ENT chances? (M3)

[MickyMyki]

M3 considering ENT. I am fairly confident I could pull a case report if I choose. 255+ step. Average clinical grades (either d/t missing the shelf cut off by a couple pts or getting average evals...no red flags in the comments, however).

Do I have a chance at ENT or should I scrap it? I was looking at the charting outcomes and noticed that only 1 person didn't match with my step 1 score bracket. And the step 1 vs. prob of matching curve seemed very favorable (indicating a 95% chance of matching for my step score). Is the importance of clinical grades overstated? Assuming I do well on the subi and get letters there, I am wondering if this could be a feasible route. 1) Thoughts? 2) If I don't have a geographic preference, can I forgo doing aways?

Also, is ENT really as competitive as everyone thinks? See this: Is There a Crisis in the Otolaryngology Match? - ENTtoday

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[libertyyne]

Do you have any research

 

[Dwan]

M3 considering ENT. I am fairly confident I could pull a case report if I choose. 255+ step. Average clinical grades (either d/t missing the shelf cut off by a couple pts or getting average evals...no red flags in the comments, however).

Do I have a chance at ENT or should I scrap it? I was looking at the charting outcomes and noticed that only 1 person didn't match with my step 1 score bracket. And the step 1 vs. prob of matching curve seemed very favorable (indicating a 95% chance of matching for my step score). Is the importance of clinical grades overstated? Assuming I do well on the subi and get letters there, I am wondering if this could be a feasible route. 1) Thoughts? 2) If I don't have a geographic preference, can I forgo doing aways?

Also, is ENT really as competitive as everyone thinks? See this: Is There a Crisis in the Otolaryngology Match? - ENTtoday

I think you'll do well as long as you check the boxes. ENT isn't quite as competitive anymore - I know people who scrambled into it from other fields.

 

[operaman]

Been a lot of fluctuations in number of applicants. There will be over 100 unmatched applicants this year. There were 2 down years that prompted all the hand wringing and last year was the only one where there were more spots than applicants but that has completely reversed this year.

You’ve got a shot. Your step 1 is average for us but that’s ok; nobody matches a competitive field off a step score because all the other applicants have scores just as high or higher than you and after a point nobody cares anymore. I was amazed at the number of people scoring into the 270s this year and even some scoring numbers that I didn’t even know scores went to. Test prep materials are really allowing top students to decimate these exams.

Your clinical grades hurt you. Your lack of research hurts you. You are a little behind the 8ball if you’re just starting now but it’s doable. Most of the applicants we interviewed had nearly flawless to flawless grades and that remains one of the strongest anecdotal predictors of who succeeds as a resident for us. Most applicants we interviewed had at least 5 publications in addition to multiple posters and presentations; some MD-only applicants had >30 publications. It’s nuts. Cranking out a single case report is not going to be enough to check that box.

You need to start cranking out pubs and you need to figure out why your evals are so-so. You may be someone who benefits from a research year, or maybe you can be one of those who cranks out 5+ pubs between now and September. A so-so performance on your sub-I would probably put you at high risk of not matching so figure out what’s going on there.

Your job this week is to meet with some faculty in your ent department and start strategizing. Talk to 4th years who are applying to find out which faculty are the best mentors and good with students. Find out how tough this cycle has been. Get multiple opinions and then make a decision. The truth is there is no way anyone can properly advise you over a forum. We can give some context but you really need people who know you to help you navigate the process.

 

[SandP]

Been a lot of fluctuations in number of applicants. There will be over 100 unmatched applicants this year. There were 2 down years that prompted all the hand wringing and last year was the only one where there were more spots than applicants but that has completely reversed this year.

You’ve got a shot. Your step 1 is average for us but that’s ok; nobody matches a competitive field off a step score because all the other applicants have scores just as high or higher than you and after a point nobody cares anymore. I was amazed at the number of people scoring into the 270s this year and even some scoring numbers that I didn’t even know scores went to. Test prep materials are really allowing top students to decimate these exams.

Your clinical grades hurt you. Your lack of research hurts you. You are a little behind the 8ball if you’re just starting now but it’s doable. Most of the applicants we interviewed had nearly flawless to flawless grades and that remains one of the strongest anecdotal predictors of who succeeds as a resident for us. Most applicants we interviewed had at least 5 publications in addition to multiple posters and presentations; some MD-only applicants had >30 publications. It’s nuts. Cranking out a single case report is not going to be enough to check that box.

You need to start cranking out pubs and you need to figure out why your evals are so-so. You may be someone who benefits from a research year, or maybe you can be one of those who cranks out 5+ pubs between now and September. A so-so performance on your sub-I would probably put you at high risk of not matching so figure out what’s going on there.

Your job this week is to meet with some faculty in your ent department and start strategizing. Talk to 4th years who are applying to find out which faculty are the best mentors and good with students. Find out how tough this cycle has been. Get multiple opinions and then make a decision. The truth is there is no way anyone can properly advise you over a forum. We can give some context but you really need people who know you to help you navigate the process.

thanks, this was helpful. curious--do you go to a top institution in ENT?

 

[operaman]

thanks, this was helpful. curious--do you go to a top institution in ENT?

Yes. But there is not a wide range of stats between programs. Just take a look at past years matched and unmatched numbers and you’ll see they aren’t terribly different. I know the subtext of your question implies that my experience might be skewed and that OP would be just fine at less competitive programs, but I think that’s a dangerous notion. Just ask the 100+ people with absolutely stellar applications who aren’t going to match into any program this year.

Some programs are definitely less competitive than others but it’s not like other fields where a baller step 1 score will impress a less competitive program. If you google current residents at lesser known programs you’ll still find mostly AOA, multiple pubs, etc.

It’s definitely not an impossible match by any stretch but it does require some planning and work in crafting a competitive application. The idea is not to discourage prospective applicants, but to properly warn them so they can take the necessary steps to have a good chance of matching.

 

[afib123]

Been a lot of fluctuations in number of applicants. There will be over 100 unmatched applicants this year. There were 2 down years that prompted all the hand wringing and last year was the only one where there were more spots than applicants but that has completely reversed this year.

You’ve got a shot. Your step 1 is average for us but that’s ok; nobody matches a competitive field off a step score because all the other applicants have scores just as high or higher than you and after a point nobody cares anymore. I was amazed at the number of people scoring into the 270s this year and even some scoring numbers that I didn’t even know scores went to. Test prep materials are really allowing top students to decimate these exams.

Your clinical grades hurt you. Your lack of research hurts you. You are a little behind the 8ball if you’re just starting now but it’s doable. Most of the applicants we interviewed had nearly flawless to flawless grades and that remains one of the strongest anecdotal predictors of who succeeds as a resident for us. Most applicants we interviewed had at least 5 publications in addition to multiple posters and presentations; some MD-only applicants had >30 publications. It’s nuts. Cranking out a single case report is not going to be enough to check that box.

You need to start cranking out pubs and you need to figure out why your evals are so-so. You may be someone who benefits from a research year, or maybe you can be one of those who cranks out 5+ pubs between now and September. A so-so performance on your sub-I would probably put you at high risk of not matching so figure out what’s going on there.

Your job this week is to meet with some faculty in your ent department and start strategizing. Talk to 4th years who are applying to find out which faculty are the best mentors and good with students. Find out how tough this cycle has been. Get multiple opinions and then make a decision. The truth is there is no way anyone can properly advise you over a forum. We can give some context but you really need people who know you to help you navigate the process.

Not to hijack this thread, but how much is research valued in an applicant? I feel the point of going to medical school is to do well on board exams and clinical rotations and research is just something to show interest and commitment to the field. But after 1-2 publications which shows that you know how to do research, rest comes to down whether the applicant did research prior to coming to med school or decided very early on during med school.
Is deciding in 3rd year pretty much a gone thing now for competitive applications with 250+ scores, top 25 percent of the class but don't have the time to do lot of research? It is not that they can't, pretty easy to if they take a gap year but what's the point of it?

Getting 5 quality publications where you do majority of the work (writing the IRB, going through charts, getting the data analysis done, writing the manuscript, getting it published) will be pretty hard even if I tried hard from day one.

Now of course, if I am the third or fourth author and spent 2-3 days doing chart reviews helping out the other authors and getting a pub from it, that's a different issue. But what's the point of that, it is not showing any traits of hard work, commitment, intellectual curiosity which I am guessing are the traits research is supposed to highlight.

I am not blaming you, I just want to hear your opinion as someone who will have say in the rank list of future applications on how your program views research.

 

[operaman]

Not to hijack this thread, but how much is research valued in an applicant? I feel the point of going to medical school is to do well on board exams and clinical rotations and research is just something to show interest and commitment to the field. But after 1-2 publications which shows that you know how to do research, rest comes to down whether the applicant did research prior to coming to med school or decided very early on during med school.
Is deciding in 3rd year pretty much a gone thing now for competitive applications with 250+ scores, top 25 percent of the class but don't have the time to do lot of research? It is not that they can't, pretty easy to if they take a gap year but what's the point of it?

Getting 5 quality publications where you do majority of the work (writing the IRB, going through charts, getting the data analysis done, writing the manuscript, getting it published) will be pretty hard even if I tried hard from day one.

Now of course, if I am the third or fourth author and spent 2-3 days doing chart reviews helping out the other authors and getting a pub from it, that's a different issue. But what's the point of that, it is not showing any traits of hard work, commitment, intellectual curiosity which I am guessing are the traits research is supposed to highlight.

I am not blaming you, I just want to hear your opinion as someone who will have say in the rank list of future applications on how your program views research.

In general, research is academic currency and remains so for the duration of a career. Faculty have to go before their chairman each year and account for their productivity and this includes research output.

So when you’re a faculty member reviewing apps and you see the person with 2 pubs and the one with 20, it seems that one of them is far more likely to help generate academic productivity. You’re right though that a couple pubs does show you are able to do this and it really is a function of when you decided on your field.

The other point is that research is one of the few objective ways in which applicants can distinguish themselves after starting medical school. Everyone has great step scores and grades and a few even have amazing back stories before medicine, but research is something tangible you can do to elevate your application. It’s also rather objective and has to pass peer review so applicants can’t really fake it like you can other things.

In the end, you just need enough research to keep yourself in the game. Ten years ago a case report and an nth author pub was probably enough. Today it would put an applicant at the bottom of the pile. Just like step one does t really tell you much after a certain point, the score still matters because everyone else is doing so well on it. Ten years ago a 240 was a good solid score; now it may even get you screened out at many programs.

So in the end it’s less about research highlighting certain traits as it is showing you can generate truly meaningful academic productivity and continue to do so as a resident.

 

[afib123]

In general, research is academic currency and remains so for the duration of a career. Faculty have to go before their chairman each year and account for their productivity and this includes research output.

So when you’re a faculty member reviewing apps and you see the person with 2 pubs and the one with 20, it seems that one of them is far more likely to help generate academic productivity. You’re right though that a couple pubs does show you are able to do this and it really is a function of when you decided on your field.

The other point is that research is one of the few objective ways in which applicants can distinguish themselves after starting medical school. Everyone has great step scores and grades and a few even have amazing back stories before medicine, but research is something tangible you can do to elevate your application. It’s also rather objective and has to pass peer review so applicants can’t really fake it like you can other things.

In the end, you just need enough research to keep yourself in the game. Ten years ago a case report and an nth author pub was probably enough. Today it would put an applicant at the bottom of the pile. Just like step one does t really tell you much after a certain point, the score still matters because everyone else is doing so well on it. Ten years ago a 240 was a good solid score; now it may even get you screened out at many programs.

So in the end it’s less about research highlighting certain traits as it is showing you can generate truly meaningful academic productivity and continue to do so as a resident.

I guess. Our institution is not super productive in terms of producing research. Hopefully my 2 first author pubs where I did the entire work will be viewed upon in the same breadth as someone who has 5 pubs but as a 3rd or 4th author. Have to wait and see till the interview season

 

[ciestar]

Im not applying ENT for a multitude of reasons later this year, but I feel absolutely screwed these days with the application i am going to have

 

[operaman]

I guess. Our institution is not super productive in terms of producing research. Hopefully my 2 first author pubs where I did the entire work will be viewed upon in the same breadth as someone who has 5 pubs but as a 3rd or 4th author. Have to wait and see till the interview season

Well two first author pubs is nothing to sneeze at and if they are original research articles and not just case reports then that’s even better. You have a lot of time before applications are due so you could easily churn out a couple more little things before then. Even if it’s just submitted you can still list it; eras has a category for recently submitted work too.

While 2 first author pubs probably represents more work than 5 Nth author ones, there’s definitely a visual impact from having a nice long list of citations. Adding a couple more would certainly help.

 

[Agent Michael Scarn]

Most of the applicants we interviewed had nearly flawless to flawless grades and that remains one of the strongest anecdotal predictors of who succeeds as a resident for us. Most applicants we interviewed had at least 5 publications in addition to multiple posters and presentations; some MD-only applicants had >30 publications. It’s nuts. Cranking out a single case report is not going to be enough to check that box.

Me: *Begins looking for new field to be interested in*

 

[operaman]

Me: *Begins looking for new field to be interested in*

I will say this probably holds true across all the smaller competitive fields. I would imagine also true at top programs in more moderately competitive fields.

The idea is not to discourage anyone, but rather to make sure people aren’t blindsided by it. There are many things in an application that can’t be helped once they’re done. That doesn’t mean a slightly lower step 1 or mediocre clinical grades will sink you, but it does say you need to find ways to bolster your application if you aren’t stellar in some areas. That can be taking time and knocking CK out of the park, or a research year, or a few away rotations to try and impress more than your home program (obviously this can backfire).

On that note, always remember that anyone’s best chance at matching a competitive field remains your home program, especially if you have a couple dings on your application. If your home department adores you, it can get you a ranked to match spot because there is definitely value in taking a known quantity over an unknown who looks amazing on paper.

 

[afib123]

I will say this probably holds true across all the smaller competitive fields. I would imagine also true at top programs in more moderately competitive fields.

The idea is not to discourage anyone, but rather to make sure people aren’t blindsided by it. There are many things in an application that can’t be helped once they’re done. That doesn’t mean a slightly lower step 1 or mediocre clinical grades will sink you, but it does say you need to find ways to bolster your application if you aren’t stellar in some areas. That can be taking time and knocking CK out of the park, or a research year, or a few away rotations to try and impress more than your home program (obviously this can backfire).

On that note, always remember that anyone’s best chance at matching a competitive field remains your home program, especially if you have a couple dings on your application. If your home department adores you, it can get you a ranked to match spot because there is definitely value in taking a known quantity over an unknown who looks amazing on paper.

What role do interviews play in this process? Once you invite a person for an interview, then does the application take backseat and performance on the interview become the primary determinant? Or do you still go back to the person's application while ranking them after their interview?

Also, if you (hope this doesn't happen) happen to do poorly on an away rotation, will other programs find out about that or are your chances just restricted for that specific away rotation program?

 

[libertyyne]

What role do interviews play in this process? Once you invite a person for an interview, then does the application take backseat and performance on the interview become the primary determinant? Or do you still go back to the person's application while ranking them after their interview?

Also, if you (hope this doesn't happen) happen to do poorly on an away rotation, will other programs find out about that or are your chances just restricted for that specific away rotation program?

You are supposed to get a letter from aways. a missing letter would look bad.

 

[afib123]

You are supposed to get a letter from aways. a missing letter would look bad.
View attachment 248087

Interesting. I am not sure if programs know you did an away at a place unless they see your letter of rec. So I am not sure if they will know you have a missing letter unless you tell them.
I might be wrong, so someone who's been through the eras and interviews, feel free to correct me.

Of course if you did 3 aways and have 0 letters, that's look fishy. But if you did 3 aways and have 2 letters (hypothetically you did poorly on 1 rotation), will programs know you did poorly on the third away/will they know you even did an away there?

 

[libertyyne]

Interesting. I am not sure if programs know you did an away at a place unless they see your letter of rec. So I am not sure if they will know you have a missing letter unless you tell them.
I might be wrong, so someone who's been through the eras and interviews, feel free to correct me.

Of course if you did 3 aways and have 0 letters, that's look fishy. But if you did 3 aways and have 2 letters (hypothetically you did poorly on 1 rotation), will programs know you did poorly on the third away/will they know you even did an away there?

IIRC it will be on your transcript.

 

[7331poas]

You are supposed to get a letter from aways. a missing letter would look bad.

That graph is for all specialties. Surely that rule does not apply to every residency, as I know plenty of people who did aways and did not feel the need to include letters from those programs in their application.

 

[Oh_Gee]

Im not applying ENT for a multitude of reasons later this year, but I feel absolutely screwed these days with the application i am going to have

same

 

[libertyyne]

That graph is for all specialties. Surely that rule does not apply to every residency, as I know plenty of people who did aways and did not feel the need to include letters from those programs in their application.

That graph has nothing to do with the point that if you doing aways and you are not getting LORs this may warrant further investigation by the program you are applying to. In reality this probably only applies to the most competitive of fields considering most of them are small and your PD probably knows the program where you rotated through and might call to get an idea of what happened. In most other non-competitive fields you dont really have to do aways to match. I am just inferring this based on what I have read about matching in the field i am interested in, maybe a more experienced member can speak to the idea of not getting a letter from an away.

 

[operaman]

What role do interviews play in this process? Once you invite a person for an interview, then does the application take backseat and performance on the interview become the primary determinant? Or do you still go back to the person's application while ranking them after their interview?

Also, if you (hope this doesn't happen) happen to do poorly on an away rotation, will other programs find out about that or are your chances just restricted for that specific away rotation program?

Good question. During interviews appplications take a back seat but they aren’t completely forgotten. That said, we don’t invite anyone for an interview that we wouldn’t strongly consider ranking very highly.

The interview becomes a major determinant, the general sense of how well you fit. The application and especially letters play a big role. Our own sleuthing and talking with faculty and residents and your own fellow students if we know any become very important. Basically it’s trying to figure out if you’re the real deal.

At the interview stage people are pretty similar on paper. There are still some standouts but overall the paper is pretty close. The interviews and sense of fit really does take over. For us, we know that we will be spending a LOT of time with you if you match here. It sucks being in an OR at 2am but it sucks a little less if you’re with people you really like. That’s a huge factor we look for in interviews given that the applications are all great.

If you do poorly on an away I doubt other programs would find out unless someone knew somebody and made a phone call. We definitely checked some peoples’ away performance by texting/calling their residents that we know. In general though nobody is going to be proactively calling other programs to tell them you were terrible. Truth is that terrible rotators tend to suck on all their rotations so there’s not much to be gained by checking up on them.

You don’t need a letter from away rotations. It’s a nice touch if you work with someone a lot but many students don’t ask for one since they have plenty of strong ones from their home program.

 

[meowfish6868]

IIRC it will be on your transcript.

It depends on when you complete your aways. One of mine was on the transcript and dean’s letter when my school uploaded them to ERAS. Both listed the rotation as “surgery elective” - there was no mention that it was an away rotation. In contrast, I was on the second away in September, so there was no mention of it anywhere in my app.

Regardless, I’d personally stick with letters that I’m pretty sure are great over a form letter from my second away.
All of my letter writers could speak about working with me personally, whereas the second away was primarily a shadowing experience.

 

[afib123]

It depends on when you complete your aways. One of mine was on the transcript and dean’s letter when my school uploaded them to ERAS. Both listed the rotation as “surgery elective” - there was no mention that it was an away rotation. In contrast, I was on the second away in September, so there was no mention of it anywhere in my app.

Regardless, I’d personally stick with letters that I’m pretty sure are great over a form letter from my second away.
All of my letter writers could speak about working with me personally, whereas the second away was primarily a shadowing experience.

This is more consistent with what I heard. The transcript does not show where you did the away rotations or if it was an away rotation at all. Anyone who has looked at their transcript feel free to add in or correct me

I guess the reason that I ask is because there is always a probability a rotation might not go your way (like my third year ob/gyn rotation, I would never ask someone in that rotation for a letter because I never got along with the residents like I did in all my other rotations) Just want to know the consequences of that which have been well covered in this thread so far.

 

[Hyahh15]

You are supposed to get a letter from aways. a missing letter would look bad.

Current applicant, did 2 aways, but got no letters from them because they were later in the fall. If you have 3-4 ENT letters, no one seems to care if you don't have a letter from an away.

Edited to fix the quoting.

 

[Newyawk]

I understand operaman is an established, respected member of sdn, but this is a load of crap.
you're making it seem like the majority of your applicants have 270/AOA/all honors/perfect letters/10 first author pubs.
maybe you're at Harvard for ENT or whichever hospital is best at looking at ears but regardless stop with this nonsense you're not helping anyone. the NRMP match data clearly contradicts what you're saying in the overall match. one doesn't need to look far to realize you're either talking complete nonsense or your experience is not reflective of the general match.

Mod staff: This post has been edited to remove inappropriate language. Let's please keep this discussion professional.

 

[operaman]

I understand operaman is an established, respected member of sdn, but this is a load of crap.
you're making it seem like the majority of your applicants have 270/AOA/all honors/perfect letters/10 first author pubs.
maybe you're at Harvard for ENT or whichever hospital is best at looking at ears but regardless stop with this nonsense you're not helping anyone. the NRMP match data clearly contradicts what you're saying in the overall match. one doesn't need to look far to realize you're either talking complete nonsense or your experience is not reflective of the general match.

Mod staff: This post has been edited to remove inappropriate language. Let's please keep this discussion professional.

Well you have exaggerated slightly but I understand the sentiment. What you describe above is obviously not the normal applicant but I have seen more of those type of applications than one would expect.

Our “average” applicant is probably more 250+/AOA/mostly honors/great letters/2-3 first author pubs plus a smattering of others. This is much closer to the NRMP numbers.

The nrmp doesn’t really break things down into details, especially regarding research since they aggragate things into one bucket. You can pull up post match stats on otoMatch and see a little more detail. Obviously those are biased data but you can start seeing some patterns and find people with similar stats and see how well they did, knowing that unmatched applicants don’t really post on those sheets.

The idea is not to be a prick but to ensure that people are not blindsided by the field. Many of the 100+ soon to be unmatched applicants were probably given some bad advice along the way and underestimated the field, especially in light of 2 recent years with fewer applicants. I don’t know if there’s a warm fuzzy way to say that, but if my bluntness leads someone to beef up their application and avoid that “sorry you did not match” email, then I’m calling it a win.

 

[Newyawk]

Well you have exaggerated slightly but I understand the sentiment. What you describe above is obviously not the normal applicant but I have seen more of those type of applications than one would expect.

Our “average” applicant is probably more 250+/AOA/mostly honors/great letters/2-3 first author pubs plus a smattering of others. This is much closer to the NRMP numbers.

The nrmp doesn’t really break things down into details, especially regarding research since they aggragate things into one bucket. You can pull up post match stats on otoMatch and see a little more detail. Obviously those are biased data but you can start seeing some patterns and find people with similar stats and see how well they did, knowing that unmatched applicants don’t really post on those sheets.

The idea is not to be a prick but to ensure that people are not blindsided by the field. Many of the 100+ soon to be unmatched applicants were probably given some bad advice along the way and underestimated the field, especially in light of 2 recent years with fewer applicants. I don’t know if there’s a warm fuzzy way to say that, but if my bluntness leads someone to beef up their application and avoid that “sorry you did not match” email, then I’m calling it a win.

fair enough. sorry for calling you a prick.

 

[libertyyne]

 

[Graywolf]

Current Oto applicant. This is a particularly competitive year -- the average number of interviews is somewhere around 10 (this is self reported from people on otomatch, so some selection bias going on and the entire pool average might even be fewer than 10). Last year otomatch had an average of >15.

I'm a 260+ Step 1 & Step 2, non-AOA, honored most rotations in both 3rd and 4th year (FM and peds were HP), some really great letters*, and I have a couple publications and about 3 ongoing projects recently submitted to conferences which were discussed heavily at interviews. Been offered 16 invites, was able to attend 13 interviews. *I want to point out that my letters writers are incredible, well-known faculty and wrote some flattering things that I was not aware of until I was interviewing and people read to me some sentences*.

Unfortunately, I believe next year is going to challenging again because many of those 100 unmatched applicants will reapply. I wouldn't be surprised to see another 60-70% match rate next year, though I hope not. Things you CAN do: knock step 2 out of the park, get several projects ongoing that you can talk about in interviews, work with future letter writers, and provide updates to programs as things get accepted/submitted. In my opinion, active/ongoing projects are important as previously completed work.

Good luck and definitely find a mentor to help you out and get plugged into good research (try to get involved in more than just case reports, such as prospective or retrospective reviews, maybe even bench/translation stuff). It's a small field but that's what makes it great!

Oh and with regards to aways...I didn't do a single away. I couldn't afford it and had some scheduling conflicts with my wedding. Didn't seem to hurt me, but only because I have a strong home ENT program.

 

[afib123]

Current Oto applicant. This is a particularly competitive year -- the average number of interviews is somewhere around 10 (this is self reported from people on otomatch, so some selection bias going on and the entire pool average might even be fewer than 10). Last year otomatch had an average of >15.

I'm a 260+ Step 1 & Step 2, non-AOA, honored most rotations in both 3rd and 4th year (FM and peds were HP), some really great letters*, and I have a couple publications and about 3 ongoing projects recently submitted to conferences which were discussed heavily at interviews. Been offered 16 invites, was able to attend 13 interviews. *I want to point out that my letters writers are incredible, well-known faculty and wrote some flattering things that I was not aware of until I was interviewing and people read to me some sentences*.

Unfortunately, I believe next year is going to challenging again because many of those 100 unmatched applicants will reapply. I wouldn't be surprised to see another 60-70% match rate next year, though I hope not. Things you CAN do: knock step 2 out of the park, get several projects ongoing that you can talk about in interviews, work with future letter writers, and provide updates to programs as things get accepted/submitted. In my opinion, active/ongoing projects are important as previously completed work.

Good luck and definitely find a mentor to help you out and get plugged into good research (try to get involved in more than just case reports, such as prospective or retrospective reviews, maybe even bench/translation stuff). It's a small field but that's what makes it great!

Crazy. How common is applying to a back up in ENT? If yes, what are the common backups people apply to (and pull off considering the number of aways needed in ENT won't make it easy for someone to squeeze in a sub-i from a different speciality)

Also, are people listing presentations where another author presented but your name is on the poster as one of the authors?

 

[Graywolf]

I'd say the minority of people are applying for backups. Next year, I would prepare for a back up as Gen Surg or Anesthesia if you are an otherwise strong applicant. You really one need one away to apply ENT if you have no home program, ideally two for the purpose of getting letters. You could finish 3rd year in Spring, start ENT sub-I in May/June, then do a month of Anesthesia in July/August or some variation of that.

Presentations listed where you are not the actual presenter: Yes, list them. I had a project early in med school where I actually did more work than the presenter with regards to data gathering, analysis, and producing figures. But since the person was going for fellowship, she was the presenter in this case, which is part of the game.

 

[afib123]

I'd say the minority of people are applying for backups. Next year, I would prepare for a back up as Gen Surg or Anesthesia if you are an otherwise strong applicant. You really one need one away to apply ENT if you have no home program, ideally two for the purpose of getting letters. You could finish 3rd year in Spring, start ENT sub-I in May/June, then do a month of Anesthesia in July/August or some variation of that.

Presentations listed where you are not the actual presenter: Yes, list them. I actually did more work than the presenter with regards to data gathering, analysis, and producing figures. But since the person was going for fellowship, she was the presenter in this case, which is part of the game.

Not applying to ENT but a similar competitive surgical sub. Thanks for the advice

 

[GoinHardenYaHoe]

Serious question:

Where do pre-clinical grades fall into all of this? (assuming one is non-AOA)

 

[meowfish6868]

Serious question:

Where do pre-clinical grades fall into all of this? (assuming one is non-AOA)

Folks already said this in your other thread, but they're probably not as significant as other parts of your app. Regardless, doing well throughout medical school, including pre-clinical courses, certainly doesn't hurt. Likewise, you don't need AOA to match in something super competitive, but it's definitely nice to have when you're applying for residency.

 

[nimbus]

View attachment 248339

Was this one of the crisis years? Because this shows only 12 applicants went unmatched and even most applicants with <230 matched.

 

[libertyyne]

Was this one of the crisis years? Because this shows only 12 applicants went unmatched and even most applicants with <230 matched.

Not sure it is charting outcomes 2018.

 

[operaman]

If someone did decent on step 1 (low 250s), does it raise flags if they don't have CK in by the time apps are submitted?

Hard question. Many - myself included - applied without ever submitting CK until the last minute and has no trouble. ENT used to be an early match and most people didn’t have CK done in time so it was never part of the picture. I think this is slowly evolving as I see more and more people with it completed. It may not be done in time for submission as people do always and whatnot, but it seems many are getting it done in time for interviews so all those numbers are available by the time rank lists are made.

I wouldn’t call it a red flag, especially if your step 1 is good, but this is an evolving paradigm. I think the safest way would be time your CK so it doesn’t go out with your initial transcript release and requires you to submit it separately. This way you can control things if you randomly bomb it.

 

[operaman]

Was this one of the crisis years? Because this shows only 12 applicants went unmatched and even most applicants with <230 matched.

Definitely. This was the year when there were more available slots than applicants and ~12 positions had to get filled in SOAP.

 

[Psai]

Definitely. This was the year when there were more available slots than applicants and ~12 positions had to get filled in SOAP.

Jesus lol. Hard to imagine.

 

[operaman]

Jesus lol. Hard to imagine.

Yeah there was a lot of hand wringing and editorials in the ent literature pontificating about it. Nothing changed and now there are 100 more applicants than spots.

 

[libertyyne]

Yeah there was a lot of hand wringing and editorials in the ent literature pontificating about it. Nothing changed and now there are 100 more applicants than spots.

I wonder if the average stats are different for the applicants with the addition of 100 more. Also are those 100 more USMDs or has there been an increase in other applications?

 

[Agent Michael Scarn]

I wonder if the average stats are different for the applicants with the addition of 100 more. Also are those 100 more USMDs or has there been an increase in other applications?

It will be interesting to see if the average stats for matching go up, or if the last two years just made more people with lower step 1 scores/less research apply who in previous years might not have applied and you end up with a weird left skew or something without an overall change in averages for matched applicants. I can't imagine the increase in applications is anything but more USMDs though.

Next year is going to be wild though with all the people who don't match this year, some of whom will take research years and reapply next fall. Could be a rough match rate for the next couple years.

 

[DokterMom]

Yeah there was a lot of hand wringing and editorials in the ent literature pontificating about it. Nothing changed and now there are 100 more applicants than spots.

I'm thinking those 100 more applicants might have included a fair number of 'very good but not excellent' candidates encouraged by the oddball crisis years.

@operaman -- I vaguely recall reading something about ENT adding a new requirement for a "Why our program, specifically?" response in the application. Is that a faulty recollection on my part? And if not, did that ever come to pass? And if so, did that coincide with the abrupt drop-off in applications?

 

[afib123]

Is this like an ent insider thing as to how many applicants were in the game this year or did nrmp release stats

 

[operaman]

I wonder if the average stats are different for the applicants with the addition of 100 more. Also are those 100 more USMDs or has there been an increase in other applications?

Nearly all USMDs

 

[operaman]

I'm thinking those 100 more applicants might have included a fair number of 'very good but not excellent' candidates encouraged by the oddball crisis years.

@operaman -- I vaguely recall reading something about ENT adding a new requirement for a "Why our program, specifically?" response in the application. Is that a faulty recollection on my part? And if not, did that ever come to pass? And if so, did that coincide with the abrupt drop-off in applications?

Agreed hard to say where the influx came from. Personally I think it was just the law of averages bringing things back after a couple off cycles. Almost surely there were some less competitive applicants who were probably advised to give it a shot since it hasn’t been so bad of late.

There wasnt an official requirement but it was strongly suggested and therefore not really optional. It did seem to drop total number of apps per applicant a bit but the paragraphs were pretty worthless overall. There’s just no way a student can read our website and have anyone clue of the nuances of our training and be able to meaningfully articulate why they are interested in us.

There was another quasi optional requirement of a telephone based screening interview that was scored by a third party. That seems to have fallen by the wayside as nobody knew how to interpret it. Personally I thought it was a great idea and in line with what most major corporations do for first interviews, but it didn’t seem to go well.

All of these did coincide with the drop off but I have to believe such a minor inconvenience wouldn’t lead people to pick an entirely different career. Maybe it did for some though.

My personal thought was that the drop off was more due to a couple of really brutal years with many unmatched applicants leading schools to advise people toward other fields unless they were stellar. It’s gotta be hard for faculty to see their top students not match and probably lead to some stern warnings and/or research years for people with more average numbers.

 

[DokterMom]

All of these did coincide with the drop off but I have to believe such a minor inconvenience wouldn’t lead people to pick an entirely different career. Maybe it did for some though.

I'm betting it did. I remember talking with a few M3s sitting on high STEP 1s and trying to decide between several surgical subspecialties. It definitely mattered for them -- but again, they were somewhat undecided to begin with. The responses I heard were along the lines of "Hoops" and "Bullshirt!" which, when combined with the large number of applications an "average" ~250 STEP 1 applicant who hadn't been fully committed to ENT for years already would need to submit to be reasonably secure in matching into such a competitive specialty -- well, it was enough to tip the balance to Ortho or Plastics.

 

[operaman]

I'm betting it did. I remember talking with a few M3s sitting on high STEP 1s and trying to decide between several surgical subspecialties. It definitely mattered for them -- but again, they were somewhat undecided to begin with. The responses I heard were along the lines of "Hoops" and "Bullshirt!" which, when combined with the large number of applications an "average" ~250 STEP 1 applicant who hadn't been fully committed to ENT for years already would need to submit to be reasonably secure in matching into such a competitive specialty -- well, it was enough to tip the balance to Ortho or Plastics.

Hmmm that’s a good point. Yeah I guess for someone on the edge it might have been enough to nudge them in another direction.

 

[Chelsea FC]

The program director came and told students that they should give it a shot. So I bet alot of students who had no business applying got encouraged to do so.