Official 2019-2020 Psychiatry Interview Invite Thread

[nebuchadnezzarII]

I don't even know what a safety is at this point. I thought I applied to enough "safeties" based on Residency Explorer (being in the "upper 25% of matched applicants"/"above range of matched applicants"). I have plenty of schools where, based on my numbers and extracurriculars, I thought I was competitive at. All of them have been pumping out interviews to anyone but me. Only one has invited me and they are regional. The non-regional ones aren't even looking at me. "Safety" or not, I only applied to programs I genuinely liked in locations my partner and I could see ourselves living in so it's killing me to not hear from them.

I'm so sorry I don't know what happened. I agree with the regional bias, but things also look quite random too. How many interviews do you have so far? Would you be happy going to any of them?

Things are looking quite abysmal this year. Can anyone here with 6+ interviews thus far comment on all this? I'm just wondering if the low invites are an almost-universal thing or if a small group of applicants are getting the lion's share of the interviews.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Oedipa Maas]

I'm so sorry I don't know what happened. I agree with the regional bias, but things also look quite random too. How many interviews do you have so far? Would you be happy going to any of them?

I have two and I am stoked on both of them, I am seriously in love with one of the programs and the regional one would take me back home which would also be nice in its own way. I just obviously don't feel "safe" to match going on only 2 interviews.

 

[downwithDTB]

ERAS was completely overwhelmed because even though they steal enough of your money they don't buy enough server space and it took some people several days to download MSPEs... given that a program may have only gotten them yesterday or today, has billions to go through and they are the only objective-ish measure of performance relative to peers beyond step 1... I would remain patient.

 

[itsallgood123]

ERAS was completely overwhelmed because even though they steal enough of your money they don't buy enough server space and it took some people several days to download MSPEs... given that a program may have only gotten them yesterday or today, has billions to go through and they are the only objective-ish measure of performance relative to peers beyond step 1... I would remain patient.

anyway you can site source/verify this?

 

[psychedforpsych123]

anyway you can site source/verify this?

Based on prior messages it appears this user is a PD

 

[docksan]

I'm so sorry I don't know what happened. I agree with the regional bias, but things also look quite random too. How many interviews do you have so far? Would you be happy going to any of them?

Things are looking quite abysmal this year. Can anyone here with 6+ interviews thus far comment on all this? I'm just wondering if the low invites are an almost-universal thing or if a small group of applicants are getting the lion's share of the interviews.

I got my first 8 invites before the MSPE, then the next 2-3 around its release. Absolutely nothing since October 1st.

I think there's some wisdom in waiting to hear from next week. I imagine the number of applications went up 10%, for one, and aforementioned possible delays being another factor.

I also statistically targeted programs I was competitive in, and I'm a B student.

 

[downwithDTB]

Based on prior messages it appears this user is a PD

I am not a PD but I do speak with them regularly and review applications. Various match systems crash year in and year out on the heavy traffic days.

 

[nebuchadnezzarII]

I got my first 8 invites before the MSPE, then the next 2-3 around its release. Absolutely nothing since October 1st.

I think there's some wisdom in waiting to hear from next week. I imagine the number of applications went up 10%, for one, and aforementioned possible delays being another factor.

I also statistically targeted programs I was competitive in, and I'm a B student.

That's very interesting. Thanks for providing us with this information. If you feel comfortable saying so, would you please tell me either here or through messages what region you're in (in general)? I am wondering if certain areas/states tend to have a cluster of schools that send things out slower or later than normal. Congrats on the invites. Knock 'em dead. That's insanely impressive to have so many invites so far!!!

 

[docksan]

Which is strange, because I don't feel like my application is that stellar.

 

[jpmiz]

I'm so sorry I don't know what happened. I agree with the regional bias, but things also look quite random too. How many interviews do you have so far? Would you be happy going to any of them?

Things are looking quite abysmal this year. Can anyone here with 6+ interviews thus far comment on all this? I'm just wondering if the low invites are an almost-universal thing or if a small group of applicants are getting the lion's share of the interviews.

I have 7 but 3 are aways and the rest are places I have significant family connections so I think for a lot of us it’s just aways boosting our application. I had a bad COMLEX <500 so it seems like we all can have a good shot at psych regardless of scores if we applied to the right kinds of places.

 

[docksan]

That's very interesting. Thanks for providing us with this information. If you feel comfortable saying so, would you please tell me either here or through messages what region you're in (in general)? I am wondering if certain areas/states tend to have a cluster of schools that send things out slower or later than normal. Congrats on the invites. Knock 'em dead. That's insanely impressive to have so many invites so far!!!

Let's just say I'm neither east nor west coast.

 

[Pandy4993]

I haven’t gotten an invite since 9/25 and am at 5 total. I’m a solidly below average US MD applicant (very low step 1, average step 2, only honored peds third year, and have very unimpressive extracurriculars, all unrelated to psych) so I know I shouldn’t be expecting a lot. Still panicking though, considering I applied super broadly to a ton of programs, including new programs and community programs, and did get a trickle of interviews during weeks 1-2.

 

[docksan]

Hang in there. There just doesn't seem to be any pattern to inviting this year and it seems to largely depend on where you applied and if it's regional. I think due to the weird matches last year programs are just cautious about who they extend and don't extend invites to.

 

[ThisHumerusIFound]

I haven’t gotten an invite since 9/25 and am at 5 total. I’m a solidly below average US MD applicant (very low step 1, average step 2, only honored peds third year, and have very unimpressive extracurriculars, all unrelated to psych) so I know I shouldn’t be expecting a lot. Still panicking though, considering I applied super broadly to a ton of programs, including new programs and community programs, and did get a trickle of interviews during weeks 1-2.

Similar boat with interviews. 3 IV so far.

Only applied regionally and to a lot of programs. DO. HP everything 3rd year, H in sub-i's with letter from a sub-i. Strong letters. 5 pubs/presentations, all 1st author.

Wondering what's going on myself too.

 

[superfrogpoke]

Hang in there. There just doesn't seem to be any pattern to inviting this year and it seems to largely depend on where you applied and if it's regional. I think due to the weird matches last year programs are just cautious about who they extend and don't extend invites to.

Just curious what do you mean by "weird matches"?

 

[docksan]

Apparently last year there was an overabundance of applications to "safety schools", leading to canceled interviews once the applicant "hit a magic number" but statistically they may not have been a competitive match at the institution compared to ones they normally may have been but didn't interview at. The result was matching at lower ranks (5-6 ranks in) as compared to top ranks for many students. Besides this it was said that too many interviews were extended early on, leading to a similar result.

This is all stuff I heard.

 

[Oedipa Maas]

If it makes anyone else feel better:

DO applicant, bottom of the class. Below average COMLEX 1/2 but passed on first attempts. Excellent third year though - all A's, great evaluations. Four strong LoRs. Applied to 60 programs. Haven't gotten a single invitation.

Makes me feel less alone but doesn’t make me feel better! It just makes me more upset at this process. Wishing you all the best, I’ll be thinking of you!

 

[docksan]

Makes me feel less alone but doesn’t make me feel better! It just makes me more upset at this process. Wishing you all the best, I’ll be thinking of you!

Yea, if anything it does little to lend credence to the process when above average and below average people have the same number of invites with basically the other 80% getting nada. Something is definitely wrong.

 

[Oedipa Maas]

Yea, if anything it does little to lend credence to the process when above average and below average people have the same number of invites with basically the other 80% getting nada. Something is definitely wrong.

Yep I’m literally average scores wise with good ECs and research. MSPE was glowing. 2 invites before MSPE, none after. Makes me wonder if there is something horribly wrong with my app that I am blind to?

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

Most places don't send out invites until after MSPEs are out. I have had them for a week, but I have had 800 of them so please calm down. An other big change is the ACGME common program requirements require plans/committees to target under represented minorities. This task mixed with committees bring the process to a crawl. So no fair panicking yet.

 

[docksan]

Most places don't send out invites until after MSPEs are out. I have had them for a week, but I have had 800 of them so please calm down. An other big change is the ACGME common program requirements require plans/committees to target under represented minorities. This task mixed with committees bring the process to a crawl. So no fair panicking yet.

Hey, thank you for everything you are all doing this year. Most of us figured the common requirements played in on this.

We are sorry for our extreme anxiety.

 

[darknecrosforte]

Most places don't send out invites until after MSPEs are out. I have had them for a week, but I have had 800 of them so please calm down. An other big change is the ACGME common program requirements require plans/committees to target under represented minorities. This task mixed with committees bring the process to a crawl. So no fair panicking yet.

Is this largely regional? For example, for general healthcare, Filipinos are NOT under-represented due to the prevalence in nursing, but in most areas, they are for medicine. Thank you for your help.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

The ACGME leaves these questions purposely vague I think. If you lump ethnic groups too much, Asians would not be under represented for instance. My area has lots of Indian and Chinese doctors, but we could sure use some Cambodian or Vietnamese doctors. The southwest will never have enough Hispanic doctors to fill the need, but North Dakota has different needs. I think the task is to have a plan and aim for them, results will look like the demographics of medical school admissions at the end of the day. This effort has to be much further up stream than graduate medical education in my opinion.

 

[Gandyy]

It is indeed a rough time for interviews. Only 5 Psych interviews thus far. Thought I would have gotten a lot more. I hope it picks up or the possibility of not matching may become more realistic.

 

[nebuchadnezzarII]

It is indeed a rough time for interviews. Only 5 Psych interviews thus far. Thought I would have gotten a lot more. I hope it picks up or the possibility of not matching may become more realistic.

In the exact same position as you buddy. My advising dean told me this would be a very smooth application process for me and that has not turned out to be the case...Highly disappointed and starting to get a little bit scared.

 

[nebuchadnezzarII]

I'd be happy for one. Still stuck at zero, so I'd be ecstatic if I had five. Pretty sure you are in the clear.

Any idea if there's something on the app that might be holding you back? Did you submit everything? Sorry to hear about this. But I know personally a few programs that haven't even finished reviewing apps yet. This seems so strange. No flood of interviews for most people it seems, and barely a trickle for some.

 

[darknecrosforte]

Any idea if there's something on the app that might be holding you back? Did you submit everything? Sorry to hear about this. But I know personally a few programs that haven't even finished reviewing apps yet. This seems so strange. No flood of interviews for most people it seems, and barely a trickle for some.

I'm doing an away at a place I applied to and their 1st interview is this Friday. I reached out and was told that they've skimmed my app and that it's completely fine except for having 1 less psych LOR than what they want and I'm technically incomplete. That's getting fixed hopefully by tomorrow, but it makes sense and may apply to people who have not read the "Apply" page of each program's site, assuming that the site is even up to date. I read every site and was aware of the technical incomplete status of my app and thought they'd reconsider the LOR requirement because maybe bone wizardry counts for some form of experience with mental illness (*zing!), but it didn't.

 

[nebuchadnezzarII]

I'm doing an away at a place I applied to and their 1st interview is this Friday. I reached out and was told that they've skimmed my app and that it's completely fine except for having 1 less psych LOR than what they want and I'm technically incomplete. That's getting fixed hopefully by tomorrow, but it makes sense and may apply to people who have not read the "Apply" page of each program's site, assuming that the site is even up to date. I read every site and was aware of the technical incomplete status of my app and thought they'd reconsider the LOR requirement because maybe bone wizardry counts for some form of experience with mental illness (*zing!), but it didn't.

Wow. How many psych letters did these guys want?

 

[darknecrosforte]

Wow. How many psych letters did these guys want?

1 for US MD applicant and 2 for anyone else. I saw 2 of my 88 apps that required 3 and no other types. So... that was $52.

 

[nebuchadnezzarII]

1 for US MD applicant and 2 for anyone else. I saw 2 of my 88 apps that required 3 and no other types. So... that was $52.

Would you be able to message me the names of these programs? I'm curious. Because that sounds a little bit strange. I haven't seen any program that required 3 from psych docs. Some said "psychiatrists preferred" but nothing beyond that, really. Good luck to you as well.

As far as I had seen, the programs I applied to required at least one letter from a psychiatrist, which I got. If there are programs that want two or more, I'll take the "L." I applied to 60 programs thinking that was broad, but maybe I was wrong.

I think quality and quantity both matter in terms of programs you applied to. Did you apply to less competitive programs as well? I'm no program director, but it seems silly to be too judgmental over 1 failed course during 1st year. Doesn't that just sound silly? Especially if you passed all your boards in one shot. Hang in there. There should be more IVs going out these next few weeks.

 

[Pandy4993]

1 for US MD applicant and 2 for anyone else. I saw 2 of my 88 apps that required 3 and no other types. So... that was $52.

Wow, three psych. Any program I might have applied to with that requirement would certainly be a no go for me.

I actually realized last Thursday that all of the psych programs I applied to in four states (like 20+) somehow only had one of my three letters assigned. I think I must have had issues getting the select all feature to work, but I remembered going back to check the individual checklists for every program on 9/15 and specifically going back to add those letters...

I’m not sure if I’ll end up getting reviewed at those programs, but I finally got a couple of post MSPE invites today. One community program still seemed to have every October date open, so it’s definitely very early for some of them. Best of luck to you all! This process is pretty brutal and I’ve been able to get nothing done but worrying in the last week or so, even though I know it’s pretty pointless at this point.

 

[Oedipa Maas]

1 for US MD applicant and 2 for anyone else. I saw 2 of my 88 apps that required 3 and no other types. So... that was $52.

I had the opposite problem. I wrote letter requirements out before applying and for UNM I just wrote "1 psychiatry, 2 other". When I went back and checked everything neurotically after I applied, I saw that they require "1 psych, 1 from a primary care provider, and 1 other". Bummed because I am from the Southwest and love New Mexico but what is done is done, probably earned me an auto-reject.

 

[Thelonious Chunk]

I am definitely a very low tier candidate. I failed one course in first year and remediated. Low board scores, but passed on first attempts. I did really well in my third year and I have been paranoid if I missed something on my application, but there is not anything I can think of. I have one LoR from a psychiatrist, one from IM, one from FM, and one from OB/GYN (had a great rotation there and I was confident he would write a really good letter). My MSPE was really good.

So the red flags are: one failed class and low boards.
I knew that I was not going to be competitive, but I'm not applying for derm. I know psych was getting more competitive, but I've genuinely had a passion for psych since before I started medical school.

I'm not really sure what to do, but I'm not panicking yet as it is still early and there will be other phases. It's just not a comforting feeling having zero interviews mid-second week of October.

As far as I had seen, the programs I applied to required at least one letter from a psychiatrist, which I got. If there are programs that want two or more, I'll take the "L." I applied to 60 programs thinking that was broad, but maybe I was wrong.

I'm a DO w/ a low step 1 but avg to above avg all other boards (comlexes and step 2), no red flags. I applied to 105 programs, all with DOs on the roster. I have 5 interviews but they are all out of region in pretty random places. If I hadn't applied to a bunch of random places I could easily be sitting at 0 right now. I wonder if maybe applying to a few more low-tier places could be helpful, perhaps with an accompanying LOI after a week or so? Also if you're region happens to be New England or California you need to apply to plenty of programs out of region.

 

[darknecrosforte]

Would you be able to message me the names of these programs? I'm curious. Because that sounds a little bit strange. I haven't seen any program that required 3 from psych docs. Some said "psychiatrists preferred" but nothing beyond that, really. Good luck to you as well.

U Wisconsin - Milwaukee was one. Can't remember the other. However, I've had 2 programs II me despite missing 1 or 2 requirements in my app that they have little reason to expect me to complete before ranking.

Pretty random stuff this year. Sometimes I wish I could tolerate family med for more than a few months.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I'm no program director, but it seems silly to be too judgmental over 1 failed course during 1st year. Doesn't that just sound silly? Especially if you passed all your boards in one shot.

While I agree with you 100% and I have tried not to fan the flames of anxiety about all of this, there is some perspective you should understand. With the new hyper-applying that is going on, we get over 100 applications per slot. Almost all LORs are good, MSPEs have adjectives where 80% of graduates are "outstanding", and PSs are generally well edited and the same. So you are right, failing a USMLE is an obvious factor and lets say about 10% have that problem. Maybe 15% fail some organ system or have to repeat a rotation. Maybe a little under 10% repeat a whole year. Probably about 15% have a negative comment from a rotation, or a statement about a lack of professionalism in the MSPE. Even if a PD is overly strict and eliminates all candidates for absolutely any cause, that leaves about 50 applicants per slot. We yearn for the days when we could be less strict and overlook candidate's miss steps because people where applying mostly regionally and were really interested in our programs. This has become ridiculous for both sides. I wish NRMP could limit applicants to a dozen programs, but that will never happen because everyone would lawyer up and fight.

 

[Thelonious Chunk]

While I agree with you 100% and I have tried not to fan the flames of anxiety about all of this, there is some perspective you should understand. With the new hyper-applying that is going on, we get over 100 applications per slot. Almost all LORs are good, MSPEs have adjectives where 80% of graduates are "outstanding", and PSs are generally well edited and the same. So you are right, failing a USMLE is an obvious factor and lets say about 10% have that problem. Maybe 15% fail some organ system or have to repeat a rotation. Maybe a little under 10% repeat a whole year. Probably about 15% have a negative comment from a rotation, or a statement about a lack of professionalism in the MSPE. Even if a PD is overly strict and eliminates all candidates for absolutely any cause, that leaves about 50 applicants per slot. We yearn for the days when we could be less strict and overlook candidate's miss steps because people where applying mostly regionally and were really interested in our programs. This has become ridiculous for both sides. I wish NRMP could limit applicants to a dozen programs, but that will never happen because everyone would lawyer up and fight.

How is this year compared to the last couple of years? More apps, less apps?

 

[Thelonious Chunk]

Fair points. Could you let me know some low tier programs just to make sure - I maybe missed some. I have no ill disposition toward the process as I know I am a bottom of the barrel applicant, but I also know I’ve passed everything and that has to count for something. Just need to be proactive where I can.

I can PM my list which I think covers a majority after I’m done with clinic

 

[Old&InTheWay]

While I agree with you 100% and I have tried not to fan the flames of anxiety about all of this, there is some perspective you should understand. With the new hyper-applying that is going on, we get over 100 applications per slot. Almost all LORs are good, MSPEs have adjectives where 80% of graduates are "outstanding", and PSs are generally well edited and the same. So you are right, failing a USMLE is an obvious factor and lets say about 10% have that problem. Maybe 15% fail some organ system or have to repeat a rotation. Maybe a little under 10% repeat a whole year. Probably about 15% have a negative comment from a rotation, or a statement about a lack of professionalism in the MSPE. Even if a PD is overly strict and eliminates all candidates for absolutely any cause, that leaves about 50 applicants per slot. We yearn for the days when we could be less strict and overlook candidate's miss steps because people where applying mostly regionally and were really interested in our programs. This has become ridiculous for both sides. I wish NRMP could limit applicants to a dozen programs, but that will never happen because everyone would lawyer up and fight.

Are programs allowed to require "supplemental applications" like med schools do? I wonder if that would be a reasonable way to limit the number of applications. And by asking a question such as "why our program?" you can help to find the people who are actually interested.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

Are programs allowed to require "supplemental applications" like med schools do? I wonder if that would be a reasonable way to limit the number of applications. And by asking a question such as "why our program?" you can help to find the people who are actually interested.

There is no rule against it and a few programs do this, but it also works against you. Supplemental applications are a pain for applicants. If you are applying to 40 places, you will likely decide 39 is enough if someone wants to make you write another essay.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

How is this year compared to the last couple of years? More apps, less apps?

About 50 less, but the number of US allopathic grads is up.

 

[toostressedtobeblessed]

I am starting to get seriously concerned. I'm a midwest student with a very good step score, okay clerkship grades, good LORs, and average to above average extracurriculars that applied nationally, mostly to schools I considered in my wheelhouse, a few "safeties" (apparently not), and a few reaches (apparently they all are). I have 3(!) interviews so far, and I'm especially confused because one is a top-tier program, one is a wheelhouse program, and one is a safety. I honestly don't know what to do.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

While I agree with you 100% and I have tried not to fan the flames of anxiety about all of this, there is some perspective you should understand. With the new hyper-applying that is going on, we get over 100 applications per slot. Almost all LORs are good, MSPEs have adjectives where 80% of graduates are "outstanding", and PSs are generally well edited and the same. So you are right, failing a USMLE is an obvious factor and lets say about 10% have that problem. Maybe 15% fail some organ system or have to repeat a rotation. Maybe a little under 10% repeat a whole year. Probably about 15% have a negative comment from a rotation, or a statement about a lack of professionalism in the MSPE. Even if a PD is overly strict and eliminates all candidates for absolutely any cause, that leaves about 50 applicants per slot. We yearn for the days when we could be less strict and overlook candidate's miss steps because people where applying mostly regionally and were really interested in our programs. This has become ridiculous for both sides. I wish NRMP could limit applicants to a dozen programs, but that will never happen because everyone would lawyer up and fight.

The hard part of this is figuring how to pick the "right" 10% to interview. I trust the Sorting Hat Match to sort out the ones we will actually get, but how to offer interviews--the true "scarce resource" I have to allocate--to the applicants who are best suited to benefit from meeting us?

We have 50-60 no-brainers that we send out in the first wave--but another 100+ who look "good enough". I can't interview them all...

 

[Oedipa Maas]

While I agree with you 100% and I have tried not to fan the flames of anxiety about all of this, there is some perspective you should understand. With the new hyper-applying that is going on, we get over 100 applications per slot. Almost all LORs are good, MSPEs have adjectives where 80% of graduates are "outstanding", and PSs are generally well edited and the same. So you are right, failing a USMLE is an obvious factor and lets say about 10% have that problem. Maybe 15% fail some organ system or have to repeat a rotation. Maybe a little under 10% repeat a whole year. Probably about 15% have a negative comment from a rotation, or a statement about a lack of professionalism in the MSPE. Even if a PD is overly strict and eliminates all candidates for absolutely any cause, that leaves about 50 applicants per slot. We yearn for the days when we could be less strict and overlook candidate's miss steps because people where applying mostly regionally and were really interested in our programs. This has become ridiculous for both sides. I wish NRMP could limit applicants to a dozen programs, but that will never happen because everyone would lawyer up and fight.

So how screwed am I that I applied out of region because my partner and I are open and interested in moving? Only applied where I am genuinely interested. Is it LOI time since I’ve only heard from 3 programs total and one non regional?

 

[Old&InTheWay]

There is no rule against it and a few programs do this, but it also works against you. Supplemental applications are a pain for applicants. If you are applying to 40 places, you will likely decide 39 is enough if someone wants to make you write another essay.

That’s seems like it would serve the intended purpose of making the application take just enough extra work to discourage people who aren’t really interested from applying.

 

[downwithDTB]

The hard part of this is figuring how to pick the "right" 10% to interview. I trust the Sorting Hat Match to sort out the ones we will actually get, but how to offer interviews--the true "scarce resource" I have to allocate--to the applicants who are best suited to benefit from meeting us?

An underlying assumption of the match is that both applicants and programs have ideal knowledge and the match was proposed to fix a problem for residents when there were more spots than docs, which is no longer the case. The perfect knowledge clearly breaks down now due to the impossibility of 1) applicants actually knowing how competitive they are at specific programs because inadequate information is provided by programs 2) programs knowing which applicants actually want them 3) programs knowing how good applicants are because LORs are too inflated and some med school don't give discriminatory grades.

Either programs need to work on #1, the match needs to go away, or there needs to be a sequential system implemented (e.g. an interview match with limits or a series of 2-3 interview/match rounds). The match does not work ideally because it's core assumptions are grossly violated. Med schools should also work on number #3. If every applicant from a school has "all honors" I have to assume that each applicant is a 4th quartile student because the risk of bad is >> benefit of really good.

Regarding secondaries: I imagine that the interview is much more of a barrier to entry. If someone will give up a day to go somewhere, they would certainly write a quick secondary, no? The worry of someone showing up to an interview who wouldn't rank the place seems low to me: if someone gets a bunch of invites, they'll cancel their least desired over more desired. If they don't want a program but have no other interviews, they'll probably rank you #1; problem solved.

 

[Old&InTheWay]

Regarding secondaries: I imagine that the interview is much more of a barrier to entry. If someone will give up a day to go somewhere, they would certainly write a quick secondary, no?

It's not about a barrier to entry into the program, but about limiting the number of applications programs are recieveing in the first place from people who are using the brute force method of matching. It's way too easy right now to submit 60+ applications with the hope of getting your 8-12 interviews. Since everyone is doing that now, programs are flooded with applications and are having a hard time thoughtfully choosing who to invite. If a program were to make it more difficult to submit applications, they could actually review the applications they receive in a meaningful way and the program would still end up filling their interview slots. I'd rather have 300 applicants who express real interest in my program than 1000 (even if the quantifiable characteristics of the 300 are "less desirable" in aggregate). Either way, the positions will be filled.

 

[jpmiz]

My top program sent out all their invites already, but I'm rotating there in a few weeks =( . Is there any hope that I could get an informal interview or squeezed in if I do well?

 

[superfrogpoke]

Should we lose hope of more interviews at this point or no?

 

[downwithDTB]

Should we lose hope of more interviews at this point or no?

I got my last interview offer in the end of December and ended up getting multiple please rank us high phone calls from very fancy people and a paid second visit.

The game is not over. I suggest that you look at the distribution of invites from last year and the year before posted on SDN to get a better picture of the process. This same freak out* happens literally every year. Look at the threads going back as far as they go.

*10/9 is too early in the game to completely predict how well it will go. Step 1, quartile, school, ect. probably still remain your best predictors at this point. Give it 2-3 more weeks.

 

[I'm Psyched]

Most places don't send out invites until after MSPEs are out. I have had them for a week, but I have had 800 of them so please calm down. An other big change is the ACGME common program requirements require plans/committees to target under represented minorities. This task mixed with committees bring the process to a crawl. So no fair panicking yet.

Thank you for your reassurances! However...Is there a date when it does become fair to panic?