Interviewing for Radonc

[DrDarwin]

After looking through a booklet containing specialty information which our school distributes each year I noticed that grades (excluding Rad Onc rotations), AOA, and USMLE scores were noted to be significantly less important than other things, including research experience.

Is research experience more or less essential to have a shot? How important are pre-clinical grades? Does school reputation play an important role?

Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gfunk6]

Yes it's true, research is vitally important. Pre-clinical grades are not particularly important. School reputation does play a big role -- you are at a particular disadvantge if you don't have a home radonc program.

Read the "Rad Onc Application Guide" that is sticked @ the top of this forum.

 

[DrDarwin]

Which programs in NY are good?

 

[Gfunk6]

I've never been to Cornell so I can't comment. I will refer you to the "rad onc rankings" thread for more info.

 

[CNphair]

Research definitely trumps all. But to be a serious applicant for the "top" programs you need lots of research, a big name school, and a top USMLE score (to get you through the cut).

Lots of people who are at the top of their class with great scores and little research match too. But this isn't like Derm or Rads. The name of your school and number of publications are the top factors. And I don't pretend to understand the rationale behind that...

 

[DrDarwin]

Thanks for the replies. I can tell by the relative lack of activity in this thread that the field is still somewhat unknown. I guess it will have to be our little secret .

 

[deleted4401]

In my unscientific, two tries at this gig, I've come up with these factors, in order.

1. Research publications
1a. PhD
1b. Prestige of medical school

... These alone could get some people in. For the mere mortals ...

2. Step 1 (>230, try for >240)
3. Letters of recommendation from big-tymers
4. Junior AOA (i.e. pre-clinical grades)
5. AOA (i.e. clinical grades)

*** Interview Factor - hmm. The SDN elders feel this to be the great equalizer. I've said how I've felt about this, and I won't repeat myself. So, somewhere between 1 and 5 on the list (Steph thinks it's closer to 1; I think it's closer to 600, hehe).

On a personal note, I matched where I had my worst interview. Places that talked to my advisor and said I was "wonderful", "one of the best candidates they invited", and "will make an amazing radiation oncologist" negged me.

In sum, it's the NPR method - "Numbers, prestige, research".

-S

 

[DrRobert]

If med school reputation matters so much then why did the following "lower tier schools" have so much success this year?

Rosalind Franklin - 3
Medical College of Wisconsin - 3
U. of Tennessee - 2
Medical College of Georgia - 2
Jefferson - 2
Drexel - 2

 

[CNphair]

If med school reputation matters so much then why did the following "lower tier schools" have so much success this year?

Rosalind Franklin - 3
Medical College of Wisconsin - 3
U. of Tennessee - 2
Medical College of Georgia - 2
Jefferson - 2
Drexel - 2

Wow...just loooove seeing myself on this list.

You don't need to be from a prestigious school to match. However, to match at a top tier program, you do need to be. Just look at the match list. Prestige is a top factor. At Harvard, the chair referred to my (rather well known undergrad) as a "community college." Trust me...Stanford, Harvard, etc. will make sure you know your place on the social ladder.

That said, there are lots of really good programs that do not seem to give the "Name" factor much consideration at all...i.e. Wisconsin.

 

[DrRobert]

Wow...just loooove seeing myself on this list.

You don't need to be from a prestigious school to match. However, to match at a top tier program, you do need to be. Just look at the match list. Prestige is a top factor. At Harvard, the chair referred to my (rather well known undergrad) as a "community college." Trust me...Stanford, Harvard, etc. will make sure you know your place on the social ladder.

That said, there are lots of really good programs that do not seem to give the "Name" factor much consideration at all...i.e. Wisconsin.

Sorry. I wasn't trying to disrespect your school at all. Rather, I was trying to argue against the earlier posts that listed med school reputation as a top factor for matching.

 

[CNphair]

Sorry. I wasn't trying to disrespect your school at all. Rather, I was trying to argue against the earlier posts that listed med school reputation as a top factor for matching.

Oh goodness...no hard feelings whatsoever. You were right on point.

School reputation is not a top factor for matching, but after going to many top and middle tier interviews, I can tell you that it is without a doubt a large determinant for the top programs.

 

[deleted4401]

Yes, I'd like to make a correction. Prestige matters more for the top programs. The middle programs take their own. So, that becomes a factor.

To play devil's advocate with myself, who is to say that those that go to the top medical schools aren't the best applicants anyhow? I figure someone who got into Harvard Med very possibly may be <gasp> smarter than me And, possibly more <double gasp> personable.

I just can't help but be jaded when 21/130 positions go to Harvard and Yale graduates. Doesn't that make the rest of the commoners think there is a bias?

So, I finally talked to my new program director, etc. Seem nice enough. I was a little miffed that other program directors sent me e-mails saying congratulations before my own PD did, but they are making it up nicely. Turns out I get paid extra on call. That sweetens the deal, eh?

-S

 

[DrDarwin]

I agree. I am not sure that there should be a huge bias in favor of applicants from top schools, but you definitely have to consider competition, etc. when evaluating applicants.