So I realize that top schools don't make this information publically availible, but i was wondering if anyone has an idea as to how far down their rank lists most top programs go. I wouldn't be suprised if at a top ten program it were around 3-4 ranks for each spot, but really that's a complete guess... Anyone privy to inside information about this sort of thing?
How far do programs go down their rank lists?
- Thread starter Pegasus22
- Start date
NRMP Results and Data 2010 - Table 17
'Average Number of Ranked Applicants Needed to Fill Each Position by Specialty'
Neurology PGY1
2010: 5.4
2009: 4.6
Neurology PGY2
2010: 5.9
2009: 5.5
*Table 17 displays by specialty the average number of ranked applicants needed to fill each position within programs.
Only programs that filled all of their positions are included in the calculations. Specialties with fewer than 5 programs
that filled all positions also were excluded to maintain their anonymity. Although this measure is affected by such
factors as the number and geographic distribution of programs as well as the number of programs ranked per applicant,
it is a rough measure of specialty competitiveness. It may be more appropriate to interpret the data within each
specialty across time and less appropriate to compare across specialties, especially for specialties with a large
proportion of programs that do not fill.
Using Anesthesiology as an example, on average programs ranked 7.5 applicants to fill each position in the 2010
Match. That figure represents an increase of 1.3 ranked applicants per filled position over the 2009 average of 6.2.
'Average Number of Ranked Applicants Needed to Fill Each Position by Specialty'
Neurology PGY1
2010: 5.4
2009: 4.6
Neurology PGY2
2010: 5.9
2009: 5.5
*Table 17 displays by specialty the average number of ranked applicants needed to fill each position within programs.
Only programs that filled all of their positions are included in the calculations. Specialties with fewer than 5 programs
that filled all positions also were excluded to maintain their anonymity. Although this measure is affected by such
factors as the number and geographic distribution of programs as well as the number of programs ranked per applicant,
it is a rough measure of specialty competitiveness. It may be more appropriate to interpret the data within each
specialty across time and less appropriate to compare across specialties, especially for specialties with a large
proportion of programs that do not fill.
Using Anesthesiology as an example, on average programs ranked 7.5 applicants to fill each position in the 2010
Match. That figure represents an increase of 1.3 ranked applicants per filled position over the 2009 average of 6.2.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2006
- Messages
- 1,868
- Reaction score
- 887
For top programs it is a point of pride to not need to go too far down the applicant ROL to fill the class. It is a surrogate measure of the desirability of the program; if everyone who interviews ranks a program number one on their list, then they would fill the program 1:1. In reality, this doesn't happen, but there are clear advantages to being able to gauge the quality of your class before match day.
Just as applicants rank programs that are not their favorite, programs do the same thing to ensure that they fill even in a bad year. You don't really want your class to be filled by a large amount of these "safety applicants". This is why the NRMP is so careful about post-interview contact, because unscrupulous programs could try to game the system based on the applicants' ROL to fill more quickly with higher quality applicants. This is also why top applicants get notes from PDs telling them how much they enjoyed meeting them, to try to influence their ranking on the applicant's ROL in order to help them rank to match.
Just as applicants rank programs that are not their favorite, programs do the same thing to ensure that they fill even in a bad year. You don't really want your class to be filled by a large amount of these "safety applicants". This is why the NRMP is so careful about post-interview contact, because unscrupulous programs could try to game the system based on the applicants' ROL to fill more quickly with higher quality applicants. This is also why top applicants get notes from PDs telling them how much they enjoyed meeting them, to try to influence their ranking on the applicant's ROL in order to help them rank to match.
