Scramble spots

[Orchida]

I'm glad I've matched somewhere in pathology, but as I was perusing the Myreport list for unfilled spots, I saw 55/525 residency spots were not filled (~10%). This translates into around 1 in every 4 to 5 residency programs have around 1 unfilled spot. I bet by sheer statistics, some top tier programs like Duke, UCLA, Stanford, Harvard, JHU, etc did not go filled. Kinda irks me why programs risk going unfilled when there are so many applicants to choose from to interview AND rank.

Any opinions are welcomed.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[the alchemist]

I'm glad I've matched somewhere in pathology, but as I was perusing the Myreport list for unfilled spots, I saw 55/525 residency spots were not filled (~10%). This translates into around 1 in every 4 to 5 residency programs have around 1 unfilled spot. I bet by sheer statistics, some top tier programs like Duke, UCLA, Stanford, Harvard, JHU, etc did not go filled. Kinda irks me why programs risk going unfilled when there are so many applicants to choose from to interview AND rank.

Any opinions are welcomed.

yeah, i saw that, too. can't see the SOAP list of where since i matched as well. but i agree, i wouldn't think it'd be highly likely that a program would pick up someone much better than the ppl they chose to interview through scramble/soap. though i do know of someone last year w/ great #s, etc who did a suicide match - only wanted 1 place due to fam connections, etc - who didn't match and who got an unfilled spot at a great program on caliber w/ the one s/he didn't match to. its also disconcerting that the # of unfilled path programs seems to keep going up, 55 (or about 10%) is a lot for a small field like path. curious as to what the exact dynamics were that produced this situation...

 

[mlw03]

Because a bad resident is often worse than no resident, even in pathology where there's less dependence on residents. Would you want a resident you didn't trust grossing your loved one's surgical resection? Or worse, a resident who didn't care and was outright lazy?

 

[2121115]

Because a bad resident is often worse than no resident, even in pathology where there's less dependence on residents. Would you want a resident you didn't trust grossing your loved one's surgical resection? Or worse, a resident who didn't care and was outright lazy?

Haha. No way academic programs are thinking like that.

 

[the alchemist]

Because a bad resident is often worse than no resident, even in pathology where there's less dependence on residents. Would you want a resident you didn't trust grossing your loved one's surgical resection? Or worse, a resident who didn't care and was outright lazy?

i don't think anyone would disagree with ur statement. i agree with it. but most ppl i saw on the interview trail could hold it together for the day of interview and didn't appear to be lazy, etc (if they they truly r, would never know it b/c they didn't show any indicators...or maybe a more seasoned interviewer would catch things that i didn't). just seems surprising that when most programs interview 10x the # of spots they are offering, that that many didn't make the cut. of course, they'd have to factor in that their top choices r prob also the top choices at other similar places and rank a nice buffer amt but they know that from yrs of experience.

 

[Orchida]

How can you tell on paper or interview if a person is bad in grossing? Is a pathology resident a bad resident if he can't gross but can interpret a slide superbly? Plus, there are many different aspects of path (clinical path, autopsy, general AP). I'm sure some programs had the hubris of ranking only half they interview only to go unfilled. Is it really better to have a person from the bottom half your rank list go to your program vs. going unfilled vs. looking for a scramble resident? Why bother even interviewing them if you aren't going to rank at least the majority of them?

 

[jxr902]

where do you find this list your referencing if your a medical student

 

[Orchida]

If you logon to NRMP go to Myreports then download the html file of unfilled spots by residency. Its available to everyone, however, the exact spots at exact programs are not known except to SOAP applicants. I'm just speculating quite a few big name places had unfilled spots across the country because if 11% of positions were not filled for 55 total (55/~120 programs) means about 25% did not fill their positions.

 

[the alchemist]

where do you find this list your referencing if your a medical student

which list? if u're talking about the soap list of unfilled programs, u can only access that if u didn't match. my account went from "soap eligible" on fri to "soap ineligible" now b/c i matched so i can't see it.

if u log into ur nrmp account and look under "my reports", u can see prelim stats on unfilled positions by region of the US. most regions had about 10% of their spots go unfilled w/ the western region (ca, etc) at slightly less than 10% unfilled. come next mon after match day, they will post a list by state of all programs and their results (so u can see which had unfilled spots in the match but most likely those will be filled by that point through the soap since ppl who didn't match r applying/interviewing b/t now and fri for those spots)

 

[TMZ2007]

55 spots seems higher than usual; isn't it historically around 20-25? I'll be very curious to see which programs didn't fill.

 

[thebouque]

This year in Canada, out of the 16 schools offering pathology, 13 had unfilled positions after the 1st round

 

[jxr902]

Any information on the New York metropolitan area

 

[mlw03]

This year in Canada, out of the 16 schools offering pathology, 13 had unfilled positions after the 1st round

Wow - why?

 

[thebouque]

It's not popular at all in Canada and there is a shortage (especially in Quebec).
In Canada most programs are AP only. Some are AP + CP (called general pathology or laboratory medicine). You also have a few pure neuropathology, hemepath, med micro and medical biochemistry spots.
The typical AP residency is a 5 years program: 1 clinical year + 4 years of AP.

 

[adamMD]

I was pretty bummed to see so many empty spots. It makes pathology look less competitive than psych and family.. I might have my numbers off, but I think there were roughly 2000 applying. I doubt the top schools had any trouble filling their spots. Most schools will surely fill by Friday. Right?

 

[the alchemist]

I was pretty bummed to see so many empty spots. It makes pathology look less competitive than psych and family.. I might have my numbers off, but I think there were roughly 2000 applying. I doubt the top schools had any trouble filling their spots. Most schools will surely fill by Friday. Right?

i think that your #s might be off. are you talking about total ranked positions for US seniors? i believe i heard that there is usu about 600-700 ppl that apply path in the past for about 500+ odd positions. this year, i was told the #s were lower and thus it was less competitive. i heard this at multiple places i interviewed. there's usu around 25 or so unfilled so a jump to 55 is a lot. though last yr i think the # of unfilled spots was about 42 which was considered an anomaly then so this is even worse.

actually top schools do every often have unfilled spots b/c they miscalculate and don't make a large enough rank list and the ppl they ranked ended up somewhere else. i already saw another post on sdn that there were a decent # of unfilled spots at certain top programs. i know last year, emory had an unfilled spot and every once in a while 1 of the 3 harvard programs has also had unfilled spots in the past.

though i do agree that most programs will fill by fri if the past is any indicator of how things go wrt pathology, unless they decide not to enter that position into the SOAP.

 

[pathstudent]

I think it is likely that pathology, which in the last decade experienced a resurgence in choice of specialty amongst amgs (150 applicants in the late 90s to high 300s in mid naughts) , is now starting to wane. It is not surprising if a a school like Jhu or Michigan has one of their spots unfilled but to have so many brand name programs unfilled and some with many spots is very unusual.

 

[2121115]

These things go in cycles, and pathology may experiencing a down swing. On the bright side, that bodes well for you in the job market 5 years from now (or at least may work to correct the oversupply somewhat).

 

[sbp]

for the last 5 years or so the # of unfilled spots has been over 40 so 55 doesnt seem to be such a significant change....don't worry most will fill in the scramble within the first hour..

many programs have unfilled spots some of this is mis-calculation and some of it is arrogance...

the job market won't change untill the number of training spots are reduced.. so this has no concequences because all the spots will eventually fill....

 

[gbwillner]

for the last 5 years or so the # of unfilled spots has been over 40 so 55 doesnt seem to be such a significant change....don't worry most will fill in the scramble within the first hour..

many programs have unfilled spots some of this is mis-calculation and some of it is arrogance...

the job market won't change untill the number of training spots are reduced.. so this has no concequences because all the spots will eventually fill....

Don't forget that many of these spots at the "top" places that go unfilled may be CP only spots- they are reserved for a research-track applicant, and if they don't find the person they want, they'd rather get no one.

 

[adamMD]

That's a really good point. Over my entire interview season, I didn't meet a single CP only candidate (not that they don't exist, just rare). I bet that's what's going on here.

 

[mlw03]

That's a really good point. Over my entire interview season, I didn't meet a single CP only candidate (not that they don't exist, just rare). I bet that's what's going on here.

Some, likely not all.

 

[sbp]

yes there is no question that some of the spots are cp only or some special position like ap-np or ap-fp...

 

[pathstudent]

yes there is no question that some of the spots are cp only or some special position like ap-np or ap-fp...

But still it is almost a 40% increase in open spots. I believe 2005 was about the peak for AMGs applying to pathology with around 350. In 2008 it was down to 315 and in 211 it was down to 289. I predict the NRMP data will show 255 AMGs.

 

[KluverB]

... I saw 55/525 residency spots were not filled (~10%)...

Apparently, our hard work of discouraging applicants from going into path here at SDN is finally paying off. Winning!

 

[Thrombus]

Apparently, our hard work of discouraging applicants from going into path here at SDN is finally paying off. Winning!

Unfortunately there will still be 400+ entering the saturated field; most will find bad jobs, some will be unemployed, the rest will be competing against those in bad jobs while the administrator/senior pathologist rakes in the dough on our backs or the government/insurers low-ball us further.

thumbdown

 

[gbwillner]

But still it is almost a 40% increase in open spots. I believe 2005 was about the peak for AMGs applying to pathology with around 350. In 2008 it was down to 315 and in 211 it was down to 289. I predict the NRMP data will show 255 AMGs.

That's some interesting math.....

It's more like a 2% increase in unfilled positions, but whatever. Panic away.

2011 data: 518 positions, 42 unfilled (8.1%)
2012 data (unverified): 525 positions, 55 unfilled (10.5%)

 

[pathstudent]

That's some interesting math.....

It's more like a 2% increase in unfilled positions, but whatever. Panic away.

2011 data: 518 positions, 42 unfilled (8.1%)
2012 data (unverified): 525 positions, 55 unfilled (10.5%)

55 is 13 more than 42. It is more like a 30% increase in number of unfilled spots Back in 2008 there were only 26 unfilled spots. That is over a 100% increase in number of unfilled spots.

Nothing wrong with that math.

 

[adamMD]

So obviously in 2016 there will be 100 unfilled spots and in 2020 200 positions will go unfilled. With time, pathology programs will lose hundreds or even hundreds of thousands of current residents with each 'match'. Obama better get in there and fix this soon

 

[KCShaw]

It's not uncommon at all for academic places to not entirely fill. There comes a point of diminishing returns during interviews, and despite the trend that not all 'desirable' programs completely fill -and- the knowledge that most programs really, really want to fill, programs tend to think there's a point of diminishing returns on the rank list too. I.e., not everyone interviewed will get ranked, in part because there is always a focus on the better-liked interviewees and in part because programs (even those not generally considered highly desirable) develop a strange sense of holiness during the interview season and just don't believe they won't fill. PD's are fond of saying that they would rather not fill than have bad residents, and while it's partly true I think it's -only- partly true.

It's also true that substantial numbers of applicants simply aren't appropriate applicants -- can't speak English, haven't passed required exams, won't have their MD, etc., regardless of anything else. Then there are those who just aren't very -good- applicants on paper -- fails before passing, questionable English, zero prior pathology exposure, etc. Then programs have to compete over everyone else and decide how far they're willing to dip.

 

[pathstudent]

Whoever scores the Hawaii scramble spot, you are about the luckiest person who didn't match.

 

[Real Name]

I agree that there were probably a few inappropriate applicants, and that a program would rather go unfilled that risk a bad resident. I also think that maybe this year people applied to more programs than they would have before because of the advent of the SOAP. I am sure that I applied to more than I should have, and to programs that were less competitive. My interview spot would have previously been given to a less competitive applicant. Two of the programs that I interviewed at apparently have unmatched spots.

 

[pianoguy05]

Whoever scores the Hawaii scramble spot, you are about the luckiest person who didn't match.

agreed 100%.

 

[the alchemist]

kinda curious how the path scramble/soap is going. from what i c about the soap in general, about 1/2 (?) the positions were gone by the end of round 1, not sure how many of those were path though...prob all fill by fri.

saw a post by someone who had to soap (not sure what specialty) b/c they only ranked 2 programs (and was a competitive candidate) who scrambled into a "prestigious program in a large city that prob wouldn't have interviewed them had they not matched"...kinda cool to hear some good stories come out of soap after reading so many sad ones and reading that argument about amg's vs caribbean imgs/fmgs that was going back and forth on another thread...

 

[2121115]

What is SOAP? Is that somehow related to the scramble?

 

[pathstudent]

What is SOAP? Is that somehow related to the scramble?

From what i found out it is a new system to make the scramble more fair and organized and a little less of a "scramble".

 

[deleted432032]

Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP)

The link above kinda explains the basics of it starting on page 4.

 

[sbp]

Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP)

The link above kinda explains the basics of it starting on page 4.

interesting.. the match is just getting more control...

 

[gbwillner]

Heard from PD that AMG applications were down 30% this year. It doesn't explain why so many good places did not fill (they didn't rank enough applicants or interview enough), but it is something. Maybe the pessimistic message of this board is getting out there.

 

[KCShaw]

The curse of this type of pessimism is that it probably drives away more "good" candidates, leaving the less competitive ones to fill the existing open positions -- which for the most part WILL still be filled. More students are being dumped into the system all the time, and almost all will choose -some- kind of specialty. We can either fight for the good ones or drive them away while knowing the less impressive ones are going to end up in our lap as a result.

 

[Doormat]

The 30% decline in AMG applicants to pathology programs has a big upside. IMGs that fill open pathology spots while carrying F1 visas are unable to compete in the US job market. Unless an employer wants to shell out big money to sponsor an H1B permanent visa for an IMG after training. Private practice and commercial labs don't do H1B opportunities. The only places that I've seen sponsor H1B visas are academic pathology departments that need faculty. Supply and demand matters. Less AMG supply = more demand. Hopefully next year we will see additional drops in AMG applicants to pathology. This is what happens when pathology is commoditized and pathologists evolve from "the doctor's doctor" to "the doctor's bitch".

 

[KeratinPearls]

The 30% decline in AMG applicants to pathology programs has a big upside. IMGs that fill open pathology spots while carrying F1 visas are unable to compete in the US job market. Unless an employer wants to shell out big money to sponsor an H1B permanent visa for an IMG after training. Private practice and commercial labs don't do H1B opportunities. The only places that I've seen sponsor H1B visas are academic pathology departments that need faculty. Supply and demand matters. Less AMG supply = more demand. Hopefully next year we will see additional drops in AMG applicants to pathology. This is what happens when pathology is commoditized and pathologists evolve from "the doctor's doctor" to "the doctor's bitch".

I aint gonna be nobody's biatch when I'm done. You forgot US Carrib grads.

 

[pathstudent]

Heard from PD that AMG applications were down 30% this year. It doesn't explain why so many good places did not fill (they didn't rank enough applicants or interview enough), but it is something.

Sure it does. Last year they only filled 50% of spaces with amgs. A 30% drop in applicants would mean only about 35% of spaces filled with amgs. That isn't enough amgs to fill all the good places in all locations.

I believe I predicted above that there would only be 250 amg applicants. It looks like it will come in closer to 200-210. We are still well above the trough of the late 90s where only 150 amg went into path. But there were probably fewer residency spots back then.


But was this national data or just the PDs guestimate for his institution?

 

[2121115]

The 30% decline in AMG applicants to pathology programs has a big upside. IMGs that fill open pathology spots while carrying F1 visas are unable to compete in the US job market. Unless an employer wants to shell out big money to sponsor an H1B permanent visa for an IMG after training. Private practice and commercial labs don't do H1B opportunities. The only places that I've seen sponsor H1B visas are academic pathology departments that need faculty. Supply and demand matters. Less AMG supply = more demand. Hopefully next year we will see additional drops in AMG applicants to pathology. This is what happens when pathology is commoditized and pathologists evolve from "the doctor's doctor" to "the doctor's bitch".

This.

The class that matched this year is probably the luckiest in the past decade.

 

[KCShaw]

So how many IMG's are actually on visa, or finish residency needing a work visa? As far as I'm aware, none of the ones I know have been (one or two I'm not 100% sure about, though) -- they were either returning U.S. citizens, gained citizenship/legal resident, or were able to stay for other reasons than training/work visas. At any rate I can't think of any who didn't end up with jobs in the U.S., save one who chose stay home (in the U.S.) and continue raising the kids. Personal experience only, of course.

That said, hasn't an argument also been that IMG's take up, even indirectly create, crappy jobs because if their willingness to work for little in suboptimal conditions in order to stay in the U.S.? (And, now, allegedly everyone else is following suit just to have a job and try to pay back some debt.) Can't really have it both ways.

Personally, I maintain that driving away good candidates and thereby increasing the ratio of those just trying to get a residency spot in -any- specialty is a disservice to the specialty. Even if some do happen to end up practicing in another country. It makes no sense to me to try to strengthen a specialty by intentionally turning weaker candidates into those who practice it -- which isn't quite the same as trying to control the ebb and flow of -numbers- of practitioners, and I think it's more than a little dangerous to try to merge the two.

 

[gbwillner]

But was this national data or just the PDs guestimate for his institution?

Don't know. Honestly, now I don't remember if it was AMGs or all applicants were down 30%.

 

[Torsed]

Half of the pathology training programs should become a memory. Too many graduates, they can't all work at the VA.