Couple matching 1 yr apart

[trkd]

Just wondering if anyone has any experience with this. I am applying EM for the upcoming match. My husband will be applying for gen surg the following year. I can:

A) wait a year to do couples match
B) start residency and hope that he matches close by

Not sure if I can help his cause by chatting up the gen surg PD after I match. I have thought that I should maybe apply in big cities but it still no guarantee and generally harder to match in for both EM and gen surg. Smaller programs scare me because not many options for him to match into if it doesn't work out with my hospital. However, they are easier to match in. Both of us will be decent applicants with publications and average boards but graduates of an Australian med school.

Anyone have any experience with this situation. Please give me your thoughts.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[disque71]

i think i remember reading that the couples match isnt that successfull. i probably wouldnt wait.

 

[MD/TX2006]

couples match is successful. i did it with anesthesiology/radiology this year.

the year apart thing is way harder! a friend is having that same issue. at least couples matching is guaranteed together, and EM is difficult but not impossible, and gen surg is fairly competitive but has many spots. it's easier to address couples match when both departments are interviewing at the same time and have an opportunity to talk to each other.

my advice would be to wait a year, do something useful with your time... and then couples match and apply to twice as many programs as you would as a single. if both applicants are decent, and you sound like it, it should be easier.

 

[SoCuteMD]

Just wondering if anyone has any experience with this. I am applying EM for the upcoming match. My husband will be applying for gen surg the following year. I can:

A) wait a year to do couples match
B) start residency and hope that he matches close by

Not sure if I can help his cause by chatting up the gen surg PD after I match. I have thought that I should maybe apply in big cities but it still no guarantee and generally harder to match in for both EM and gen surg. Smaller programs scare me because not many options for him to match into if it doesn't work out with my hospital. However, they are easier to match in. Both of us will be decent applicants with publications and average boards but graduates of an Australian med school.

Anyone have any experience with this situation. Please give me your thoughts.

Could you do a 1 year transitional (only apply for those in the upcoming match), and then apply to 2-4 EM programs the year your husband is applying for gen surg? It would limit your options to 2-4 programs, but you would be in the couples match.

 

[meri222]

To add my two cents: I think that couples match can be very successful when done in the same year. Our graduating class has four couples who all received their first choices as a "couples match". I am one of those couples (EM/Peds). We were very successsful, and it can certainly work to your favor. It is obviously more difficult with a difficult specialty, but that doesn't mean that it won't work out. One of the men in our class is actually from the year above us, but he took a year off so that he could couples match with his partner.

On the other hand, if you match in a city (like NYC) where there are many many programs for your partner to choose from in the area, it might be okay to go ahead with your match and feel pretty certain that he will match with something near you.

Just some thoughts........Good luck! If you have any questions about the specifics of the couples match, feel free to ask. It can get a little confusing at times. 😉

 

[trkd]

Could you do a 1 year transitional (only apply for those in the upcoming match), and then apply to 2-4 EM programs the year your husband is applying for gen surg? It would limit your options to 2-4 programs, but you would be in the couples match.

I definitely thought about this option. The only thing is that I am not sure how this is possible when all the PGY2 spots in EM seem to fill each year. Unless I am not understanding the data correctly, that does not leave any room for people who are applying after their PGY1 year because the spots were matched the previous year. Anyone out there that can clarify this?

 

[trkd]

To add my two cents: I think that couples match can be very successful when done in the same year. Our graduating class has four couples who all received their first choices as a "couples match". I am one of those couples (EM/Peds). We were very successsful, and it can certainly work to your favor. It is obviously more difficult with a difficult specialty, but that doesn't mean that it won't work out. One of the men in our class is actually from the year above us, but he took a year off so that he could couples match with his partner.

On the other hand, if you match in a city (like NYC) where there are many many programs for your partner to choose from in the area, it might be okay to go ahead with your match and feel pretty certain that he will match with something near you.

Just some thoughts........Good luck! If you have any questions about the specifics of the couples match, feel free to ask. It can get a little confusing at times. 😉

Based on the numbers, couples match appears to be very successful. I don't know if these totally hold true when you account for the fact that we are in Australia but I suspect it won't be too huge of a problem. Going for a big city also doesn't sound like a bad idea because obviously I would love to get started. Doing research or something for a year would be 👎 . Or more correctly , but that is just a personal feeling.

Thanks everyone. Keep the thoughts coming in. I am still so confused as to what I should do. I wish my dad was the PD for an EM program and my mom a PD for the gen surg program at the same hospital... which overlooks the beach... and the hospital has a free frozen yogurt machine. I should stop now.

 

[SoCuteMD]

I definitely thought about this option. The only thing is that I am not sure how this is possible when all the PGY2 spots in EM seem to fill each year. Unless I am not understanding the data correctly, that does not leave any room for people who are applying after their PGY1 year because the spots were matched the previous year. Anyone out there that can clarify this?

Eeek - good point. Brain fart on my part.

Haha, that rhymes.

 

[daisyduke]

Both choices have their pros and cons.

You could wait one year, do something fun with it, or do research, or make some money then apply as a couple. While the couples match is successful for many, it can also be dissapointing. In my class there were 5 couples. 1 got their first choice, another got their 2nd, and the rest were left speechless on match day. Also, since you guys will be applying as IMG's, this puts you at a slight disadvantage in the match. Just check out the surgery forum to see how difficult things were this year. The DO's who frequent that board, while good applicants, came up empty handed on match day. Several great AMG surgery applicants went half way down their lists. Not saying that you can't match as an IMG, but doing the couples match as two IMGs into competitive fields such as GSurg and EM, I think you would be smart to have a back up plan (or apply to every program in the country).

Now with the scenario of you applying and matching and him applying in the same city the next year, this may be advantagous as you would get your foot in the door and start training. Then perhaps you can get to know some surgery faculty at your program and advertise your husband and plead your case. We also had this same situation in my class. A student was trying to match at the same institution as her fiance who is already in residency. Despite making this very clear to that institution, she got the shaft on match day and will be living several hours away from her husband. The match has NO gaurantees! Of course, your husband could only rank programs in your city and if he goes unmatched, grab a prelim spot in that same city, or sit out a year and do research in the same city.

Tough call! Good luck with your decision!

 

[madcadaver]

People don't seem to understand the couples match.

The couples match works neither "better" nor "worse" than the regular match. It is the same, except your rank list has pairs of programs. It would be stupid to speculate on the "effectiveness" of the couples match based on how a few couples at your school did last year.

If you are applying from an Australian med school, this will put you at a disadvantage relative to US grads with similar stats. You are also applying for fairly competetive specialties. Two scenarios:

1. If you apply and match this year, you restrict your husband to a very limited geographical area next year and risk him not matching or matching into a program he does not like.

2. If you wait and couples match you can both apply to multiple geographical areas and see what the best combinations of programs are. It will be time consuming and costly to apply and interview more widely but will give you additional flexibility.

 

[gutonc]

I would recommend going the big city route. A friend/classmate of mine is married to an MS2. He went for Gen Surg but only in major cities (NYC, Philly, Boston, Chicago and SF) where there are a large number of both Univ. and community programs. He ended up matching at TJU in Philly and his wife is already planning away rotations in Philly.

BE

 

[daisyduke]

People don't seem to understand the couples match.

The couples match works neither "better" nor "worse" than the regular match. It is the same, except your rank list has pairs of programs. It would be stupid to speculate on the "effectiveness" of the couples match based on how a few couples at your school did last year.

I do understand how the couples match works. I was just in it. As for being better or worse than the regular match, I could argue I would have matched higher on my list as a single applicant, however, I would not have matched at the same place as my S.O. In the end it is more important to be with the ones you love.

My point in my post was that in this couples' scenario, is it better for them to couples match into competitive specialties as IMGs or apply separate years and try to get the later applicant to match in the same city. Its a tough call.

 

[trkd]

I would recommend going the big city route. A friend/classmate of mine is married to an MS2. He went for Gen Surg but only in major cities (NYC, Philly, Boston, Chicago and SF) where there are a large number of both Univ. and community programs. He ended up matching at TJU in Philly and his wife is already planning away rotations in Philly.

BE

We have thought this option through. Just after match day for me, he would apply to do all electives at hospitals in and around my match. Surely this would pan out something you would think. I think of the worse case senario being that will live apart. I am mildly (very mildly) reassured that I would finish 2 years after he enters the match if I do a 1-3 program (during which time I would spend any electives or vacation by him). But I tell you, 2 years is still a very long time.

I wonder if a transfer would work if all went sour. But I guess the chances of an EM spot opening up are slim. Gen surg pretty similar.

By all these responses, at least I know that there wasn't some "right" way to do it that I was missing. Thanks everyone.

 

[lattimer13]

guy here at U of Arizona matched urology in cleveland...his wife was a year behind him and just this year matched EM in cleveland as well. it can be done. good luck either way.

 

[trkd]

guy here at U of Arizona matched urology in cleveland...his wife was a year behind him and just this year matched EM in cleveland as well. it can be done. good luck either way.

That is very encouranging. Thanks.

 

[LaCirujana]

One of our gen surg interns this year left his wife in med school (she did a ton of rotations here) and she subsequently matched in derm at our program. I know both our PD and chairman worked with the Derm dept. to make this happen. We had a similar situation in my class: my classmate and her boyfriend elected not to couples match and did NOT end up in the same place. A year later, a transfer was arranged by discussions between the departments (surgery and medicine). Her boyfriend (now husband) did not have to repeat a year, although that could have been an option. Additional complicating factor in that situation was that although he graduated from an american med school, he's not a US citizen, so there were some visa issues to deal with. Incidentally, we're not in a big city by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[lilycat]

People don't seem to understand the couples match.

The couples match works neither "better" nor "worse" than the regular match. It is the same, except your rank list has pairs of programs. It would be stupid to speculate on the "effectiveness" of the couples match based on how a few couples at your school did last year.

Acutally, the Dean of Students at my school told us that the couples' match generally works worse for those individuals trying to match. Studying years of match data from our school is what led to this opinion, not just a "few couples... last year." They said people, even very well-qualified, tend to go down further on their list than they would have using an individual-only match list -- again they came to this statement by comparing outcomes for applicants in those fields. Its definitely not a scientific study, but they have enough info. to believe there is an actual trend there.

I would try to match and then hope that your husband can match in your same location the next year. Also, as an IMG I believe your husband may have the option of signing "outside" the match if an offer is made to him -- I'm not sure if that happens in a specialty as competitive as G. surg, but just a thought...

 

[trkd]

Acutally, the Dean of Students at my school told us that the couples' match generally works worse for those individuals trying to match. Studying years of match data from our school is what led to this opinion, not just a "few couples... last year." They said people, even very well-qualified, tend to go down further on their list than they would have using an individual-only match list -- again they came to this statement by comparing outcomes for applicants in those fields. Its definitely not a scientific study, but they have enough info. to believe there is an actual trend there.

It would make sense to me that you would have to go further down your list. Both individuals would have to match at a hospital that ranked them to match simultaneously. Even if my #1 ranked me to match, it makes no difference if my husband wasn't. We would still end up further down the list as opposed to me matching at my #1. That said, I want to do EM. He wants to do gen surg. Period. Doesn't matter were we are. Pickers can't be choosers. But we'll try our best to choose if we can. 😀

I would try to match and then hope that your husband can match in your same location the next year. Also, as an IMG I believe your husband may have the option of signing "outside" the match if an offer is made to him -- I'm not sure if that happens in a specialty as competitive as G. surg, but just a thought...

I hear this also. I don't think EM or gen surg signs outside of the match. Maybe if you had 280 on both step 1 and 2 and slept with the PD. That's a bit over the top but you get the point. I would love to hear otherwise but I just don't think it happens.

I am leaning towards matching and pulling him in. Not definite but leaning. If I did, not sure if I would go for big city with lots of programs or smaller place that is easier to get into. The smaller place might just be too risky but as someone posted, I guess it could work. All for the better, I like smaller places.

 

[madcadaver]

They said people, even very well-qualified, tend to go down further on their list than they would have using an individual-only match list
...

This has nothing to do with the couples match algorithm. It is inherent in trying to match with a partner. If my top three choices are in SF and yours are in NY, one or more of us is not going to get one of our top three if we apply as a couple.

Both individuals would have to match at a hospital that ranked them to match simultaneously. Even if my #1 ranked me to match, it makes no difference if my husband wasn't. We would still end up further down the list as opposed to me matching at my #1.

You know you do not have to match at the same hospital to couples match, right? You can make whatever pairs of programs you like. Thus, if you are "ranked to match" at your #1, you are cool as long as your husband can match at an institution in the same area.

 

[trkd]

You know you do not have to match at the same hospital to couples match, right? You can make whatever pairs of programs you like. Thus, if you are "ranked to match" at your #1, you are cool as long as your husband can match at an institution in the same area.

Oh, I didn't know that you could match at separate hospitals in the same area in the couples match. Pretty cool.

 

[lilycat]

This has nothing to do with the couples match algorithm. It is inherent in trying to match with a partner. If my top three choices are in SF and yours are in NY, one or more of us is not going to get one of our top three if we apply as a couple.

Um, the second quote you attributed to me was NOT mine, but belonged to the original poster.

Secondly, your first statement in the quote above contradicts your initial post in the thread, or else we (including daisyduke) are saying the same thing, but in different ways. In one post you say:

The couples match works neither "better" nor "worse" than the regular match. It is the same, except your rank list has pairs of programs.

But then, as quoted above, you state that the difficulty in the couples match is "inherent in matching with a partner." Then the example you use of each member of the couple having top 3 choices in different cities isn't accurate or pertinent, because a couple wouldn't go through the couples' match and do that -- the point of the couples' match is to match in the same city or region. If you were purposely going to rank programs in completely different regions (and I know couples that did this also), then you would rank as individuals.

Even when couples are on the same page in terms of willingness to rank programs in the same region, there are still cases every year where one member of the couple doesn't match. My Dean's point in stating that the couples' match was "more difficult" was that the couples tend to match lower on their lists (not always, but again, there seems to be a trend) and by going further down on the list, there is an increased chance that one member may match and the other won't -- whereas using comparisons from the class, that unmatched person would have likely matched in the "regular match."

To the OP, since you will be ready to try and match this coming year, and you and your SO have the added difficulty of being IMGs, I would go ahead and apply for yourself, and hope that your presence in a particular area will be helpful to your SO. I think it will almost certainly be helpful in getting interviews (based on personal experience). In terms of influencing rank list, you can only cross your fingers. Also, if he is still a student when he applies the following year, perhaps he can do an away rotation at your institution -- that would likely help the chances more than anything else. I've seen friends do things both ways, and I think performing well on an away-rotation is a factor that can really help your boyfriend's chances in this case -- the program will be more likely to be responsive to your entreaties if they've had a positive work experience with him and they feel comfortable having him as part of the team. Of course that can work against you if he doesn't perform well on the elective...

 

[luckystar]

Do the programs know if you're doing the couples match when you first apply? Will they offer interviews to both students in their respective specialties, or are interviews offered individually?

 

[daisyduke]

Do the programs know if you're doing the couples match when you first apply? Will they offer interviews to both students in their respective specialties, or are interviews offered individually?

There is a box you check on ERAS that says something like "notify programs of couples status". You can go through the couples match without ever telling the programs you are doing so, or you can have it printed on your application. It is your choice.

As for interview offers, departments screen their applications independantly of each other. As a couples match vet, I received interviews that my partner did not receive and vice versa. In a few cases I called the dept that had invited me and pleaded my case for them to call his dept and encourage them to invite him as well. This worked sometimes, other times it did not. Also, because you can choose to match at different hospitals in the same city (sometimes necessary if a hospital doesn't have residency programs in both of your specialties) there will probably not be any collaboration between the two institutions in that scenario.

I agree with Lilycat... it is harder to match at your #1 as a couple than as a single applicant simply because of the probability of both people making a match at that institution. Even if both people are competitive and would be offered a spot at 50% of their top 6 choices, if they don't match at the same choice in the top 6, they move down their list quickly.

In the couples match, you decide that being together is the top priority, and the institution where you match comes second.

 

[Osteotome]

I matched this year into ortho and was trying to land a spot at the same place as my finacee who is in an internal med residency about 4 hrs away (we have been doing a long distance thing for 2 years). I rotated and worked my ass off at her institution, got great letters from their own department and had a pretty damn good application. We had the coordinators of boh departments talking and still the process didn't work for us. But just remember that there are worse things. People leave their families to go to war and never come back, people from othe countries come to the US and work for years before they send for their family. Training sucks in this field but if you want it to work I'm sure it will no matter what, just keep trucking along.
Also, remember there are no nice people in medicine. The field is competitive across the board and nobody really gives a damn about you, so never take someone on their word!

 

[luckystar]

There is a box you check on ERAS that says something like "notify programs of couples status". You can go through the couples match without ever telling the programs you are doing so, or you can have it printed on your application. It is your choice.

As for interview offers, departments screen their applications independantly of each other. As a couples match vet, I received interviews that my partner did not receive and vice versa. In a few cases I called the dept that had invited me and pleaded my case for them to call his dept and encourage them to invite him as well. This worked sometimes, other times it did not. Also, because you can choose to match at different hospitals in the same city (sometimes necessary if a hospital doesn't have residency programs in both of your specialties) there will probably not be any collaboration between the two institutions in that scenario.

Good to know! Thanks, daisyduke.

 

[trkd]

Also, if he is still a student when he applies the following year, perhaps he can do an away rotation at your institution -- that would likely help the chances more than anything else. I've seen friends do things both ways, and I think performing well on an away-rotation is a factor that can really help your boyfriend's chances in this case -- the program will be more likely to be responsive to your entreaties if they've had a positive work experience with him and they feel comfortable having him as part of the team. Of course that can work against you if he doesn't perform well on the elective...

He will have 4 rotations available from Aug-early Dec. I figure rotations at 4 programs close by should get at least 4 interviews close by. Hopefully this would pan out in a match. I guess this may not work so well for gen surg in somewhere like LA/So.Cali (unfortunately) or Boston, but hopefully most other places around the country.

Osteotome-sorry to hear how it worked out for you. Hopefully your SO can join you soon after her IM training is done.

Any thoughts out there on whether I should try the big cities with tons of programs OR smaller places with less (maybe even one) programs but also less competitive. The latter is more risky but they may be more helpful/sympathetic.

 

[madcadaver]

...couples tend to match lower on their lists (not always, but again, there seems to be a trend) and by going further down on the list, there is an increased chance that one member may match and the other won't -- whereas using comparisons from the class, that unmatched person would have likely matched in the "regular match."

This is just not true. Look at the way the algorithm works and you can see there is no disadvantage in comparison to the singles match. If you can give me any example, in the context of this algorithm, how a couple would be more likely to match at their top choice in the singles match instead of the couples match, I will tip my hat to you.

The same goes for being unmatched. You will still rank the same programs in the couples match, so how could you possibly be less likely to match?

 

[madcadaver]

Any thoughts out there on whether I should try the big cities with tons of programs OR smaller places with less (maybe even one) programs but also less competitive. The latter is more risky but they may be more helpful/sympathetic.

I would try to cover both; one or two major metro areas and some smaller isolated programs. Your idea that smaller place may be more sympathetic is right on. If one of you is a top choice for a program, many PDs will make calls to the partner's PD to make things happen.

 

[lilycat]

This is just not true. Look at the way the algorithm works and you can see there is no disadvantage in comparison to the singles match. If you can give me any example, in the context of this algorithm, how a couple would be more likely to match at their top choice in the singles match instead of the couples match, I will tip my hat to you.

The same goes for being unmatched. You will still rank the same programs in the couples match, so how could you possibly be less likely to match?

To quote the NRMP site:
"The couple will match to the most preferred pair on their list where each partner has been offered a position. [Note: choices 11 through 20 indicate that one partner is willing to go unmatched if the other is matched to a position.]

If Partner I has offer from Chicago-A, New York City-A, and New York City-B, and Partner II has offers from Chicago-Y and New York City-X, then this couple will match to the pair of programs that were ranked second. If the Chicago programs had not accepted both partners, their match would have been their seventh pair in New York City."

The couple is going to match where they both have offers. It is entirely conceivable that one member of the pair will get offers at half the programs and that the other member will get offers at the remaining half of programs, with no overlap. If one member of the couple has an "offer" at one of their top 5 choices, but the other member of the couple doesn't have an offer, than they will continue to move down their rank list. The disadvantage is that regardless of You ranking a program to match, and that program ranking you to match, if your sig. other was not ranked to match at the program for that corresponding rank choice, then you will not match at that program. And then for the next-ranked program, the same situation might be happening in reverse SO ranked to match and SO Ranks program to match, but you are not ranked to match for the corresponding program in that rank position. Again, a match does not happen, and so on...

 

[lilycat]

Any thoughts out there on whether I should try the big cities with tons of programs OR smaller places with less (maybe even one) programs but also less competitive. The latter is more risky but they may be more helpful/sympathetic.

Worry about your match first and try not to game-play/strategize it with regard to where you think it is likely that your sig. other will match. There are no guarantees in the match, and it may end up being just as likely that he could end up somewhere in Boston near you vs. a less competitive program in West Virginia. Try to go to the program that you like best, and that your SO thinks would be an acceptable place to try to get into the g. surg program. I wouldn't try to base it on stratifications of "competitiveness" -- that just seems like disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Mista Suprane]

the disadvantage you have to couple's matching is that if your #1 choice likes you, but no programs in the same geographic area as your #1 choice like your partner, you will not match at your #1 choice.

which would push you down your rank list.

whereas, if you were just matching by yourself, you would be at your #1 choice.

therefore, inherently, you will sacrifice a little on your rank list. but you will get to be with your partner. that's the whole point, right? 😉

 

[madcadaver]

The couple is going to match where they both have offers. It is entirely conceivable that one member of the pair will get offers at half the programs and that the other member will get offers at the remaining half of programs, with no overlap.

And how would this couple be better off matching as singles instead of the couples match?

 

[la gringa]

the wait a year thing sometimes doesn't pan out... one girl from my school stayed "home" and her bf the next year did NOT... at the home institution.

OTOH, sometimes if the first "arrival" is really good and the SO can make inroads at the institution it can work out - that's done in the department i'm doing my prelim year in, but 90+% of the residents in the dept are FMG's and it's not a competitive specialty.

 

[lilycat]

And how would this couple be better off matching as singles instead of the couples match?

Because the couples' match causes a member of the couple to lose a tentative match if the other member of the couple does not have an "offer" at the corresponding program for that rank. As a single, the match would take place.

 

[madcadaver]

Because the couples' match causes a member of the couple to lose a tentative match if the other member of the couple does not have an "offer" at the corresponding program for that rank. As a single, the match would take place.

And matching as singles, they would still not match in the same location. So how is that better?

 

[lilycat]

And matching as singles, they would still not match in the same location. So how is that better?

I think we're discussing two different questions: 1) Does an individual fare the same (in terms of where on the rank list he/she matches) using the individual or the couples' match, and 2) Can a couple match just as well utilizing the single's match as they would utilizing the couples' match. Your original post on this thread implied to me that we were debating the first question, but your last post implies that we are debating the second question. To answer your last question, there is a better chance that a couple will match in the same location/region utilizing the couples' match than the single match, because their ranks are yoked together. To answer the first question, there is the possiblity of a trend that an individual will go lower on his/her match list in the couples' match vs. if they had tried to match in the regular match -- I know the match data from my school over many years supports this trend.

 

[madcadaver]

It would be pointless to argue that singles fare "better" than couples because the goal is to match a pair of people and not just one. My contention is that the couples match is the most effective way to do this.

Maybe you can explain the "data" from your dean's office to us in more detail. I would not want people to be scared away from participating in the couples match based on a statement like

"there is the possiblity of a trend that an individual will go lower on his/her match list in the couples' match vs. if they had tried to match in the regular match -- I know the match data from my school over many years supports this trend."

without some sort of explanation about how this data was compiled and the specific results.

 

[kas23]

Oh, I didn't know that you could match at separate hospitals in the same area in the couples match. Pretty cool.

Couple matching one year apart is very hard but definitely doable. My fiance matched one year ahead of me. He ranked big cities where there are many programs available for me. It worked out for both of us. Now, one year and 15 interviews later, I matched to the same area as him but not the same hospital. It worked out very well for us. Someone has to make a sacrifice. There are many programs in other cities that I really really like, but I also want to stay in the same area as my fiance more. It will all work out for you. Good luck.

 

[lilycat]

It would be pointless to argue that singles fare "better" than couples because the goal is to match a pair of people and not just one. My contention is that the couples match is the most effective way to do this.

Maybe you can explain the "data" from your dean's office to us in more detail. I would not want people to be scared away from participating in the couples match based on a statement like without some sort of explanation about how this data was compiled and the specific results.

I think I explained it in my post on the first page. My school keeps track of match data going back over 10 years, including stats like class rank and board scores and rank position on match list where a match took place. They use this to assess all sorts of trends with regard to the match, and to better advise their students during the application process. Among areas that they have looked at include position on rank list at which a match occurs for both regular match participants and couples' match participants, regional competitiveness for all specialties, and specific specialties, effects of out-of-state residency, etc. By looking at these data points for over 10 years, the office feels comfortable stating that certain trends exist in order to help their students make the best possible decisions during the match process. The choice to take this information or disregard it is entirely the students. I can't give you specific results because I'm not in the Dean's office -- just a graduating MS4 who benefited from some of this counseling. I never stated that I had specific statistics regarding any of this, only that per my school, a trend exists with respect to the couples' match. Like any piece of "information" on an internet messageboard, I assume that people can use this as they see fit, or not at all.

I have no problem with your "contention" that the couples match is the most effective way to try and match as a couple -- I agree with you, and I think people who went through the couples match, even if they got their last choice, agree with you. If your first goal in the match is to be with your sig. other, the couples' match is your best bet. If this was the point you were arguing all along, it was unclear to me, and to a few other people on this thread judging from their posts, based on your initial post on this thread.

 

[trkd]

Couple matching one year apart is very hard but definitely doable. My fiance matched one year ahead of me. He ranked big cities where there are many programs available for me. It worked out for both of us. Now, one year and 15 interviews later, I matched to the same area as him but not the same hospital. It worked out very well for us. Someone has to make a sacrifice. There are many programs in other cities that I really really like, but I also want to stay in the same area as my fiance more. It will all work out for you. Good luck.

Thanks, that is very encouraging. I agree that there is definitely a sacrifice to be made here and I am certainly feeling it. There will be some big cities that I am going to apply to, and probably rank at the top of my list, though they certainly are not my first choice. Furthermore, a few hospitals in places like LA, which I am very interested in, will probably not be highest on my list where I want them to be because California gen surg might be out of reach for him as an aussie grad. Not ideal but life is not always ideal. I'll take my husband over the ideal city, program, etc.

Thanks.

 

[madcadaver]

Among areas that they have looked at include position on rank list at which a match occurs for both regular match participants and couples' match participants

When I went through the couples match a couple years ago, my couples match rank list was about 70 spots long. Does it make sense to compare how far down I went on this this to a single rank list that is 6 or 10 spots long? Without any further explanation your dean's data still doesn't seem to address any particular useful point.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but I have seen for a couple years on this board people saying "Oh, I heard that people get screwed in the couples match" and other vague statements that scare away poor young underclassmen who don't really know how it works (For example, the OP who did not even know that you could match at different institutions in the same geographical area).

All I ask is that people look at the NRMP site and understand the process. I will leave the vague data to others.

 

[lilycat]

When I went through the couples match a couple years ago, my couples match rank list was about 70 spots long. Does it make sense to compare how far down I went on this this to a single rank list that is 6 or 10 spots long? Without any further explanation your dean's data still doesn't seem to address any particular useful point.

Depends on the rank list. There are people out there in the regular match with rank lists 60 spots long (depending on the specialty). Additionally the fact that you thought you needed 70 ranks to achieve a match in the couples' match vs. the average of 10-15 ranks in the regular match to achive a match is telling in and of itself.

...but I have seen for a couple years on this board people saying "Oh, I heard that people get screwed in the couples match" and other vague statements that scare away poor young underclassmen who don't really know how it works...

Is this really any different than the regular match? Or the SF Match? Or the Urology Match? Every year, on every residency board, isn't there someone who is posting about "getting screwed in the match"? And yet, that doesn't seem to scare anyone away from entering SF Match, urology match, regular match, or couples match... strange.

I don't mean to be argumentative...All I ask is that people look at the NRMP site and understand the process. I will leave the vague data to others.

If you don't "mean to be argumentative" then why are you arguing? If you truly don't "mean to be argumentative" then by your own free will, you could stop arguing. You're either arguing or you aren't -- why try to couch it in "vague" language that obscures your true meaning, as well as directly contradicts your actions and language as shown in the previous 2 pages of posts? You can be argumentative all you want, but if you do argue it would be more helpful if you would at least argue in good faith, by maintaining a clear line of thought, as well as not incorrectly misquoting people. In your initial post on this thread, you implied that other posters did not understand the couples' match algorithm, and then stated that there was absolutely no disadvantage to it compared to the regular match. These posters who you judged were not all "poor young underclassmen" but included some people who just went through the couples match themselves -- I think they have a pretty good idea of how it works at this point in time, especially since they've just had their fate determined by said algorithm. Second, your claim that there is no disadvantage to the couples' match as compared to the regular match is just not true, depending on the outcome that you are looking to assess. This can be assessed by the NRMP site, not just by "vague" data. 😉 As I've said many times already, perhaps this was not the original point you were trying to assert (it seems like your argument had shifted at some point during this thread), but that is how it originally came across. I hope this helps.

 

[madcadaver]

Additionally the fact that you thought you needed 70 ranks to achieve a match in the couples' match vs. the average of 10-15 ranks in the regular match to achive a match is telling in and of itself.

This statement reflects poor understanding of the couples match. You would be surprised how many desirable combinations of programs two people can come up with when they are restricted to two large metropolitain areas.

I'm interested in your dean's data, since you brought it up and have based many posts on it... let me know when you can enlighten us with the details.

 

[lilycat]

This statement reflects poor understanding of the couples match. You would be surprised how many desirable combinations of programs two people can come up with when they are restricted to two large metropolitain areas.

You're missing the point, but that's par for the course. And I'm not surprised in the least that you and your SO came up with that many combinations -- if anything, I applaud your for ranking that many because I honestly don't know any other couple that took the trouble to rank up to 70 ranks. The fact that for a couple's match be successful requires the yoking of two mutual preferences is at the heart of what generates the different # of combinations, and also what can generate the disappointment in the match for people for whom it doesn't work.

I'm interested in your dean's data, since you brought it up and have based many posts on it... let me know when you can enlighten us with the details.

Alas poor madcadaver, once again, I'm sorry to retread my previous statements -- you're free to reread them if you want, especially prior to posting. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the data of my dean's office, since I don't work in the office of student affairs -- they don't release the hard data to students. What I've mentioned on this thread has been their opinion of a trend based on the performance of our school's performance -- I've been very honest and specific about that -- there were never hard numbers that I've reported or that it was based on information outside of our school. I trust people can make of that what they want - use, discard, etc. As for the "basis" of many posts, I have discussed the apparent disadvantage of couples' match vs. single match with you using the NRMP algorithm alone -- that has also been the "basis" for my posts as well. I hope this has been enlightening. 🙂