CV/resumé inquiry for 2012 Matchers (matchees?)

[RadOnc37]

Have my eye on some particularly competitive radonc programs but am genuinely uncertain of my chances. Wondering...

What kind of CV is needed to match into a "top 10" (as vague as our made-up rankings may be) program? If you were lucky enough to match into a top program, what was your CV like? In your opinion, at what lower end do board scores become limiting for the top programs? Thanks for the info and CONGRATS ON MATCHING

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gfunk6]

Here are the magic ingredients for matching into a "top" program (in order of importance):

1. Connections
2. Connections
3. Connections
4. Pedigree of medical school
5. Connections
6. Strong publication record
7. Clinical Grades/Step I score
8. Connections
9. Connections
10. Pre-clinical grades/AOA

Given the importance of "connections" perhaps I should elaborate further. The best "connection" is if you happen to go to a medical school with a "top" program. This allows you to meet multiple people early in your education, work with them on research projects and clinically rotate in the department. The second best "connections" are doing an away rotation at a "top" program. The problem is that a lot of people do this so you have to be really good or really lucky (or both) to get noticed. Third best is if you have a pre-existing "connection" with a mentor or PI who happens to be a big-wig in the field. A sincere, hearfelt letter of recommendation or phone call from that person can/will carry a lot of weight.

 

[FSU2013]

Here are the magic ingredients for matching into a "top" program (in order of importance):

1. Connections
2. Connections
3. Connections
4. Pedigree of medical school
5. Connections
6. Strong publication record
7. Clinical Grades/Step I score
8. Connections
9. Connections
10. Pre-clinical grades/AOA

Given the importance of "connections" perhaps I should elaborate further. The best "connection" is if you happen to go to a medical school with a "top" program. This allows you to meet multiple people early in your education, work with them on research projects and clinically rotate in the department. The second best "connections" are doing an away rotation at a "top" program. The problem is that a lot of people do this so you have to be really good or really lucky (or both) to get noticed. Third best is if you have a pre-existing "connection" with a mentor or PI who happens to be a big-wig in the field. A sincere, hearfelt letter of recommendation or phone call from that person can/will carry a lot of weight.

Well, here's to hoping I can make it happen next year without connections, a prestigious medical school and a strong publication record.....hahaha........ (uncomfortable laugh....).....this could be a long year.

 

[Neuronix]

My opinion...

1. Clinical Grades/Step I score
2. Connections
3. Strong publication record
4. Pedigree of medical school

But what do I know... Even if you have an amazing publication record with a step 1 score of 210 I wonder if you'd match anywhere.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

My opinion...

1. Clinical Grades/Step I score
2. Connections
3. Strong publication record
4. Pedigree of medical school

But what do I know... Even if you have an amazing publication record with a step 1 score of 210 I wonder if you'd match anywhere.

It's possible, just got a long uphill battle in front of you.

-R

 

[johnthomas75]

I'm not sure connections has a direct relationship to institution or departmental excellence.

Sometimes the ability to get connections really just depends on the ability to facilitate that first point of commonality, which is usually more contingent upon personality/likability than it is on how "Ivy-league" your background is.
Having the stamp of approval from an ivy league institution or a big name in a field is like buying a particular brand, the impression of the product is significantly colored by the brand's reputation and not necessarily the product. There are plenty of examples of how otherwise excellent "brands"/companies have generated bad products and vice versa.

After this last match, its interesting to note that some of the people form the best schools were just bad products regardless of their packaging. Many of the people that you would think would not only match but match well (top tier) because they come from a big name institution, dont even match at all.

A good product/person is still essential for a good match regardless of the connections and branding.

johnthomas75
http://the-d-o-c-t-o-r.blogspot.com/

 

[Gfunk6]

I'd like to clarify that the OP is asking only about "top" programs. If you are just talking about getting into any program in general, I think connections are not quite as important.

 

[onb2014]

I'd like to clarify that the OP is asking only about "top" programs. If you are just talking about getting into any program in general, I think connections are not quite as important.

What would you think are the magic ingredients in order of importance to getting into any radonc program?

 

[Gfunk6]

What would you think are the magic ingredients in order of importance to getting into any radonc program?

It would be more along the lines of what Neuronix posted above.

 

[RadOnc37]

Thanks everyone. I will certainly be applying to 40+ programs (in the end, I'll be happy by simply matching), but I was curious about your thoughts of how to handle my next year as I pursue one particular top program. Will make sure to take full advantage of the connections available

 

[Lamount]

I am an MSIII who is interested in rad onc.I have been a little disheartened reading the forums and was hoping for some advice.

I got 260+ on step I, will prob be AOA. I have a background/research in applicable basic science. And some non rad onc research during medical school. my institution doesn't have a rad onc residency and there isn't any research in rad onc here. I have applied to two away electives for next year (both top tier). I am going to attempt to do some rad onc research at my away electives, but i certainly can't depend on that happening. I am in a geographic region with many rad onc residency programs. It would be difficult for me to take a year off to do research because of family obligations. Is it likely I can match with these stats?

 

[ramsesthenice]

I am an MSIII who is interested in rad onc.I have been a little disheartened reading the forums and was hoping for some advice.

I got 260+ on step I, will prob be AOA. I have a background/research in applicable basic science. And some non rad onc research during medical school. my institution doesn't have a rad onc residency and there isn't any research in rad onc here. I have applied to two away electives for next year (both top tier). I am going to attempt to do some rad onc research at my away electives, but i certainly can't depend on that happening. I am in a geographic region with many rad onc residency programs. It would be difficult for me to take a year off to do research because of family obligations. Is it likely I can match with these stats?

Man you should be more than fine. Those stats are great, congratulations. Are you planning on doing basic science research in your career? If so and you have done good work I would say based on my experience (slightly inferior test scores and lots of basic science with no direc onc research) you can do pretty well for yourself. Everything is institution specific and some people will ademately disagree for good reason. End of the day, I got interviews at half the places I applied including 4/7 of thre top ten. No suprise, I did better at traditional basic science programs and not as well at more clinical programs. We are not the rule but we are not the exception either. You seem to have done real well for yourself. Enjoy interviews and 4th year. Its a good time

 

[ramsesthenice]

Ok, to be fair, I say my two cents and then something like post #45 comes up on the match stats forum. Good people do go unmatched. That is an important thing to keep in mind. But for you lamount it sounds like they were a bit lighter on research than you are. Id still put big money on you matching if I had too. Keep a healthy respect for the competativeness of the match, but try not to live in fear. To quote tony horton, "do your best and forget the rest."

 

[Lamount]

Thank you everyone for replying...

 

[Carotenoid]

Here are the magic ingredients for matching into a "top" program (in order of importance):

1. Connections
2. Connections
3. Connections
4. Pedigree of medical school
5. Connections
6. Strong publication record
7. Clinical Grades/Step I score
8. Connections
9. Connections
10. Pre-clinical grades/AOA

Given the importance of "connections" perhaps I should elaborate further. The best "connection" is if you happen to go to a medical school with a "top" program. This allows you to meet multiple people early in your education, work with them on research projects and clinically rotate in the department. The second best "connections" are doing an away rotation at a "top" program. The problem is that a lot of people do this so you have to be really good or really lucky (or both) to get noticed. Third best is if you have a pre-existing "connection" with a mentor or PI who happens to be a big-wig in the field. A sincere, hearfelt letter of recommendation or phone call from that person can/will carry a lot of weight.

you know, I just matched - and I didn't do as well as I had thought I could've (given my research+clinical track+USMLE scores...) - and I have to say that the "connections" part is the weakest part of my "package" - yes, I did aways and had LORs from impressive people in the field, but none of them were mentors in a true sense of the word (which is probably my fault, as I just got the work done but didn't put any effort in actually fostering relationships!)
So if I had to do it all over again, I'd listen to Gfunk and get those darn connections. Whether you are doing an elective at your home prog, or an away, don't just sit there through the night crunching data. Talk to people. Some attendings (the aforementioned bigwigs) can be very busy - and I was afraid to annoy them, so I did a lot of emailing to be "efficient" - but in retrospect, it was only efficient in getting the publication or a poster out. I should have spent more time in their offices face-to-face.

 

[RadOnc37]

you know, I just matched - and I didn't do as well as I had thought I could've (given my research+clinical track+USMLE scores...) - and I have to say that the "connections" part is the weakest part of my "package" - yes, I did aways and had LORs from impressive people in the field, but none of them were mentors in a true sense of the word (which is probably my fault, as I just got the work done but didn't put any effort in actually fostering relationships!)
So if I had to do it all over again, I'd listen to Gfunk and get those darn connections. Whether you are doing an elective at your home prog, or an away, don't just sit there through the night crunching data. Talk to people. Some attendings (the aforementioned bigwigs) can be very busy - and I was afraid to annoy them, so I did a lot of emailing to be "efficient" - but in retrospect, it was only efficient in getting the publication or a poster out. I should have spent more time in their offices face-to-face.

That advice is helpful. Thanks.