US Applicants down?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Radiologyreviews2015

Radiologyreviews2015

Membership Revoked
Removed
7+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
1,181
Reaction score
74
Not surprised at all;

With more and more DOs, FMGs, and not stellar AMGs applying to community and lower tier programs it's no wonder then that more and more graduates are finding it difficult to secure desirable jobs or jobs at all for that matter.
 
radsswtich said:
Not surprised at all;

With more and more DOs, FMGs, and not stellar AMGs applying to community and lower tier programs it's no wonder then that more and more graduates are finding it difficult to secure desirable jobs or jobs at all for that matter.
Click to expand...

Even though US graduates applying went down from 1371 --> 1290, more DOs and FMGs are added up. I think total number of applicants this season for radiology including all of US, DO, FMG and Canada grads, it's 2668 (if I counted, correctly). Anybody knows how many radiology residency spots are offered this year, officially?
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Hello all,

Found that AAMC updated their ERAS statistics last month and was wondering what people thought:

https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/erasmdphd/

specifically

https://www.aamc.org/download/321564/data/factstablec4.pdf

seems to show that US MD applicants are down from 1371 to 1290? I remember reading that applicant numbers were rebounding this year so don't know if I'm misinterpreting something.
Click to expand...

"The academic year refers to residency training that begins in the corresponding academic year (e.g., 2015-2016)"
I think the number for 2015-2016 are for people who matched in 2014.

This year there have been multiple PD's reportedly saying they saw increase of good quality applicants by > 100 compared to last year
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
"The academic year refers to residency training that begins in the corresponding academic year (e.g., 2015-2016)"
I think the number for 2015-2016 are for people who matched in 2014.

This year there have been multiple PD's reportedly saying they saw increase of good quality applicants by > 100 compared to last year
Click to expand...

This makes sense as it was previously reported more than 150 increased
 
Radiology applicants have been down since 2009. I think it's beginning to pick up again because people are realizing that it's not nearly as competitive as people have said it was. Some were discouraged to apply back in the day because of how competitive it was. The job market has also modestly improved since 2012. Maybe the hate has gone too far and the field was oversold as described in the JACR article.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1546144015005281
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Radiology applicants have been down since 2009. I think it's beginning to pick up again because people are realizing that it's not nearly as competitive as people have said it was. Some were discouraged to apply back in the day because of how competitive it was. The job market has also modestly improved since 2012. Maybe the hate has gone too far and the field was oversold as described in the JACR article.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1546144015005281
Click to expand...

While I understand his argument/sentiment, he compares two separate time periods: one a 3y frame and one a 7y frame.

0.jpeg
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
While I understand his argument/sentiment, he compares two separate time periods: one a 3y frame and one a 7y frame.

View attachment 199908
Click to expand...

I would think that market change does not change application numbers in real time. Rather, application numbers would react to the market change with 2-3 years of lag

In any case I agree that the above graph is a poor way to show the correlation. He should have just plotted both lines as time series
 
"If radiology manages to dig itself out of this recession, the students who bought into radiology at its low point will enjoy an auspicious reward."

Or if there is another market crash in 2-3 years, the current crop of applicants will see the worse job market in radiology's history?
 
I'm sorry but the rad job market is still a disaster. Being marginally better than 2012 doesn't mean much. It has gone from "horrendously bad" to "very bad". The job offers I've heard of in desirable and semi-desirable locations are crap, including IR. There are a few jobs out there now, but they are churging and burning young rads. Salaries are insulting. If you want to practice in South Dakota you are set, because good jobs can be found there.
 
badasshairday said:
I'm sorry but the rad job market is still a disaster. Being marginally better than 2012 doesn't mean much. It has gone from "horrendously bad" to "very bad". The job offers I've heard of in desirable and semi-desirable locations are crap, including IR. There are a few jobs out there now, but they are churging and burning young rads. Salaries are insulting. If you want to practice in South Dakota you are set, because good jobs can be found there.
Click to expand...

Your preaching to the choir my friend

the truth is no applicants will believe you.....until they reach that point in their training. When that time comes, good luck.
 
Sell. With the caveat that if you're going to buy, branding is more important than ever. It's not the MGH, UCSF, Penn alumni who will go unemployed - hyperbole, but you get the point.
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Sell. With the caveat that if you're going to buy, branding is more important than ever. It's not the MGH, UCSF, Penn alumni who will go unemployed - hyperbole, but you get the point.
Click to expand...

I would argue that location is probably also more important in a tight/declining market. Training in a saturated metropolitian market does not do someone any favors compared to the person training in South Dakota to begin with.
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Buy the dip or sell the rip?
Click to expand...

Hilarious. Is anyone buying the family medicine dip?
Do it if you like it, not because you expect things to get better. I would be grateful if the market I graduate into doesn't deteriorate further.
If I couldn't do radiology, my next career choice would likely be outside of medicine.
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Sell. With the caveat that if you're going to buy, branding is more important than ever. It's not the MGH, UCSF, Penn alumni who will go unemployed - hyperbole, but you get the point.
Click to expand...

Maybe not unemployed but stuck in crappy jobs in Boston, SF, and Philly. Keep in mind that even when the market was booming, jobs in these cities were relatively crappy compared to jobs in less urban settings...
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
Hilarious. Is anyone buying the family medicine dip?
Do it if you like it, not because you expect things to get better. I would be grateful if the market I graduate into doesn't deteriorate further.
If I couldn't do radiology, my next career choice would likely be outside of medicine.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My medicine intern year reminds me every day that I picked Radiology because it is a genuinely more interesting and enjoyable field, not because of the money or lifestyle.
 
Agree with going to top places when job market is down. Even more important when more residents are staying for fellowship with 3+2 program.
 
The job market is slowly improving.

Unlike what some people say here, the offers are still solid. The first and second year salaries do not count.

You can not compare SF or Boston radiology salaries with IM salary in south Dakota.
 
Last edited:
shark2000 said:
The job market is slowly improving.

Unlike what some people say here, the offers are still solid. The first and second year salaries do not count.

You can not compare SF or Boston radiology salary with IM salary in south Dakota.
Click to expand...


Shark is one of the few opinions I take seriously on here. Glad to hear the sky isn't falling.
 
shark2000 said:
The job market is slowly improving.

Unlike what some people say here, the offers are still solid. The first and second year salaries do not count.

You can not compare SF or Boston radiology salary with IM salary in south Dakota.
Click to expand...

I am comparing radiology salaries in first 2 years with hospitalist, both in west coast. IR offer was for very low 200s, hospitalist salary. Another place with mid to upper 200s with 7 year partnership track (besides IR call pool the lucky person hired to this jobe would also be taking in house diagnostic call).
 
badasshairday said:
I am comparing radiology salaries in first 2 years with hospitalist, both in west coast. IR offer was for very low 200s, hospitalist salary. Another place with mid to upper 200s with 7 year partnership track (besides IR call pool the lucky person hired to this jobe would also be taking in house diagnostic call).
Click to expand...

Your numbers are very wrong. Even academic starting salaries are above those numbers.

I am in California and I am very well aware of the salaries of many groups here.
 
shark2000 said:
Your numbers are very wrong. Even academic starting salaries are above those numbers.

I am in California and I am very well aware of the salaries of many groups here.
Click to expand...

People can look up academic starting salaries at University of California departments to easily to confirm/deny your statement. https://ucannualwage.ucop.edu/wage/

Example: starting gross pay at UCLA, 2013
Simin Bahrami - body + IR - $346516
Rinat Masamed - body - $307734
 
Last edited:
chronicidal said:
These numbers don't make much sense. The table on applicants from US MD-granting medical schools has HIGHER numbers (eg, 1290) than the table on US and Canadian graduates (eg, 1117), which should include DOs.

https://www.aamc.org/download/321564/data/factstablec4.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/358760/data/residency.xlsx
Click to expand...
That's because the US and Canadian graduates statistic only includes US and Canadian LCME graduates. Also, I'll have to look into it when I'm not on my phone, but I believe that one figure includes all applicants to a specialty, while the other includes only first choice applicants, so the the former number ends up being larger than the later due to people applying to multiple specialties.

Also, I'm not surprised that PDs say they have higher quality apps- despite the slump, radiology is still far more competitive than, say, anesthesia, which is also slumping quite hard. And people are applying more broadly and safely than ever, leaving you with a net result of more, higher quality apps.
 
I'm not arguing here. You are showing people who have jobs which are good are making a descent salary. I'm saying that the guys I know looking for jobs over the past two graduating classes have had a tough time finding jobs. A couple have found gems, others have done second fellowships or have taken not so good jobs. The problem now is that there are jobs out there, just not very good jobs. The other problem is that when a good job opens up, not only are the guys finishing up now competing for it, but so are the guys who finished over the last few years as well. Those guys who finished in the last few years have taken not so hot jobs and are itching for an upgrade.

chronicidal said:
People can look up academic starting salaries at University of California departments to easily to confirm/deny your statement. https://ucannualwage.ucop.edu/wage/

Example: starting gross pay at UCLA, 2013
Simin Bahrami - body + IR - $346516
Rinat Masamed - body - $307734
Click to expand...
 
badasshairday said:
I'm not arguing here. You are showing people who have jobs which are good are making a descent salary. I'm saying that the guys I know looking for jobs over the past two graduating classes have had a tough time finding jobs. A couple have found gems, others have done second fellowships or have taken not so good jobs. The problem now is that there are jobs out there, just not very good jobs. The other problem is that when a good job opens up, not only are the guys finishing up now competing for it, but so are the guys who finished over the last few years as well. Those guys who finished in the last few years have taken not so hot jobs and are itching for an upgrade.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the rationale of 2nd fellowships over bad offers? Isn't even a bad offer going to be 100k+ whereas fellowship would be lower? Are people significantly more marketable after a 2nd fellowship?
 
My group just hired two fellows and the starting salary, the years to partnership and the partners salary are very different than what some people say here.
 
badasshairday said:
I sent you a PM shark. This is fact, not fiction.
Click to expand...

You can always find some outliers. There are Spine surgeons who make <300K but these are uncommon.

Some practices don't hire a new person unless they can really low ball it. Not surprisingly, these practices ALWAYS have a job opening and have very high turn over. As a result, many fellows end up interviewing with these practices and eventually turning down their offer.

If I put a price of 1 million on my second hand Honda and advertise it on KSL, it does not mean that the market price of a second hand Honda is 1 million. But, you can reference to KSL and CLAIM that a second hand Honda is 1 million.
 
shark2000 said:
You can always find some outliers. There are Spine surgeons who make <300K but these are uncommon.

Some practices don't hire a new person unless they can really low ball it. Not surprisingly, these practices ALWAYS have a job opening and have very high turn over. As a result, many fellows end up interviewing with these practices and eventually turning down their offer.

If I put a price of 1 million on my second hand Honda and advertise it on KSL, it does not mean that the market price of a second hand Honda is 1 million. But, you can reference to KSL and CLAIM that a second hand Honda is 1 million.
Click to expand...

Shark is an attending and still has to drive a honda. The market must be bad.

*joking
 
Radiologyreviews2015 said:
I don't understand the rationale of 2nd fellowships over bad offers? Isn't even a bad offer going to be 100k+ whereas fellowship would be lower? Are people significantly more marketable after a 2nd fellowship?
Click to expand...

Did a year of pp and then a 2nd fellowship (which included light IR and breast, areas I was weak in). Helped out tremendously in terms of my marketability, though having a year of pp under my belt also helped a lot
 
those guys over the ER forums are talking about making $400+/hr after 3 yrs of residency.....
 
radsswtich said:
those guys over the ER forums are talking about making $400+/hr after 3 yrs of residency.....
Click to expand...

That won't last with the influx of NPs/PAs over the next few years along with likely changes to the ACA/health care laws...plus their job is hell and they only work an average of 10 years. I have 0 envy for anything they have going on.
 
Cubsfan10 said:
That won't last with the influx of NPs/PAs over the next few years along with likely changes to the ACA/health care laws...plus their job is hell and they only work an average of 10 years. I have 0 envy for anything they have going on.
Click to expand...

While I agree I don't envy the job description of an ER doc, the rest of your statements I cannot agree with. ACA is a good thing for ER docs because now all the patient's will have some sort of insurance. No more "no pays." Small government medicaid insurance is better than nothing.

NP/PA's influxing into ED is not new, and I'm not sure what you are trying to say about that. Are you insinuating that NP/PA's will take over ER's? If you think that, I highly disagree with that as I know numerous ED physicians who are my friends and my wife is a mid-level in the ED. Hospitals and patients want ER doc's running th ED's. While NP/PA's are very helpful in the ED, I don't think you will see ER doc's going jobless because of them... rather they will go jobless if they overproduce and increase training spots like radiology has.

Yes there is burn out in ED, but I think you are exaggerating when you say "average of 10 years". Would you provide a source. Based on the numerous ED doc's I know, many have been in practice over 10 years. I know several in there 50's and 60's. I do agree that ER doc's on average retire earlier than radiologists because of the nature of there work. But honestly it works it because it keeps the ER market good since no oldies are hanging onto there jobs into there 70's and 80's.
 
badasshairday said:
While I agree I don't envy the job description of an ER doc, the rest of your statements I cannot agree with. ACA is a good thing for ER docs because now all the patient's will have some sort of insurance. No more "no pays." Small government medicaid insurance is better than nothing.

NP/PA's influxing into ED is not new, and I'm not sure what you are trying to say about that. Are you insinuating that NP/PA's will take over ER's? If you think that, I highly disagree with that as I know numerous ED physicians who are my friends and my wife is a mid-level in the ED. Hospitals and patients want ER doc's running th ED's. While NP/PA's are very helpful in the ED, I don't think you will see ER doc's going jobless because of them... rather they will go jobless if they overproduce and increase training spots like radiology has.

Yes there is burn out in ED, but I think you are exaggerating when you say "average of 10 years". Would you provide a source. Based on the numerous ED doc's I know, many have been in practice over 10 years. I know several in there 50's and 60's. I do agree that ER doc's on average retire earlier than radiologists because of the nature of there work. But honestly it works it because it keeps the ER market good since no oldies are hanging onto there jobs into there 70's and 80's.
Click to expand...
The government actually just eliminated the one reason ED physicians got paid as much as they did: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/well-this-is-nice.1172315/

Basically, there was a requirement in the law that ensured that ED physicians were paid a reasonable rate for their services, due to the fact that they were required to see any patient that came in their door. That requirement has been rescinded, so now insurers could pay them 5 bucks and a Twix bar and they'd still be forced to see that insurer's patients under EMTLA. PAs and NPs are less of a threat- they simply aren't competent enough for most hospitals to eat their liability costs. The only places I know that use them in place of physicians are small community hospitals that transfer anything worse than a common cold. All of the big hospitals here seem to use them largely in an urgent care capacity, seeing low-priority patients that should have seen their PCPs. EM won't saturate for quite some time, but the pay is going to drop.

Plus there's that whole working nights, evenings, weekends, and holidays for the rest of your life thing. That sucks.
 
badasshairday said:
While I agree I don't envy the job description of an ER doc, the rest of your statements I cannot agree with. ACA is a good thing for ER docs because now all the patient's will have some sort of insurance. No more "no pays." Small government medicaid insurance is better than nothing.

NP/PA's influxing into ED is not new, and I'm not sure what you are trying to say about that. Are you insinuating that NP/PA's will take over ER's? If you think that, I highly disagree with that as I know numerous ED physicians who are my friends and my wife is a mid-level in the ED. Hospitals and patients want ER doc's running th ED's. While NP/PA's are very helpful in the ED, I don't think you will see ER doc's going jobless because of them... rather they will go jobless if they overproduce and increase training spots like radiology has.

Yes there is burn out in ED, but I think you are exaggerating when you say "average of 10 years". Would you provide a source. Based on the numerous ED doc's I know, many have been in practice over 10 years. I know several in there 50's and 60's. I do agree that ER doc's on average retire earlier than radiologists because of the nature of there work. But honestly it works it because it keeps the ER market good since no oldies are hanging onto there jobs into there 70's and 80's.
Click to expand...

And the salary of 400/hour is a big exaggeration. And the low salaries and the bad job market of radiology are also exaggerations.

There is something that is called the "market norm" and then there are exceptions. I don't say there is no place that offer 400/hour for ED for a few days under specific circumstances. But it is way above the market routine and it won't last long.

If you do the math, even spine surgeons and orthropods who are indisputably top earners in medicine make (much) less per hour.
 
ED and ICU are fool's gold. They are burn out city.

Buy the dip in Radiology?
 
Agreed 400$/hr is a huge exaggeration for ER salaries. I agree with you all though. Radiology is a much better gig then ER and pretty much all of medicine (except for derm if you find skin interesting imo), as long as you can find a fair job where you want to live. Easier said than done in the current time.
 
badasshairday said:
NP/PA's influxing into ED is not new, and I'm not sure what you are trying to say about that. Are you insinuating that NP/PA's will take over ER's? If you think that, I highly disagree with that as I know numerous ED physicians who are my friends and my wife is a mid-level in the ED. Hospitals and patients want ER doc's running th ED's. While NP/PA's are very helpful in the ED, I don't think you will see ER doc's going jobless because of them... rather they will go jobless if they overproduce and increase training spots like radiology has.
Click to expand...

What I'm curious is why hospitals haven't forced ER docs into an anesthesia/ACT-model where 1 ER Physician supervises 4 midlevels? This could be bad, because unlike anesthesia, the ER doc can't necessarily bill for their services.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Breast fellowship applicants
Replies
8
Views
3K
Rubix8
R
R
Chances for DR Re-applicant - Current PGY-1
Replies
6
Views
3K
GwBXtRTrVktW9E
G
Steve_Zissou
The use of Midlevels in image interpretation
Replies
1
Views
1K
GadRads
G
X
Which MRI breaks down the least?
Replies
1
Views
798
ilovecostco
I
E
How important are US LORs?
Replies
1
Views
1K
knosway14
knosway14
Top