Help me understand charting outcomes in the match 2016

[bananasewq]

I think I understand the charts, but I'm just in disbelief so I would like some confirmation.

For Diagnostic Radiology, charting outcomes in the match 2016: For U.S. Allopathic (MD) Seniors (Those who have not taken a gap year for research, ie. graduated on time after 4 years of medical school) there were 652 matched, 9 unmatched. This is a 98.6% match rate.

Basically almost every Allopathic Senior who wants to match DR, will match DR (98.6% match rate). Am I interpreting this correctly? If so, then why does everyone say radiology is competitive to match? Also, for those 9 people who were unmatched in diagnostic radiology, did they match into another specialty that they ranked as another distinct specialty, or did they just not match into anything at all?

However, if you look at the NMRP data from 2017, for PGY-2 positions in DR, there were 909 U.S. seniors who applied. Only 667 matched. This is a huge discrepancy from the charting outcomes in the match data with 98.6% matched. Can someone explain?

Thanks!

 

[Raryn]

I think I understand the charts, but I'm just in disbelief so I would like some confirmation.

For Diagnostic Radiology, charting outcomes in the match 2016: For U.S. Allopathic (MD) Seniors (Those who have not taken a gap year for research, ie. graduated on time after 4 years of medical school) there were 652 matched, 9 unmatched. This is a 98.6% match rate.

Basically almost every Allopathic Senior who wants to match DR, will match DR (98.6% match rate). Am I interpreting this correctly? If so, then why does everyone say radiology is competitive to match?

Radiology is the least competitive "competitive" field to get *a* spot in. It's been like that for years. Three or four years ago, there were >80 unmatched total spots in radiology, giving it the lowest fill rate of any field (below family medicine). It's gotten a little bit "better" for the programs in the last 1-2 years, but it is still nowhere near as competitive as the rest of the usual suspects.

That said, matching in a *good* radiology program is still difficult, and if you want to do a competitive fellowship (more or less just IR) or have an academic career, the quality of your residency matters.

Also, for those 9 people who were unmatched in diagnostic radiology, did they match into another specialty that they ranked as another distinct specialty, or did they just not match into anything at all?

No way to know. For charting outcomes, everyone is counted and analyzed only based on the specialty of the #1 rank on their list. In addition, charting outcomes only counts people who agree to be counted. When you sign up for the match, you can opt out of detailed data collection, which about 10% of people do.

However, if you look at the NMRP data from 2017, for PGY-2 positions in DR, there were 909 U.S. seniors who applied. Only 667 matched. This is a huge discrepancy from the charting outcomes in the match data with 98.6% matched. Can someone explain?

Thanks!

There's also PGY-1 DR spots (the integrated ones, 121 of them for the 2017 match). In addition, the results/data counts everyone who ranked at least one radiology spot, not just those who ranked radiology as #1. With residencies, there's enough people who dual-apply that it will be off. The numbers would be even more off if you looked at ERAS data where apparently 1573 US applicants (note: this includes prior grads and DOs, so probably closer to 1200 "us senior"s in truth) in 2016 submitted at least one application to DR.

Basically, charting outcomes is the data of the match rate for not just those who applied radiology, but those who applied radiology, got at least one interview, didn't opt out of NRMP detailed data collection, and chose to rank radiology first amongst all specialties. Of course, by a first order approximation, it's still probably roughly the same as the "true" match rate (almost everyone who isn't completely and utterly unrealistic will get at least one interview, you really only care about people who choose to rank radiology first if you're one of them, and we have no indication that people who opt out of the data collection have any higher or lower match rate than those who don't).

Edit: Also, you might want to change your status in your profile. It states you're "pre-podiatry", which I presume is not true.