Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship 2021/2022 Cycle

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
ShowtimeKaner88 said:
So does this mean EM applicants are going to be lumped in together with IM now? I read on an ACEP forum somewhere that Pitt was going to have a separate match for EM and separate for IM but I didn’t fully understand how that would be possible. Do you think it will have a significant impact on how many EM applicants get into CCM? It certainly seems like EM has more to lose with CCM joining the match than IM does wit the much larger number of IM applicants.
Click to expand...
I think programs like Pitt (those that have a long history of training EM intensivists and an interest in doing so) will likely devise a similar scheme to make sure they match EM trainees. I personally am prioritizing those particular programs, and will therefore not sweat it too much. I've met too many PDs/APDs that are EM-trained who are heavily invested in training us to think they would go without EM fellows. I already have a few interviews at those particular programs too, which helps dissuade this palpable SDN anxiety.
Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Doctor Bob said:
As with everything in medicine... it depends.
A program could try and fill all of their interview spots in one wave, then seek more if they don't fill all their interview spots. Or they might send out more if they're going through interviews and not finding people they mesh well with. Or it might be staggered; sending out the invites to the people they want to give the best dates to and then send a subsequent wave.

Lots of ways to skin this cat. However with the match process, there's less incentive to have a lot of little smaller waves of tiered applicants, and instead just simplify things with a single wave.



It does make it weird for EM applicants. A program has the option of not putting all of their spots into the ABIM match and a place like Pitt could get away with doing that; only send the IM applicants through the match and have all the EM applicants compete for a smaller number of out-of-match positions. Less well known places would have a harder time making that work out in their favor.

It makes things very interesting for programs. For example... last year we had 6 spots and I wanted to have a mix of IM and EM fellows so that played a factor as I was sending out pre-match offers (since CCM wasn't in the match last year). This year I have the same 6 spots, would like a mix of IM and EM again, but I have no idea how or to where we're going to fall on our match list. So I could potentially end up with all IM or all EM and have no way to build my rank list to ensure that I get some of each. The IM people may also be ranking PCCM programs but EM people aren't so in a way the IM people have a greater chance of matching somewhere else. All things being equal if my list alternates between IM and EM people, I'm more likely to get a class of all EM people. If I try to weight it and have more IM people toward the top I could weight it wrong and never fall to an EM person that I might have really wanted. The match process is a lot more ulcer-inducing for me than the outside-the-match process was.
Click to expand...
Well this is mildly terrifying to read. Sigh.
Not sure what was deficient about my app. No red flags. Good board scores. Strong LORs. First-author papers in high-impact journals, among other posters at ATS...not sure what else I could have possibly done during residency to be "competitive".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
jpsayshi said:
Well this is mildly terrifying to read. Sigh.
Not sure what was deficient about my app. No red flags. Good board scores. Strong LORs. First-author papers in high-impact journals, among other posters at ATS...not sure what else I could have possibly done during residency to be "competitive".
Click to expand...
have your received any invites? thats what stresses me out as well being a DO with avg board scores but with 10+ publications and strong LORs. not sure what your credentials are.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
How many interviews are people planning on attending? The NRMP Charting the Outcomes report was based on 2018 data, and I wonder how it changed with virtual interviews/COVID. It is a lot easier to attend more interviews now.
 
Doctor Bob said:
As with everything in medicine... it depends.
A program could try and fill all of their interview spots in one wave, then seek more if they don't fill all their interview spots. Or they might send out more if they're going through interviews and not finding people they mesh well with. Or it might be staggered; sending out the invites to the people they want to give the best dates to and then send a subsequent wave.

Lots of ways to skin this cat. However with the match process, there's less incentive to have a lot of little smaller waves of tiered applicants, and instead just simplify things with a single wave.



It does make it weird for EM applicants. A program has the option of not putting all of their spots into the ABIM match and a place like Pitt could get away with doing that; only send the IM applicants through the match and have all the EM applicants compete for a smaller number of out-of-match positions. Less well known places would have a harder time making that work out in their favor.

It makes things very interesting for programs. For example... last year we had 6 spots and I wanted to have a mix of IM and EM fellows so that played a factor as I was sending out pre-match offers (since CCM wasn't in the match last year). This year I have the same 6 spots, would like a mix of IM and EM again, but I have no idea how or to where we're going to fall on our match list. So I could potentially end up with all IM or all EM and have no way to build my rank list to ensure that I get some of each. The IM people may also be ranking PCCM programs but EM people aren't so in a way the IM people have a greater chance of matching somewhere else. All things being equal if my list alternates between IM and EM people, I'm more likely to get a class of all EM people. If I try to weight it and have more IM people toward the top I could weight it wrong and never fall to an EM person that I might have really wanted. The match process is a lot more ulcer-inducing for me than the outside-the-match process was.
Click to expand...
Dr. Bob. Do you know why Florida programs have not sent out invites yet ? Thank you
 
mirali said:
did you confirmation of the final dates. Their process was very extensive. we could choose who we want to interview with.
Click to expand...
Haven’t confirmed final date yet. Filled out that long qualtrics form, just waiting to hear back now
 
It's been absolute silence since Friday... my anxiety is through the roof right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
appears to be a lot of invites sent out today based on the check boxes but without filling out the date of interview. could the integrity of the spreadsheet be compromised?
 
  • Hmm
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
M
JustLungs said:
appears to be a lot of invites sent out today based on the check boxes but without filling out the date of interview. could the integrity of the spreadsheet be compromised?
Click to expand...
i think the data there is meaningless and has been since day 1
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Did anyone in this forum hear from the places on the sheet??
 
When are you going to send letter of interest to the programs you like the most ?
 
IMDubJay said:
Why do you say that?
Click to expand...
The anonymity removes accountability. Data gets added/deleted without explanation, things get posted in the wrong sections, people don’t understand how to use it, doesn’t line up with last years’ data, doesn’t line up with anecdotal evidence from this year, people like messing with other people for fun. I’m not saying that it’s completely wrong. The (very limited) data I have lines up with what’s on the sheet. What I’m saying is there are reasons to doubt some of what’s on there. Think of it as more rumor than solid fact.
 
IMDubJay said:
Why do you say that?
Click to expand...
This is my second time applying and I’ve been monitoring this thread for 4-5 years since I was an intern. There is always, always a period at the beginning where everybody gets worried about not having interviews and it seems like everyone else has them. Things balance out after a while.
 
Whack Get Out said:
The anonymity removes accountability. Data gets added/deleted without explanation, things get posted in the wrong sections, people don’t understand how to use it, doesn’t line up with last years’ data, doesn’t line up with anecdotal evidence from this year, people like messing with other people for fun. I’m not saying that it’s completely wrong. The (very limited) data I have lines up with what’s on the sheet. What I’m saying is there are reasons to doubt some of what’s on there. Think of it as more rumor than solid fact.
Click to expand...
Yup. I know for a 100% fact my home program has not sent out invites yet, and yet it is listed as having sent out invites. The spreadsheet is full of errors,
 
...or maybe we should use this format?

AMG-MD

AMG-DO

IMG-US (does NOT need Visa)


IMG-International (needs Visa)


Rejections
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
ET-tube said:
When are you going to send letter of interest to the programs you like the most ?
Click to expand...
tonythetiger_2021_pccm said:
Great question, also do you send it to program coordinator and/or PD and/or aPD?
Click to expand...

Bleh. I get so many of these letters/emails. These are (nearly) meaningless. I have no way of knowing if you're sending it just to me or to every single program on your list. Instead, if there's a place you're really interested in, print out their faculty list from their website, then take it around to all of your attendings and see if they recognize any names from the list. If so, have them call the person they know on your behalf and ask them to bend the ear of the PD.

Whack Get Out said:
The anonymity removes accountability. Data gets added/deleted without explanation, things get posted in the wrong sections, people don’t understand how to use it, doesn’t line up with last years’ data, doesn’t line up with anecdotal evidence from this year, people like messing with other people for fun. I’m not saying that it’s completely wrong. The (very limited) data I have lines up with what’s on the sheet. What I’m saying is there are reasons to doubt some of what’s on there. Think of it as more rumor than solid fact.
Click to expand...

Oh but it's so much better than having to wade through a long thread of repeatedly cut-and-pasted lists to try and find the questions buried amongst them. Yea, it's somewhat spurious data, and really not useful for much other than as a curiosity... but it's nice having it somewhere set out of the way but where you can find it if you want it.

ghoshbabu said:
How much Steps attempts affect PCCM application?
Click to expand...

>1 attempt per step = not good
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For the folks that are knowledgeable on this matter, could you give a list of programs by tier (3 tiers)? Non comprehensive... most interested between distinguishing between high and mid-tiers! So i can focus on the mid tiers with my attendings to start making some calls please
 
Mobitz Type II said:
Safe to say the spreadsheet has lost all credibility. Thanks to whoever ruined it 🙄
Click to expand...
For me at least, the spreadsheet has been very accurate. Rejected from Yale the date others checked the box, Received interviews the dates others checked the box for the noted program. If there are errors, there are NONE related to my results so far. It has been very accurate for the places I applied.
 
tonythetiger_2021_pccm said:
For the folks that are knowledgeable on this matter, could you give a list of programs by tier (3 tiers)? Non comprehensive... most interested between distinguishing between high and mid-tiers! So i can focus on the mid tiers with my attendings to start making some calls please
Click to expand...

How do you define the tiers? There is no ranking of programs (never has been, never will be) because the criteria that's important to you may be irrelevant to someone else. And things like "malignancy", "amount of scut work", "autonomy", are unquantifiable in a meaningful way. Something like "amount of pathology" could be vaguely quantified by looking at average APACHE score, but doesn't necessarily tell you if it's a wide type or if the place is a urosepsis center of excellence. Plus that data isn't readily available. The things that are quantifiable don't always translate into "good training". Number of research publications, value of NIH grants, book chapters written by attendings, etc... those things may speak to the academic chops a place has, but still doesn't tell you if it's a good training place or not. Percentage of graduates that pass the boards is the one useful quantifiable point and a lot of programs don't release that data.

Ultimately if you wanted to rank how good a program is at training, you'd have to look at treatment outcomes of their graduates; mortality expected vs observed in different care categories... and even then that's very murky data as to whether it's really a reflection of how well someone was trained.

Every year, in every discipline, people ask for program rankings. And every year the answers are the same; a shrug, no consensus, people listing their favorite places or recognizable names, and finally an exhortation to come up with your own list based on what's important to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For me at least, the spreadsheet has been very accurate. Rejected from Yale the date others checked the box, Received interviews the dates others checked the box for the noted program. If there are errors, there are NONE related to my results so far. It has been very accurate for the places I applied.
 
Resident Doctor Boy said:
For me at least, the spreadsheet has been very accurate. Rejected from Yale the date others checked the box, Received interviews the dates others checked the box for the noted program. If there are errors, there are NONE related to my results so far. It has been very accurate for the places I applied.
Click to expand...

I think it had been accurate up until this week. I think those dates form 8/11 is someone thinking it would be fun to make up some interview dates.
 
I'm little bit depressed for not receiving any interviews yet. My credentials are 235 step1, 234 step2, 213 step3, and CS all first attempt, University affiliated program, IMG needs Visa, research fellow for 8 months in big university before IM residency, finished 3 years pulmonary residency at home country, 11 peer-reviewed publications, 5 posters in ATS and SCCM, 10+ Oral presentations. What are my chances??
 
Last edited:
Shixo said:
I'm little bit depressed for not receiving any interviews yet. My credentials are 235 step1, 234 step2, CS all first attempt, University affiliated program, IMG needs Visa, research fellow for 8 months in big university before IM residency, finished 3 years pulmonary residency at home country, 11 peer-reviewed publications, 5 posters in ATS and SCCM, 10+ Oral presentations. What are my chances??
Click to expand...
Same boat as you are,img requiring visa, my steps are 25x, 27x,26x, all first attempts,15 posters, 8 publications, univ affiliate program. Chief resident,
And zilch ivs. I wasn’t a research fellow, but have prior training as well.
 
Forgottenhopes said:
Same boat as you are,img requiring visa, my steps are 25x, 27x,26x, all first attempts,15 posters, 8 publications, univ affiliate program. Chief resident,
And zilch ivs. I wasn’t a research fellow, but have prior training as well.
Click to expand...
This is very frustrating. Also just received a rejection from Allegheny Hlth Network Pgm.
 
Shixo said:
This is very frustrating. Also just received a rejection from Allegheny Hlth Network Pgm.
Click to expand...
It certainly is, the fact that other than my visa, I don’t know what else can i change, my LORs are really good, as well
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If there is no whatsapp group yet for this year's match, I can start one. DM me if you are interested
=============
# 16 people joined so far.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Shixo said:
I'm little bit depressed for not receiving any interviews yet. My credentials are 235 step1, 234 step2, CS all first attempt, University affiliated program, IMG needs Visa, research fellow for 8 months in big university before IM residency, finished 3 years pulmonary residency at home country, 11 peer-reviewed publications, 5 posters in ATS and SCCM, 10+ Oral presentations. What are my chances??
Click to expand...
do you have step 3 done?
 
Whack Get Out said:
It means somebody is filling out the spreadsheet wrong. It is supposed to mean that a program is full or not recruiting.
Click to expand...
I remember last year one program literally sent out a "Sorry, we filled internally, no you don't get your app money back lol" 1-2 weeks after apps were sent out. Could be a thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

C
Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship 2024-2025 Cycle
Replies
5
Views
567
friedapple
F
M
Separately doing Pulmonary and Critical Care fellowships?
Replies
2
Views
737
zeroman
zeroman
I
Pulmonary and Critical Care Fellowship 2023-2024 Cycle
2 3 4 5
Replies
208
Views
45K
NewYorkDoctors
NewYorkDoctors
0
Pulmonary Critical Care Fellowship 2022/2023 Cycle
2
Replies
94
Views
35K
sami123x
S
T
Critical Care TOP Board Review Courses
Replies
3
Views
3K
gulmohr
gulmohr
Top