- Joined
- Jul 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,102
- Reaction score
- 1,185
Is non-radiation oncology competitive? I've heard a lot about radiation oncology, but that seems to be a fairly small segment of the oncologist population.
Oncology competitive?
- Thread starter Endoxifen
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2015
- Messages
- 3,378
- Reaction score
- 4,617
I think med onc has a big disparity between the competitiveness of community programs vs academic programs.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2013
- Messages
- 8,597
- Reaction score
- 19,854
Interesting, had no idea this was the trend!
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,174
- Reaction score
- 1,001
Whole different ballgame. You have to do IM then do a Heme/Onc fellowship. In 2017, 99.1 percent of Heme/Onc fellowship positions were filled.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 3,163
I want to caution that just because there was a 96% match rate and that even though the wustl page says it is "low" competitiveness, this is largely due to self selection. The average step 1 score is in the upper 240's and it is the specialty that most heavily values research production in its applicants. The reason the match rate is so high is because it is a little-known specialty and of the people who do know about it, those who have no chance don't even apply. It is in the same realm of competitiveness as ortho, derm, plastics, neurosurg, ent and IR.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,102
- Reaction score
- 1,185
Besides the depressing topic, why do you think the match rate is so high?
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,174
- Reaction score
- 1,001
It's certainly not competitive compared to Cards/GI, for example in 2017, 729 people applied (332 U.S. Grads) for 549 positions.
I'm really not sure, but if I had to guess, a lot of IM graduates do not want to be hospitalists or internists. Heme/Onc offers a higher salary, and the hours comparatively are not as demanding. Still a tough job I'd imagine.
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 528
- Reaction score
- 940
Rad Onc is a relatively niche speciality. Students get little exposure to it and those with lower board scores or lack of research experience are generally advised against applying. The match rate is really just a product of supply and demand, and right now the supply and demand are about equal. You can see this more apparently in a specialty like ENT where the match rate can fluctuate widely year to year. Some years, there just aren't as many people as others.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2013
- Messages
- 8,597
- Reaction score
- 19,854
Any reason why cards/GI are the most competitive? JW
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 3,163
Bingo. There has also been a steady increase in the number of positions available over the past few years, but about the same level of interest from students (manifested by a pretty consistent number of applicants). Same number of applicants + more spots = higher match rate. But that does not mean that those applicants are any less competetive.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 3,163
They are procedure heavy = more $$$$$$
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2013
- Messages
- 8,597
- Reaction score
- 19,854
Ah so it is true, there is money in ****
There's certainly self selection, but there's also self-selection in specialties that are ranked as "competitive." Ortho is self-selective as well, from what I hear. And these other competitive specialties actually do get the "high" or at least "intermediate" ranking in the competitiveness category by WashU:
https://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Orthopedic Surgery.aspx
https://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Neurosurgery.aspx
https://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Otolaryngology.aspx
https://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Dermatology.aspx
The only exception that seems to follow the radiation oncology trend appears to be plastics:
https://residency.wustl.edu/CHOOSING/SPECDESC/Pages/PlasticSurgery.aspx
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2013
- Messages
- 8,597
- Reaction score
- 19,854
Prob because the WUSTL ranking depends on percent matched and not other metrics like Avg Step 1/2, mean number of research products, AOA percent etc
It actually states explicitly: "Competitiveness is based upon the percentage of U.S. Seniors who ranked each specialty as their only choice." So yeah, you don't get those measures you mention, although each of the measures you mention will also be skewed by self-selection.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 3,163
It's very true that those other specialties suffer from self selection. I think that in the smaller specialties like plastics, neurosurg, rad onc, and to a certain extent ent, the match rate is much more susceptible to statistical noise than specialties like ortho and derm. In those specialties with much fewer spots, the match rate is greatly affected by fluctuations in med student interest. In specialties with more spots and that are more well-known to med students, there is less variability. In my opinion, the intrinsic "competetiveness" of rad onc or plastics is not significanfly different than other competetive specialties because of the large variability in student interest coupled with the small number of positions. I'm sure somebody could run some stats and get a paper out of this.
