Scramble?

[jbar]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just wondering how people were doing. Last year there were a lot of people on here looking for a spot, haven't heard much this year. Best of luck to those scrambling.

 

[Tiger26]

Apparently there was only 5 unmatched spots this year . . .

 

[xaelia]

Supposedly ERAS crashed.

So, I imagine, more stressful than usual - not to mention only 5 spots, all in the South.

 

[alphaholic06]

NRMP also crashed! I sympathize with those that are scrambling, and dealing with these issues.

 

[EM2BE]

Supposedly ERAS crashed.

So, I imagine, more stressful than usual - not to mention only 5 spots, all in the South.

👎

Yuck! So glad it's not me. And that I am already an intern (okay glad I'm an intern today as I have the day off!)

 

[deleted109597]

You would think by now the spots would be filled and people could just say where the programs are.
I'm kinda anxious that my next job could have one or more of the spots.

 

[vicinihil]

5 unmatched spots? Why is EM so popular this year?

 

[RobbingReality]

Which programs did not match?

 

[fergustsi]

is it legal to post what programs had spots available? i know theyre pretty testy about putting this kind of info up.

 

[RxnMan]

Supposedly ERAS crashed...

NRMP also crashed! I sympathize with those that are scrambling, and dealing with these issues.

I just got the email from ERAS stating that both services failed today. The email says that everything is back up now and that ERAS will open up tonight, tomorrow and Thursday. So I guess the scramble just started in earnest? Ugh. Good luck folks.

Here's a link from the ERAS forum describing the situation. An important point is later on in the thread where they say we cannot post the list of programs and NRMP will pursue legal action against those who do.

 

[jbar]

So were people allowed to scramble today even though the computers were down? Or was everything just put on hold till tomorrow?

 

[Colbert]

I was helping a friend scramble today. The whole thing was a giant cluster F. Schools got the list of open spots and some sent it to their students, so some students knew were the openings were and some didn't until about 2:00. By then a vast majority of the spots were gone. Throw on top of that problem the fact that ERAS didn't work until after 3 and even then it was slower than molasses until about 4:30, making sending applications to the few remaining programs nearly impossible. And the "Dynamic List" of open spots wasn't running till about 4:00 either, so you had to call each program to find out if their spots were even available or else you would waste one of your 30 applications.

I wasn't even the person scrambling, I was just helping a friend, and it was one of the most stressful things I've ever been a part of.

 

[Entgegen]

I wasn't even the person scrambling, I was just helping a friend, and it was one of the most stressful things I've ever been a part of.

Same here. I was helping a friend find an internship spot (had already matched advanced), and we were successful to that end. But I'm STILL on edge a bit from the whole thing...I think I may just go to bed now.

 

[deleted109597]

Here's a link from the ERAS forum describing the situation. An important point is later on in the thread where they say we cannot post the list of programs and NRMP will pursue legal action against those who do.

So the copyrighted list absolutely cannot be posted. However, knowledge of what programs did or did not fill is not privileged information. They could not possibly successfully sue you because you said "so and so did not fill." Especially now that all of those spots are likely long filled.
As mentioned in the other thread, this is further evidence that gme is flawed in this country.

 

[otacon88]

oh god, now i'm super stressed out. only 5 unmatched spots?!?! I'm applying to ER this coming year...i'm screwed.

i hope they release the stats of the 2011 match soon...

 

[Colbert]

How in the world do you consider yourself "screwed"? You are the same person who was worried that your 228 was too low for EM. You're right, you're super stressed, but you seem like you're super stressed all the time.

RELAX. You'll be fine.

 

[otacon88]

How in the world do you consider yourself "screwed"? You are the same person who was worried that your 228 was too low for EM. You're right, you're super stressed, but you seem like you're super stressed all the time.

RELAX. You'll be fine.

you're right, but unfortunately that's really all i have in my application, and even that score isn't too stellar. it's not like i have 5 published research abstracts, or went to some third world country to do service for a month, or did some amazing project to cure the blind.

all i have is that, and some random volunteer work. i don't even have good NBME scores on shelf exams, and haven't really honored any courses.

i feel like a pretty under-qualified to average candidate, and ER is becoming more and more popular.

 

[gro2001]

So the copyrighted list absolutely cannot be posted. However, knowledge of what programs did or did not fill is not privileged information. They could not possibly successfully sue you because you said "so and so did not fill." Especially now that all of those spots are likely long filled.
As mentioned in the other thread, this is further evidence that gme is flawed in this country.

Although they probably can't sue you (successfully) they can hit you with a 'match violation' since they are the ones who decide what that means. Also, they are the ones who handle the appeal process.

 

[RxnMan]

So the copyrighted list absolutely cannot be posted. However, knowledge of what programs did or did not fill is not privileged information. They could not possibly successfully sue you because you said "so and so did not fill." Especially now that all of those spots are likely long filled...

But the info is well controlled. In the usual scramble, the programs get their info just before applicants, and applicants get that info all at the same time. Nobody has time to act on the list even if it was passed around.

That obviously didn't happen this year. The programs knew and some of the applicants knew which places didn't fill. Most applicants couldn't get into their ERAS, and unfilled programs were looking for any way to tell applicants who to contact - ACOG was advertising open PGY-1 positions!

...As mentioned in the other thread, this is further evidence that gme is flawed in this country.

In the sense that all human endeavors are flawed, sure. But I don't think we should scrap it. Stories about the bad old days make me cringe. The Match is the best way to make the most people the most happy. The SOAP system is the last real addition needed; it'll be fair and get rid of the scramble.

 

[Blackjack870]

We'll all be able to see the places on Monday anyway, right? When the Match Outcome by State is released on NRMP? I'll be checking just out of pure curiosity.

 

[deleted109597]

In the sense that all human endeavors are flawed, sure. But I don't think we should scrap it. Stories about the bad old days make me cringe. The Match is the best way to make the most people the most happy. The SOAP system is the last real addition needed; it'll be fair and get rid of the scramble.

Really? Do you know when those bad days were? The first match was in 1952. I don't imagine that you can count the number of physicians who went through that on more than 1 finger at this point in time. In those days, there were more slots than interns, so the hospitals were more cutthroat. Also, history has a way of jading processes deemed to be "barbaric."
Socializing the system (which is what they've done) to make it more "fair" goes against every other aspect of society. Honestly, unless you go to medical school in Texas, this is the only time you won't go to a job, and either have a yes or a no answer in a relatively short period of time. If it's such a good system, why don't we do it for jobs after residency? Or for college?

 

[WilcoWorld]

Really? Do you know when those bad days were? The first match was in 1952. I don't imagine that you can count the number of physicians who went through that on more than 1 finger at this point in time. In those days, there were more slots than interns, so the hospitals were more cutthroat. Also, history has a way of jading processes deemed to be "barbaric."
Socializing the system (which is what they've done) to make it more "fair" goes against every other aspect of society. Honestly, unless you go to medical school in Texas, this is the only time you won't go to a job, and either have a yes or a no answer in a relatively short period of time. If it's such a good system, why don't we do it for jobs after residency? Or for college?

What's the exception for Texas?

 

[OncoticPressure]

What's the exception for Texas?

TMDSAS. It's a "match" system for medical school admissions.

 

[RxnMan]

Really? Do you know when those bad days were? The first match was in 1952. I don't imagine that you can count the number of physicians who went through that on more than 1 finger at this point in time. In those days, there were more slots than interns, so the hospitals were more cutthroat. Also, history has a way of jading processes deemed to be "barbaric."...

I agree that history can change with the telling, but you don't tell me that recruiting pre-clinical students with exploding offers is somehow better than what we have today. I'd rather have the option of figuring out what specialty I actually enjoy before I sign a contract binding me to a residency out of fear and intimidation.

...Socializing the system (which is what they've done) to make it more "fair" goes against every other aspect of society. Honestly, unless you go to medical school in Texas, this is the only time you won't go to a job, and either have a yes or a no answer in a relatively short period of time. If it's such a good system, why don't we do it for jobs after residency? Or for college?

Ugh. Can you name an industry where there is a similarly-large cohort of new workers who need such specific post-graduation training? Where everyone not only graduates within a couple of months of each other and has to start work on the same day every year?

PDs know, with a high depree of certainty, that any random student will likely graduate in 4 years from matriculation. Those students that did well early on would probably do well in school and make good residents. That foreknowledge is what supported the bad old days, not an excess of spots.

And the match is used for post-residency jobs: IM fellowships. There the issue is the same: a large crop of similarly-trained people looking for the same type of post-graduate training, all at the same time.

I also put forth that a system that successfully places 93-94% of applicants, and half of those to their first choice, is a good system.

 

[deleted109597]

I agree that history can change with the telling, but you don't tell me that recruiting pre-clinical students with exploding offers is somehow better than what we have today. I'd rather have the option of figuring out what specialty I actually enjoy before I sign a contract binding me to a residency out of fear and intimidation.

You don't have to. There's lots of jobs out there.

Ugh. Can you name an industry where there is a similarly-large cohort of new workers who need such specific post-graduation training? Where everyone not only graduates within a couple of months of each other and has to start work on the same day every year?

Let's see, people going to grad school, medical school, pharmacy school, law school....
Also, most people finish college either in May/June or December. I guess law firms should have matches for their internships. That makes it fair

PDs know, with a high depree of certainty, that any random student will likely graduate in 4 years from matriculation. Those students that did well early on would probably do well in school and make good residents. That foreknowledge is what supported the bad old days, not an excess of spots.

So limit offers to fourth year students. I'm not saying that any system can't be ****ed up, just that there are better ways of doing it. Remember, back then they didn't have as many specialties, and the ones that existed didn't have residencies, and people were fighting for the "best" medicine slots.

And the match is used for post-residency jobs: IM fellowships. There the issue is the same: a large crop of similarly-trained people looking for the same type of post-graduate training, all at the same time.

Just because other people do it doesn't make it a good argument.

I also put forth that a system that successfully places 93-94% of applicants, and half of those to their first choice, is a good system.

Yeah, it's good for those people. What about people who don't match? Instead of the way it works in the job world, where you keep applying until you get a job or give up, in medicine you get to take a year off. Or pick a completely different specialty. Or fight to get one of 5 spots using a system you paid for that not only failed you in the match, but failed during the scramble.

 

[OncoticPressure]

While I agree with McNinja's points, getting rid of the match wouldn't make it any better. There would still be too many applicants for a limited number of spots. Mathematically everyone cannot match and this wouldn't be solved by getting rid of the match. The people that failed to match would likely have a hard time getting a position with traditional applications.

 

[deleted109597]

There are more spots available than there are US grads. I don't mind IMG/FMG trainees, but when my tax money is funding residency spots, I think US citizens should have first shot. Just like in state tuition at colleges.

 

[OncoticPressure]

There are more spots available than there are US grads. I don't mind IMG/FMG trainees, but when my tax money is funding residency spots, I think US citizens should have first shot. Just like in state tuition at colleges.

Agree with that. I really think the IMG/FMG shouldn't be allowed to pre-match etc. or should only be allowed to scramble after every US Senior has gotten a spot.

 

[WilcoWorld]

Agree with that. I really think the IMG/FMG shouldn't be allowed to pre-match etc. or should only be allowed to scramble after every US Senior has gotten a spot.

This view strikes me as very unCapitalistic, which seems inconsistent with DMN's general tenor.

 

[RxnMan]

I'll reiterate up front what I said above - this year was a nightmare.

You don't have to. There's lots of jobs out there...

Exactly - the Match protects medical students. Pre-match, I would have to. I don't know what jobs in particular you're referencing.

...Just because other people do it doesn't make it a good argument...

Of course not. But you asked for an example of another match-type arrangement, so I gave you one.

...Let's see, people going to grad school, medical school, pharmacy school, law school...

Graduates of law, pharmacy, and graduate schools have many more types of post-graduate plans than medical students. These have varying lengths and flexible start dates, and there isn't any mandatory post-graduate training for any of those fields. Pharmacists can practice without a residency, PhDs can go into education, post-docs, journalism, further schooling, etc. The vast majority of medical students go on to residency, a residency that starts on one date.

You're also talking about relatively small numbers of people in each residency program. A large EM program matriculates 16 interns. It would be difficult for a program to have multiple start dates for such a small group.

...So limit offers to fourth year students. I'm not saying that any system can't be ****ed up, just that there are better ways of doing it. Remember, back then they didn't have as many specialties, and the ones that existed didn't have residencies, and people were fighting for the "best" medicine slots...

I agree that the current situation isn't perfect, but how would offers be better than the match? Give me a specific example.

...Yeah, it's good for those people. What about people who don't match?...

If we had a treatment that cured people, or delayed onset of complications, or whatever, in 90% of patients, wouldn't you call that a successful treatment?

...Instead of the way it works in the job world, where you keep applying until you get a job or give up, in medicine you get to take a year off. Or pick a completely different specialty. Or fight to get one of 5 spots using a system you paid for that not only failed you in the match, but failed during the scramble.

That's a false dichotomy. In the real world, if you don't get the job, you can try again. But if you don't have any success, you consider your options and maybe choose to do something completely different.

 

[RxnMan]

This view strikes me as very unCapitalistic, which seems inconsistent with DMN's general tenor.

Sure, but it is pro-US grads. Since the US residency system is funded by US taxpayers, it is not unreasonable to favor applicants with a greater likelihood of practicing in the US.

 

[turkeyjerky]

Sure, but it is pro-US grads. Since the US residency system is funded by US taxpayers, it is not unreasonable to favor applicants with a greater likelihood of practicing in the US.

On the other-hand, though, one could make the argument that the US taxpayer is getting more for their money in IMGs by leveraging the education budgets of other countries. Also, I feel like their aren't very many IMGs who match in this country w/ the intention of leaving after residency.

Just sayin'

 

[CodeHotPink]

There are more spots available than there are US grads. I don't mind IMG/FMG trainees, but when my tax money is funding residency spots, I think US citizens should have first shot. Just like in state tuition at colleges.

*Sigh* 1) There are a good number of IMG and FMG that are also citizens. Last time I checked there is a shortage of doctors in this country. If a program director feels that an IMG is more suited for his program he should have full liberty to rank them accordingly. 2) People should really focus on being as competetive as they can be and not worry so much about someone else "taking their spot". It screams insecurity. 3) You are unemployed, what "tax dollars" do you speak of. 4) Most IMGs that do residencies in this country stay and practice in this country. so there isn't a question on lost investment.

-signed a US medical graduate.

 

[gattaca83]

Sure, but it is pro-US grads. Since the US residency system is funded by US taxpayers, it is not unreasonable to favor applicants with a greater likelihood of practicing in the US.

I'm curious about that last part of your comment. Having known a lot of FMGs, I find it very rare that they go through the arduous experience of being an FMG applying in the US match (in which everything is seemingly stacked up against them) only to go back to their own country afterwards. Is that something that happens? It seems to me that most FMGs applying for the match do so because they want to settle and build a foundation in the US. Does the fact that they would eventually be taxpayers who contribute to the residency system matter at all or am I just being naive?

I also just have to add that I feel terrible for anyone who had to scramble this year. What a frustratingly unfair experience during a process that is already inherently nightmare-inducing.


..sorry..I wrote this before seeing the other responses, so now it seems redundant

 

[alexmtr]

I also put forth that a system that successfully places 93-94% of applicants, and half of those to their first choice, is a good system.

Can't really argue with the data here. As out of your control as the match feels, these outcomes are definitely better than those in med school or college application process.

 

[gman33]

I'll be applying next year.
The lack of open spots in the scramble is scary.
Better make sure I apply to and rank more than enough programs.

Have to put some thought into how overboard I want to go.

 

[deleted109597]

*Sigh* 1) There are a good number of IMG and FMG that are also citizens. Last time I checked there is a shortage of doctors in this country.

FMGs are not US citizens. IMGs are US citizens who went to medical schools in other countries. I didn't make the lingo, but to my understanding that's what it means.
The shortage of doctors is irrelevant when it comes to the match. If training were only about "making competent doctors" and not "providing lower cost healthcare to CMS and VA patients" then the concept of preliminary internships wouldn't still exist.

If a program director feels that an IMG is more suited for his program he should have full liberty to rank them accordingly.

Some of this comes from the match. Remember, residencies less likely to fill are more likely to pre-match/rank other candidates rather than scramble usually. I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to. I'm just saying it shouldn't come at the people who fund the system's existence's expense.

2) People should really focus on being as competetive as they can be and not worry so much about someone else "taking their spot". It screams insecurity.

I never said anyone was taking my spot (or took my spot). But the fact of the matter is that qualified candidates fail to get spots every year

3) You are unemployed, what "tax dollars" do you speak of.

I guess I'll ask for the $30K I gave Uncle Sam last year back. Also, the state owes me some, since I'm "unemployed." Also, I worked in undergraduate and medical school, so I paid taxes then as well.

4) Most IMGs that do residencies in this country stay and practice in this country. so there isn't a question on lost investment.

It isn't about lost investment. It's about how it is paid for. Just like college and medical school admissions, it's not paid for after you go, it's paid for before you go.

Can't really argue with the data here. As out of your control as the match feels, these outcomes are definitely better than those in med school or college application process.

Really? I bet more than 90% of the qualified candidates who apply to college get in.

Exactly - the Match protects medical students. Pre-match, I would have to. I don't know what jobs in particular you're referencing.

It was in reference that you wouldn't have to sign out of fear or intimidation because someone gave you an exploding offer for residency. During your second year. If you think about it, how ridiculous can those stories get? I mean, were second year students applying for jobs? How ****ing Einstein would you have to be for a "premier residency" to come find you during second year of medical school?

Graduates of law, pharmacy, and graduate schools have many more types of post-graduate plans than medical students. These have varying lengths and flexible start dates, and there isn't any mandatory post-graduate training for any of those fields. Pharmacists can practice without a residency, PhDs can go into education, post-docs, journalism, further schooling, etc. The vast majority of medical students go on to residency, a residency that starts on one date.

And the vast majority of all those post-grad schools start on the same date. In fact, most undergraduates do as well. Either you think the match is ideal and should apply to all secondary education, or it shouldn't.

You're also talking about relatively small numbers of people in each residency program. A large EM program matriculates 16 interns. It would be difficult for a program to have multiple start dates for such a small group.

You wouldn't have to have different dates. See examples of all other schools. They all start and end on the same day (for all intents and purposes)

I agree that the current situation isn't perfect, but how would offers be better than the match? Give me a specific example.

Like earlier this year, when I was applying for a job. I go interview. I get a yes or no. If I like it, I sign. If not, I don't. Then you go down your list in order that you want, not theirs. It gives you the power. The difference between this and the match is that I can keep going until I get a job and I know on that day I have a job. Not "I know 2 months from now I may have a job or may be part of unholy terror."

If we had a treatment that cured people, or delayed onset of complications, or whatever, in 90% of patients, wouldn't you call that a successful treatment?

Sure, for those 90%. That doesn't mean that the the other 10% should get screwed.

That's a false dichotomy. In the real world, if you don't get the job, you can try again. But if you don't have any success, you consider your options and maybe choose to do something completely different.

But at least you know that you're not having success and you can change your mind before 98% of the jobs are filled.

 

[deleted109597]

Really the match could be improved by making it all more transparent. Believe me, I know they're not going to scrap the system that earns them all that money. Just like Step II CS. But for medicine on one hand to say "we are trying to educate them and make them better" and then turn around with "you can't see your file because it might say something about you" is downright stupid. Nowhere else can this happen. In fact, in actual job interviews, if someones says something about you that prevents you from getting the job, you can actually sue them for libel. But at the very least you can read it and know what's there.

 

[gman33]

Really the match could be improved by making it all more transparent. Believe me, I know they're not going to scrap the system that earns them all that money. Just like Step II CS. But for medicine on one hand to say "we are trying to educate them and make them better" and then turn around with "you can't see your file because it might say something about you" is downright stupid. Nowhere else can this happen. In fact, in actual job interviews, if someones says something about you that prevents you from getting the job, you can actually sue them for libel. But at the very least you can read it and know what's there.

As a result of this practice, many large corporations now have a policy that they will only verify dates of employment for former employees. As LORs are a big part of the application process, "unblinding" this data might lead to negative consequences.

I can't really comment on the rest of the match process.

 

[Xerxes1729]

In fact, in actual job interviews, if someones says something about you that prevents you from getting the job, you can actually sue them for libel.

Only if you can show that what they said is most likely false.