MS3: Do I need a research year?

[Ophthoapplicant92]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[i-doctor]

I myself wouldn’t do a research year with your credentials. You have enough publications and extracurriculars. Impressive enough research as is! The “weaker” parts of your application are elsewhere, so a research year wouldn’t add much in your case. In fact, it has some risks. It could backfire if the research doesn’t pan out and you wind up with little to show for it. (It now looks like a goof-off year where you spent half of the time at your parents’ condo in Myrtle Beach). And, for God’s sake, don’t be too disappointed if you don’t match in NYC or California. Consider it as a bonus if you match there. Every ophthalmology residency position is a piece of gold.

 

[Ophthoapplicant92]

I myself wouldn’t do a research year with your credentials. You have enough publications and extracurriculars. Impressive enough research as is! The “weaker” parts of your application are elsewhere, so a research year wouldn’t add much in your case. In fact, it has some risks. It could backfire if the research doesn’t pan out and you wind up with little to show for it. (It now looks like a goof-off year where you spent half of the time at your parents’ condo in Myrtle Beach). And, for God’s sake, don’t be too disappointed if you don’t match in NYC or California. Consider it as a bonus if you match there. Every ophthalmology residency position is a piece of gold.

Thanks for giving it to me straight. Since the biggest question mark is my step 2 score, would you still recommend against a research year if I score average (245; 51%)?

 

[i-doctor]

Yes, same advice. Let’s assume an average Step 2 score. If you do a research year before MS4 year and then don’t match as an MS4, you’re sunk. There is virtually nothing you can do to improve your application. Another research year (also known as pre-residency “research fellowship”)?
If, however, you apply next year and don’t match as an MS4, taking a research year and re-applying makes sense because you are supposedly improving your resume for the next cycle.
Overall I stand by my original recommendation because you are already strong in research. And I don’t think the risk/reward is there to throw away a year of your life unnecessarily since I think you can match as a senior without it.

 

[dantt]

What URM are you? AAO has been making an effort in increasing DEI...

 

[Ophthalmic Senator]

Is the unmatched rate higher for URM in ophthalmology? It may not be. It could be that URM apply at a lower rate but when they do, they do just as well. If that is the case, any diversity efforts should be towards the early medical school level, not at the residency application level. Medical schools could say "go into family medicine, peds, or ophthalmology".

I think the true URM are the ugly people. I got into ophthalmology because I am tall and not fat. They just had to look away from my face. My eyes are good looking though. You laugh and say I jest? Don't. I interviewed with glasses and they asked about this, just like 5th graders taunting another 5th grader. My glasses are not too different, just some myopia. For the next residency interview, I got contacts and the bullying stopped.

 

[i-doctor]

Is the unmatched rate higher for URM in ophthalmology? It may not be. It could be that URM apply at a lower rate but when they do, they do just as well. If that is the case, any diversity efforts should be towards the early medical school level, not at the residency application level. Medical schools could say "go into family medicine, peds, or ophthalmology".

I think the true URM are the ugly people. I got into ophthalmology because I am tall and not fat. They just had to look away from my face. My eyes are good looking though. You laugh and say I jest? Don't. I interviewed with glasses and they asked about this, just like 5th graders taunting another 5th grader. My glasses are not too different, just some myopia. For the next residency interview, I got contacts and the bullying stopped.

Well, from that perspective virtual interviews are a great equalizer. Nobody can see that you’re short while you are sitting down at the computer screen.

 

[dantt]

Is the unmatched rate higher for URM in ophthalmology? It may not be. It could be that URM apply at a lower rate but when they do, they do just as well. If that is the case, any diversity efforts should be towards the early medical school level, not at the residency application level. Medical schools could say "go into family medicine, peds, or ophthalmology".

I think the true URM are the ugly people. I got into ophthalmology because I am tall and not fat. They just had to look away from my face. My eyes are good looking though. You laugh and say I jest? Don't. I interviewed with glasses and they asked about this, just like 5th graders taunting another 5th grader. My glasses are not too different, just some myopia. For the next residency interview, I got contacts and the bullying stopped.

Just as long as you don't have strabismus.

 

[Ophthoapplicant92]

So don't be ugly or have strabismus and be tall (or short if virtual), got it.

 

[Ophthoapplicant92]

Anyone else in the crowd have some thoughts? I'm just another MS3 hoping for the best but planning for the worst.

 

[Trefoil]

Well, I don’t know that URM will help in the near future. That really depends on what the Supreme Court rules and how residencies respond. I’d say aim for a great step 2 to be on the safe side. I’d say aim for 80 percentile. The nice thing about step II is that shelf exams both help prepare you and give you a good indicator of your score. Honestly, the training you will get would be better outside of NYC. I think residencies in that area have trouble getting cataract numbers. It’s probably easier in California, but honestly there are a lot of other states out there that have great programs. I wouldn’t fixate on location as residency is really busy, and your primary focus should be on training. You can move wherever you want after.

 

[i-doctor]

Well, I don’t know that URM will help in the near future. That really depends on what the Supreme Court rules and how residencies respond. I’d say aim for a great step 2 to be on the safe side. I’d say aim for 80 percentile. The nice thing about step II is that shelf exams both help prepare you and give you a good indicator of your score. Honestly, the training you will get would be better outside of NYC. I think residencies in that area have trouble getting cataract numbers. It’s probably easier in California, but honestly there are a lot of other states out there that have great programs. I wouldn’t fixate on location as residency is really busy, and your primary focus should be on training. You can move wherever you want after.

Very good points. I did my residency in NYC and did not have high cataract numbers. And living there for 3 years is just a blip now that I look back upon it.

 

[salami bahama]

I'd just say that it's really, really hard to guarantee yourself a spot in any particular program or region. I agree that every ophthalmology spot is truly gold. You can make it your goal to match in NY or CA, but I wouldn't plan your life around that or set your heart on it. Every person you are competing against to get a residency spot is amazing and top of their class. Now that Step 1 is pass/fail, I'm curious to see if more people will apply to ophthalmology now that a low step 1 score won't stop people from pursuing ophthalmology.

I think the research side of your application is great already. Your clerkship grades are probably below the average ophthalmology applicant without at least one honors. I'd say go for it without a research year, but be prepared to match anywhere. If you want to stay in NYC, impress your home program.

 

[Ophthoapplicant92]

Well, I don’t know that URM will help in the near future. That really depends on what the Supreme Court rules and how residencies respond. I’d say aim for a great step 2 to be on the safe side. I’d say aim for 80 percentile. The nice thing about step II is that shelf exams both help prepare you and give you a good indicator of your score. Honestly, the training you will get would be better outside of NYC. I think residencies in that area have trouble getting cataract numbers. It’s probably easier in California, but honestly there are a lot of other states out there that have great programs. I wouldn’t fixate on location as residency is really busy, and your primary focus should be on training. You can move wherever you want after.

I'd just say that it's really, really hard to guarantee yourself a spot in any particular program or region. I agree that every ophthalmology spot is truly gold. You can make it your goal to match in NY or CA, but I wouldn't plan your life around that or set your heart on it. Every person you are competing against to get a residency spot is amazing and top of their class. Now that Step 1 is pass/fail, I'm curious to see if more people will apply to ophthalmology now that a low step 1 score won't stop people from pursuing ophthalmology.

I think the research side of your application is great already. Your clerkship grades are probably below the average ophthalmology applicant without at least one honors. I'd say go for it without a research year, but be prepared to match anywhere. If you want to stay in NYC, impress your home program.

I agree that training is probably better outside NYC and as others have said every ophthalmology spot is precious. But training will be busy everywhere and for my mental health would prefer to stay in NYC/California if possible. Ultimately my goal is to match and will move wherever.

I will definitely aim for 80% step 2 and study as much as possible as that would ideal but if I'm being honest with myself there's possibility I may fall short. So my thought process is that by doing a research year I could further bolster my application.

 

[Trefoil]

I agree that training is probably better outside NYC and as others have said every ophthalmology spot is precious. But training will be busy everywhere and for my mental health would prefer to stay in NYC/California if possible. Ultimately my goal is to match and will move wherever.

I will definitely aim for 80% step 2 and study as much as possible as that would ideal but if I'm being honest with myself there's possibility I may fall short. So my thought process is that by doing a research year I could further bolster my application.

Yeah, I get that! Well, I think the numbers will definitely be better in California. I don’t know specifically per program. Generally speaking, I’ve heard many NYC programs come pretty close to the minimum numbers. You will be able to practice at the minimum, but you won’t come out feeling supremely confident. I think aiming for a program that can get you 120+ cataracts is ideal. The more the better. Canadian programs generally graduate people with 300+ for reference. It also helps if you aren’t just doing easy cataracts and are able to find tough cases in residency. You really want to do those when you have an attending watching.

Financially, you would be better off not being in NYC as well. That’s just my opinion, but anyway. I think you have a solid research base. A research year certainly won’t hurt if you have a lower than desired step score. You can defeat that exam. I would go in with the mentality that it can be beaten. It’s just a knowledge exam. Do practice questions based on your rotation every day, and the info will start to stick. Best of luck!!

 

[Slide]

Currently I serve on our residency interview committee and have done so for the past six years. In the southeast, and my PD and chair are heavily involved in the AUPO. This is my lean with the information gathered from them as well as the trends I have noticed.

There is a definitely a stronger push by AUPO as well as some of the ophthalmology specialty organizations to recruit URMs. There is also a lower application and acceptance rate for URMs in specialty fields like ophthalmology, hence the push. You may disagree with it but those are the facts and that is what the AUPO is acting on. Note that while there is a push, it is only a recommendation for programs to consider it, not a mandatory requirement, so the effects of this will vary from program to program.

Is the unmatched rate higher for URM in ophthalmology? It may not be. It could be that URM apply at a lower rate but when they do, they do just as well. If that is the case, any diversity efforts should be towards the early medical school level, not at the residency application level. Medical schools could say "go into family medicine, peds, or ophthalmology".

I think the true URM are the ugly people. I got into ophthalmology because I am tall and not fat. They just had to look away from my face. My eyes are good looking though. You laugh and say I jest? Don't. I interviewed with glasses and they asked about this, just like 5th graders taunting another 5th grader. My glasses are not too different, just some myopia. For the next residency interview, I got contacts and the bullying stopped.

To me it sounds more like you interviewed at a malignant program, and this is a horrible take of what URM means. Tons of our applicants wear glasses and it's never been an issue. Now if you have strabismus, that can certainly cause legitimate issues (like worse stereopsis). I don't think you truly know how some of the URM applicants have structural disadvantages (more financial issues, more COVID-related health issues in families, less community and cultural capital to help with medical school, etc.) versus the rest of the applicant pool.

I agree that training is probably better outside NYC and as others have said every ophthalmology spot is precious. But training will be busy everywhere and for my mental health would prefer to stay in NYC/California if possible. Ultimately my goal is to match and will move wherever.

I will definitely aim for 80% step 2 and study as much as possible as that would ideal but if I'm being honest with myself there's possibility I may fall short. So my thought process is that by doing a research year I could further bolster my application.

Don't limit yourself to just NYC/California if possible. If we continue virtual interviews for next year, limiting yourself to these regional areas will increase your chances of not matching. Having Step 1 as pass/fail has already made this difficult tough (luckily this year we can see the numerical score including P/F, which helps us with cut-offs). Even as a CA native, you will be facing stiff competition in CA because many of the programs there are ranked fairly highly (like the NYC programs). At the end, if you care about matching, you need to widen your net. There are many top programs outside NYC/CA that will give you excellent training, and the reality is that your first half of residency will be so busy you really won't be able to enjoy the perks of being in these areas.

Thanks for giving it to me straight. Since the biggest question mark is my step 2 score, would you still recommend against a research year if I score average (245; 51%)?

If this is your average score, you have a good chance of matching somewhere. I wouldn't do a research year unless it's something you really wanted to do and have a desire to match at certain competitive programs.

On the note of virtual interviews, the prevalent opinion is that many programs hate it despite the cheaper cost because of the sheer volume of applicants and that it is ultimately more difficult to get a read on applicants during a virtual interview. Some programs are trying to compile evidence that virtual interviews actually hurt applicants more than not (especially URMs that don't have a home program) because more programs are simply sticking with more internal candidates (better the devil you know vs the devil you don't know...). This is even more so with fewer things available to stratify applicants (with Step 1 P/F and the numerical score being hidden in the future). Personally I can't wait for us to be rid of them.

 

[i-doctor]

Slide—
You confirmed what many are wondering about for this year. Namely, you are indeed using the actual Step 1 numerical score in your assessment. Some programs insist they are blinding them for this year, but I suspect that’s the minority of programs.
From your comments it seems to me that if virtual interviews continue for next year, doing as many away rotations as possible is the wisest course. The devil you know….

 

[Slide]

Slide—
You confirmed what many are wondering about for this year. Namely, you are indeed using the actual Step 1 numerical score in your assessment. Some programs insist they are blinding them for this year, but I suspect that’s the minority of programs.
From your comments it seems to me that if virtual interviews continue for next year, doing as many away rotations as possible is the wisest course. The devil you know….

I'm sure there are programs that may be stating they are not using numerical scores, but we should all be honest with ourselves...given the deluge of applicants we have with virtual interviews, we are certainly going to use all the information we have to make the best informed decisions about who we want to interview. I can tell you that the number of attendings who like the new P/F changes are very, very small (it was a topic a lot of us complained about during a staff meeting).

And yes, you are right. Away rotations are much, much more important with virtual interviews being the thing now. Hopefully we get rid of them soon in the future, it's been quite a mess for both the residency and fellowship applicant cycles the past two years.

 

[Ophthoapplicant92]

Currently I serve on our residency interview committee and have done so for the past six years. In the southeast, and my PD and chair are heavily involved in the AUPO. This is my lean with the information gathered from them as well as the trends I have noticed.

There is a definitely a stronger push by AUPO as well as some of the ophthalmology specialty organizations to recruit URMs. There is also a lower application and acceptance rate for URMs in specialty fields like ophthalmology, hence the push. You may disagree with it but those are the facts and that is what the AUPO is acting on. Note that while there is a push, it is only a recommendation for programs to consider it, not a mandatory requirement, so the effects of this will vary from program to program.


To me it sounds more like you interviewed at a malignant program, and this is a horrible take of what URM means. Tons of our applicants wear glasses and it's never been an issue. Now if you have strabismus, that can certainly cause legitimate issues (like worse stereopsis). I don't think you truly know how some of the URM applicants have structural disadvantages (more financial issues, more COVID-related health issues in families, less community and cultural capital to help with medical school, etc.) versus the rest of the applicant pool.



Don't limit yourself to just NYC/California if possible. If we continue virtual interviews for next year, limiting yourself to these regional areas will increase your chances of not matching. Having Step 1 as pass/fail has already made this difficult tough (luckily this year we can see the numerical score including P/F, which helps us with cut-offs). Even as a CA native, you will be facing stiff competition in CA because many of the programs there are ranked fairly highly (like the NYC programs). At the end, if you care about matching, you need to widen your net. There are many top programs outside NYC/CA that will give you excellent training, and the reality is that your first half of residency will be so busy you really won't be able to enjoy the perks of being in these areas.



If this is your average score, you have a good chance of matching somewhere. I wouldn't do a research year unless it's something you really wanted to do and have a desire to match at certain competitive programs.

On the note of virtual interviews, the prevalent opinion is that many programs hate it despite the cheaper cost because of the sheer volume of applicants and that it is ultimately more difficult to get a read on applicants during a virtual interview. Some programs are trying to compile evidence that virtual interviews actually hurt applicants more than not (especially URMs that don't have a home program) because more programs are simply sticking with more internal candidates (better the devil you know vs the devil you don't know...). This is even more so with fewer things available to stratify applicants (with Step 1 P/F and the numerical score being hidden in the future). Personally I can't wait for us to be rid of them.

Thanks for the detailed reply. My priority is of course to match but if possible in NYC/CA (due to family and social support). I understand that things may not go my way and I will absolutely move elsewhere if necessary.

There does seem to be a push to increase diversity in ophtho at least from a medical student perspective. There's the MOM program, Rabb Venable, ASRS DEI mentorship, and several talks at the last AAO that spoke on this topic. I am curious to see how this will play out with URM match rates.

I do have a home program, which will be my best chance. But I am thinking about doing aways in CA and additional away in a different region to improve my chances of matching. Has your institution started taking a closer look at rotators with the era of virtual interviews?

 

[SippyLord]

This is even more so with fewer things available to stratify applicants (with Step 1 P/F and the numerical score being hidden in the future). Personally I can't wait for us to be rid of them.

Hi Slide, do you know if programs will be able to see Step 1 scores for the 2023-2024 cycle? I took the exam before starting my PhD a few years ago so I thankfully have a numerical score. I'm just hoping programs will actually be able to see it when I apply next year.

 

[Anakinmemer]

What tier is your medical school?

 

[Slide]

Thanks for the detailed reply. My priority is of course to match but if possible in NYC/CA (due to family and social support). I understand that things may not go my way and I will absolutely move elsewhere if necessary.

There does seem to be a push to increase diversity in ophtho at least from a medical student perspective. There's the MOM program, Rabb Venable, ASRS DEI mentorship, and several talks at the last AAO that spoke on this topic. I am curious to see how this will play out with URM match rates.

I do have a home program, which will be my best chance. But I am thinking about doing aways in CA and additional away in a different region to improve my chances of matching. Has your institution started taking a closer look at rotators with the era of virtual interviews?

We have but our data set is too small - we will know more after this year's match.

Hi Slide, do you know if programs will be able to see Step 1 scores for the 2023-2024 cycle? I took the exam before starting my PhD a few years ago so I thankfully have a numerical score. I'm just hoping programs will actually be able to see it when I apply next year.

To be honest, no clue. We'll know next year I guess? Your numerical score I imagine will be available regardless and if it's good it will no doubt be helpful on your part.

 

[SippyLord]

To be honest, no clue. We'll know next year I guess? Your numerical score I imagine will be available regardless and if it's good it will no doubt be helpful on your part.

I appreciate your response, thanks. I guess we'll find out.