Is it true that Pain had a 87% match rate?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad :)
Good or bad is complicated.

It's good for folks that matched.
It's bad for the specialty to an extent if it suggests the field is getting less applicants or less competitive.
 
When I interviewed I was told that there were 300 applicants for 3 spots in my fellowship. This was the early 2000's. Is pain no longer attracting the same caliber of applicants?

For some programs it's still the same. Over 400 applicants this year.
 
When I interviewed I was told that there were 300 applicants for 3 spots in my fellowship. This was the early 2000's. Is pain no longer attracting the same caliber of applicants?

Adjustments.JPG


starting in 2016, it went from 305 to 316 to 335 to 359 available positions.

that’s a pretty substantial increase imo

Sent from my iPhone using SDN
 
When I interviewed I was told that there were 300 applicants for 3 spots in my fellowship. This was the early 2000's. Is pain no longer attracting the same caliber of applicants?

Please expound on the idea of the caliber of the applicants.
 
Increase in number of applicants is not commensurate with the number of increase in spots.

Hence less competitiveness and increase in match percentage.

Pain may not be as competitive as it once was.
 
Also people went to NASS fellowships this year for the first time (had to accept about a month ago). Met some on the trail so that is taking away from the denominator
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I really think it's due to the number of spots that have opened in the last year or so. Talking to my anesthesia based co-fellows, they said that the market for general anesthesia has not been bad either.
 
84.7%. It is available to everyone that matched. Highest match rate ever for pain. Last year it was 79%.
It was 75% the year before that.

Wonder why it's getting easier?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
I agree, this seems to be driven by an increase in the spots within the match without a significant increase in applicants. We'll see what happens when this is less of an anesthesiology based fellowship in the next few years.
 
I agree, this seems to be driven by an increase in the spots within the match without a significant increase in applicants. We'll see what happens when this is less of an anesthesiology based fellowship in the next few years.

Why would it be less Anes?
 
2 reasons:

1) Anes market is GREAT - anytime this happens, there are less people applying to pain.
2) Increase in number of spots more than increase in applicants.
 
So do we know how many applicants there were? Those graphs don’t mention the number of applicants, only the number of slots available, filled and those left vacant
 
Top