How much weight do great LORs carry in the post interview process?

[9909]

I found this AAMC data showing that to get a II, GPA > MCAT > LORs fall in such an order of importance, but to get the acceptance, interview and LOR raise to the top.
https://www.aamc.org/download/261106/data/aibvol11_no6.pdf

I have been curious lately, as I have met so many great, charismatic and seemingly (on the surface) qualified applicants on the interview trail. From what I understand, the adcoms rank applicants post interview on a number of criteria.

What role do great LORs play in pushing a qualified applicant (decent stats, ECs, and good interview) up on that rank? Can they overcome deficits in MCAT/GPA compared to other applicants with higher stats but less impressive letters? How does the school differentiate between great applicants?

I've only been on MMIs so far so I'm speaking about a more formal ranking systems, as I know traditional interview recommendations carry a significant but perhaps different type of weight.

For the time being we could qualify "great letters" as multiple letters from physicians whom the applicant worked with for a significant amount of time. Perhaps doctors who runs a well known lab or are chiefs at a prestigious hospital and who can advocate in detail specific reasons why said applicant should be admitted.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Spector1]

well I guess once you get an interview, they know you can handle the rigor of the course. Post interview evaluations are more of character assessments so that would make sense

 

[9909]

well I guess once you get an interview, they know you can handle the rigor of the course. Post interview evaluations are more of character assessments so that would make sense

True. I guess it becomes about fit for the school, their mission and culture as well.