What are my real chances after interview?

[tm12]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Many of us have attended these interviews where we're told we're fantastic, highly qualified applicants and will get in somewhere for sure. The program receives 350-500 applications and interviews 35-50 applicants so we must be in the top 10% of applicants.

I certainly don't feel like a top 10% applicant and have not received interviews at any of the large programs where they're presumably interviewing up to 80-90 applicants. Am I really a "top 10%" applicant or are the more competitive people simply not applying to the programs where I'm getting interviews? How many of the other 90% not getting interviews at these programs were serious contenders (1st time US allopathic applicants) vs. DOs, FMG, IMG, reapplicants, etc?

 

[InterviewMe]

The process is a lot more complicated than the "top 10%" getting invites everywhere and eventually turning them down.

There are regional biases. Someone with California ties is more likely to get a California interview, etc.

There are performance biases. By this, I mean that some programs won't interview the guy with the 'perfect' application because they know he won't end up there.

There are name-recognition biases. If the PD knows your letter writer, or if your letter writer trained at their institution, you may get an interview there.

There are program-specific biases. Some PDs prefer researchers, others want clinicians, others might interview you because you are an athlete/opera singer/whatever.

Overall, more qualified applicants will likely get more interviews. If you got an interview at a top program, chances are that you have many interviews. And if you have more interviews, you become much more likely to match. That is what the PD meant.

Don't look too far into the 10% statement.