Unfilled Neonatology/Perinatology Fellowships

[SoFla Dad]

While reviewing the results of the 2018 match I noticed that of the 96 neonatology/perinatology programs that 22 programs didn't fill all their spots for a total of 34 unfilled positions. My first thoughts were that these were lesser programs and/or undesirable locations. To my surprise I found programs such as UCSF, Childrens National, NYU, Cornell NYP, and others going unfilled. I couldn't come up with a reason that made any sense and was wondering what could be the reason that these and other programs that would seem from the outside to be desirable going unfilled.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[applicant2016]

Most likely reason: they did not go down enough in their rank list. This is not uncommon behavior for top programs, Emory in 2015 , they failed to fill 3 out of 4 of their peds cardiology program positions, it is not that it is a bad program, but probably they only ranked 4 applicants, and then 3 of them matched at CHOP lol

 

[MorrisMD]

My logic, they "may" possibly was not impressed by the candidates that were interviewed!! it is unlikely... but a possibility!

 

[MEN2C]

How could they not have been impressed? I was one of the candidates

I applied to two of those programs and didn’t get an interview (got an interviews everywhere else such as CHOP, Boston, Northwestern, Columbia, Hopkins, Cincinnati, etc). So maybe their standards were just too high or they were looking for specific research interests that the candidates that year didn’t have.

I considered myself a pretty good applicant so I was surprised not to get those interviews. But a lot of this is about the right “fit” so I’m not sure what they were looking for specifically.

 

[pedstar09]

ON a possibly related/unrelated note, how may interviews do people recommend to ensure a spot? Charting outcomes was in 2011 last and that said 4 contiguous ranks and I am sure that has changed in last 7 years..

 

[applicant2016]

ON a possibly related/unrelated note, how may interviews do people recommend to ensure a spot? Charting outcomes was in 2011 last and that said 4 contiguous ranks and I am sure that has changed in last 7 years..

From NRMP data on the 2018 match, 84% got into one of their top 3 choices..so I guess 4 ranks maybe still working

 

[MEN2C]

You want to interview at more than that unless you’re absolutely sure where you want to be. Not just for matching purposes but you want to find the program that’s going to set you up for success (eg type of research you want to do, for example) and where you’ll be happy (type of schedule - front loaded vs spread out, calls, transport, etc).

 

[MorrisMD]

How could they not have been impressed? I was one of the candidates

I applied to two of those programs and didn’t get an interview (got an interviews everywhere else such as CHOP, Boston, Northwestern, Columbia, Hopkins, Cincinnati, etc). So maybe their standards were just too high or they were looking for specific research interests that the candidates that year didn’t have.

I considered myself a pretty good applicant so I was surprised not to get those interviews. But a lot of this is about the right “fit” so I’m not sure what they were looking for specifically.

I have applied to them this year, I have 15+ publications, 2 book chapters, 4+ Oral presentations, 5-6 Poster presentations, I consider myself as a decent candidate, I was rejected by Colorado. No news from 8 of my 16 that applied. I feel maybe I have not done enough

 

[SoFla Dad]

Thanks for the comments. So it sounds as if the top 20 or so programs compete for the same top 50ish candidates and that if they don't match them they would rather leave the spots unfilled, correct. @oldbearprofessor does this sound accurate?

 

[MEN2C]

I have applied to them this year, I have 15+ publications, 2 book chapters, 4+ Oral presentations, 5-6 Poster presentations, I consider myself as a decent candidate, I was rejected by Colorado. No news from 8 of my 16 that applied. I feel maybe I have not done enough

I have one publication. Over ten years ago. No chapters. No posters. I got interviews at most top places, as I mentioned above, including Colorado. It’s not that you don’t have enough. Maybe it’s not in the field they are looking for....

Where did you do your residency?
What are your LORs like?
Any red flags in med school or residency?
Step scores (any failed)?

Research is very important since at most places you’ll be spending about 2 years on it. But it’s not the only thing. All sorts of things go into it.

 

[applicant2016]

Thanks for the comments. So it sounds as if the top 20 or so programs compete for the same top 50ish candidates and that if they don't match them they would rather leave the spots unfilled, correct. @oldbearprofessor does this sound accurate?

No, they scrambled or whatever they did to fill their positions, if you check apps acgme website, positions are filled. Someone has to take calls, go to deliveries and put lines, very difficult to leave spots unfilled, especially in something like NICU with in house calls, bla bla bla...

 

[SoFla Dad]

No, they scrambled or whatever they did to fill their positions, if you check apps acgme website, positions are filled. Someone has to take calls, go to deliveries and put lines, very difficult to leave spots unfilled, especially in something like NICU with in house calls, bla bla bla...

That makes sense, thank you.

 

[MorrisMD]

I have one publication. Over ten years ago. No chapters. No posters. I got interviews at most top places, as I mentioned above, including Colorado. It’s not that you don’t have enough. Maybe it’s not in the field they are looking for....

Where did you do your residency?
What are your LORs like?
Any red flags in med school or residency?
Step scores (any failed)?

Research is very important since at most places you’ll be spending about 2 years on it. But it’s not the only thing. All sorts of things go into it.

Thank you.. I will PM you the details

 

[oldbearprofessor]

I'm not really sure why there were unfilled spots at well known location. It could have been "match failure" on the part of the program by interviewing and ranking too few. It could also have been a decision to wait until the post-match period to fill unfilled spots (by US grads) with non-US medical graduates. In general, neo remains popular and there is a reasonable, although not overwhelming job market that is unlikely to disappear. It is possible to leave spots unfilled and not "ruin" a clinical program. Many small programs with only 2 or so fellows each year are used to night call etc without fellows and can handle having less than the optimal, although obviously they'd like to fill up all their slots. In every case, an unfilled slot is better than a really bad fellow.

 

[thelogicalsong]

I'm not really sure why there were unfilled spots at well known location. It could have been "match failure" on the part of the program by interviewing and ranking too few. It could also have been a decision to wait until the post-match period to fill unfilled spots (by US grads) with non-US medical graduates. In general, neo remains popular and there is a reasonable, although not overwhelming job market that is unlikely to disappear. It is possible to leave spots unfilled and not "ruin" a clinical program. Many small programs with only 2 or so fellows each year are used to night call etc without fellows and can handle having less than the optimal, although obviously they'd like to fill up all their slots. In every case, an unfilled slot is better than a really bad fellow.

Why would they want non-US grads to fill the spots?

 

[oldbearprofessor]

They didn't prefer them, that's why they didn't rank them. After the match, they can decide the relative merits of taking them or not