided it makes the most sense to pick 3 regions of interest since programs will only see that we indicated a preference for their region, right?
 
fldoctorgirl said:
So for the supplemental, we've decided it makes the most sense to pick 3 regions of interest since programs will only see that we indicated a preference for their region, right?
Click to expand...
That is how I interpreted the instructions. I had 2 very obvious regions of interest but I added the third because it seemed like a strategic failure not to.
 
Ganon said:
That is how I interpreted the instructions. I had 2 very obvious regions of interest but I added the third because it seemed like a strategic failure not to.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I really only have 1 but I figure I might as well add 2 more and will just pick the ones that happen to have the most programs I am applying to.
 
Also, is the work preferences section available for programs to see, or is this literally just the AAMC collecting research data? It says it's optional to complete and "research only". It's the stuff that comes after the submit page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Class of 2025 ERAS Panic Thread
Replies
23
Views
5K
Darrow O'Lykos
Darrow O'Lykos
Y
IM away post ERAS
Replies
0
Views
902
yardyknow2025
Y
TheRealBibFortuna
ERAS regional preference versus home program
Replies
4
Views
1K
NotAProgDirector
NotAProgDirector
M
Orthopedic Match Spreadsheet 2025
Replies
0
Views
5K
m22499
M
Mr.Smile12
MD & DO ERAS 2026: Resources and What to expect
Replies
0
Views
1K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top