Number of Interviews to match

[psych23]

---

Members don't see this ad.

How many interviews should I accept to have a 99.99% chance of matching. I read in previous posts Peppy saying 10-12 and Whopper, D Bagel, Maranatha saying 10...is that a good amount?

My main concern is if I interview at the best 12 programs I got an interview at and I am a mediocre/borderline applicant in their selected pool, wouldn't there be a decent chance of me not matching any of the 12? I am not saying I am mediocre or borderline for any program, I am just thinking worst case scenario here haha.

With that thought, I was planning on going to 15 interviews. 12 university programs and 3 community based programs as safeties. Is that reasonable or is that overkill?

I clearly applied to too many programs, although I am very happy and do not regret it one bit. I just wanted some advice on this so I can start canceling some interviews and withdrawing some applications.


Thanks for the help.

 

[psychattending]

see graph P-1 (pg 242) of

http://www.nrmp.org/data/chartingoutcomes2009v3.pdf

 

[psych23]

Oh my!

That 100% answers my question.


Thank you! 😀

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Isn't data amazing sometimes? 🙂

 

[Gordon Sims]

Isn't data amazing sometimes? 🙂

Indeed. But how is that the independent applicant matches with fewer programs ranked than a US senior?

 

[st2205]

Indeed. But how is that the independent applicant matches with fewer programs ranked than a US senior?

I'd take another look at the graph, unless you're asking why there were US seniors that ranked eight or more places that went unmatched while there were independent applicants that ranked one spot and matched.

 

[Gordon Sims]

I'd take another look at the graph, unless you're asking why there were US seniors that ranked eight or more places that went unmatched while there were independent applicants that ranked one spot and matched.

US seniors that matched ranked an average of 7.3 programs while independents that matched ranked an average of 5.8 programs.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

US seniors that matched ranked an average of 7.3 programs while independents that matched ranked an average of 5.8 programs.

Couldn't this mean that US seniors just got more interviews?

 

[Gordon Sims]

Couldn't this mean that US seniors just got more interviews?

Certainly.

 

[pingouin]

US seniors that matched ranked an average of 7.3 programs while independents that matched ranked an average of 5.8 programs.

Those are contiguous ranks within a single specialty.

Since more independent applicants than US applicants applied to more than one residency type (Chart P-2), it makes sense they'd have a shorter contiguous list- ie, 5 psych programs, then 2 FM programs, then another 3 psych programs, etc.

Page 7 at the very top of the document addresses this quite well.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Those are contiguous ranks within a single specialty.

Since more independent applicants than US applicants applied to more than one residency type (Chart P-2), it makes sense they'd have a shorter contiguous list- ie, 5 psych programs, then 2 FM programs, then another 3 psych programs, etc.

Page 7 at the very top of the document addresses this quite well.

No fair reading the whole document!
psychattending only directed us to look at the pictures!

 

[pingouin]

oh great- now the SDN paragraph of my Dean's Letter next year will read "doesn't follow directions well".

 

[psychattending]

Indeed. But how is that the independent applicant matches with fewer programs ranked than a US senior?

The graph is showing the likelihood of matching for a given number of contiguous rankings. A US senior who ranked 5 programs contiguously on averaged matched about 94% of the time. In contrast an independent applicant who ranked 5 programs matched about 50% of the time. Thus, the independent applicant is less likely to match than a US senior.

Another way to look at the difference is to ask how many contiguous rankings does one have to have in order to have a certain chance of matching (e.g. 90%). A US senior only had to rank between 2 and 3 programs, whereas an independent had to rank 14.

Note: independent does NOT equal IMG. Independent = non US seniors (DOs, canadian MDs, IMGs, and US grads who are not currently seniors).

Obviously the data do not speak to why there is a difference. There could be several, e.g. independents can go outside of the Match (the stronger ones get out of match offers and the weaker ones don't), independents have a less strong application, prejudice, independents apply to more than one specialty.

 

[MiesVanDerMom]

The graph is showing the likelihood of matching for a given number of contiguous rankings. A US senior who ranked 5 programs contiguously on averaged matched about 94% of the time. In contrast an independent applicant who ranked 5 programs matched about 50% of the time. Thus, the independent applicant is less likely to match than a US senior.

Another way to look at the difference is to ask how many contiguous rankings does one have to have in order to have a certain chance of matching (e.g. 90%). A US senior only had to rank between 2 and 3 programs, whereas an independent had to rank 14.

Note: independent does NOT equal IMG. Independent = non US seniors (DOs, canadian MDs, IMGs, and US grads who are not currently seniors).

Obviously the data do not speak to why there is a difference. There could be several, e.g. independents can go outside of the Match (the stronger ones get out of match offers and the weaker ones don't), independents have a less strong application, prejudice, independents apply to more than one specialty.

14? Holy moly! I better get cracking here...

 

[getsmart]

oops. wrong thread.