NRMP Charting Outcomes

[LandoftheJagain]

Hey everyone,

Thought I'd get everyone's advice here as well.

I was reading the NRMP Charting Outcomes document, and it says on page 86 (http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-IMGs-2016.pdf) that for FM US-IMGs with 15 interviews have a 75% chance of matching where non-US IMGs have like a 50% chance. That curve is crazy.

How is it that 15 interviews can give such a low chance of matching? Am I missing something here interpreting these stats?

J

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Donald Juan]

Hey everyone,

Thought I'd get everyone's advice here as well.

I was reading the NRMP Charting Outcomes document, and it says on page 86 (http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Charting-Outcomes-IMGs-2016.pdf) that for FM US-IMGs with 15 interviews have a 75% chance of matching where non-US IMGs have like a 50% chance. That curve is crazy.

How is it that 15 interviews can give such a low chance of matching? Am I missing something here interpreting these stats?

J

You're not missing something. There are more IMGs wanting to come to America and practice than there are positions available. It is competitive.

 

[itisallrelative]

You're not missing something. There are more IMGs wanting to come to America and practice than there are positions available. It is competitive.

Some programs will just give out interviews while knowing ahead of time there is 0% chance that they will ever want you in their program unless you simply astound them during the interview. Brutal, but that's the way it is. FMG - very tough. A lot of (much, much more) competition

 

[Osteoth]

Some programs will just give out interviews while knowing ahead of time there is 0% chance that they will ever want you in their program unless you simply astound them during the interview. Brutal, but that's the way it is. FMG - very tough. A lot of (much, much more) competition

Why would they waste their time?

 

[itisallrelative]

Why would they waste their time?

I shouldn't have written "Brutal," but the reason is simply courtesy.

 

[Osteoth]

I shouldn't have written "Brutal," but the reason is simply courtesy.

Honestly I think brutal is a fine way to describe it. They're wasting everyone's time & money doing that. Some of those IMGs probably paid for plane tickets, hotels etc all for nothing.

 

[Goro]

Honestly I think brutal is a fine way to describe it. They're wasting everyone's time & money doing that. Some of those IMGs probably paid for plane tickets, hotels etc all for nothing.

A friend of mine (BN) was telling me yesterday that when she had a phone interview with a lab in Germany about doing her post-doctoral fellowship, the PI said that "there's no way we're hiring you without a live interview". What was unsaid was that that BN would have to pay for the trip herself.

Perhaps this is the same type of scenario?

 

[Stagg737]

There are likely many other factors as well. A US-IMG will may be more likely to stay in the US after residency than an FMG who has never been to the US before. Most residency programs want to train people that will stick around and contribute, and having someone that may want to come and be educated in the US, then head back to their home country may not be as desirable as an applicant.

There's also the language barrier. US-IMGs typically have a solid grasp of English and be very understandable as they're from the U.S., FMGs may not. I saw this on a recent interview with an FMG from India. She was a very sweet lady and probably completely qualified, but I literally couldn't understand half of the things she said (and I've worked with several docs with very heavy Indian accents). I'm guessing some residencies may not want to take the chance on someone who is barely understandable when they have a huge pool of qualified applicants for which it's not a problem.

 

[Osteoth]

A friend of mine (BN) was telling me yesterday that when she had a phone interview with a lab in Germany about doing her post-doctoral fellowship, the PI said that "there's no way we're hiring you without a live interview". What was unsaid was that that BN would have to pay for the trip herself.

Perhaps this is the same type of scenario?

Sounds similar, but at least in that scenario your friend had a shot at the position.

Assuming I'm not mistaken, in the situation above the IMGs might have flown thousands of miles for a residency interview that was never going to lead anywhere anyway.

There are likely many other factors as well. A US-IMG will may be more likely to stay in the US after residency than an FMG who has never been to the US before. Most residency programs want to train people that will stick around and contribute, and having someone that may want to come and be educated in the US, then head back to their home country may not be as desirable as an applicant.

There's also the language barrier. US-IMGs typically have a solid grasp of English and be very understandable as they're from the U.S., FMGs may not. I saw this on a recent interview with an FMG from India. She was a very sweet lady and probably completely qualified, but I literally couldn't understand half of the things she said (and I've worked with several docs with very heavy Indian accents). I'm guessing some residencies may not want to take the chance on someone who is barely understandable when they have a huge pool of qualified applicants for which it's not a problem.

I'm not saying there aren't reasons not to take IMGs in general, but to have them fly all the way out on their own dime for an interview that has no potential to lead to a spot is cruel.

 

[Goro]

There are likely many other factors as well. A US-IMG will may be more likely to stay in the US after residency than an FMG who has never been to the US before. Most residency programs want to train people that will stick around and contribute, and having someone that may want to come and be educated in the US, then head back to their home country may not be as desirable as an applicant.

There's also the language barrier. US-IMGs typically have a solid grasp of English and be very understandable as they're from the U.S., FMGs may not. I saw this on a recent interview with an FMG from India. She was a very sweet lady and probably completely qualified, but I literally couldn't understand half of the things she said (and I've worked with several docs with very heavy Indian accents). I'm guessing some residencies may not want to take the chance on someone who is barely understandable when they have a huge pool of qualified applicants for which it's not a problem.

There are also visa issues as well. As pointed out in these for a many times, many places simply don't want the hassle.

 

[LandoftheJagain]

See, what I'm confused about is how that programs would invite non-US IMGs (and take positions from other IMGs) with no intention of taking them. Seems just like a waste of time and effort that residency programs are too busy to do?

 

[LandoftheJagain]

Thanks for the replies everyone- but, in terms of visa stuff, why even send out in the interviews in the first place?

 

[jhamaican]

See, what I'm confused about is how that programs would invite non-US IMGs (and take positions from other IMGs) with no intention of taking them. Seems just like a waste of time and effort that residency programs are too busy to do?

Because they do take them. Rarely. And only the top tier cream of the crop IMG. Completely different game as AMG vs IMG, everyone knows this. Not news

 

[Donald Juan]

See, what I'm confused about is how that programs would invite non-US IMGs (and take positions from other IMGs) with no intention of taking them. Seems just like a waste of time and effort that residency programs are too busy to do?

One person said they've heard of places giving interviews with 0% chance of taking the applicant....I'm not convinced that there are lots of places out there interviewing people for absolutely no reason other than to waste peoples time. I see no motive. I think lots of undesirable places give out interviews to a wide spectrum of people to make sure they fill their spots.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

There are several explanations for this.

First of all, it's not quite true. If you look back at the histograms one page earlier, which are the same data, you'll see that if you only go on 1-2 interviews your chances of matching are not all that great. But once you get above 7 interviews or so, your match chances are pretty good. And then there's this weird result that those that rank 16+ seem to do worse than those that do less. So why might that be? I don't really know -- it's possible that people are ranking all sorts of places they didn't even interview. Or that some programs are doing Skype interviews and hence it's easy to get many in. Or if someone looks good on paper but then interview is a disaster, could generate lots of interviews with no match.

From a program standpoint, no one interviews people who have no chance of going there (perhaps except for people who are physically rotating there, sometimes they might interview them even if no chance). None of us want to waste our time. But it's possible that programs might have difficulty deciding on paper which IMG's they might want, so they might invite a bunch, and then only rank a fraction of them.

 

[NurWollen]

Anyone know if there is going to be an updated charting outcomes this year? I'm already a resident but I've kind of been mentoring some med student friends and it would be valuable information to have.

Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile

 

[Foot Fetish]

Anyone know if there is going to be an updated charting outcomes this year? I'm already a resident but I've kind of been mentoring some med student friends and it would be valuable information to have.

Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile

I believe it is released every two years, so the next one would come out in 2018