match outcomes

[unoriginal]

Regarding the Match Outcomes document published by the NRMP and AAMC, I was wondering if I am understanding the numbers correctly. According to my interpretation, if you had a 240 or above you had a 90% change of matching. Is this correct? Is this misleading? Are these people who are above 240 superstars in every other area (research and clinical grades)?

Let's say if someone has done well in his rotations, demonstrates interest during rotations and at interviews (i.e. through research and hardwork), and has good board scores, does this give them a good chance of matching (i.e. >90%).

Can board scores ever make up for lack of research experience?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[achybrachy]

I honestly don't know how much stock you can put in those numbers prognostically for the reasons you mentioned; there are just too many other confounding variables. Yes, of applicants with step I >40, 90% matched, but does that mean you or I will have a 90% chance? I don't think you can say that because of all the other factors and different cicumstances of all the individual applicants. Virtually all applicants had some research experience, but they lumped most of them together in the "1-5" projects category, so you can't really draw any conclusions between those who did just a little summer project vs. someone who was much more active and worked on 5 different things.

I know I didn't answer the real question, can anything make up for a weak research portfolio? I also await the responses of those with more wisdom in these matters than I. My gut response is anything is possible, but it's going to be an extremely uphill battle. And of course there's a big difference between matching at MDA vs. matching somewhere.

 

[kimplera]

Although I haven't sat in on the discussions, I really think that a large part of the process is how well you "fit" a given program. One of my attendings this week said that she really likes the 1 on 1 interview time because she can usually tell within the first 5 minutes if she is going to be able to stand working with the person for 4 years, if she would rather stop working than work with them, or if she will look forward to working with them.

Unlike some arenas, once you get an interview, being described as having a good personality isn't a knock, it's a good thing.

 

[120300]

Here's another way to look at this: the match success rate for US Seniors in radiation oncology is about 77% based on NRMP 2005 data. So if you really want to bottom line your ability to match you need to ask yourself "Am I in the top 77% of RadOnc applicants nationally based on board scores, research, LOR's, interview skills, etc?" If the answer is yes, then you have a reasonable chance to match SOMEWHERE. Plus you can increase your odds by applying to a whole lot of programs.