Just how numbers driven is residency matching?

[loveoforganic]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Say someone is shooting for rad onc. They have low stats (say, one standard deviation below step 1 match average for rad onc and non-whatever that med school good GPA club is, can't remember the name). Do things like significant research pertinent to the field significantly increase interview invite chance?

 

[nontrdgsbuiucmd]

there's not a quantifiable, exact answer to this question. In a med school orientation meeting, we saw a study on program directors and what they considered "very, somewhat, little, or not at all" important; I think 150 or so program directors responded, and the answers were across the board.

the most important areas, on average, were clerkship grades (MS3 and possibly MS4, to the extent MS4 clerkships are complete prior to residency interviews) and USMLE step 1 scores. Grades were important to some, not important to others. Other than that, who knows; you can play the "all else being equal" game, but that always seemed silly to me. (all else being equal, if I'm wearing the same brand shoes as the interviewer maybe I'd have a leg up on the competition!).

That said, if you've never shown any interest, or done any research, or shadowed any physicians, or obtained any letters of reference from any radonc docs and are applying to a residency in that field, I cannot imagine the interviewer would think you have solidly planned for a career in rad onc.

 

[loveoforganic]

Thanks for the reply. I wasn't expecting anything definite, and that was very helpful 🙂

 

[Ativanigans]

From what I hear, it's a lot harder to work your way into something really competitive if your numbers are really ****ty vs. med school where you can save some african children to make up for a 30 MCAT. Research is good but plenty of the top notch applicants have research as well.

 

[Global Warming]

It seems that the race never ends...everything is soooo competitive!

Call me crazy, but that's why I love it. It makes success that much more delicious to me. It makes everything worth working for. In my life experiences...it seems that any success obtained by people around me always came with an asterik. For example, someone I know is very well off, financially. However, he works in shady business.

It will be nice, for a change, to obtain something rare w/o any shortcuts or cheats.

 

[b-real]

I refer you to this paper in Academic Medicine.

http://journals.lww.com/academicmed..._Criteria_for_Residency__Results_of_a.24.aspx

 

[b-real]

It seems that the race never ends...everything is soooo competitive!

Call me crazy, but that's why I love it. It makes success that much more delicious to me. It makes everything worth working for. In my life experiences...it seems that any success obtained by people around me always came with an asterik. For example, someone I know is very well off, financially. However, he works in shady business.

It will be nice, for a change, to obtain something rare w/o any shortcuts or cheats.

Umm, I hate to break it to you, but residency matching has as much to do with whom you know as it does what you know (high GPA, USMLE). Networking is huge, especially in the competitive specialties. If you don't play the game, you may be sorely disappointed in where you end up.

 

[JJMrK]

there's not a quantifiable, exact answer to this question. In a med school orientation meeting, we saw a study on program directors and what they considered "very, somewhat, little, or not at all" important; I think 150 or so program directors responded, and the answers were across the board.

the most important areas, on average, were clerkship grades (MS3 and possibly MS4, to the extent MS4 clerkships are complete prior to residency interviews) and USMLE step 1 scores. Grades were important to some, not important to others. Other than that, who knows; you can play the "all else being equal" game, but that always seemed silly to me. (all else being equal, if I'm wearing the same brand shoes as the interviewer maybe I'd have a leg up on the competition!).

That said, if you've never shown any interest, or done any research, or shadowed any physicians, or obtained any letters of reference from any radonc docs and are applying to a residency in that field, I cannot imagine the interviewer would think you have solidly planned for a career in rad onc.

Good info, thanks for the response. 👍

 

[michigator04]

I refer you to this paper in Academic Medicine.

http://journals.lww.com/academicmed..._Criteria_for_Residency__Results_of_a.24.aspx

According to that study Rad. Onc. values published research very highly compared to other specialties. For Rad. Onc. it is tied for number 1 in importance with LOR's (grades and USMLE are 4 and 5). For all the other specialties except Plastics, published research is ranked 8th or below in importance.

 

[J ROD]

Umm, I hate to break it to you, but residency matching has as much to do with whom you know as it does what you know (high GPA, USMLE). Networking is huge, especially in the competitive specialties. If you don't play the game, you may be sorely disappointed in where you end up.

great!! I worked in politics for 3.5 yrs!! 👍

 

[loveoforganic]

According to that study Rad. Onc. values published research very highly compared to other specialties. For Rad. Onc. it is tied for number 1 in importance with LOR's (grades and USMLE are 4 and 5). For all the other specialties except Plastics, published research is ranked 8th or below in importance.

Cool, I was kind of thinking something like this might be the case for rad onc, but I definitely wasn't expecting that much of a disparity between the other fields.

 

[Law2Doc]

Cool, I was kind of thinking something like this might be the case for rad onc, but I definitely wasn't expecting that much of a disparity between the other fields.

Don't kid yourself. In the small competitive fields, they want, and get, the whole package. They pick and choose from amongst the best and brightest, who have both the grades AND research. So you aren't really seeing folks with poor grades pulling themselves into competitiveness for rad onc based on research, you are seeing folks who already have that 240 Step 1 having to do research because the field prizes it.

I do have to second the suggestion that networking and who you know also plays a role, which is why you see people going into the competitive fields tending to do away rotations, to better meet the players. But if you want an uber competitive field like radonc, plan on (1) getting top numbers, (2) doing research, and (3) networking/doing audition rotations, because, regardless of what order the field lists what it deems important, it gets the whole list when it is that small and selective. I mean so what if they consider X not as important as Y when they are able to pick and choose from folks who have both X and Y.

 

[skeptic29]

I do have to second the suggestion that networking and who you know also plays a role, which is why you see people going into the competitive fields tending to do away rotations, to better meet the players. But if you want an uber competitive field like radonc, plan on (1) getting top numbers, (2) doing research, and (3) networking/doing audition rotations, because, regardless of what order the field lists what it deems important, it gets the whole list when it is that small and selective. I mean so what if they consider X not as important as Y when they are able to pick and choose from folks who have both X and Y.

What's an audition rotation?

 

[MedMan25]

Don't kid yourself. In the small competitive fields, they want, and get, the whole package. They pick and choose from amongst the best and brightest, who have both the grades AND research. So you aren't really seeing folks with poor grades pulling themselves into competitiveness for rad onc based on research, you are seeing folks who already have that 240 Step 1 having to do research because the field prizes it.

I do have to second the suggestion that networking and who you know also plays a role, which is why you see people going into the competitive fields tending to do away rotations, to better meet the players. But if you want an uber competitive field like radonc, plan on (1) getting top numbers, (2) doing research, and (3) networking/doing audition rotations, because, regardless of what order the field lists what it deems important, it gets the whole list when it is that small and selective. I mean so what if they consider X not as important as Y when they are able to pick and choose from folks who have both X and Y.

Agreed. Residency is a numbers game, just like med school admissions. Granted, there are some PDs who could care less about what your scores are but the bottom line is someone applying for rad onc with <220 on the boards is going to be fighting an uphill battle. Programs can only interview so many and the competitive programs usually get way more applicants than they have time to interview so they need some objective method for screening applicants. Someone with a 210 applying for rad onc is likely to have their application trashed before the research, letters, etc. are even considered.

 

[MedMan25]

What's an audition rotation?

It's when a med student does a rotation at a program away from his/her home institution that he/she is interested in matching.

 

[MedMan25]

From what I hear, it's a lot harder to work your way into something really competitive if your numbers are really ****ty vs. med school where you can save some african children to make up for a 30 MCAT. Research is good but plenty of the top notch applicants have research as well.

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

 

[panthera]

A friend of a friend is an MS1 and has his mind set on rad onc. Due to the competitive nature of the specialty -- instead of partying all summer before first year, he was doing research at the med school he was accepted to!

Major props to him and others who are that determined for a specialty.

 

[MedMan25]

A friend of a friend is an MS1 and has his mind set on rad onc. Due to the competitive nature of the specialty -- instead of partying all summer before first year, he was doing research at the med school he was accepted to!

Major props to him and others who are that determined for a specialty.

A lot of med students do this. Pretty smart actually since rad onc isn't the only specialty that is competitive and values research and since your opportunities for doing research become limited once school starts.

 

[skeptic29]

It's when a med student does a rotation at a program away from his/her home institution that he/she is interested in matching.

Didn't know you could do this. Is this something most people do or is it something that happens occassionally? I'm sure there's some sort of an application process though... what is that like?

 

[MedMan25]

Didn't know you could do this. Is this something most people do or is it something that happens occassionally? I'm sure there's some sort of an application process though... what is that like?

Away rotations are not uncommon. You do have to apply for away rotations, some programs are more selective than others. The number of students applying and the competitiveness of the program usually dictates how selective they are.

 

[Ableton]

Residency matching is VERY numbers driven at competitive programs. If a secretary has over 500 applications for 50 interview spots, what do you think is the easiest way to trim it down? Set a cutoff based on Step 1 scores.

Now, occasionally a few individuals might make it through based on outstanding letters, exceptional away rotations or sometimes even a phone call made on their behalf. But make no mistake, residency matching far from being anything but a numbers game.

 

[skeptic29]

Away rotations are not uncommon. You do have to apply for away rotations, some programs are more selective than others. The number of students applying and the competitiveness of the program usually dictates how selective they are.

I was just reading another thread and found a reference to what they called a "sub-I". Is this the same as an away rotation?

 

[MedMan25]

I was just reading another thread and found a reference to what they called a "sub-I". Is this the same as an away rotation?

A sub-I is short for "sub-internship". It is a little different than an elective rotation. These are rotations you do during 4th year where you are given the responsibilities of an intern in order to prepare you for residency. A little searching will give you more info on that.

 

[ahmcadams]

Say someone is shooting for rad onc. They have low stats (say, one standard deviation below step 1 match average for rad onc and non-whatever that med school good GPA club is, can't remember the name). Do things like significant research pertinent to the field significantly increase interview invite chance?

If you look at the published applicant statistics for residency, median USMLE Step-1 scores for those matching into the most competitive fields (neurosurg, rad onc, etc.) are typically around 240, which is approximately 1 standard deviation above the mean. Roughly speaking, you therefore need a 240 to reach the point where your score is essentially a non-factor and gets you about even with the competition. Even average scorers are going to need a pretty substantial leg-up elsewhere in their applications to make those cuts, so imagine the uphill battle that faces someone a full standard deviation below the mean (~200).

There are plenty of success stories from those who have matched into the most competitive fields with below-average stats, but those cases are rare and that path isn't one most people are likely to follow.

 

[diosa428]

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

While I definitely agree that getting in to the residency of your choice is probably less competitive than the med school of your choice, keep in mind that the 134 people who applied to rad onc does not include the X number of people who were told not to apply because they would not match.

 

[JJMrK]

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

Correct me if this is way off, but I feel like this is a little bit misleading for two reasons:
1) People apply to a ton of medical schools. A lot of those 5000 people just threw an application at Harvard for the heck of it (I know I did). When applying to residency though, people are more likely to apply only to rad onc programs if that's what they're interested in.
2) I'd assume that many people choose not to apply to competitive residencies if they have little chance of matching. Not matching would be a lot worse than not getting into 1 particular medical school.

 

[RandomAttending]

Say someone is shooting for rad onc. They have low stats (say, one standard deviation below step 1 match average for rad onc and non-whatever that med school good GPA club is, can't remember the name). Do things like significant research pertinent to the field significantly increase interview invite chance?

This completely depends on the specialty. A high step 1 score is always good and for really competitve specialties better have research. Many students don't have step 2 score back yet or (or haven't taken the test) when they apply. I know in EM, it is fine to have research but most applicants don't. Talk to someone who really knows your specialty.

 

[RandomAttending]

Residency matching is VERY numbers driven at competitive programs. If a secretary has over 500 applications for 50 interview spots, what do you think is the easiest way to trim it down? Set a cutoff based on Step 1 scores.

Now, occasionally a few individuals might make it through based on outstanding letters, exceptional away rotations or sometimes even a phone call made on their behalf. But make no mistake, residency matching far from being anything but a numbers game.

never heard of a secretary making such critical decisions. residency is not all about numbers. depends on the specialty and program.

 

[DoctorDeMan]

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

You sure 134 people applied and not ranked?

 

[MedMan25]

You sure 134 people applied and not ranked?

According to NRMP there were 155 rad onc applicants (U.S. allopathic seniors, doesn't include DO/IMG applicants which adds another 45) in 2009. See http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2009v3.pdf

 

[bigal40]

Correct me if this is way off, but I feel like this is a little bit misleading for two reasons:
1) People apply to a ton of medical schools. A lot of those 5000 people just threw an application at Harvard for the heck of it (I know I did). When applying to residency though, people are more likely to apply only to rad onc programs if that's what they're interested in.
2) I'd assume that many people choose not to apply to competitive residencies if they have little chance of matching. Not matching would be a lot worse than not getting into 1 particular medical school.

You're right, there is probably quite a bit of self-selection going on, but the numbers are the numbers.

 

[MedMan25]

Correct me if this is way off, but I feel like this is a little bit misleading for two reasons:
1) People apply to a ton of medical schools. A lot of those 5000 people just threw an application at Harvard for the heck of it (I know I did). When applying to residency though, people are more likely to apply only to rad onc programs if that's what they're interested in.
2) I'd assume that many people choose not to apply to competitive residencies if they have little chance of matching. Not matching would be a lot worse than not getting into 1 particular medical school.

Like I said, applying to a competitive residency with low scores puts you at a disadvantage. There is no argument about that. But I stand by what I said before, getting into a competitive med school as an average applicant is much harder than getting into a competitive specialty as an average (U.S. allo) med student.

Sure, there are a lot of people who apply to Harvard just for kicks but even for the less competitive med schools the numbers are not much different. Medical College of Wisconsin got 6,429 applicants for 212 seats in '08. WVU got ~2,979 for 110 seats. In total there were 42,269 applicants to U.S. allo schools and only 18,390 matriculants in 2009 (see http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table17-fact2009mcatgpa98-09-web.pdf). Not to sound discouraging to anyone here but that means there were 23,879 more applicants to U.S. medical schools than there were seats available this year.

In 2009 there were 15,638 U.S. allo seniors applying for 21,982 residency positions. That means there are 6,344 more positions available then there are U.S. allo applicants for residency positions.

Yes, residency for some programs is numbers driven but if you just want to play the odds game, you have a much greater chance of landing even a competitive residency as an average senior graduating from a U.S. allo school than the average applicant does applying for med school.

 

[icalz]

The only thing I can add to this thread is that I had shadowed an Anesthesiology Program Director for three days and she was very open in answering questions. What she stated to me was that she doesn't take people with very high stats or very low stats...but average stats. She went on to explain that she had learned from her past experiences that the residents with high stats were (1) less teachable; they knew it all, and (2) they weren't as willing to do the more menial tasks. She stated that the average resident knew that they were average and worked twice as hard to prove that they could do it...and that's why she prefers average-stat applicants.

I know this is probably not indicative of most other programs, but I just wanted to share what this one PD told me. Take it as you will.

 

[MedMan25]

The only thing I can add to this thread is that I had shadowed an Anesthesiology Program Director for three days and she was very open in answering questions. What she stated to me was that she doesn't take people with very high stats or very low stats...but average stats. She went on to explain that she had learned from her past experiences that the residents with high stats were (1) less teachable; they knew it all, and (2) they weren't as willing to do the more menial tasks. She stated that the average resident knew that they were average and worked twice as hard to prove that they could do it...and that's why she prefers average-stat applicants.

I know this is probably not indicative of most other programs, but I just wanted to share what this one PD told me. Take it as you will.

I think that illustrates the fact that residency program directors are typically looking for different characteristics than a medical school looks for. PDs want someone who is going to work hard, is reliable, gets along with coworkers, etc. Most PDs understand that if you can make it through med school you have the intellect to be a doctor but they need to know that you can work like one.

You have to keep in mind though, different PDs have different opinions, objectives, etc. One criteria essential to one PD may be totally irrelevant to another. I have heard PDs say they absolutely don't care what your numbers are as long as you've passed. I've heard a PD in a different program at the same school say they don't even look at you unless you scored > 220 on step 1.

 

[RySerr21]

A friend of a friend is an MS1 and has his mind set on rad onc. Due to the competitive nature of the specialty -- instead of partying all summer before first year, he was doing research at the med school he was accepted to!

Major props to him and others who are that determined for a specialty.

Thats a mistake! Enjoy that summer. Travel the world. Relax. I guess if he enjoyed the research, then good for him. For 99% of people that is not necessary tho!

 

[45408]

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

Yes, but don't forget - most people who apply for a given specialty already know they are somewhat competitive. I'm applying for a specialty that I know I'm competitive in, and I've gotten lots of interview invites. I also have LORs from that specialty, honors in the sub-I in that specialty, and a Step 1 that is well above the average for it as well, etc. I know that I'm not competitive for derm (darn!), so I don't bother applying. Your adviser will tell you if you're wasting your time and money trying to get into a specialty. Some people apply with a long shot, but most people don't apply with no chance at all. If they do, they should at least have a back-up specialty.

 

[MedMan25]

Yes, but don't forget - most people who apply for a given specialty already know they are somewhat competitive. I'm applying for a specialty that I know I'm competitive in, and I've gotten lots of interview invites. I also have LORs from that specialty, honors in the sub-I in that specialty, and a Step 1 that is well above the average for it as well, etc. I know that I'm not competitive for derm (darn!), so I don't bother applying. Your adviser will tell you if you're wasting your time and money trying to get into a specialty. Some people apply with a long shot, but most people don't apply with no chance at all. If they do, they should at least have a back-up specialty.

I think people for the most part do the same thing when applying to med school though. People apply to the schools they think they will have a chance at. The big difference is there are thousands more applying for med school than there are applying for residency.

 

[ILikeDrugs]

You can make some educated guesses by looking here:

http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2009v3.pdf

It shows the number of research activities vs matched and non-matched. Of course it's a very rough guide since nothing in this process is ever clean cut, but it's still better than nothing.

The mean number of research experiences for those matched to rad onc is 3.8. While the number of research experience for those who didn't match is 3.6. However, there were 5 people who had no research experience and did match, and there were 7 people who had more than 5 experiences and didnt match. Like I said, it's a very rough guide. 😀

 

[thesauce]

You sure 134 people applied and not ranked?

You're right. 134 people ranked a radonc program first. That's probably almost identical to the number that applied because it's rare not to get a single interview.

 

[Law2Doc]

never heard of a secretary making such critical decisions. residency is not all about numbers. depends on the specialty and program.

The secretary doesn't have to do it. The residency application program (ERAS) reportedly has built in filters that allow program directors to screen for certain credentials if they so choose. Bottom line is that with any application process where you cannot realistically see everybody, there has to be a mechanism to throw out X% of the applications unseen, so separate the wheat from the chaff. In most cases this is a by the numbers (or more likely by the board scores) approach, because objective screens are easiest. So you narrow the group the the number you can actually wade through as a committee in the time allotted, and then start sending out interview invites. Unlike med school admissions, where there is usually a dean of admissions whose primary job is admissions, most program directors are clinicians first, but have taken on this additional responsibility of selecting and managing the residents on top of that. So it is essential that they find a time efficient way to do their admissions selection, because they still have to (1) do their clinician job, and (2) handle the issues of the current group of residents (which can be plentiful).

 

[Law2Doc]

Thats a mistake! Enjoy that summer. Travel the world. Relax. I guess if he enjoyed the research, then good for him. For 99% of people that is not necessary tho!

I tend to agree with this, not only because hitting the ground refreshed probably results in better first year grades, and a stronger foundation for second year and the boards, which are going to matter for residency, but also because residencies put far more weight on research done once you have started med school than before. Not sure why this is, but they do. So if you are going to wow a residency with research, you'd better plan on squeezing it in during med school (the summer after first year is most common, squeezing in some time during second year is doable for some, and taking a year off after third year is not unheard of).

 

[thesauce]

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

But you're talking about 1 particular school. I'll give you the stats for Ohio State University Radiation Oncology (from my rejection letter) : >140 applicants for 1 spot. By your logic, it's 4 or 5-times more competitive than Harvard med.

 

[MedMan25]

You're right. 134 people ranked a radonc program first. That's probably almost identical to the number that applied because it's rare not to get a single interview.

You're right, my mistake. 134 matched, 155 US allo seniors applied (page 3 http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2009v3.pdf) for 156 positions. That's 1 more rad onc position than there are US allo applicants.

 

[MedMan25]

But you're talking about 1 particular school. I'll give you the stats for Ohio State University Radiation Oncology (from my rejection letter) : >140 applicants for 1 spot. By your logic, it's 4 or 5-times more competitive than Harvard med.

If you look at the overall numbers though (since hardly anyone applies to just 1 med school, likewise, most med students apply to several residency programs) there are far more residency positions available than there are residency applicants. In contrast, there are far fewer available seats for incoming med students at US allo schools than there are applicants.

 

[thesauce]

From a sheer numbers perspective, I would say you have more of an advantage as an average med student applying for a competitive residency than you do as an average premed applying for a competitive med school. Take Harvard for example. They get about 5,000 applicants a year for 165 seats. If you had got a 30 on the MCAT, it doesn't matter how many babies in Africa you saved since you are going to be up against 3,000 other people who have probably saved more babies than you have.

Last year 134 people from allopathic medical schools in the U.S. applied for rad onc and 113 of those people matched. Granted, the average step 1 score for the group that matched was fairly high, based on numbers alone you have a better chance of getting into a competitive residency than you do getting into a competitive medical school.

You're right, my mistake. 134 matched, 155 US allo seniors applied (page 3 http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2009v3.pdf) for 156 positions. There is 1 more rad onc position than there are US allo applicants.

I didn't look at the document before I posted, I just went by your numbers. The 155 number is the number of applicants that actually ranked a radonc program first (i.e. got at least 1 interview). Just to clarify, that's approximately the number that applied because very few people don't get a single interview.

 

[MedMan25]

I didn't look at the document before I posted, I just went by your numbers. The 155 number is the number of applicants that actually ranked a radonc program first (i.e. got at least 1 interview). Just to clarify, that's approximately the number that applied because very few people don't get a single interview.

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong but on page 3 under the column for "total number of applicants" for rad onc is 179. If you subtract the total number of independent applicants (24) you get 155 US allo seniors applied. I don't see a reference to the number ranked anywhere.

 

[thesauce]

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong but on page 3 under the column for "total number of applicants" for rad onc is 179. If you subtract the total number of independent applicants (24) you get 155 US allo seniors applied. I don't see a reference to the number ranked anywhere.

They define an applicant to a specialty as someone who ranked that specialty first on their rank-list. In order to rank that specialty first, you need at least 1 interview in that specialty. It's in the intro somewhere. Haven't looked at it in a while.

 

[MedMan25]

They define an applicant to a specialty as someone who ranked that specialty first on their rank-list. In order to rank that specialty first, you need at least 1 interview in that specialty. It's in the intro somewhere. Haven't looked at it in a while.

Well, that changes everything. So how can you find out the number that actually applied?

 

[thesauce]

ERAS (as opposed to NRMP) has that info and I don't think they released it.

 

[Law2Doc]

... Just to clarify, that's approximately the number that applied because very few people don't get a single interview.

I don't know if this is actually true. I suspect a lot of people don't get an interview to some of the uber competitive paths. Many med schools will guarantee you an interview to your home program simply by being a student there, but certainly not all med schools have rad onc programs. If you are talking about a less competitive path, then sure, most applicants would get at least one place to rank, but I'm pretty sure it's not unheard of for someone applying to rad onc to not get any interviews, and certainly most med schools advise folks applying to those insanely competitive paths to strongly consider applying to back-up fields.