NYU IM

[nowanmd]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I completed IM residency at North Shore Manhasset about 1/3 of our residents were D.O.s (btw they were some the best residents) at time the program would only take foreign grads from the Israeli medical schools- but I have no idea of the programs preferences today

 

[the argus]

Saying you matched into a university program means nothing. There are lots of IMG-riddled university programs where US MDs wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. In addition, just because your school may pay hospitals to have your students rotate within proximity to US MD students doesn't mean your rotating with them. LCME programs have requirements well beyond just showing up and taking an exam at the end of a rotation.

As I said before, there are USMDs, DOs, US-IMGs, and foreign-IMGs in my program. And also, do you not see the absurdity in arguing about LCME program requirements and then saying "matched into a university program means nothing"? If it is a university program, then the LCME obviously thinks enough of the institution, and it's academic departments/residency programs, to allow a medical school to operate there.

But go ahead, keep making ridiculous statements and gross generalizations.

 

[NurWollen]

Saying you matched into a university program means nothing. There are lots of IMG-riddled university programs where US MDs wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. In addition, just because your school may pay hospitals to have your students rotate within proximity to US MD students doesn't mean your rotating with them. LCME programs have requirements well beyond just showing up and taking an exam at the end of a rotation.

"IMG-riddled?" How's that for loaded terminology. And seriously, the bolded doesn't look like a substantiable claim. I mean, yeah, Carribbean schools pay hospitals to take on students. So do US MD schools. So do a lot of DO schools.

If you think US-MD schools have rotations of uniform quality, you're kidding yourself. There are residents and attendings who don't like to teach, regardless of where you go, and there are those that do, regardless of where you go.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

The usage of the term "top choice" is hilarious. You "chose" between IM,FM, and Peds. Then after getting over 70 rejections from programs you made a rank list out of programs who didn't instantly throw your app in the trash.

Just because you ranked it number 1 doesnt mean you "chose" your program any more than the 50% of your classmates who "chose" not to match anywhere.

 

[the argus]

The usage of the term "top choice" is hilarious. You "chose" between IM,FM, and Peds. Then after getting over 70 rejections from programs you made a rank list out of programs who didn't instantly throw your app in the trash.

Just because you ranked it number 1 doesnt mean you "chose" your program any more than the 50% of your classmates who "chose" not to match anywhere.

Reading your posts reminds me of one of my grandfather's favorite sayings, "Never argue with an idiot."

With that in mind, I'll just correct your factual inaccuracies.

1. US-IMGs match into all the same specialties that DOs do in the allopathic match. Again, the DO NRMP match profile is much more similar to US-IMGs than to USMDs, which is why DOs are included with "independent applicants" and not allopathic medical students. The same ACGME residency programs that are open to DOs are also open to US-IMGs. This isn't debatable. Again, if it makes you feel good to trash caribbean students, go ahead, just realize that DOs are much closer to US-IMGs than they are to USMDs in the world of ACGME residencies.

2. The big 3 caribbean schools have 80-90% first time match rates. All quoting that 50% does is show that you are unable to critically analyze the NRMP data reports and exemplifies a fundamental lack of understanding.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

Lol


Considering that there are ~5000 USIMGs in the match, and over 2500 of them are coming from your "big 3", you are very wrong. Devry doesnt emphasize this stuff, but you make up the biggest group....by far....included in that 50% match pool.

 

[Sileni]

Reading your posts reminds me of one of my grandfather's favorite sayings, "Never argue with an idiot."

With that in mind, I'll just correct your factual inaccuracies.

1. US-IMGs match into all the same specialties that DOs do in the allopathic match. Again, the DO NRMP match profile is much more similar to US-IMGs than to USMDs, which is why DOs are included with "independent applicants" and not allopathic medical students. The same ACGME residency programs that are open to DOs are also open to US-IMGs. This isn't debatable. Again, if it makes you feel good to trash caribbean students, go ahead, just realize that DOs are much closer to US-IMGs than they are to USMDs in the world of ACGME residencies.

2. The big 3 caribbean schools have 80-90% first time match rates. All quoting that 50% does is show that you are unable to critically analyze the NRMP data reports and exemplifies a fundamental lack of understanding.

1. There are PLENTY of programs that take DOs but not IMGs. Wisconsin's IM program comes to mind as well as Brown's and OHSU.

2. 80-90% of people who get to that point (IE they ignore everyone who failed out), and that includes preliminary spots (IE dead ends). I just saw posted on AUC's twitter that they're bragging about some guy who matched Preliminary Surgery at UF. 1) He match prelim which essentially means he didn't match and has to try again next year for a real residency. 2) They have this guy giving advice about how to obtain a residency when he barely managed to get a 1 year position at low tier program. But it speaks to how these program operate, they don't mention at all that preliminary surgery is a 1 year dead end position, where the people have to try again to match - often with even lower chances than the first time. They instead glorify that someone "match surgery at the prestigious UF". UF btw is known for many things, academics is definitely not one of them.

 

[Sileni]

duplicate.

 

[the argus]

1. There are PLENTY of programs that take DOs but not IMGs. Wisconsin's IM program comes to mind as well as Brown's and OHSU.

2. 80-90% of people who get to that point (IE they ignore everyone who failed out), and that includes preliminary spots (IE dead ends). I just saw posted on AUC's twitter that they're bragging about some guy who matched Preliminary Surgery at UF. 1) He match prelim which essentially means he didn't match and has to try again next year for a real residency. 2) They have this guy giving advice about how to obtain a residency when he barely managed to get a 1 year position at low tier program. But it speaks to how these program operate, they don't mention at all that preliminary surgery is a 1 year dead end position, where the people have to try again to match - often with even lower chances than the first time. They instead glorify that someone "match surgery at the prestigious UF". UF btw is known for many things, academics is definitely not one of them.

1. well according to FRIEDA and their websites, neither Brown nor Wisconsin IM have any DOs in their programs. But even if they did, cherry picking individual programs doesn't really mean anything. Ross matched someone this year in ophthalmology at Ohio State, does that mean Ross is awesome? What is true is that overall, the allopathic specialties that are open to DOs are also open to US-IMGs, and the same tier of programs within specialties that are open to DOs are also open to US-IMGs.

2. Yes there are significant attrition rates at caribbean schools, but this really has no relevance to this discussion. This discussion was about about how atainable certain specialties/programs are for DOs, and then people (i.e. you) started trashing caribbean students. I was just pointing out that US-IMGs (majority of which are caribs), do just as well in the NRMP as do DOs. And please do not quote that 53% stat from the NRMP data reports, as using that is a misinterpretation of what that data actually represents.

3. Dead-end prelim spots makes up a very small percentage of big 3 caribbean school matches. This is a common talking point on this forum that has no basis in reality. The majority of dead-end prelim spots go to AMGs. All you have to do is look at the actual data. There are ~900 dead-end prelim spots total, >500 of which are filled in the SOAP each year. >80% of SOAP positions go to AMGs (MD or DO). You can look at the match lists for the big 3 caribbean schools, not many of their 1700+ matches are dead-end prelim spots.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

Hmmmm if only there were data on what % of USIMGs match. That would be really nice right?


I am done with this clown.

 

[the argus]

Lol


Considering that there are ~5000 USIMGs in the match, and over 2500 of them are coming from your "big 3", you are very wrong. Devry doesnt emphasize this stuff, but you make up the biggest group....by far....included in that 50% match pool.

Hmmmm if only there were data on what % of USIMGs match. That would be really nice right?

Yes, there is. And as I've pointed out multiple times, you are misinterpreting it. You are not taking the time to actually understand what that data represents. I've explained why multiple times in previous threads, I'll copy it below if you care to read it.

If you look at the ECFMG report from 2013,
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uplo...tional-Medical-Graduates-Revised.PDF-File.pdf,
you will see that the average time since graduation for the unmatched cohort of US-IMGs is 5.7 years.

When people say "match rate", they usually mean the chances of a recent graduate who is in the match for the first time. This is exemplified by the fact that the NRMP data reports actually breaks up US allopathic applicants into US seniors vs. US grad.

But when quoting that 53% you are not actually describing US-IMGs in the match for the first time, you are describing all US-IMGs in the match regardless of how many times they have applied. The NRMP data reports don't differentiate US-IMG senior vs US-IMG grad. There is without a doubt a percentage (~10%) of US-IMGs that manage to graduate from school, but are poor applicants (semester failures, step failures, etc) and are not able to ever match. This small yearly cohort continues to apply every year, builds up over time (hence the 5.7 years above), and drastically skews the US-IMG "match rate".

If you want to include those reapplicants when describing true US-IMG "match rates", then you also have to include all the applicants from those previous years that did successfully match. If you don't do this (like the NRMP data reports), you are way oversampling the poor applicant/unmatched cohort. The NRMP does actually recognize this because they split US allopathic applicants into those 2 groups, they just don't do it for IMGs for some reason.

People try to say the US MD vs US-IMG match rates are 94% vs 53%, which is in fact comparing 2 completely different data sets. The yearly match rates for NRMP defined US grads (i.e. non-matched applicants from previous years) are actually 40-50%, showing that poor applicants, regardless of where they come from, do not do very well in the match.

The first-time match rate for the big 3 caribbean medical schools is between 80-90%. Granted this does not take into account students lost to attrition before graduation, which is no doubt substantial.

But when people say caribbean grads have a ~50% chance of matching, they are grossly misinterpreting the data.

You seem to be under the impression that I am somehow anti-DO, or I think that the caribbean is as good an option as going DO. I'm not anti-DO, and I've said repeatedly on this forum that I think going DO is a better option than the caribbean. All I try to do is inject some much needed reality into discussions about DO and US-IMG residency prospects.

 

[trev5150]

As an aside, I grew up on Long Island. WRT their not taking DO's at North Shore LIJ and Hofstra - Eff 'em. You don't need 'em. Living on LI is stupid expensive. I would rather live and work nearly anywhere else in the country that's not the desert. My sinuses bleed just thinking about the nearly 17 years I lived and worked in the Mojave.

 

[JimmyB123]

Just want to state that the argus does make valid points with his arguments.

I think sometimes as DO students we are quick to dismiss IMGs and we are quick to make assumptions. He is right in that the opportunities in the NRMP match for DOs are much more similar to that of IMGs than to that of US MDs. Obviously DOs have greater match rates but he is also right in that we more or less have access to the same caliber of program as IMGs do. Personally, I'm thankful that I don't have to worry about the the chance of not matching...which is a very real concern for IMGs. I think that's where the real distinction is. Let's leave it at that b/c the landscape of the match is changing and who knows where it will go for sure.

 

[Malcolm X]

What is the overall match rate of DOs?

Can someone explain what percentage of DO grads place into any aoa/acgme residency?

Is match rate different from the first number?

 

[the argus]

What is the overall match rate of DOs?

Can someone explain what percentage of DO grads place into any aoa/acgme residency?

Is match rate different from the first number?

The overall DO match rate (i.e. any AOA/ACGME residency) is very high, approaching 100%.

This is because the 20-30% (~600) of DOs that do not match through the NRMP yearly are able to then go and fill the ~1000 AOA residency positions that go unfilled in the osteopathic match each year.

This will all change though in the coming years as the residency merger finalizes. Those ~1000 unfilled positions will either be dismantled, or will also be open to USMDs and IMGs (***probably*** no one knows exactly how this is gonna play out)

 

[acapnial]

The overall DO match rate (i.e. any AOA/ACGME residency) is very high, approaching 100%.

This is because the 20-30% (~600) of DOs that do not match through the NRMP yearly are able to then go and fill the ~1000 AOA residency positions that go unfilled in the osteopathic match each year.

This will all change though in the coming years as the residency merger finalizes. Those ~1000 unfilled positions will either be dismantled, or will also be open to USMDs and IMGs (***probably*** no one knows exactly how this is gonna play out)

Actually the osteopathic match is first, so you can't try the NRMP then fall back on osteo if it doesn't work out. I believe if an osteopathic student fails to match in the NRMP they fail to match entirely.

 

[the argus]

Actually the osteopathic match is first, so you can't try the NRMP then fall back on osteo if it doesn't work out. I believe if an osteopathic student fails to match in the NRMP they fail to match entirely.

Incorrect, not matching in the NRMP does not disqualify a DO from getting an unfilled AOA residency position. You absolutely can fall back on osteo, and many people do exactly that every year. Here is the series of events.

1. Osteopathic match (this year was on 2/9) - if you match here, you are automatically removed from the NRMP. ~1000 positions are left unfilled every year following match day.
2. NRMP (this year was on 3/20) - historically, 70-80% of DOs (who have foregone the DO match) match.
3. The 20-30% of DOs that go unmatched in the NRMP are then able to go and fill the ~1000 unfilled AOA residency positions.

As @JimmyB123 stated above, this is where the real advantage of going DO over US-IMG lies, having access to all the osteopathic residency positions.

 

[acapnial]

Incorrect, not matching in the NRMP does not disqualify a DO from getting an unfilled AOA residency position. Here is the series of events.

1. Osteopathic match - if you match here, you are automatically removed from the NRMP. ~1000 positions are left unfilled every year following match day.
2. NRMP - historically, 70-80% of DOs (who have foregone the DO match) match.
3. The 20-30% of DOs that go unmatched in the NRMP are then able to go and fill the ~1000 unfilled AOA residency positions.

Hm, didn't know that. Those probably aren't the most desirable positions in the AOA. I wonder what the competition will look.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

Just want to state that the argus does make valid points with his arguments.

I think sometimes as DO students we are quick to dismiss IMGs and we are quick to make assumptions. He is right in that the opportunities in the NRMP match for DOs are much more similar to that of IMGs than to that of US MDs. Obviously DOs have greater match rates but he is also right in that we more or less have access to the same caliber of program as IMGs do. Personally, I'm thankful that I don't have to worry about the the chance of not matching...which is a very real concern for IMGs. I think that's where the real distinction is. Let's leave it at that b/c the landscape of the match is changing and who knows where it will go for sure.

Thank you. I was hoping a few pre meds would jump in and help clarify things.



Just to reference one of your other (brilliant) posts
...

...

Totally agree with you man. I would never encourage someone to go MD over DO in any case. But let's just take a pause and look at the match list from TCMC (an MD school, albeit low-tier):


I know that judging an institution by it's match list is not very conclusive, but that match list looks oddly similar to to that of a DO school, no? Some of the more established DO schools boast better matching results actually. I'm not meaning to start an argument or something but I do think that in SOME cases, a well established DO school can provide you a better career trajectory than some of the brand new mission-based MD schools. There aren't many MD schools like that honestly but TCMC comes to mind right away. If I had to choose between CCOM & TCMC right now, I would really have to think about that decision for a while.

 

[JimmyB123]

Thank you. I was hoping a few pre meds would jump in and help clarify things.



Just to reference one of your other (brilliant) posts
...

...

Referring to my earlier post, I admit I was mistaken. But where I say that "I would never encourage someone to go MD over DO in any case"....that's obviously a typo. I meant the other way around. I also didn't know much about TCMC at that time and now I know it is hands down a better option than going to any DO school in the nation.

But nonetheless, you are going around claiming that DO>>>>>>>IMG, which is exaggerated on many levels. The Argus has used solid, hard data to refute the claim. His points are valid and anyone (yes, even a pre-med) can attest to that.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

....so two months ago you admittedly had literally zero clue what you were talking about, but today you are here to dispel the published fact that Caribbean match rates are horrible.

Got it

 

[Bea5T]

So why are we encouraging US students to go study in sub-par 3rd world conditions again? Why some of you guys hold onto these Caribbean schools blows my mind. But loyalty dies hard I guess. There seems to be 3-4 former IMG students in this forum for some odd reason that will not let go. My question is Why? Why are you guys so gung-ho on continuing the tradition of these off-shore schools admitting whoever applies and bankrolling off government loans? Boggles my mind, and I have multiple family members who have gone through Ross battling through hurricanes, blackouts, floods, lack of internet etc etc

This is not a DO vs MD thing. It's about keeping students in this damn country. But whatever, this is SDN, some of you guys are crazy people.

 

[the argus]

So why are we encouraging US students to go study in sub-par 3rd world conditions again? Why some of you guys hold onto these Caribbean schools blows my mind. But loyalty dies hard I guess. There seems to be 3-4 former IMG students in this forum for some odd reason that will not let go. My question is Why? Why are you guys so gung-ho on continuing the tradition of these off-shore schools admitting whoever applies and bankrolling off government loans? Boggles my mind, and I have multiple family members who have gone through Ross battling through hurricanes, blackouts, floods, lack of internet etc etc

This post exemplifies the problem with so many people when discussing these topics on SDN. Who was talking about loyalty and tradition? No one, only you. As I have said already in this thread, and many times on this forum, I think DO is a better option than Caribbean and people should exhaust all other options before going the Caribbean route. But that doesn't mean the Caribbean is a terrible option. And just pointing out the realities of DO and USIMG outcomes in the match doesn't make me anti-DO or pro-Caribbean, it makes me pro-reality and anti-bull****.

The prevailing narratives surrounding Caribbean and DO medical education on SDN is completely ridiculous, and I think it's important to inject some reality into these discussions. Most of the comments are made by people who really just have no idea what they are talking about (many of the posters in this thread being a perfect example of this), and often there is cold hard data to refute their claims.

This is not a DO vs MD thing. It's about keeping students in this damn country. But whatever, this is SDN, some of you guys are crazy people.

All clinical rotations at the big 3 Caribbean schools are done in the US. As I've already said, every single one of my rotations was done alongside USMD or DO students. Does it really matter where med students do their basic science learning? Most US med students now do this in their pajamas at home.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

The prevailing narratives surrounding Caribbean and DO medical education on SDN is completely ridiculous, and I think it's important to inject some reality into these discussions. Most of the comments are made by people who really just have no idea what they are talking about (many of the posters in this thread being a perfect example of this), and often there is cold hard data to refute their claims.

Here is copy-pasted from the ECFMG charting outcomes document the per-specialty breakdown for first time applicants (i.e. <1 year from graduation):

Yes, this uses the charting outcomes definition of "matched" as "matched to preferred specialty" however when you compare charting outcomes to the main match data, the correlation between this definition and the actual match rate is extremely high.

 

[NontradCA]

Here is copy-pasted from the ECFMG charting outcomes document the per-specialty breakdown for first time applicants (i.e. <1 year from graduation):
View attachment 191801

Yes, this uses the charting outcomes definition of "matched" as "matched to preferred specialty" however when you compare charting outcomes to the main match data, the correlation between this definition and the actual match rate is extremely high.

That's better than I thought.

 

[the argus]

Here is copy-pasted from the ECFMG charting outcomes document the per-specialty breakdown for first time applicants (i.e. <1 year from graduation):
View attachment 191801

Yes, this uses the charting outcomes definition of "matched" as "matched to preferred specialty" however when you compare charting outcomes to the main match data, the correlation between this definition and the actual match rate is extremely high.

Exactly, 73% match to their first choice specialty. Add to that people who match into second choice and also prematches. And this is all US-IMGs, people from the big 3 caribbean schools do better than this (80-90% match rate).

Outcomes are much better in reality than people around here claim.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Exactly, 73% match to their first choice specialty. Add to that people who match into second choice and also prematches. And this is all US-IMGs, people from the big 3 caribbean schools do better than this (80-90% match rate).

Outcomes are much better in reality than people around here claim.

If you subtract the total number matched from the main match data and the number "matched" to top choice specialty from this report, the numbers are trivial. And ore matches are down to only a small number of programs.

So I suppose it depends on your definition of better. I'd phrase it as a 75% chance of matching into a primary care field and maybe not your first choice specialty...assuming you make it to the match in the first place.

 

[the argus]

So I suppose it depends on your definition of better. I'd phrase it as a 75% chance of matching into a primary care field and maybe not your first choice specialty...assuming you make it to the match in the first place.

Yes, thats much better than you would think reading the bombastic comments prevalent in this forum. These outcomes are very similar to DO outcomes in the NRMP, certainly more similar than DO is to USMD.

Again, I've never said the caribbean is a better option than DO, only that it's not nearly as bad as it is made out to be on this website. I think that chart pretty much proves my point. 75% is much different than the 50% number that people try to present as fact.

 

[22031 Alum]

Yes, thats much better than you would think reading the bombastic comments prevalent in this forum. These outcomes are very similar to DO outcomes in the NRMP, certainly more similar than DO is to USMD.

Again, I've never said the caribbean is a better option than DO, only that it's not nearly as bad as it is made out to be on this website. I think that chart pretty much proves my point. 75% is much different than the 50% number that people try to present as fact.

You're totally right that the 53% stat isn't most accurate. But I would argue that your emphasis on "first choice" is not the most accurate. I would say "first choice out of limited options." Fields like ENT or derm or rad onc, and prime programs like CHOP for the peds folks, are off the table. So saying first choice means less when it is actually first choice of what is left.
Whereas a US MD grad can more legitimately say they got their first choice of all possible paths, not just a select few.

 

[Dharma]

You're totally right that the 53% stat isn't most accurate. But I would argue that your emphasis on "first choice" is not the most accurate. I would say "first choice out of limited options." Fields like ENT or derm or rad onc, and prime programs like CHOP for the peds folks, are off the table. So saying first choice means less when it is actually first choice of what is left.
Whereas a US MD grad can more legitimately say they got their first choice of all possible paths, not just a select few.

Self-selection happens everywhere, albeit more so amongst the average D.O. student, but most certainly not exclusive.

 

[Dharma]

I do find it interesting how many take such a vested interest in these statistics and often with an underlying emotional tone that tends towards a defensive stance of some sort.

 

[22031 Alum]

Self-selection happens everywhere, albeit more so amongst the average D.O. student, but most certainly not exclusive.

The statement I was replying to, and the chart posted higher up, concern US IMGs and not DOs. I'd argue that you can't just hand wave self-selection. The fact that I self-selected out of derm as a US MD grad isn't the same as a Caribbean grad "self-selecting" out of derm. One is truly a choice, one isn't.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

Uh are we just going to ignore that those "stats" include 1600 students, which is less than one class size of one medical school?

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Uh are we just going to ignore that those "stats" include 1600 students, which is less than one class size of one medical school?

I suggest you look at the data

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

1225 + 453 = 1678

Ross class size = between 400-600 per semester.


I admit Im not the best at math, but if you add in SGU and Saba and AUA and, well all the other countries on the globe that contribute to the group of US IMGs ......... Its gonna be more than 1678.


In fact, if YOU look at the data, its around triple that number

 

[RustBeltOnc]

with respect to the original post ---

--- there are like 20 other medicine programs within a subway ride of the NYU main campus. Many of them can serve as an excellent springboard to a great fellowship/career and several are much less malignant then the NYU IM program --- so .... what does it matter NYU discriminates?

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

1225 + 453 = 1678

Ross class size = between 400-600 per semester.


I admit Im not the best at math, but if you add in SGU and Saba and AUA and, well all the other countries on the globe that contribute to the group of US IMGs ......... Its gonna be more than 1678.


In fact, if YOU look at the data, its around triple that number

You really need to look at the ECFMG document rsther than act like I'm making up numbers. You have so many misconceptions in your post I can't even

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

You really need to look at the ECFMG document rsther than act like I'm making up numbers. You have so many misconceptions in your post I can't even

Which one is a misconception? The part about how 1225+453=1678 or the part where 400-600 x 3 semesters = 1200-1800?

Which cant you even? Your phone probably has a calculator app to help you with this.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Which one is a misconception? The part about how 1225+453=1678 or the part where 400-600 x 3 semesters = 1200-1800?

Which cant you even? Your phone probably has a calculator app to help you even.

Sources:
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/resultsanddata2013.pdf
http://www.ecfmg.org/resources/NRMP...atch-International-Medical-Graduates-2014.pdf

2013 Main Match data: 2706 US-IMGs matched

2013 ECFMG charting outcomes in the match: 2369 US-IMGs matched to 1st choice specialty (i.e. approximately 350 US-IMGs matched into a backup specialty)

Now, those numbers include all US-IMGs - current students and graduates. That is the source of the 50% match number that gets tossed around frequently.

Argus' criticism was that this is inaccurate since it includes both current students and graduates, and that the graduates are a fundamentally different pool (i.e. mostly people who failed to match at least once before). So my entire reason for making that table was to subdivide the total into the current seniors applying.

Within the major specialties, the ECFMG document gives a chart showing the results broken down by years since graduation (Chart 10 for each specialty). That is the source for the numbers I used.

The number I provided is intentionally not all US-IMGs that matched or that applied, it is only the current seniors who matched in their 1st choice specialty for the specialties where the ECFMG document has provided a breakdown. If you would actually look at the source documents rather than persist being obtuse, you'd see that the totals for applicants 1-2 years out from graduation make up the bulk of the rest of the total of matches and the applicants >2 years out from graduation make up the rest.

As for why the number of matriculants is higher than the number of residency applicants, I'll leave that to you to figure out. The answer is obvious.

 

[NurWollen]

This has got to be one of the nastiest threads I've seen in a while.

 

[crotchrocketer]

I think attrition in the Caribbean schools is a negligible point completely (particularly in this discussion). Schools gives one a chance to pursue a degree and if you fail to meet the standards clearly set forward from the beginning, then you'll be cut just like in any other similar situation. Obviously they give the chance to many that never should be there in the first place, but it's common knowledge that they are for profit institutions (aka businesses, which most new DO are too).

After attrition, the only major difference that I see between the big 3 and many of the newly minted DO schools is the ability of one to fall back into an AOA residency (or historically AOA once the merger happens). This factor alone coupled with the amount of $$ it takes to finance a medical education makes DO a better option overall.

Most people should be extremely happy to have the dead weight fail early. Low admission standards basically means there will be high attrition in order to insure that there IS a level of quality upheld internally before allowing people to graduate.

 

[YankeeCandle1141]

That is exactly my point you asshat. God damn you are thick.


If you are within the 50% of the class that ever makes it to send an application....... You have a 73% chance of matching. That is abysmal.


I admit that I did not know that over 50% of IMGs send out between 101-250 applications.

 

[RustBeltOnc]

NurWollen -- my point is, doesn't have to be nasty. Let NYU do it's thang, the OP and others can go to plenty other places, and thrive.

Besides --- is our collective purpose to argue about the status level of the different degrees or .. to encourage others?

FWIW, I think any effort to become gen cards in Manhattan proper should cause the doc to consider profound philosophical / spiritual / existential questions:

i. e., does the human race need yet another human chasing afib consults on this island?

But this is a topic for another thread.

 

[crotchrocketer]

That is exactly my point you asshat. God damn you are thick.


If you are within the 50% of the class that ever makes it to send an application....... You have a 73% chance of matching. That is abysmal.


I admit that I did not know that over 50% of IMGs send out between 101-250 applications.

My point was nobody is crying for the ~50% that don't make it. That's seems to be mostly just you. At least I think it's a good thing considering the admission standards. Going the IMG route is surely not advisable to many that consider it (ie someone just just can't do well on standardized testing) but it can be a viable option for some that have exhausted all other options.

Seems like your pissed for a some personal reason idk.

 

[group_theory]

Yeah ... this is a productive thread (sarcasm alert)

Closing.