Likelihood of red flags not caught until post-int?

[markmann]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I just received an outright, post-int R following an early interview at my mid-ranked state school that accepts/waitlists most interviewees. This school seemed to be a good fit for me (generally research-interested) and was seemingly well within my reach; I've been fortunate enough to receive a number of II's, many at "T20" research schools. Since almost all of the other schools I'm interviewing at are non-rolling, this R will probably be the only post-I feedback I'll have to simmer on until the new year. So I'm puzzling over how much of a bad omen this is.

Assuming my interview day behavior was fine (I know flubbing here is a real possibility, but let's say I'm pretty inoffensive on average), I was wondering how often it's the case that an application holds some issue that has eluded or simply not bothered pre-interview screeners but which can capsize it at decision time.

 

[kingdomheart]

First let me ask you, what you think a potential red flag in your application could be?

Im gonna go ahead and say there are no red flags in your app, because you have IIs and at T20s as well. One potential reason for an R could be yield protection. Or perhaps your interview did not go as well as you believe. At this point there is no point in worrying, focus on the rest of your IIs. You have a several and you should hopefully get an A.

 

[Cornfed101]

Very unlikely that there is a blatant red flag. More likely that you had a poor interview or poor fit

 

[markmann]

First let me ask you, what you think a potential red flag in your application could be?

A one-year gap in my timeline several years back (I was just waiting tables, didn't include in my app)? An advanced research degree with work that's written-up but that I'm still working to get published? Something that I'm unaware of?

 

[paradoxic_toxic]

A one-year gap in my timeline several years back (I was just waiting tables, didn't include in my app)? An advanced research degree with work that's written-up but that I'm still working to get published? Something that I'm unaware of?

The most likely explanation is that you had a bad interview without realizing it. You wouldn't have gotten the II if you had red flags in your app.

 

[kingdomheart]

A one-year gap in my timeline several years back (I was just waiting tables, didn't include in my app)? An advanced research degree with work that's written-up but that I'm still working to get published? Something that I'm unaware of?

No red flags 🙂

 

[markmann]

The most likely explanation is that you had a bad interview without realizing it. You wouldn't have gotten the II if you had red flags in your app.

I really hope so! I'm pretty critical of myself here, and maybe I can identify a few iffy things I said (like "I'm not so interested in primary care.") but nothing remarkable.

Red flags aside, I guess the broader question is whether the interview nets at these schools are so wide compared to the acceptance nets that you can have someone interviewing at a T20 because they tick certain boxes (advanced degree, LizzyM, some clinical experience) but, on closer examination by a committee, are not even competitive for acceptance at a mid-rank school.

 

[paradoxic_toxic]

I really hope so! I'm pretty critical of myself here, and maybe I can identify a few iffy things I said (like "I'm not so interested in primary care.") but nothing remarkable.

Oof. Do not say this.

 

[mwsapphire]

A one-year gap in my timeline several years back (I was just waiting tables, didn't include in my app)? An advanced research degree with work that's written-up but that I'm still working to get published? Something that I'm unaware of?

Those are not red flags at all.

 

[Goro]

I just received an outright, post-int R following an early interview at my mid-ranked state school that accepts/waitlists most interviewees. This school seemed to be a good fit for me (generally research-interested) and was seemingly well within my reach; I've been fortunate enough to receive a number of II's, many at "T20" research schools. Since almost all of the other schools I'm interviewing at are non-rolling, this R will probably be the only post-I feedback I'll have to simmer on until the new year. So I'm puzzling over how much of a bad omen this is.

Assuming my interview day behavior was fine (I know flubbing here is a real possibility, but let's say I'm pretty inoffensive on average), I was wondering how often it's the case that an application holds some issue that has eluded or simply not bothered pre-interview screeners but which can capsize it at decision time.

Let It Go. You bombed your interview. Case closed

 

[Futuredocplz531]

Oof. Do not say this.

The classic “you can think it, but don’t say it”

 

[mwsapphire]

This is an olympic class competition where everyone being interviewed is already in the top 10-20%. And like the olympics, only the top few get the “medal” of being accepted.

so it wasnt you were bad or had a red flag; you may simply just be a fraction of second or a point behind the medal winners. That is just the way sheer numbers affect this process

A lot of med school admissions is not just EC's and numbers, but who you are who you come across as. Not saying that's OP's problem but just making it seem like its just numbers and EC's a little inaccurate.

 

[deleted972488]

Assuming my interview day behavior was fine (I know flubbing here is a real possibility, but let's say I'm pretty inoffensive on average)

I think you have to better than just "pretty inoffensive." You have to be someone they want to admit! But I don't think you should be too worried. I was rejected post-interview at one program but accepted at others (including others that are "higher ranked"). Perhaps other programs will see you as a better fit.

Oof. Do not say this.

Why not?

 

[Cornfed101]

Why not?

Depending on the state school, the mission could be VERY focused on training primary care physicians. That's how it is at my state school. "Oh you want to be a neurosurgeon? We don't need those here."

 

[deleted972488]

Depending on the state school, the mission could be VERY focused on training primary care physicians. That's how it is at my state school. "Oh you want to be a neurosurgeon? We don't need those here."

I missed the state school part and read "generally research-interested." Thanks for clarifying!

 

[Futuredocplz531]

Depending on the state school, the mission could be VERY focused on training primary care physicians. That's how it is at my state school. "Oh you want to be a neurosurgeon? We don't need those here."

At a school I interviewed at they really pushed primary care. Yet there were a lot of neurosurgery, ortho, derm, rads, and etc marches, and the class size is small so a large percentage went into a competitive field. This makes me think that the adcom and school mission is almost separate in a way from the actual clinical faculty and advisors

 

[markmann]

This is an olympic class competition where everyone being interviewed is already in the top 10-20%. And like the olympics, only the top few get the “medal” of being accepted.

so it wasnt you were bad or had a red flag; you may simply just be a fraction of second or a point behind the medal winners. That is just the way sheer numbers affect this process

I guess I thought that if my score were medal-worthy (or even waitlist-worthy) anywhere it'd be at this school, which is "less competitive" and has better post-interview yields than anywhere else I've interviewed, while still seeming like a good fit. And it wasn't. Maybe it has something to do with this particular school's calculation and/or my interview day performance (looks like the "not so interested in primary care" comment might've cost me), but if it doesn't... Then at all these others schools, I fear I'll just be running the same time against faster runners.

I think you have to better than just "pretty inoffensive." You have to be someone they want to admit! But I don't think you should be too worried. I was rejected post-interview at one program but accepted at others (including others that are "higher ranked"). Perhaps other programs will see you as a better fit.

That's reassuring, thank you! Good to know that schools' "admissions calculations" can vary this much!

Let It Go. You bombed your interview. Case closed

This answer is probably best for my sanity!

 

[deleted846158]

Oof. Do not say this.

I think phrasing is important here, I think it’s ok to express this same sentiment if you were to express it as a positive interest rather than a negative. Ex: “I’m interested in cardiology, GI, neurosurgery, ENT....” is fine if you have some experience there but phrasing it in the negative “I’m not interested in primary care” or “I’m not interested in a medical specialty” will rub a lot of people the wrong way.

 

[datboi_58]

It is very likely you bombed your interview. It is not yield protection as that only applies to interview invites and not post-interview decisions. There is a slight possibility they saw a red flag but I would assume it is very, very low since you have IIs at other schools. So all that remains is that you bombed your interview. Review your answers, ask questions of others (advisors, friends, etc.) and practice interviewing before your other interviews.

 

[Isoval]

It could just be that they don't think you fit their class. Doesn't mean that anything is wrong with you, your application, or your interview.

You could have a wonderful interview and application and still get rejected just because you didn't quite fit the mold that the admissions members wanted.

Just the nature of the game.

 

[datboi_58]

It could just be that they don't think you fit their class. Doesn't mean that anything is wrong with you, your application, or your interview.

You could have a wonderful interview and application and still get rejected just because you didn't quite fit the mold that the admissions members wanted.

Just the nature of the game.

I would equate this to bombing the interview. They were invited to an interview so they at least partially fit the mission. Part of the interview is knowing the mission of the school and molding oneself accordingly so that the aspects of you that fit the mission are emphasized.

 

[Jloe_101]

I just received an outright, post-int R following an early interview at my mid-ranked state school that accepts/waitlists most interviewees. This school seemed to be a good fit for me (generally research-interested) and was seemingly well within my reach; I've been fortunate enough to receive a number of II's, many at "T20" research schools. Since almost all of the other schools I'm interviewing at are non-rolling, this R will probably be the only post-I feedback I'll have to simmer on until the new year. So I'm puzzling over how much of a bad omen this is.

Assuming my interview day behavior was fine (I know flubbing here is a real possibility, but let's say I'm pretty inoffensive on average), I was wondering how often it's the case that an application holds some issue that has eluded or simply not bothered pre-interview screeners but which can capsize it at decision time.

I've had the same thoughts. I got an out right rejection from a "low tier" school and I wondered why. LOR? EC? Who knows but I'm going to think that I unknowingly bombed the interview. I can at least change how I present myself as I'm not going to have a lot of luck redacting a LOR or something lol.

If you were honest and forth-right in your preparation then there isn't a conspiracy against you getting into school. Let's work on our interviewing

 

[Isoval]

I would equate this to bombing the interview. They were invited to an interview so they at least partially fit the mission. Part of the interview is knowing the mission of the school and molding oneself accordingly so that the aspects of you that fit the mission are emphasized.

Not sure if I agree here.

I’m not really referring to the fact that you may not be clear on the mission of the school. More accurately, I had “they don’t like your personality” in mind. There are a lot of very soft things that are analyzed in addition to your bona fide answers that are very difficult, if not impossible, to change about yourself before the interview.

 

[markmann]

Thinking back, I probably did a lousy job of selling myself to this particular program. Apart from my primary care blunder (it was a single comment, but the student interviewer did recognize it with a pointed response), I did not express interest in staying in the state (and I have spent considerable time outside of it), I did not express interest in the school's somewhat unique TBL curriculum, and I did express interest in an area of research that this school is not particularly strong in. I did not send an update after the Dean "suggested" we might send one.

Otherwise, I really don't think my interview performance would have raised any flags that would disqualify me for the waitlist. An interviewer elsewhere told me I'm a "good interviewee," which I realize guarantees nothing about these interviews, but which does reassure me that my self-image isn't compleeetely out of whack. That being said, I'm sure I can use improvement!

Could another student have been guilty of everything I was during the interview and still have been accepted (or waitlisted)? I don't know, and that's what bothers me as someone who had a superficially strong app for this program. Also as someone with a severe case of non-traditis, I didn't have anyone reading my primary app with a critical eye, so maybe that's where the paranoia stems from. And while my II count is encouraging I have no idea whether the committees read apps differently before making final decisions.

 

[Seihai]

Think about it this way.

It costs a school money, time, and significant effort (a lot more than people think) to interview any one applicant. As such, they would never want to interview someone they might not otherwise accept. If there really were a red flag in your application, you probably wouldn't be interviewed in the first place.

This essentially means: you messed up during your interview. How exactly you messed up, no one here can possibly know. It's pointless for people on SDN to try to speculate based on only one perspective of the entire interview day - yours, which will obviously be biased in your favor (whether consciously or not).

Just focus on the remaining interviews you do have and reflect as best as you can to try to not repeat your mistakes.

 

[gyngyn]

One potential reason for an R could be yield protection.

Resource management would happen before an interview, not after.

 

[markmann]

I always appreciate updates to neurotic questions like this one, so here's mine.

While I'm still awaiting decisions from the majority of the schools I visited, I did hear back from two more: both acceptances. One from a state school (in another state!) equivalent in rank to the one under discussion above, and one from a comfortably higher ranked private school (T20 in primary care, maybe without as big of an open emphasis on PC as a state school though). How were these interviews different from the first one? By the time I sat for them, I had gotten more practice (purely on the trail), and had begun to openly express interest in a particular quasi-primary care specialty. While I can't speak to how major the impact of my interest in this specialty was, apart from this change I can't really identify anything that was especially different about the first interview (comfort level, faux pas, etc.) -- and I've experienced and reflected on over a dozen program visits, so I think I do have some perspective on the matter.

Let the reader take all this for what they will. My own feeling is that there's a surprising amount of what's effectively noise (not to say that it's all uncontrolled on the adcom side) in how your application ranks among different programs.

 

[Seihai]

I always appreciate updates to neurotic questions like this one, so here's mine.

While I'm still awaiting decisions from the majority of the schools I visited, I did hear back from two more: both acceptances. One from a state school (in another state!) equivalent in rank to the one under discussion above, and one from a comfortably higher ranked private school (T20 in primary care, maybe without as big of an open emphasis on PC as a state school though). How were these interviews different from the first one? By the time I sat for them, I had gotten more practice (purely on the trail), and had begun to openly express interest in a particular quasi-primary care specialty. While I can't speak to how major the impact of my interest in this specialty was, apart from this change I can't really identify anything that was especially different about the first interview (comfort level, faux pas, etc.) -- and I've experienced and reflected on over a dozen program visits, so I think I do have some perspective on the matter.

Let the reader take all this for what they will. My own feeling is that there's a surprising amount of what's effectively noise (not to say that it's all uncontrolled on the adcom side) in how your application ranks among different programs.

Given this, I honestly think your inexperience with interviews (and some element of pure random chance) may have been really the only thing holding you back on the very first school. Congrats on your acceptances, and thanks for the update!

 

[LizzyM]

Good to know that you had a "good outcome" when examining the entire interview season,
although regarding that rejection, no one quite knows the reason.

 

[seeinghowitgoes]

I always appreciate updates to neurotic questions like this one, so here's mine.

While I'm still awaiting decisions from the majority of the schools I visited, I did hear back from two more: both acceptances. One from a state school (in another state!) equivalent in rank to the one under discussion above, and one from a comfortably higher ranked private school (T20 in primary care, maybe without as big of an open emphasis on PC as a state school though). How were these interviews different from the first one? By the time I sat for them, I had gotten more practice (purely on the trail), and had begun to openly express interest in a particular quasi-primary care specialty. While I can't speak to how major the impact of my interest in this specialty was, apart from this change I can't really identify anything that was especially different about the first interview (comfort level, faux pas, etc.) -- and I've experienced and reflected on over a dozen program visits, so I think I do have some perspective on the matter.

Let the reader take all this for what they will. My own feeling is that there's a surprising amount of what's effectively noise (not to say that it's all uncontrolled on the adcom side) in how your application ranks among different programs.

Congrats! Just so you know, having a post-interview rejection isn’t so crazy - I know I had one as well, as did many of my med school classmates who did well at a good med school and are all doing great at great residencies now. In addition to just a random bad interview performance or poor fit (for schools with specific missions), if you only have one or two post-interview rejections it is honesty just as likely you just had bad interviewers. Interviewers are usually only cursorily trained, and people who interview for schools come with their own biases and own awkwardness and quirks. You will quickly realize that many, many doctors are meh communicators and probably shouldn’t be evaluating other people, and yet they are the gatekeepers.

As general advice I wouldn’t read too much into any one outcome (eg one post-interview rejection) but instead make behavior change based on trends (eg multiple post-interview rejections).

 

[gyngyn]

Thanks for the follow-up!