MD DO MERGER 2020 (BAD FOR DO)

[AlteredScale]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Moderator action is kept confidential for a number of reasons. Let's refrain from discussing these things on public threads please 🙂


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Lexdiamondz]

Looks like RVU just got confirmed in the match list thread, UofI chicago. That makes 7! Which may not sound super hopeful for the DOs out there with IR on the mind, but definitely better than 1 lol


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Yeah, 7 out of 91 isn't actually that awful lol. It's not great in the least, but it isn't terrible

 

[IslandStyle808]

Yeah, 7 out of 91 isn't actually that awful lol. It's not great in the least, but it isn't terrible

People have to realize that IR is really competitive to get into. While the DO bias is there, the other factor is the caliber of students. DO students don't have the scores MD students do. So the fact that 7 people match is pretty good.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

People have to realize that IR is really competitive to get into. While the DO bias is there, the other factor is the caliber of students. DO students don't have the scores MD students do. So the fact that 7 people match is pretty good.

I wouldn't call matching in the single digits pretty good IMO. It's just not terrible.

 

[JoeUSA]

Why does this matter? After you go through your residency and are a board certified whateverologist, the initials behind your name don't matter. So what if the med school you went to closes down. So what if there is no more DO or MD or they make new initials. It doesn't matter because you will be a board certified specialist already. Why worry about something that no longer needs to be worried about?

This isn't going to happen by the way. DO schools will stay around and so will the initials. Even if they do merge down the road. Who cares? DO's and MDs are the same thing anyways. If we never had any initials at all, no one would know the difference. No one knows the difference anyways. Just go to med school. Become a doctor. Practice Medicine. That's it.

When it comes to getting a job the initials do matter. I like being a DO but I have lost jobs because of it. I have been told directly to my face that my DO degree would not be acceptable to the local MD school. Since the person making the decision thought that I could not become a faculty member, the concluded that I could not be the Chairperson. It is not true, but the person making the hiring decision believed it and turned me down. The position went to an MD with less experience, fewer publications and no management education. Discrimination continues.

 

[SlugMD]

Yeah, 7 out of 91 isn't actually that awful lol. It's not great in the least, but it isn't terrible

Per the link on page one of the 2017 match list thread, there is 29 IR spots. So 7/29 (24.1%) is really great considering IR is so hard to get into. In an ideal world, every field should have 75% MD and 25% DO because that's the current medical student ratio. It's nice to see that a competitive field is close to that 75/25 ratio.

 

[DrfluffyMD]

Per the link on page one of the 2017 match list thread, there is 29 IR spots. So 7/29 (24.1%) is really great considering IR is so hard to get into. In an ideal world, every field should have 75% MD and 25% DO because that's the current medical student ratio. It's nice to see that a competitive field is close to that 75/25 ratio.

124 or so, not 29, if we are talking about this year.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

Per the link on page one of the 2017 match list thread, there is 29 IR spots. So 7/29 (24.1%) is really great considering IR is so hard to get into. In an ideal world, every field should have 75% MD and 25% DO because that's the current medical student ratio. It's nice to see that a competitive field is close to that 75/25 ratio.

Per the NRMP data there were 95 spots in IR available this cycle, of which 91 were filled and 4 went unfilled. Of those 91 spots, 82 were filled by US-MDs

See page 3 of the following:
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Advance-Data-Tables-2017.pdf


Again, 7/91 isn't bad at all, but it isn't exactly good. DOs are performing better than expected in IR, but that's largely because the bar was fairly low to begin with considering how competitive it is.

 

[SlugMD]

Per the NRMP data there were 95 spots in IR available this cycle, of which 91 were filled and 4 went unfilled. Of those 91 spots, 82 were filled by US-MDs

See page 3 of the following:
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Advance-Data-Tables-2017.pdf


Again, 7/91 isn't bad at all, but it isn't exactly good. DOs are performing better than expected in IR, but that's largely because the bar was fairly low to begin with considering how competitive it is.

I now see where you are getting the 91 from. The 29 I was referring to is the number of PGY-1 IR (integrated) spots. When looking at match lists, how can one tell the difference between PGY-1 and 2 IR matches?

 

[KaapstadMK]

Hey all y'all, @AlteredScale has more of the pertinent info on a sticky in the Med Student - DO forum:
All Things ACGME/AOA Merger

Also, one major thing that's been said a couple times that keeps getting overlooked: a combined match system is awesome, because DOs will no longer have to choose AOA or ACGME match. Currently, if you list both, because AOA matches in Feb vs ACGME in Mar, you always end up in an AOA residency, meaning that you have to burn your bridges and risk it if you want specifically an ACGME residency.

And to address what has been said about losing the distinctiveness of DOs: Given that the main difference is OMT (and some would argue the philosophy, but to truly argue that one would have to attend a couple DO & MD schools - ain't nobody got the time), the biggest factor for maintaining the distinction would be for more research to go into OMT as an effective primary or adjunct treatment. There are some articles published outside of the JAOA (Particularly regarding lymphatic pump techniques and shortened hospital stays), but they are few. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence of OMT working and I think few would deny its immediate application in treating musculoskeletal complaints.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

I now see where you are getting the 91 from. The 29 I was referring to is the number of PGY-1 IR (integrated) spots. When looking at match lists, how can one tell the difference between PGY-1 and 2 IR matches?

There isn't any real difference. PGY1 and PGY2 matches just refer to programs that either require an intern year (Transitional Year or Prelim) before starting your residency training vs. programs that don't. I was under the impression that all IR programs started as PGY-2s and forgot that a few are Categorical and start as PGY-1s.

Still, 7 DOs out of 120 total spots (both categorial and advanced) isn't awful. It's not great, but it's not as bad as other fields like ENT, Ortho, Optho and Plastics.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I wouldn't call matching in the single digits pretty good IMO. It's just not terrible.

It would be nice to have a little context too with regards to how many applied. If only like 8 applied and 7 got spots then I would say that is great, but if it was like 30 applied and there were only 7 matches then that isn't so great.

I have a feeling a bunch of people applied IR wth DR as a back up specialty and that quite a few fell into DR and only a few matched IR. Probably similar to the people that apply to a ACGME surgical-sub and then end up matching gen surg as their back up.

Still great to have N>5 match into IR though.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

It would be nice to have a little context too with regards to how many applied. If only like 8 applied and 7 got spots then I would say that is great, but if it was like 30 applied and there were only 7 matches then that isn't so great.

I have a feeling a bunch of people applied IR wth DR as a back up specialty and that quite a few fell into DR and only a few matched IR. Probably similar to the people that apply to a ACGME surgical-sub and then end up matching gen surg as their back up.

Still great to have N>5 match into IR though.

Very true. NRMP hasn't released more comprehensive data regarding the breakdown of applicants to matches for this cycle. As of now, we can only see how many USMDs matched vs. Independent applicants, and there isn't any breakdown for DOs, IMGs and people who graduated in previous years.

With that said, I agree that there was likely a considerable number of people (both MD and DO) who applied DR as back up and ended up matching there rather than IR.

 

[IslandStyle808]

I wouldn't call matching in the single digits pretty good IMO. It's just not terrible.

How many DOs are able to hit a 250 USMLE versus how many MDs are able to hit the same score? You're right it is not good, but I believe the scores are holding the students more so than the letters of their degree.

 

[IslandStyle808]

Very true. NRMP hasn't released more comprehensive data regarding the breakdown of applicants to matches for this cycle. As of now, we can only see how many USMDs matched vs. Independent applicants, and there isn't any breakdown for DOs, IMGs and people who graduated in previous years.

With that said, I agree that there was likely a considerable number of people (both MD and DO) who applied DR as back up and ended up matching there rather than IR.

Yep, if DR wasn't a back up the amount of people trying and actually matching into IR would be much worse.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

How many DOs are able to hit a 250 USMLE versus how many MDs are able to hit the same score? You're right it is not good, but I believe the scores are holding the students more so than the letters of their degree.

Nah man.

Even in moderately competitive specialties that are "DO-friendly" like EM, being a DO still puts you at a disadvantage. A DO that I rotated with at one of my aways who has similar scores to me had far fewer interviews despite applying to more programs, and we both honoured the away we were on (and he did 4 aways vs. my 2). The stigma is still very much a thing, as many PDs feel that if they rank and match too many DOs it hurts their prestige and affects the types of applicants they get in subsequent cycles. It sucks, but it's the reality in most specialties.

 

[IslandStyle808]

Nah man.

Even in moderately competitive specialties that are "DO-friendly" like EM, being a DO still puts you at a disadvantage. A DO that I rotated with at one of my aways who has similar scores to me had far fewer interviews despite applying to more programs, and we both honoured the away we were on (and he did 4 aways vs. my 2). The stigma is still very much a thing, as many PDs feel that if they rank and match too many DOs it hurts their prestige and affects the types of applicants they get in subsequent cycles. It sucks, but it's the reality in most specialties.

I'm not questioning that at all. What you are stating about is the non-LCME filters and yes you are knocked out the running for a good chunk of programs. I'm stating your scores hurt more than the DO status. Just check the forums, you will find a lot of DOs trying to match with a 230 USMLE scores or less into ultra competitive programs.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

I'm not questioning that at all. What you are stating about is the non-LCME filters and yes you are knocked out the running for a good chunk of programs. I'm stating your scores hurt more than the DO status. Just check the forums, you will find a lot of DOs trying to match with a 230 USMLE scores or less into ultra competitive programs.

I mean obviously if you don't have the scores you don't have the scores, I agree.

 

[petomed]

How many DOs are able to hit a 250 USMLE versus how many MDs are able to hit the same score? You're right it is not good, but I believe the scores are holding the students more so than the letters of their degree.

It isn't the number of MD's vs. DO's hitting that score, but the ratio of USMLE test-taking DO's who hit it. It may be that a higher percentage of DO's hit the mark because all MD's take USMLE. Or not.