For Those Of You Looking For Match Lists

[W222]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Where you end up matching is not solely dependent on where you end up going to school. You can match anywhere if you work hard enough, so why bother looking at this. Also, schools can go to **** over four years due to unforseen circumstances so you may end up with a bad match. Too bad, so sad. Who cares about match lists?

 

[jjmack]

I agree some what. I think that match lists do have some merit though. You just need to weigh things appropiately.

Where you end up matching is not solely dependent on where you end up going to school. You can match anywhere if you work hard enough, so why bother looking at this. Also, schools can go to **** over four years due to unforseen circumstances so you may end up with a bad match. Too bad, so sad. Who cares about match lists?

 

[nascentdoc]

Also, schools can go to **** over four years due to unforseen circumstances so you may end up with a bad match. Too bad, so sad. Who cares about match lists?

I'm not quite sure what you mean. How can schools go to **** (just a for instance)? 😕

 

[W222]

Well, schools go down in public perception due to a number of factors. For instance, UCLA and the body donation problems of this past year. UPenn and the death of a patient in a gene therapy trial. Drexel, AKA MCP Hannehman, that has been plagued by name changes, affiliation issues, and financial problems. Those issues would be of more concern to me than where a class matched.

 

[CalBeE]

Match list is useful to see if a lot of students match at a particular hospital (Except the ones affiliated with the med school). If so, it may be because that particular hospital favors graduates from the school, or the school's faculty members have a lot of connections with that hospital.

For example, about 10% of UChicago grads match at UCSF...now that could mean faculty members at Pritzker have good relationship with UCSF residency directors (Hence the letters of rec carry more weight).

I think many people will agree that the match is about your abilities (board scores, grades, etc.), but it's also about connections.

 

[Newquagmire]

Well, schools go down in public perception due to a number of factors. For instance, UCLA and the body donation problems of this past year. UPenn and the death of a patient in a gene therapy trial. Drexel, AKA MCP Hannehman, that has been plagued by name changes, affiliation issues, and financial problems. Those issues would be of more concern to me than where a class matched.

I don't think you can honestly say you believe any of these three programs has "gone to @#$%," can you? That's like saying the asthma trial death at Hopkins caused it's slide to #3 in USNWR.

 

[kikkoman]

Well, schools go down in public perception due to a number of factors. For instance, UCLA and the body donation problems of this past year. UPenn and the death of a patient in a gene therapy trial. Drexel, AKA MCP Hannehman, that has been plagued by name changes, affiliation issues, and financial problems. Those issues would be of more concern to me than where a class matched.

You care more that one individual in a UPenn trial died than where their students match?

Calbee brings up great points - getting into competitive residencies is a lot about politics and which schools have cozy relationships. A lot of top schools do this - "partnerships." I know if you go to MIT, its easier to get into Berkeley and Caltech for grad school and vice versa. From what I've heard, med schools are similar.

 

[W222]

No, I never said that those programs went to sh@t but UPenn was definitely faced with some serious questions. Questions that could have influenced whether they were even accredited. Things that embarrass a school can have influence. IT seems some people were missing my original point, that putting alot of weight on a match list is pointless in the long run if you dont work hard. Mass General isnt going to take you just because you went to school X, they are going to take you because you worked your ass off. Thats my point.

 

[kikkoman]

No, I never said that those programs went to sh@t but UPenn was definitely faced with some serious questions. Questions that could have influenced whether they were even accredited. Things that embarrass a school can have influence. IT seems some people were missing my original point, that putting alot of weight on a match list is pointless in the long run if you dont work hard. Mass General isnt going to take you just because you went to school X, they are going to take you because you worked your ass off. Thats my point.

I think the nature of those controversies, while potentially influencing accredidation beaurocrats, do not really hurt their reputations in the medical community because ultimately they say little about the schools other than that they are heavily involved in research. Taking on the gene therapy trial was risky - everyone knew it - but Penn and others decided to take the risk, and paid a heavy price in the media. I'd be interested to hear if you can get one top residency director to say that they don't favor students from Penn because of their clinical trials. Or Hopkins for that matter.

 

[CalBeE]

No, I never said that those programs went to sh@t but UPenn was definitely faced with some serious questions. Questions that could have influenced whether they were even accredited. Things that embarrass a school can have influence. IT seems some people were missing my original point, that putting alot of weight on a match list is pointless in the long run if you dont work hard. Mass General isnt going to take you just because you went to school X, they are going to take you because you worked your ass off. Thats my point.

If you read over my post again...I basically say that working hard helps, but connections really matters too, especially if you're going into competitive specialties. And being at a certain school, getting the letter from the dean, and building relationships with certain faculty members at the school, can help you in your residency application to a certain hospital.

 

[kikkoman]

An back to the original point - I think people can place an appropriate value on the matchlist. That's not to say that if you go to school X you will have a Y percent chance of getting into orthopedics at Penn or whatever, but sometimes they can be valuable in indicating what the class leans towards as well as whether you might have a disproportionately high chance at landing your residency of choice.

If your point was that you can get a good residency regardless of which school you went to, contingent on being smart and working hard - I don't think anyone will argue with that - but it in no way discredits people looking for and valuing matchlists....

 

[Eraserhead]

Match lists can be important. For example, in making my UCI vs. UCSD decision... only a few UCSD students got into residencies at UCLA whereas many from Irvine went on to UCLA. To me, that means something about the connections between the programs.

 

[elias514]

Match lists, match lists, match lists...what we think about the relationship between prestige and the Match 4 yrs from now should be very interesting.

 

[Jalby]

You should also check match lists for trends in departments, esp if you are interested in that. i.e. Both Northwestern and Georgetown match a ton of people in Ortho, so if you are diehard ortho and are undecided between those schools and other ones....

Another point mentioned previously is check how many students go into their own school. Some schools say they don't give preference to their own students, while as some schools go out of their way to try to get their own. This could make your life a lot easier down the road.

 

[Newquagmire]

Taking on the gene therapy trial was risky - everyone knew it - but Penn and others decided to take the risk, and paid a heavy price in the media.

Not that this is really the focus of your point, but I'm not aware of any galvanized group that opposes gene therapy trials on the grounds of health risks to volunteers (whom are generally terminal to begin with). The media fuss about gene therapy (warning, unfair simile nearby) is like the media making a fuss of Abu Ghraib prison and pretending it doesn't happen in, say, Guantanamo.

As long as you take matchlists from the past few years into weighted consideration (if matching matters at all to you at this point in your life), then who cares what somebody thinks about when they decide?

 

[kikkoman]

Not that this is really the focus of your point, but I'm not aware of any galvanized group that opposes gene therapy trials on the grounds of health risks to volunteers (whom are generally terminal to begin with). The media fuss about gene therapy (warning, unfair simile nearby) is like the media making a fuss of Abu Ghraib prison and pretending it doesn't happen in, say, Guantanamo.

As long as you take matchlists from the past few years into weighted consideration (if matching matters at all to you at this point in your life), then who cares what somebody thinks about when they decide?

I agree with you about gene therapy, and I think a lot of other do too and that is why I said that they paid a heavy price in the media. For rare, terminal diseases, it makes a lot of sense to give someone the therapy, and the fact that a few deaths are accelerated shouldn't detract from that, but many medical ethicists think different. The results at Penn definitely dealt viral-based gene therapy a blow as a treatment in general, but I really felt (and others do too) that it still seems like a "good" option for some individuals.

Anyway, again, not the point - although that particular case didn't seem to hurt UPenn in anyone's eyes (except those a) not informed about the details b) who didn't understand the details, two categories in which residency directors don't fall).