Least unfilled spots since 2010

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

thatsrad

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
80
Reaction score
63
16 unfilled spots (15 advanced, 1 categorical) for diagnostic rads this year.

45 in 2016 (35 advanced, 10 categorical)
150 in 2015 (137 advanced, 13 categorical)
74 in 2014 (58 advanced, 16 categorical)
65 in 2013 (51 advanced, 14 categorical)
86 in 2012 (75 advanced, 11 categorical)
41 in 2011 (33 advanced, 8 categorical)
6 in 2010 (4 advanced, 2 categorical)

Clearly we are seeing radiology's competitiveness increasing substantially over the past 2 years. And it's not just that PD's are being smarter (more realistic) in their interviewing and ranking. The % of PGY2 spots being filled by US Seniors has been increasing as well. 58% of spots filled by US Seniors in 2015, 72% in 2017. Still not to where we were at in 2010 when 84% were filled by US Seniors.

Of course, I don't think this decrease in % of US Seniors is all due to a decrease in competitiveness since there are so many DO's going into radiology now. 10-12% of matches are DO, compared to a measly 3-4% in 2010.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I think its a combination of PD's being a bit more aggressive with how many people they interview/rank, and also the whole 'radiology will be outsourced' mentality that was turning applicants off for a while has finally proven to be an unlikely factor.
 
Can confirm, this was a much more competitive year than last year.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Nope! I matched DR-only. I'm quite happy with my match, but it does mean I'll have to work hard(er) for a fellowship spot.
Congratulations! This leaves you flexible to choose a different IR program if you aren't thrilled with your home IR institution, too (I already know of one person from the last cycle who switched out of their integrated IR program to instead do DR at that institution because they weren't happy with their IR).
 
Nope! I matched DR-only. I'm quite happy with my match, but it does mean I'll have to work hard(er) for a fellowship spot.

This is a blessing in disguise. You will be able to learn new techniques by going to two different institution. I know you probably feel down but you'll be just fine.

BTW, it's better to end up at UCSF DR than podunk DR/IR.

You may fall in love with DR anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The DR/IR path is a bad choice, I think...Coming from someone who is an R2 and still like 70% IR. You're better off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's not a bad pathway, it's just super competitive right now. You are buying it high. Like I said, IR matches used to be completely noncompetitive.
 
It's a bad path because of making that commitment so early. Most people who come in, guns blazing for IR end up in DR. With that path, you need to have someone to swap out with. Having a choice is never a bad thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, the flip side is I have more options now. This year was quite competitive. I'm writing a blog post about my experience and will link to it shortly. The main takeaway is the same advice given to radiology applicants of old - your Step 1 score matters more than anything.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, the flip side is I have more options now. This year was quite competitive. I'm writing a blog post about my experience and will link to it shortly. The main takeaway is the same advice given to radiology applicants of old - your Step 1 score matter more than anything.

Looking forward to reading it.
 
Thanks for the encouragement. Yes, the flip side is I have more options now. This year was quite competitive. I'm writing a blog post about my experience and will link to it shortly. The main takeaway is the same advice given to radiology applicants of old - your Step 1 score matter more than anything.

matched IR/DR at a top 10 place with step 1 not much diff than yours. personality/fit matter. plz stop misleading/discouraging people
 
Members don't see this ad :)
matched IR/DR at a top 10 place with step 1 not much diff than yours. personality/fit matter. plz stop misleading/discouraging people

Congrats on matching! We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. IR/DR will be like neurosurgery, vascular surgery and plastic surgery going forward. Outliers exist, but for the majority of applicants you should shoot for a >240 Step 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
outliers exist but in this case, i can speak from actual expertise. ofc you should aim for highest step scores possible, but you and I both had > 10 interviews in IR. it wasn't the scores that kept you from matching into IR.
 
outliers exist but in this case, i can speak from actual expertise. ofc you should aim for highest step scores possible, but you and I both had > 10 interviews in IR. it wasn't the scores that kept you from matching into IR.


just curious what rank ~ is your med school?
 
It's a bad path because of making that commitment so early. Most people who come in, guns blazing for IR end up in DR. With that path, you need to have someone to swap out with. Having a choice is never a bad thing.

I concur.
 
matched IR/DR at a top 10 place with step 1 not much diff than yours. personality/fit matter. plz stop misleading/discouraging people

From calling PGY4 "pulling number out of his ass" (phrasing?) to putting someone who didn't match immediately down after match day...If I were you I would chill out a bit more. IR is a small field and let's be kind to each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
From calling PGY4 "pulling number out of his ass" (phrasing?) to putting someone who didn't match immediately down after match day...If I were you I would chill out a bit more. IR is a small field and let's be kind to each other.

you're right, i'm sorry for being so crass. I've just been frustrated with the quality of posts by some of the posters. It's really frustrating, SDN premed and even allo was so great and helpful. this rads forum has been the exact opposite, and it's frustrating. But you are right - no reason to be a dick. Again, i'm sorry.
 
you're right, i'm sorry for being so crass. I've just been frustrated with the quality of posts by some of the posters. It's really frustrating, SDN premed and even allo was so great and helpful. this rads forum has been the exact opposite, and it's frustrating. But you are right - no reason to be a dick. Again, i'm sorry.

Hard to say if it's more competitive or not this year. With the redistribution of DR --> IR, it may simply have boiled down to a matter of zero-sum.

Naijaba, you have kick-ass posts btw. Rock on.
 
you're right, i'm sorry for being so crass. I've just been frustrated with the quality of posts by some of the posters. It's really frustrating, SDN premed and even allo was so great and helpful. this rads forum has been the exact opposite, and it's frustrating. But you are right - no reason to be a dick. Again, i'm sorry.

You know, you are direct and to the point, and seem like a go getter. This is the attitude IR needs so glad to have you in the field.

And you are right in a way. I did read the other poster's post, and seems like he is ranking around 5 top 10 IR first and then top DRs after that. The top IR programs are very very competitive but I know for a fact he can match into an IR program knowing who we matched.

I was giving a talk at the SIR this year and I was surprised by the amount of student presentating
 
.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Congrats on matching! This year was VERY competitive. Even for DR. Someone from my school with 240s steps, above average clinical grades, matched their 15th out of 15th choice in DR (no red flags, good social skills, not a weirdo or anything). I did match IR but fell much lower on my list than I expected (down to #9). Somewhere where I really loved the IR, but didn't love the DR. Perhaps I should have ranked the better DRs higher. While I have a guaranteed IR spot at a well respected IR program, I will unfortunately be compromising on the diagnostic side of things. Will make the most of it regardless!

With regards to the future, now that IR is the hot kid on the block for med students and more IR/DR residencies are opening up, I don't see it getting less competitive any time soon (only more). I'm sure it will become self selecting once charting outcomes is released, but I would agree with the opinion of many others that IR/DR will be up there with plastics, ent, & neurosurgery in terms of applicant CV

Self Selecting, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You know, you are direct and to the point, and seem like a go getter. This is the attitude IR needs so glad to have you in the field.

And you are right in a way. I did read the other poster's post, and seems like he is ranking around 5 top 10 IR first and then top DRs after that. The top IR programs are very very competitive but I know for a fact he can match into an IR program knowing who we matched.

I was giving a talk at the SIR this year and I was surprised by the amount of student presentating

I appreciate the good words! I just want to make it a point to note that IR/DR is no doubt competitive, but stressing high step scores is not going to make a stronger candidate. The people that matched IR/DR are extremely personable, committed to patient care and forwarding clinical IR, and have shown commitment to IR via research, presentations, and EC involvement in RFS/MSC. Like you said, IR is a small field. I was fortunate enough to have strong IR letters from faculty from my aways and home program, which in my opinion is THE MOST important thing alongside strong involvement with IR. If you want to do IR/DR, and you are not at a strong IR home program, it is imperative you do aways at strong IR places for those letters. Without that, you don't stand a chance.

Najaiba did the right things, but it wasn't the step scores that did him in. He also had Yale/Stanford aways and letters. In my opinion, what probably led to him not matching in IR was more personality and fit. Look at some of his posts (from the intern year advice to talking about DR Artificial intelligence stuff) - none of it strongly fits the mold of what IR/DR PDs want. He is a stellar DR candidate though and his personality is very much suited for DR.
 
Congrats on matching! This year was VERY competitive. Even for DR. Someone from my school with 240s steps, above average clinical grades, matched their 15th out of 15th choice in DR (no red flags, good social skills, not a weirdo or anything). I did match IR but fell much lower on my list than I expected (down to #9). Somewhere where I really loved the IR, but didn't love the DR. Perhaps I should have ranked the better DRs higher. While I have a guaranteed IR spot at a well respected IR program, I will unfortunately be compromising on the diagnostic side of things. Will make the most of it regardless!
I appreciate the good words! I just want to make it a point to note that IR/DR is no doubt competitive, but stressing high step scores is not going to make a stronger candidate. The people that matched IR/DR are extremely personable, committed to patient care and forwarding clinical IR, and have shown commitment to IR via research, presentations, and EC involvement in RFS/MSC. Like you said, IR is a small field. I was fortunate enough to have strong IR letters from faculty from my aways and home program, which in my opinion is THE MOST important thing alongside strong involvement with IR. If you want to do IR/DR, and you are not at a strong IR home program, it is imperative you do aways at strong IR places for those letters. Without that, you don't stand a chance.

Najaiba did the right things, but it wasn't the step scores that did him in. He also had Yale/Stanford aways and letters. In my opinion, what probably led to him not matching in IR was more personality and fit. Look at some of his posts (from the intern year advice to talking about DR Artificial intelligence stuff) - none of it strongly fits the mold of what IR/DR PDs want. He is a stellar DR candidate though and his personality is very much suited for DR.

You hit the nail in the head there. Unfortunately, AI is an extremely nuanced topic in radiology. I have to admit I don't understand about it enough and I can't predict the future. However it is a very disruptive technology and should be tightly controlled by radiology.

It's easy to come off as "hey I am gonna do IR and use AI to read DR studies to make bank" when you aren't careful and that's extremely off putting to to an IR guy.

In fact, a lot of the discussion I've had on the trail centered around the fact that I will be one of the last peope of the old pathway. Many PDs are worried that IR DR students may not take DR seriously.

I will actually be pursuing advanced DR rotations plus IR in my last year because I truly believe you cannot be a good IR without being an expert at DR.

My IR program director even do some DR work on his own time just to keep his skill sharp.

The point is, you can easily go overboard with the other direction when you begin to dismiss DR.

It's absolutely vital for IR DR applicants to show the utmost respect to their DR colleague and remember that DR and IR will always be in the same family in a way.

The take away would be that the whole thing about AI need to be talked about extremely carefully, otherwise you can come off as a med student who is eager to make attendings who spent years practicing their craft obsolete.
 
@Naijaba is being spoken about like he **** the bed in some way, but let's step back and acknowledge that he matched to one of the top and more prestigious DR/IR programs in the country and deserves the utmost props. I am certain he will end up with substantial DR training and, if he continues to pursue his interest in and passion for IR, will eventually enter an equally strong independent residency down the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
@Naijaba is being spoken about like he **** the bed in some way, but let's step back and acknowledge that he matched to one of the top and more prestigious DR/IR programs in the country and deserves the utmost props. I am certain he will end up with substantial DR training and, if he continues to pursue his interest in and passion for IR, will eventually enter an equally strong independent residency down the road.

I do not intend to discount his success in anyway. He has been a very success candidate.

I merely stated to approach the discussion about AI in an extremly careful manner. It's not something I would bring up.

As my attending told me, don't bring up religion, politics, AI or outsourcing, and football (he's half kidding about the last one).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I appreciate the good words! I just want to make it a point to note that IR/DR is no doubt competitive, but stressing high step scores is not going to make a stronger candidate. The people that matched IR/DR are extremely personable, committed to patient care and forwarding clinical IR, and have shown commitment to IR via research, presentations, and EC involvement in RFS/MSC. Like you said, IR is a small field. I was fortunate enough to have strong IR letters from faculty from my aways and home program, which in my opinion is THE MOST important thing alongside strong involvement with IR. If you want to do IR/DR, and you are not at a strong IR home program, it is imperative you do aways at strong IR places for those letters. Without that, you don't stand a chance.

Najaiba did the right things, but it wasn't the step scores that did him in. He also had Yale/Stanford aways and letters. In my opinion, what probably led to him not matching in IR was more personality and fit. Look at some of his posts (from the intern year advice to talking about DR Artificial intelligence stuff) - none of it strongly fits the mold of what IR/DR PDs want. He is a stellar DR candidate though and his personality is very much suited for DR.

Personality and fit?

When did we become judge and jury?

Slow your roll...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Personality and fit?

When did we become judge and jury?

Slow your roll...

He's achieved so much by matching that he can judge whoever he damn well pleases.

No one has ever matched before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
montgomery-burns.gif


Personality and fit, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Hi everybody, I want to be clear that I'm super stoked about my match! I'm going to UW for DR. My post above about step scores is not for IR/DR, but radiology in general. I found that I simply didn't get interviewed at a few places (UCLA, UCSF, USC), despite being from Southern California

Fit could also be an issue. I certainly cause some polarized arguments on this forum and possibly my interviews as well. I'm interested in IR and machine learning. I myself feel stretched too thin, and maybe that came across in interviews. For what it's worth UW is an incredible fit for me: I actually visited Seattle some 10 times these past four years to visit a close friend. It's without a doubt the second largest tech city in the US by density, a top-5 school for computer science, and the "best in the West" for IR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Hi everybody, I want to be clear that I'm super stoked about my match! I'm going to UW for DR. My post above about step scores is not for IR/DR, but radiology in general. I found that I simply didn't get interviewed at a few places (UCLA, UCSF, USC), despite being from Southern California

Fit could also be an issue. I certainly cause some polarized arguments on this forum and possibly my interviews as well. I'm interested in IR and machine learning. I myself feel stretched too thin, and maybe that came across in interviews. For what it's worth UW is an incredible fit for me: I actually visited Seattle some 10 times these past four years to visit a close friend. It's without a doubt the second largest tech city in the US by density, a top-5 school for computer science, and the "best in the West" for IR.

Congrats. I understand UW is considered to be better than UCSF, Stanford and UCLA for IR. Sometimes the best way is the scenic route.
 
Hi everybody, I want to be clear that I'm super stoked about my match! I'm going to UW for DR. My post above about step scores is not for IR/DR, but radiology in general. I found that I simply didn't get interviewed at a few places (UCLA, UCSF, USC), despite being from Southern California

Fit could also be an issue. I certainly cause some polarized arguments on this forum and possibly my interviews as well. I'm interested in IR and machine learning. I myself feel stretched too thin, and maybe that came across in interviews. For what it's worth UW is an incredible fit for me: I actually visited Seattle some 10 times these past four years to visit a close friend. It's without a doubt the second largest tech city in the US by density, a top-5 school for computer science, and the "best in the West" for IR.

Congrats on the wonderful achievement!!
 
Hi everybody, I want to be clear that I'm super stoked about my match! I'm going to UW for DR. My post above about step scores is not for IR/DR, but radiology in general. I found that I simply didn't get interviewed at a few places (UCLA, UCSF, USC), despite being from Southern California

Fit could also be an issue. I certainly cause some polarized arguments on this forum and possibly my interviews as well. I'm interested in IR and machine learning. I myself feel stretched too thin, and maybe that came across in interviews. For what it's worth UW is an incredible fit for me: I actually visited Seattle some 10 times these past four years to visit a close friend. It's without a doubt the second largest tech city in the US by density, a top-5 school for computer science, and the "best in the West" for IR.
You're a machine learning and Stanford away person too?? Weird...that's me.
 
You're a machine learning and Stanford away person too?? Weird...that's me.

Yep! It's a great place for that kind of work. I don't know what days you'll be out there, but there's a big GPU conference being held by Nvidia (May 8th-11th) in San Jose, CA. They have a program specific for healthcare. See: AI Driven Healthcare Conference Track and Sessions at GTC 2017

I may attend if I can get funding from my lab. The world of deep learning is exploding right now. Stanford is creating a medical ImageNet (see the bio on Curtis P. Langlotz). The goal is to have the same discriminative power of the ImageNet competition, but for radiology diagnoses. It certainly helps that Stanford's medical informatics director is a radiologist who holds a master's in computer science specializing in artificial intelligence!
 
You're a machine learning and Stanford away person too?? Weird...that's me.

Hi again Rrraadd, sorry I didn't make the connection from your posts on the SOAP thread. Yes we are strikingly similar (Ivy med school, master's during MD years, 230s board scores, interest in machine learning, away at Stanford...) I assume we're about the same age too (I'm 30). I recall your rank list thread (Stanford, MGH, Yale, UCSD, Emory). I ranked three of those programs, in the exact same order. Pretty unique coincidences, although I don't have a PhD or a Science paper.

I'm quite curious as to what takes place at ranking meetings. The red flags in our applications were low board scores and taking time off. We won't know the impact of board scores until Charting Outcomes 2017 is released. In 2016, the 25th percentile for matched US MD radiology applicants was ~231. Maybe this jumped way up in 2017. I don't think there's a bias against people interested in machine learning, but I honestly don't know.

It's frankly beyond bizarre that you didn't match to a research-heavy institution. It may be that IR programs are focused on applicants who love IR more than other activities; it's true that IR leaves much less time for research and (in my case) computer science.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hi again Rrraadd, sorry I didn't make the connection from your posts on the SOAP thread. Yes we are strikingly similar (Ivy med school, master's during MD years, 230s board scores, interest in machine learning, away at Stanford...) I assume we're about the same age too (I'm 30). I recall your rank list thread (Stanford, MGH, Yale, UCSD, Emory). I ranked three of those programs, in the exact same order. Pretty unique coincidences, although I don't have a PhD or a Science paper.

I'm quite curious as to what takes place at ranking meetings. The red flags in our applications were low board scores and taking time off. We won't know the impact of board scores until Charting Outcomes 2017 is released. In 2016, the 25th percentile for matched US MD radiology applicants was ~231. Maybe this jumped way up in 2017. I don't think there's a bias against people interested in machine learning, but I honestly don't know.

It's frankly beyond bizarre that you didn't match to a research-heavy institution. It may be that IR programs are focused on applicants who love IR more than other activities; it's true that IR leaves much less time for research and (in my case) computer science.

I'll say it again, once you get to the interview, personality is all that matters
 
Also remember, you just need to piss off one interviewer to lose the spot, and you need to impress all of them to get it.
 
I know I got a lot of flack for talking about personality and fit, but I'll even back it up with data. http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NRMP-2016-Program-Director-Survey.pdf

After students were selected for interview, the top 4 ranking criteria were
1) Interactions with faculty during interview and visit
2) Interpersonal skills
3) Interactions with house staff during interview and visit
4) Feedback from current residents

AND THEN 5) USMLE Step 1.
 
I'll say it again, once you get to the interview, personality is all that matters

I think you have a very valid point. Once youve met the objective criteria, it basically becomes a matter of how you fit in with the program.

I just think you came at Naijaba a bit sideways, thats all. You may not have meant to do so, but I think some of us were caught off guard.

Naijaba has been consistently offering some of the most detailed, accurate AND gramatically correct posts in this forum Ive ever seen.

Were all on the same team in the end, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I think you have a very valid point. Once youve met the objective criteria, it basically becomes a matter of how you fit in with the program.

I just think you came at Naijaba a bit sideways, thats all. You may not have meant to do so, but I think some of us were caught off guard.

Naijaba has been consistently offering some of the most detailed, accurate AND gramatically correct posts in this forum Ive ever seen.

Were all on the same team in the end, though.

I appreciate the support! Just trying to be helpful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I really don't understand why it has become fashionable to put naijaba on blast. I think a lot of you are projecting your own insecurities about AI in radiology on to him. Perhaps he doesnt have the clinical intuition to make entirely correct predictions about the future of radiology, but he has never stated that his opinions were absolute truth. And the dude DOES have a graduate degree in comp sci from one of the strongest comp sci programs in the world, so I think his observations do indeed have value. But regardless of that, naijaba has been nothing but helpful and cordial even in the face of a pile on that would make the defensive line of the new england patriots cringe.


Chill out nerds. (Most of us!) matched and are gonna be doctors in the best specialty! Lets just enjoy this brief interlude before we get our asses handed to us intern year(unless you are already in intern year of course.... in which case.... congrats with almost being done and starting radiology!!)

P.S. I met naijaba on the trail(Hi Naijaba!) and he is actually a super normal chill dude.
 
Last edited:
I personally can't believe so many people are choosing radiology given the recent AI developments. I wish I would have known that four years ago when I chose radiology, definitely wouldn't make the same choice now given recent developments...
 
I personally can't believe so many people are choosing radiology given the recent AI developments. I wish I would have known that four years ago when I chose radiology, definitely wouldn't make the same choice now given recent developments...

What would you have picked? I'm not worried because EKG reads are still a joke and will always be read by a cardiologist, at least for a very long time. That's a 2D line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I personally can't believe so many people are choosing radiology given the recent AI developments. I wish I would have known that four years ago when I chose radiology, definitely wouldn't make the same choice now given recent developments...

Wanna explain what you mean?

Right now it sounds like you're trying to convey that you are worried about something vague and hypothetical...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I wonder if the positive trend will continue into next year. I am optimistic that it will.
 
I think you have a very valid point. Once youve met the objective criteria, it basically becomes a matter of how you fit in with the program.

I don't believe once you get an interview that its the only criteria determining where your ranked. I asked several interviewers how they approach ranking "so many amazingly qualified applicants" and most had a formula such as 1/3 objective numbers and 2/3 interview criteria; or vice versa, or 1/2 and 1/2 etc. Point is you have 4 years of objective/subjective data on your ERAS application and your interview day is a single, largely subjective instance. To base ones rank solely on interview day would be unwise, most that have made it to residency interviews are capable of putting on a show for a few hours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top