Marched 2006!

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

AspiringPath

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I just found out that I matched! I will have to wait to know where. I havent been the most active participant in this discussion group because I did not have much to contribute; but I think I got a lot reading your posts. Thanks everyone- angry testicle, beary, yaah........
 
Haven't contributed much but you're welcome anyways.

Hope you match at your top choice.
 
There are 45 positions unfilled in the match this year. That's roughly 1 in 12 positions going unfilled.
 
Gene_ said:
There are 45 positions unfilled in the match this year. That's roughly 1 in 12 positions going unfilled.


Wow! Just curious, how do you know that?
 
It's on the NRMP web site. You can't see which programs are unfilled, just the positions unfilled by region.
 
Gene_ said:
It's on the NRMP web site. You can't see which programs are unfilled, just the positions unfilled by region.

Thanks!
 
Gene_ said:
There are 45 positions unfilled in the match this year. That's roughly 1 in 12 positions going unfilled.

Is this more or less than in past years? I have the feeling that pathology usually has more spots left unfilled and that this was a competitive year.
 
drPLUM said:
Is this more or less than in past years? I have the feeling that pathology usually has more spots left unfilled and that this was a competitive year.


I'm curious about how this compares with years past as well. It was actually a little higher than I would have guessed.I think it's probably on par with last year but that's just conjecture. Did you guys see that there was only 1 unfilled categorical general surgery spot out of 1000+? That's crazy (to me anyways)...!
 
drPLUM said:
Is this more or less than in past years? I have the feeling that pathology usually has more spots left unfilled and that this was a competitive year.

I counted 43 unfilled spots in 2003. I don't have the data for 2004 or 2005. I'm not sure how to interpret 45 unfilled spots and the fact that applications for path residencies are on the rise. Are there just a bunch of residencies out there that nobody wants to go to?
 
Gene_ said:
I counted 43 unfilled spots in 2003. I don't have the data for 2004 or 2005. I'm not sure how to interpret 45 unfilled spots and the fact that applications for path residencies are on the rise. Are there just a bunch of residencies out there that nobody wants to go to?

I think you hit the nail on the head Gene. I was thinking that too...I noticed in the geographical distribution that most of the unfilled spots are in the south and midwest - no offense to peeps from these locations but they seem to be less desirable in general...I guess when we see which specific programs are unfilled we'll have a better idea about this.
 
ChipLeader said:
I think you hit the nail on the head Gene. I was thinking that too...I noticed in the geographical distribution that most of the unfilled spots are in the south and midwest - no offense to peeps from these locations but they seem to be less desirable in general...I guess when we see which specific programs are unfilled we'll have a better idea about this.

Yeah, I noticed that too!!! There was only 2 unfilled spots in western part of the country, which according to their division included a lot of states (CA, Texas, Washington as well as other states). So happy I won't be trying to scramble in the west...
 
THere are always quite a few unfilled spots, but the majority of them are small community practice programs, and I believe some of them aren't even taking residents. I think the only way to see which programs have openings is to be someone who did not match - as a scrambler you get access to the unfilled list. Maybe someone will post it here 😉

A lot of times there are also some CP only spots.
 
I think last year was the same with 45 unfilled spots. According to ERAS, applications for US grads to pathology was slightly down from last year and about the same as 2004.
 
Ok asshats, when I get back from Vegas, I expect to see at least 20 of you post where you ended up. And I expect to see that the 5 SDN folks who ranked UVA #1 cleans house. Anything less would be unexceptable. May the force be with ya.
 
quant said:
Why did U Michigan go unmatched? 3 of them?

Did Michigan not fill? OK I'm freaking out again. If this is a joke I am going to feel like a really big dork. 😳

Of course, if Michigan didn't fill, that means there is no way I fell below #2 on my list.
 
beary said:
Did Michigan not fill? OK I'm freaking out again. If this is a joke I am going to feel like a really big dork. 😳

Of course, if Michigan didn't fill, that means there is no way I fell below #2 on my list.

Apparently, they did not. Congrats! All of my programs filled so I'll have to wait it out until Thursday, I guess. I saw that North Carolina also had an open spot.
 
BamaAlum said:
Apparently, they did not. Congrats! All of my programs filled so I'll have to wait it out until Thursday, I guess. I saw that North Carolina also had an open spot.

Can I ask where you found this? I just looked all over the internet and couldn't find the list of unfilled programs. In some ways I am excited (but surprised) if Michigan didn't fill.
 
beary said:
Can I ask where you found this? I just looked all over the internet and couldn't find the list of unfilled programs. In some ways I am excited (but surprised) if Michigan didn't fill.

Look under the general residency forums. Someone posted a link from an IMG site. Not sure how reliable, but it looks legit.
 
beary said:
Of course, if Michigan didn't fill, that means there is no way I fell below #2 on my list.


Congrats beary, sounds like you're a WAHOO now! 😎

UVAAthleticsLogo.jpg
 
BamaAlum said:
I saw that North Carolina also had an open spot.

I didn't want to be the first to mention it, since we aren't supposed to know and all, but I noticed that too. This surprises me because UNC is a good program.

Which prompts a question...
When a good program doesn't fill, what are the common reasons for this? Not ranking enough, etc? What are some things that make this happen?

On another note...
The fact that a program didn't fill doesn't necessarily mean that you can't drop below them on your list. For instance, what if they didn't rank that particular applicant at all? In that situation, the program didn't fill AND the applicant didn't match there. Is this right? I think thats how it works.
 
^Probably not ranking/interviewing enough candidates.

Two years ago both UCSF and MGH didn't fill.

Path isn't that competitive where all spots can fill. Heck even solid derm or ortho programs occassionaly have a spot or two open.

If I was in charge of a top notch program, like Michigan, and had three out of five open, I wouldn't fill it with scramblers. I would use psf, current residents and surgpath fellows to cover the holes in the schedule for next year and then interview more and recruit harder next year.
 
drPLUM said:
I didn't want to be the first to mention it, since we aren't supposed to know and all, but I noticed that too. This surprises me because UNC is a good program.

Which prompts a question...
When a good program doesn't fill, what are the common reasons for this? Not ranking enough, etc? What are some things that make this happen?

Dunno about UNC. Sometimes perfectly fine programs just have some bad luck. It's bound to happen to a few places each year. Vandy didn't fill a couple of years in a row.

As for reasons for not filling, there could be many of those. My interview at New Mexico, for instance, was a scheduling disaster. It didn't happen to everyone that year, but I know it happened to more than just me. They matched 1 out of 6. I can't say for certain if there was causation, but it struck me as highly coincidental.
 
tsj said:
If I was in charge of a top notch program, like Michigan, and had three out of five open, I wouldn't fill it with scramblers. I would use psf, current residents and surgpath fellows to cover the holes in the schedule for next year and then interview more and recruit harder next year.

Easier said than done. We lost one person this year and could feel it in terms of the workload. The extra labor brought on by three open spots would piss a lot of people off, and that in turn would make it harder to recruit the next lot. Kinda hard to sell how great you are when all the PSFs, residents and fellows feel like sacrificial lambs.
 
Havarti666 said:
Easier said than done. We lost one person this year and could feel it in terms of the workload. The extra labor brought on by three open spots would piss a lot of people off, and that in turn would make it harder to recruit the next lot. Kinda hard to sell how great you are when all the PSFs, residents and fellows feel like sacrificial lambs.



There are probably some good scramblers out there, but people that use path as a back-up generally suck to work with compared to path enthusiasts.
 
drPLUM said:
On another note...
The fact that a program didn't fill doesn't necessarily mean that you can't drop below them on your list. For instance, what if they didn't rank that particular applicant at all? In that situation, the program didn't fill AND the applicant didn't match there. Is this right? I think thats how it works.

You are absolutely right. I have been thinking about Michigan all day (since I put UVA #1 and Mich #2 and would be happy to go either place). I feel pretty confident that Michigan would rank me somewhere because of some emails I had from their PD. But yeah, if they didn't rank me at all, then I could definitely fall below them on my list.

I am concerned about the workload as well with only matching 2/5 spots. Proportionately, each resident would have more than double the workload than if they had a full class!

Another random comment - the PD told me that they had seven spots this year. I don't know if that means they filled 2 spots outside the match or what.
 
beary said:
You are absolutely right. I have been thinking about Michigan all day (since I put UVA #1 and Mich #2 and would be happy to go either place). I feel pretty confident that Michigan would rank me somewhere because of some emails I had from their PD. But yeah, if they didn't rank me at all, then I could definitely fall below them on my list.

I am concerned about the workload as well with only matching 2/5 spots. Proportionately, each resident would have more than double the workload than if they had a full class!

Another random comment - the PD told me that they had seven spots this year. I don't know if that means they filled 2 spots outside the match or what.


Yeah, I thought they had more than 5 spots also. I assume they had a couple sign outside the match.
 
tsj said:
If I was in charge of a top notch program, like Michigan, and had three out of five open, I wouldn't fill it with scramblers. I would use psf, current residents and surgpath fellows to cover the holes in the schedule for next year and then interview more and recruit harder next year.
😱
I've seen one path residency up and close and personal as a premed (NIH). And I can't imagine how THAT would work.

Congrats to everyone and for those who have to scramble, hang in there!! 👍
 
Yes, apparently didn't fill. I am really not surprised. They didn't interview a ton of people this year and the new chairman is obsessed with getting future researchers, so much so that I think they may have overlooked some otherwise great candidates. I didn't think there were enough interviews to fill the spots they had, so I guess the impression was correct.

Too bad too, because this would be a great time to come here - new chairman, new AP director who I was the first one to sign out with today and it was great, and a pending new surg path director coming in from outside as well. Not many leaving either so things are not changing that much.

It will be very interesting though to see what kind of first years we end up with next year.

As for whether there are good scramblers, I think every year there are a certain number of people who either **** up the matching process or fail to go through it all together, so they always have to scramble. Sometimes too it is people who are transferring in from other specialties or who took time off or whatever.

The "not filling" thing happens every year to somewhere unexpected. It never really means much except that the people in charge of ranking applicants overlooked something.
 
tsj said:
If I was in charge of a top notch program, like Michigan, and had three out of five open, I wouldn't fill it with scramblers. I would use psf, current residents and surgpath fellows to cover the holes in the schedule for next year and then interview more and recruit harder next year.

BAD idea. That would engender horrible distaste on the part of the current residents and lead to mutinies.
 
yaah said:
Yes, apparently didn't fill. I am really not surprised. They didn't interview a ton of people this year and the new chairman is obsessed with getting future researchers, so much so that I think they may have overlooked some otherwise great candidates. I didn't think there were enough interviews to fill the spots they had, so I guess the impression was correct.

Too bad too, because this would be a great time to come here - new chairman, new AP director who I was the first one to sign out with today and it was great, and a pending new surg path director coming in from outside as well. Not many leaving either so things are not changing that much.

It will be very interesting though to see what kind of first years we end up with next year.

As for whether there are good scramblers, I think every year there are a certain number of people who either **** up the matching process or fail to go through it all together, so they always have to scramble. Sometimes too it is people who are transferring in from other specialties or who took time off or whatever.

The "not filling" thing happens every year to somewhere unexpected. It never really means much except that the people in charge of ranking applicants overlooked something.

Michigan didn't fill?? A "top tier" program not fill? Just kidding, yaah. I couldn't help myself...

Beary, I am sure this means you are headed to UVA!!! Congrats!!!!!! 🙂
 
miko2005 said:
Beary, I am sure this means you are headed to UVA!!! Congrats!!!!!! 🙂

Thanks, but I don't feel sure of this at all! 2 people matched at Michigan. I could definitely be one of them I think. Which would be fine! 🙂
 
beary said:
Thanks, but I don't feel sure of this at all! 2 people matched at Michigan. I could definitely be one of them I think. Which would be fine! 🙂

In my haste, I didn't think of that option :idea: . Well, at the very worst option, you matched at your #2!! 🙂
 
Congrats to all those who matched! I am a long time lurker here and am also happy to have matched this year. Now it's just a matter of where.

It seems that out of about 550 or so path spots, about 45 didn't fill...wonder if someone could put that into perspective with respect to previous years. Is this considered a lot or a few? When taking into account the number of total spots and the number that filled, the percentage of unfilled is higher than im and peds...yet, people around are always saying that path is getting very competitive. Could someone shed some light on this? Perhaps the caliber of applicants is growing and more competitive than that you may find in other specialties? Anyway, if someone could expand on this a little it would be interesting to hear.

Well, ultra competitive or not so competitive, I'm just glad to have matched. Best of luck to everyone!
 
Rael said:
Congrats to all those who matched! I am a long time lurker here and am also happy to have matched this year. Now it's just a matter of where.

It seems that out of about 550 or so path spots, about 45 didn't fill...wonder if someone could put that into perspective with respect to previous years. Is this considered a lot or a few? When taking into account the number of total spots and the number that filled, the percentage of unfilled is higher than im and peds...yet, people around are always saying that path is getting very competitive. Could someone shed some light on this? Perhaps the caliber of applicants is growing and more competitive than that you may find in other specialties? Anyway, if someone could expand on this a little it would be interesting to hear.

Well, ultra competitive or not so competitive, I'm just glad to have matched. Best of luck to everyone!


Getting a path residency is easy. Getting a spot at one of the top programs is competitive.

As for increasing popularity here are some stats (numbers are for AMG's):

2001: 297 applicants
2005: 602
2006: 526

Basically, the number of AMG path applicants have doubled over the past 5 years.


Now, let's compare that to this year's hot field (anesthesia):

2001: 1,115
2005: 1,647
2006: 1,879 (for 1300 spots)
 
Hello to all the SDners- especially pathology

I would like to send my thanks for all the information and answers to my questions that I have acquired here. I am a long time lurker- who is making a switch from one specialty to pathology. It has been a tough move but this forum was a great help.!! Special thanks to Yaah and andymilonakis or rather Angrytesticle for answering my direct inquiries. I got the good news from the NRMP the other day and now am sweating out waiting (like the rest) for the bigger news tomorrow.!! Good luck to everyone and thank you once again 🙂 !!


Magnus
 
CameronFrye said:
2001: 297 applicants
2005: 602
2006: 526

Basically, the number of AMG path applicants have doubled over the past 5 years.

It doubled from 2001 to 2005, but that's a 14% drop heading into 2006. Here's another view, although I don't have the 2006 data:

Year: Positions / % filled AMG / % filled total

2001: 386 / 44 / 82
2002: 398 / 50 / 84
2003: 443 / 60 / 90
2004: 477 / 61 / 92
2005: 526 / 62 / 91

I've heard there are a few extra spots this year, and the total % filled is very close to last year. If that's true, the total number of AMG applicants exceeded the available positions for 2005, but not 2006.
 
Havarti666 said:
I've heard there are a few extra spots this year, and the total % filled is very close to last year. If that's true, the total number of AMG applicants exceeded the available positions for 2005, but not 2006.
Not only that, but I heard that those who applied in 2005 were an exceedingly exceptional bunch of applicants that are unparalleled 😉 😛
 
Havarti666 said:
It doubled from 2001 to 2005, but that's a 14% drop heading into 2006. Here's another view, although I don't have the 2006 data:

Year: Positions / % filled AMG / % filled total

2001: 386 / 44 / 82
2002: 398 / 50 / 84
2003: 443 / 60 / 90
2004: 477 / 61 / 92
2005: 526 / 62 / 91

I've heard there are a few extra spots this year, and the total % filled is very close to last year. If that's true, the total number of AMG applicants exceeded the available positions for 2005, but not 2006.

True, it did drop this year.

Here is the link to the data for all the specialties (you can see total applicants, applications/applicant, applications/program, etc):

http://www.aamc.org/programs/eras/programs/statistics/prelim/residency_200603.xls
 
My book must be really boring...

AMGs + IMGs = Total

2001: 297 + 1,294 = 1,591
2002: 351 + 1,076 = 1,427
2003: 486 + 1,043 = 1,529
2004: 526 + 1,033 = 1,559
2005: 602 + 932 = 1,534
2006: 526 + 979 = 1,505

Funny how the number of applicants always hovers around 1,524 with a standard deviation of only 51 (3.3%).
 
Havarti666 said:
It doubled from 2001 to 2005, but that's a 14% drop heading into 2006. Here's another view, although I don't have the 2006 data:

Year: Positions / % filled AMG / % filled total

2001: 386 / 44 / 82
2002: 398 / 50 / 84
2003: 443 / 60 / 90
2004: 477 / 61 / 92
2005: 526 / 62 / 91

I've heard there are a few extra spots this year, and the total % filled is very close to last year. If that's true, the total number of AMG applicants exceeded the available positions for 2005, but not 2006.


So in 2001 there were only about 180 US med students going into Path. That really is pathetic. Now it is up to a little over 300. That's still not that great, but it sure is a large increase.

Why is path really still so unpopular relative to other non-primary care fields surgery, urology, ortho, rads, anesth, ENT, plastics etc?
 
tsj said:
Why is path really still so unpopular relative to other non-primary care fields surgery, urology, ortho, rads, anesth, ENT, plastics etc?

Most people find path boring or disgusting or even pointless. Works for me, since I don't care to have tons of people flooding the field (read job market). No, they can all continue with their delusions of clinical medicine. We'll see who's laughing every time they're on call in an ICU and I'm reading on my couch with a cold one in my hand.

Besides, if it weren't for them, where would our specimens come from?
 
tsj said:
Why is path really still so unpopular relative to other non-primary care fields surgery, urology, ortho, rads, anesth, ENT, plastics etc?

Lots of medical students have no idea what a pathologist does all day. It's hard to choose pathology when you don't know what it is. There's also a stereotype - "You don't seem like a pathologist, you're too good with people."
 
Havarti666 said:
We'll see who's laughing every time they're on call in an ICU and I'm reading on my couch with a cold one in my hand.


True that! Today I was rounding on the most annoying patient in the world with the most annoying PA in the world, and I thought about throwing myself out of window to end the pain. Then I realized that in six weeks I can avoid this for the most part. I wanted to turn to my team and yell "hahahahaha SUCKERS!!! JaneDough out!" :laugh: :laugh:
 
Can't wait to see where everyone matched for this July! 😀
 
Every once in a while when I tell someone I'm going to be a pathologist, they reply with "Oh, I thought you were in med school...what happened? So, you're not going to be a doctor now?"
Then I tell them that pathologists ARE indeed doctors...and then I get "Oh, but not like the MD type right?"

I wish there was greater public awareness about the field of pathology.
 
Gene_ said:
Lots of medical students have no idea what a pathologist does all day. It's hard to choose pathology when you don't know what it is. There's also a stereotype - "You don't seem like a pathologist, you're too good with people."

I hate that sterotype! I am a very social and friendly person so i always get the "You don't seem like a pathologist, you're too good with people". But then right after saying that, they'll tell me of a pathologist that they know and then say that person is the coolest person they know...I don't get it. Do you know how many people have told me their pathologist friend is happy, fun, and amazing???
 
Top