I6 CT Surgery Residency

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

MsPrCtsurg

New Member
Joined
May 4, 2019
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hey I’m currently an US Ms3 planning on going all in For I6 CT and wanted to know how competitive am I for the programs. I have a 246 on my Step 1 still don’t have Step 2 scores but I little research which is the thing Im most worried about. Also have heard that a lot of spaces are saved from students that are from the same medical schools that have the I6. Can someone please give me some insight? There is little to no info on this on the web. Thanks

Members don't see this ad.
 
According to the 2019 match report, there were 37 spots offered this year. 80 USMD's applied, 34 matched. 34/80 = 42.5% match rate overall.

Your Step 1 is average/below-average (compared with other hyper-competitive specialties).
You have no research.

Gonna go out on a limb and say going "all in for I6" would be real dumb. Fortunately, there are other ways to become a CT surgeon that are more sane in terms of competitiveness (ie. also applying Gen Surg and doing the 2-3 year fellowship or 4+3 program).
CT Surgery Training Pathways | TSDA
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14 users
Definitely going to apply for Gen Surg tho, but would like to try out my chances on I6 too. Thanks for the honesty tho. Then if I were to go the Gen Surg way, how competitive would I be for the top programs or where in the spectrum of best-to-not-so-best-programs should I be looking into?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Definitely going to apply for Gen Surg tho, but would like to try out my chances on I6 too. Thanks for the honesty tho. Then if I were to go the Gen Surg way, how competitive would I be for the top programs or where in the spectrum of best-to-not-so-best-programs should I be looking into?
Without research you aren't any more competitive for top GS programs than you are I6 most likely. You'll still match at a solid program if you are a USMD most likely though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
This isn't true, no specialty has a match rate of 42.5% or lower. The sheet you're referencing is for all applicants, not those ranking the specialty as their first choice. By your logic, family medicine is also competitive since 1,927 applied to family med and 1,601 matched. The charting outcomes of the match publication that comes out every 2 years is the best way to gauge your competitiveness since it includes a lot of other data including research and step scores. I feel like I have commented on your posts in the past where you give people terrible interpretations of the match data. OP, don't let SDN scare you away from a competitive specialty. If you get some research under your belt and make some connections a 246 is just fine for going after the integrated pathway.

Actually your post isn't true. Unlike FM which tons of students use as a back-up, no one uses integrated CT surgery as a back up. Anyone who applied to CT surgery integrated wanted to do CT surgery. the ~40% match rate is correct. That's just the nature of having so few spots. Also official charting outcomes has never even published CT surgery because it's so small, and Charting Outcomes overestimates success odds, because it excludes certain candidates. Anyone who doesn't get at least one interview is excluded. I knew applicants so terrible that they weren't even interviewed by their home program for competitive specialties. These people don't show up in charting outcomes report. Regardless, integrated CT surgery is a crapshoot even for the best applicants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
If you don’t have research, you’re not getting into a top 5 academic program in any specialty. You wouldn’t match into Psychiatry (which is moderately competitive) let alone integrated CT surgery. Remember, you are competing with 250+, top 20 school, multiple publications, MPH/MBA/research year. This is the minimum standard for any elite residency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
240+/top 20 school/multiple publications/minority/MPH/MBA/Research year doesn’t even guaranteed top 10 program in PSYCHIATRY... Take a gap year. Don’t underestimate this process. CT surgery are some of the brightest, toughest minds in the world and they pound for pound blow me out the water. Ever kid I know that matched surgical specialty had what I described but 250+.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hey I’m currently an US Ms3 planning on going all in For I6 CT and wanted to know how competitive am I for the programs. I have a 246 on my Step 1 still don’t have Step 2 scores but I little research which is the thing Im most worried about. Also have heard that a lot of spaces are saved from students that are from the same medical schools that have the I6. Can someone please give me some insight? There is little to no info on this on the web. Thanks
From what I hear (and others please correct me if I’m wrong), these smaller sub specialties are a lot about who you know and how they vouch for you (on top of the usual step scores and research). We had a guy who matched integrated CT in my class, and I know he started working with our CT surg department from pretty early on. Have you thought about a research year working with a big name CT surgeon at your home program? That’ll kill 2 “must” birds with 1 stone I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It is a very narrow margin of people. I'd echo what others are saying. Obviously 246 is a good score, but 256 Step 1, 265+ Step 2, 2 CT surgery pubs, LORs from prominent CT surgeons (who know each other) would make you very competitive for the I6 programs.

I'm telling you something honestly. No one, I repeat no one applies for just the I6's. You have to apply GS too, ideally at a place with CT surgery fellowship
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Hey I’m currently an US Ms3 planning on going all in For I6 CT and wanted to know how competitive am I for the programs. I have a 246 on my Step 1 still don’t have Step 2 scores but I little research which is the thing Im most worried about. Also have heard that a lot of spaces are saved from students that are from the same medical schools that have the I6. Can someone please give me some insight? There is little to no info on this on the web. Thanks

I did the traditional pathway. I don't have a ton of experience with I6, but I do know a few people that are faculty at several places. When I've talked with them, they generally wanted Step 1 scores of at least 230, so your score wouldn't stop them. Research is important though. You should look into getting involved in a project. If you have a CT department where you are at that has ongoing studies, that would be the place to go. Otherwise, find a productive lab where you are that you can get running quickly.

I'm not sure about places saving places for their own students, but a known quantity does have its merits. I6 programs will want someone dedicated to CT surgery and not want to flake out midway through. You should look at doing some rotations with I6 programs in July/August to get some letters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I was gonna do some rotations in Oct/Nov and I’m currently trying to get 1-2 projects going with my CT department but am still worried about it. Regarding the traditional way, where would you recommend me doing GS so that I can get exposed to that place CT department and apply to the fellowship ?
 
I was gonna do some rotations in Oct/Nov and I’m currently trying to get 1-2 projects going with my CT department but am still worried about it. Regarding the traditional way, where would you recommend me doing GS so that I can get exposed to that place CT department and apply to the fellowship ?

October/November would be late to get a LOR. I would recommend doing your away rotations much sooner. Now if you have a I6 program at your school, you probably wouldn't need to do any aways.

You should concentrate GS applications to places that have CT surgery programs first, then with places that have matched residents into fellowship in recent years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
I chose them in Oct/Nov to get a chance to do a rotation on ct surgery at home and go with some dexterity and look nice in the away rotations tho, don’t know if it’s a bad idea now
 
I chose them in Oct/Nov to get a chance to do a rotation on ct surgery at home and go with some dexterity and look nice in the away rotations tho, don’t know if it’s a bad idea now
I didn't apply CT/GS so timelines may be different, but over 3/4 of my interviews were during October and November. Just a thought that it may be difficult to get time off during an away / look super good at a place when you're leaving to interview elsewhere. Plus a place may have seen your app and decided against interviewing you before you show up for your rotation in November.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I chose them in Oct/Nov to get a chance to do a rotation on ct surgery at home and go with some dexterity and look nice in the away rotations tho, don’t know if it’s a bad idea now

You don't need to show off OR finesse. You're going to impress more with rounding on patients, clinic, and presentations to attendings than with the OR. Sure, having a rotation in CT surgery before this could be helpful as far as knowledge base goes, but October/November really is too late. For general surgery its probably not too bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I was gonna do some rotations in Oct/Nov and I’m currently trying to get 1-2 projects going with my CT department but am still worried about it. Regarding the traditional way, where would you recommend me doing GS so that I can get exposed to that place CT department and apply to the fellowship ?


You need to absolutely do an away rotation at an I6 program before September 15th. The main goal of this rotation should be 1. to obtain an LOR, as residencies love LORs from away rotations (hopefully it says that you were an excellent student on your month long audition!) and 2. increase your chance of matching at this program, if you happen to like the program and think it is a good fit for you. But, mainly, you need an LOR as a strong LOR from an away will increase the perception of you as a desirable applicant (home program tend to write uniformly positive letters).

Also, be prepared that a lot of I6 interviews will ask you where you did your aways! This is both to make conversation and to gauge your interest in the field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You don't need to show off OR finesse. You're going to impress more with rounding on patients, clinic, and presentations to attendings than with the OR. Sure, having a rotation in CT surgery before this could be helpful as far as knowledge base goes, but October/November really is too late. For general surgery its probably not too bad.

Hi ThoracicGuy,

I appreciate your investment into these forums advising all of us who are applying. I have seen your posts many times before and they have always been helpful.

I'm applying for integrated CT this year. I'm the first to do so at my medical school. It's been a long journey in terms of learning what I need to do to prepare as I didn't have much guidance from upper classmen.

I am very interested in Stanford as it's currently my top choice (as it is for many others). I planned to do the away in September. After reading your post that it was really late, I just had to inquire further. I think getting a LOR from Stanford is definitely too late (wish I had thought of this sooner.) But, I was wondering if Stanford only takes students who do away rotations there. I heard if you wanted a chance at Stanford, UPenn, Columbia, UMichigan you need to do an away. Basically, I need confirmation that that I did not mess up badly planning for September to do my away.

In preparation for away's, do you recommend reading through the Oxford Specialist Handbook in Cardiothoracic Surgery or another text?

Additionally, if you don't mind, could I private message you about my stats and expectations for match?

Thanks!

MrEmboli
 
Hi ThoracicGuy,

I appreciate your investment into these forums advising all of us who are applying. I have seen your posts many times before and they have always been helpful.

I'm applying for integrated CT this year. I'm the first to do so at my medical school. It's been a long journey in terms of learning what I need to do to prepare as I didn't have much guidance from upper classmen.

I am very interested in Stanford as it's currently my top choice (as it is for many others). I planned to do the away in September. After reading your post that it was really late, I just had to inquire further. I think getting a LOR from Stanford is definitely too late (wish I had thought of this sooner.) But, I was wondering if Stanford only takes students who do away rotations there. I heard if you wanted a chance at Stanford, UPenn, Columbia, UMichigan you need to do an away. Basically, I need confirmation that that I did not mess up badly planning for September to do my away.

In preparation for away's, do you recommend reading through the Oxford Specialist Handbook in Cardiothoracic Surgery or another text?

Additionally, if you don't mind, could I private message you about my stats and expectations for match?

Thanks!

MrEmboli

September is probably about the limit, mostly because you still have a chance for a lor from the rotation. I'm not sure how much the away rotation matters for specific programs, but I'm sure everything is taken into account.

For surgeries mastery of CT surgery gives a good overview of the important issues. I'm not familiar with the Oxford handbook.

I'm always happy to answer questions, here or via message
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hey I’m currently an US Ms3 planning on going all in For I6 CT and wanted to know how competitive am I for the programs. I have a 246 on my Step 1 still don’t have Step 2 scores but I little research which is the thing Im most worried about. Also have heard that a lot of spaces are saved from students that are from the same medical schools that have the I6. Can someone please give me some insight? There is little to no info on this on the web. Thanks

Hey,

I'm a MS3 too. We're at the same stage.

So UT Southwestern has a huge database called Texas Star. If you google it, it'll tell you stats on half of the I6 matches (steps, aways, # of applications, who matched, who didn't, # interviews, research, quartiles, AOA, etc.). The 2019 match was super competitive and kind of scared me. I'd say the average for all who matched was around mid 250s for step 1. Average applicant step 1 was 240s. It seemed like people who got top programs also had papers (7-11). almost all were 1st quartile, couple 2nd. However, there was one guy who got in with a step 1 of 237, but had tons of papers. Some of them didn't quite correlate as well and must have gotten great LORs.

Also Dr. Woo just published a paper on the integrated track that's super recent (2019) and describes the current state of the integrated track.

Best of luck
Mr Emboli
 
From the 2019 ERAS data:
115 students from American medical schools and 94 students from Foreign medical schools (total of 209 applicants) applied
37 integrated spots
That is approximately an 18% match rate

As stated above, those who apply to I-6 programs are not applying as back ups. Letters of recommendation, performance on aways, longstanding commitment to the specialty, and research are of utmost importance.

You need to decide if you really want to go down the I-6 pathway in which case you need to do a research year (for both research and relationship purposes), or if you are okay going through general surgery in which case applying this upcoming cycle seems reasonable.

Applying to both I-6 and GS is the right way to go, but applying now versus in a year will largely dictate how competitive you are for an integrated position.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
September is probably about the limit, mostly because you still have a chance for a lor from the rotation. I'm not sure how much the away rotation matters for specific programs, but I'm sure everything is taken into account.

For surgeries mastery of CT surgery gives a good overview of the important issues. I'm not familiar with the Oxford handbook.

I'm always happy to answer questions, here or via message


do you have any other bits of advice for away rotations?
 
sorry for bumping this thread, but I also would like advice on how to make myself competitive for GS/CT and I6. I appreciate the advice you offered already. Could you assess my current CV and recommend how I can improve as a candidate? I was originally interested in academic cardiology but have been shadowing in OR and falling in love with surgery, especially cardiac:

about me:
-currently in 2nd grant-funded research year between 2nd and 3rd year: in harvard-educated cardiologist-scientist's basic science lab (predicted 2-4 publications, 1 first author from the lab; previously had 4 other publications also in basic science, 2 first author)
-mid-tier medical school
-241 step 1 (I know this is below average for top-tier programs in any field; I plan to do very well on step2 and crush rotations)
-I have surgery first for 3rd year rotations (I know I need to honors as many as I can and get AOA, letters, etc)
-will receive an MPH degree (took a few classes at night during first two years of med school and my research years)
-have option to do 3 aways total after sub-i in may of third year
-I know of 1 letter so far: my research mentor (cardiologist-scientist) said he will write an outstanding letter and call programs, but at the moment he assumes I am going IM like he did; feel like I am shooting my opportunities down a little bit if I decide surgery as he only connected to big names in IM/Cards)

Generally, I have been gearing up for 4 years so far to try and match to a top research institution for IM. I am over my head with CT as we don't have many students interested and few surgeons/mentors in this arena. I have top training in basic science but for heart disease, is that considered relevant for CT?...how much does this matter that it isn't with CT PI? Good news is I still have all of third year to demonstrate interest in the field.

Perhaps there is something I am not thinking about in terms of setting up opportunities during my third year (outside of rotations)?

Thanks for the advice!
 
By research, do you mean publication?

If you don’t have research, you’re not getting into a top 5 academic program in any specialty. You wouldn’t match into Psychiatry (which is moderately competitive) let alone integrated CT surgery. Remember, you are competing with 250+, top 20 school, multiple publications, MPH/MBA/research year. This is the minimum standard for any elite residency.
 
sorry for bumping this thread, but I also would like advice on how to make myself competitive for GS/CT and I6. I appreciate the advice you offered already. Could you assess my current CV and recommend how I can improve as a candidate? I was originally interested in academic cardiology but have been shadowing in OR and falling in love with surgery, especially cardiac:

about me:
-currently in 2nd grant-funded research year between 2nd and 3rd year: in harvard-educated cardiologist-scientist's basic science lab (predicted 2-4 publications, 1 first author from the lab; previously had 4 other publications also in basic science, 2 first author)
-mid-tier medical school
-241 step 1 (I know this is below average for top-tier programs in any field; I plan to do very well on step2 and crush rotations)
-I have surgery first for 3rd year rotations (I know I need to honors as many as I can and get AOA, letters, etc)
-will receive an MPH degree (took a few classes at night during first two years of med school and my research years)
-have option to do 3 aways total after sub-i in may of third year
-I know of 1 letter so far: my research mentor (cardiologist-scientist) said he will write an outstanding letter and call programs, but at the moment he assumes I am going IM like he did; feel like I am shooting my opportunities down a little bit if I decide surgery as he only connected to big names in IM/Cards)

Generally, I have been gearing up for 4 years so far to try and match to a top research institution for IM. I am over my head with CT as we don't have many students interested and few surgeons/mentors in this arena. I have top training in basic science but for heart disease, is that considered relevant for CT?...how much does this matter that it isn't with CT PI? Good news is I still have all of third year to demonstrate interest in the field.

Perhaps there is something I am not thinking about in terms of setting up opportunities during my third year (outside of rotations)?

Thanks for the advice!


Unless you are interested in heart failure, VADs, and transplant, I would think hard about cardiology before jumping into cardiac surgery. IM/cards has a much brighter future than cardiac surgery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Do you mind elaborating?
Unless you are interested in heart failure, VADs, and transplant, I would think hard about cardiology before jumping into cardiac surgery. IM/cards has a much brighter future than cardiac surgery.
 
Do you mind elaborating?


PCI, TAVR, mitraclip, TMVR, watchman, etc. Interventional and structural interventional cardiology are in their infancy. There will always be a role for cardiac surgeons but it is ever shrinking. One area that remains promising are mechanical assist devices (LVAD/RVAD) and transplant, but you must enjoy that type of work and that patient population. There is also some open aortic work which is unlikely to go away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
PCI, TAVR, mitraclip, TMVR, watchman, etc. Interventional and structural interventional cardiology are in their infancy. There will always be a role for cardiac surgeons but it is ever shrinking. One area that remains promising are mechanical assist devices (LVAD/RVAD) and transplant, but you must enjoy that type of work and that patient population. There is also some open aortic work which is unlikely to go away.
All the IC stuff is cool and all, but the day the ED calls cardiology for a type A dissection is the day I would say CT surgery is no longer awesome.
 
All the IC stuff is cool and all, but the day the ED calls cardiology for a type A dissection is the day I would say CT surgery is no longer awesome.


I agree it is awesome. Just realize the volume of work is sporadic for that type of work. You might get 3 aortic dissections one month, then see none for the next 3 months. It’s not like IC that can line up 6 elective TAVRs every Tuesday. And those TAVRs were all SAVRs 5 years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree it is awesome. Just realize the volume of work is sporadic for that type of work. You might get 3 aortic dissections one month, then see none for the next 3 months. It’s not like IC that can line up 6 elective TAVRs every Tuesday. And those TAVRs were all SAVRs 5 years ago.
That's fair. I probably have a skewed perspective. I'm not in either field but where I went to med school is one of the top CT surg/cardiology centers in the world and had endless volume for both services. You could wander by the ORs any time of day or night and see a total arch in one room and a valve-sparing root in the next while the consult resident is prepping a bedside pericardial window in the ICU. Meanwhile there are 2 transplants en route and a few CABGs that are still on the schedule, and oh boy someone just coded and they called for ecmo. So that's what I think CT surgery is like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
That's fair. I probably have a skewed perspective. I'm not in either field but where I went to med school is one of the top CT surg/cardiology centers in the world and had endless volume for both services. You could wander by the ORs any time of day or night and see a total arch in one room and a valve-sparing root in the next while the consult resident is prepping a bedside pericardial window in the ICU. Meanwhile there are 2 transplants en route and a few CABGs that are still on the schedule, and oh boy someone just coded and they called for ecmo. So that's what I think CT surgery is like.


Yes there are a handful of centers with that type of volume. More power to anybody who can end up there. The vast majority of cardiac surgeons don’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
According to the 2019 match report, there were 37 spots offered this year. 80 USMD's applied, 34 matched. 34/80 = 42.5% match rate overall.

Your Step 1 is average/below-average (compared with other hyper-competitive specialties).
You have no research.

Gonna go out on a limb and say going "all in for I6" would be real dumb. Fortunately, there are other ways to become a CT surgeon that are more sane in terms of competitiveness (ie. also applying Gen Surg and doing the 2-3 year fellowship or 4+3 program).
CT Surgery Training Pathways | TSDA


So this Gurby guy is just wrong and doing that like pompous thing ppl do on SDN to poo poo others' goals, just to boost their fragile egos by saying things like a "246 is average/below average." As ppl of science I can actually prove this guy wrong using a published article reviewing i6 programs from a few years back.

The article is called,
"Six-year integrated cardiothoracic surgery residency applicants: Characteristics, expectations, and concerns," it is free and accessible online.

Here is a quote from that article regarding step scores of 36/80 applicants who participated in the study, "The mean reported United States Medical Licensing Examination score was 235.7 +/-15.7 and 246.7 +/-19.5 for steps 1 and 2 CK (Clinical Knowledge), respectively." Now, the study doesn't state if these applicants matched i6, but there are some conclusions to be drawn...for almost half of the 80 total applicants the MEAN score was 235 and the highest score was about a 250, so even if programs only accepted the ~250s from the applicant group (which is obviously not the case given ~30 spots to be filled) your score would still be above average. Now lets play the devil's advocate and extrapolate that for the other half of the 80 applicants not mentioned in this study just to weigh your odds, we'd have to make an assumption that they wer all 246s and up and completely go against the bell curve with the mean score of 235 of the half of applicants that opted into the study, to put you at "avg/below avg"...which as anyone would tell you would be a statistical anomaly. So again, the only way ur score compared to this data would be "average/below average," is if this study got super unlucky and the 44 i6 applicants who didn't participate wer all 250-ish scorers and higher...which again statistically makes no sense given the bell curve of the random half that did participate in the study.

So clearly your step1 of 246 is well above average, not only for this specialty but for most others too (see NRMP data)

So anyway don't let these 'full of them selves' types like Gurby deter you based on data they pull out of thin air. The published data shows that it I6 is somewhat competitive but not some magical out of reach unicorn, and you're in a good spot. I'm sick and tired of seeing these Gurby guys like trying to discourage ppl with baseless claims, the irony is that a person like this would never be allowed into our residency program becuz of their unscientific approach.

Your character and dedication matter a lot as well and good PDs see that during you auditions and interviews. Good luck!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So this Gurby guy is just wrong and doing that like pompous thing ppl do on SDN to poo poo others' goals, just to boost their fragile egos by saying things like a "246 is average/below average." As ppl of science I can actually prove this guy wrong using a published article reviewing i6 programs from a few years back.

The article is called,
"Six-year integrated cardiothoracic surgery residency applicants: Characteristics, expectations, and concerns," it is free and accessible online.

Here is a quote from that article regarding step scores of 36/80 applicants who participated in the study, "The mean reported United States Medical Licensing Examination score was 235.7 +/-15.7 and 246.7 +/-19.5 for steps 1 and 2 CK (Clinical Knowledge), respectively." Now, the study doesn't state if these applicants matched i6, but there are some conclusions to be drawn...for almost half of the 80 total applicants the MEAN score was 235 and the highest score was about a 250, so even if programs only accepted the ~250s from the applicant group (which is obviously not the case given ~30 spots to be filled) your score would still be above average. Now lets play the devil's advocate and extrapolate that for the other half of the 80 applicants not mentioned in this study just to weigh your odds, we'd have to make an assumption that they wer all 246s and up and completely go against the bell curve with the mean score of 235 of the half of applicants that opted into the study, to put you at "avg/below avg"...which as anyone would tell you would be a statistical anomaly. So again, the only way ur score compared to this data would be "average/below average," is if this study got super unlucky and the 44 i6 applicants who didn't participate wer all 250-ish scorers and higher...which again statistically makes no sense given the bell curve of the random half that did participate in the study.

So clearly your step1 of 246 is well above average, not only for this specialty but for most others too (see NRMP data)

So anyway don't let these 'full of them selves' types like Gurby deter you based on data they pull out of thin air. The published data shows that it I6 is somewhat competitive but not some magical out of reach unicorn, and you're in a good spot. I'm sick and tired of seeing these Gurby guys like trying to discourage ppl with baseless claims, the irony is that a person like this would never be allowed into our residency program becuz of their unscientific approach.

Your character and dedication matter a lot as well and good PDs see that during you auditions and interviews. Good luck!
I can't actually find the data that gurby was quoting, as I don't obviously see I6 listed in the charting outcomes document; the numbers like 37 spots for 80 applicants are specific enough that it doesn't seem like he didn't pull them out of thin air. But the article you're quoting is from 2013 and is based on 36 survey responses from the 2012 match. So it's entirely possible that the data that you're quoting is out of date.

Furthermore, you're missing the point of gurby's post which is that a step 1 score in and of itself isn't enough for a program where there are a small number of spots. Your own article said that >90% of applicants had peer-reviewed publications with a median of 3, whereas the OP had little research or connections within the field.

So while I agree with the general sentiment that on SDN sometimes there can be a misconception that everything is hyper-competitive and the bar is set higher than it truly is, at the same time telling people "you're fine, PDs care about who you are as a person," is also equally unhelpful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
So this Gurby guy is just wrong and doing that like pompous thing ppl do on SDN to poo poo others' goals, just to boost their fragile egos

Honestly not sure who peed in my cheerios on 5/4/2019 to cause me to write such an unnecessary and aggressive post :shrug:
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
I can't actually find the data that gurby was quoting, as I don't obviously see I6 listed in the charting outcomes document; the numbers like 37 spots for 80 applicants are specific enough that it doesn't seem like he didn't pull them out of thin air. But the article you're quoting is from 2013 and is based on 36 survey responses from the 2012 match. So it's entirely possible that the data that you're quoting is out of date.

Furthermore, you're missing the point of gurby's post which is that a step 1 score in and of itself isn't enough for a program where there are a small number of spots. Your own article said that >90% of applicants had peer-reviewed publications with a median of 3, whereas the OP had little research or connections within the field.

So while I agree with the general sentiment that on SDN sometimes there can be a misconception that everything is hyper-competitive and the bar is set higher than it truly is, at the same time telling people "you're fine, PDs care about who you are as a person," is also equally unhelpful.

In the case of his score of 246 being fairly competitive and needing a few pubs along the way (which I already mentioned the median being 3), then all that's left is the interview and auditioning to get a feel for the person as just that...a person. So you reiterated what I said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This thread is getting interesting...

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
 
You say that no one uses CT as a backup, but you can't tell me for sure where applicants are ranking these programs. Since everyone dual applies to CT I6 and GS, it's possible that they aren't ranking CT as their first choice. That's why the charting outcomes is the only way to really get a handle on what is going on, although like you pointed out it isn't available for CT I6. Look at other specialties like IR. The data that @Gurby was pulling from makes it look insanely competitive, when the actual match rate in charting outcomes was around 80% this year. It's asinine to use data that doesn't take into account where people put the specialty on their rank list.

a match rate of 80% is pretty competitive to me...
 
You say that no one uses CT as a backup, but you can't tell me for sure where applicants are ranking these programs. Since everyone dual applies to CT I6 and GS, it's possible that they aren't ranking CT as their first choice. That's why the charting outcomes is the only way to really get a handle on what is going on, although like you pointed out it isn't available for CT I6. Look at other specialties like IR. The data that @Gurby was pulling from makes it look insanely competitive, when the actual match rate in charting outcomes was around 80% this year. It's asinine to use data that doesn't take into account where people put the specialty on their rank list.

Where did this 80% number come from?

In my original post I referenced the 2019 Match Report as my data source. Here it is, not pulled out of thin air, for convenience:

Image 21.png
 
When there are so few spots for something like I6CT and most programs take 1 person, #'s like step scores basically only screen you out but don't guarantee you an in. The way to match is to make connections and have amazing aways (and most likely match at home or where you did aways).

Source: 2 friends with amazing stats / apps that didn't match I6CT ;(
 
I think you're misunderstanding me, I should have been more clear. The data you are referencing is kind of garbage for determining actual competitiveness since it doesn't take into account rank list. Charting outcomes is a much better gauge.

I was using IR as a comparison, since it is similarly very competitive. Take a look at these numbers from the 2020 match. IR looks insanely competitive for PGY-1 positions (206 applications for 38 spots, "match rate" would be 18.4%, which is ridiculous). The next chart down shows applications for PGY-2 positions (238 applications for 118 positions, "match rate" would be 49.6%. Charting outcomes 2020 had the match rate for IR at 81.3%, CLEARLY a different story than this data tells. It's just inaccurate to use this data to determine any sort of competitiveness, since it doesn't tell you where applicants are ranking these programs or how many applicants are applying to multiple tracks or even specialties.

Not sure I understand still, I6CT doesn't offer PGY2 positions. How can that confound?
 
Top