I personally feel that these filters are not justified. As aPD mentioned that one can run a filter to sort the applicants who have an attempt on USMLE exams.
Just to be clear, this is one thing that ERAS cannot do. I can filter by your most recent USMLE score -- so if your last attempt was a failure, I can find that. But I can't generate a filter that shows me everyone who took a step twice. I ave to review USMLE reports by hand to do that.
So if used intelligently, these filters can make things easier for the PD.But if the PD is not even going to look at your application just because of some silly attempt or just because you have a score 1 point below their cut-off, it makes no sense.
This makes total sense to me. If we have a cutoff criteria, we have it for a reason. If you are below that cutoff, then you do not get interviewed. If I set a cutoff of 220, it might not seem fair if you got a 219. But then if I look at 219, what about 218? 217? When does it stop?
In my experience, USMLE performance clearly predicts residency performance -- those with low scores do not do well. Those with high scores don't necessarily become superstars either, but the vast majority of my residents who struggle are on the lower end of the USMLE spectrum.
Moreover the application is not free , you pay bucks for each program you apply to.
I get none of your application fees. So encouraging frivolous applications, as might seem to happen for medical schools, does not financially benefit me.
I feel the ERAS should make it mandatory to the programs to list what filters they are going to use well before sept 1st. And the program should not be allowed to use any new additional filters after that. And these filters should be visible in the applicant interface of the ERAS as well so that each applicant knows if he is eligible there or not. In fact, the applicant's ERAS interface should provide with a warning or something when the applicant tries to apply to that program if the candidate is likely to be filtered by a particularly program by its software filters.
This is an interesting idea, but the way you've written it is unreasonable, and impossible. First of all, the "filters" you talk about we use every day. Sometimes I use a filter to try to decide whom I want to interview. But I have filters for "Applicants interviewing 12/17" and "Applicants invited to interview but are missing an LOR", etc. We use, change, and apply filters every day. I have 100's of filters, and you seeing them is not going to help you in any way.
What I think you're trying to say is that ERAS should have programs list their minimum criteria in the software system, such that you could "filter" programs on your end that meet your application. Really, the only things that could be handled this way are year of graduation and USMLE scores -- things like US experience are too nebulous to try to measure in ERAS. So, I could list a year of graduation cutoff date, and minimum USMLE scores (perhaps different values for USMG's and IMG's), and then you could decide whether to apply. As Doowai points out, there's always a chance that I'll make an exception. It's an interesting idea, but I don't know if it would really change anything. Many programs might choose not to list a minimum.
Moreover when i get rejected by a program , my interface should display if i had been rejected by a filter and if yes, what filter. I have the right to know why I am rejected , so that I can improve upon my weakness and not make the same mistake next year.
I disagree. You have no right to know why you were rejected. If you get rejected from a job, school, or if you lose an election, you do not necessarily get told why, and you certainly don't have a right to it. Perhaps you would like to know why, but it's my option to answer or not.
You also misunderstand how filters work. Filters don't block applications. A filter is simply a logical rule applied to the whole group of applications to show a subgroup. I can create filters for "all USMLE scores <200" or "All applications with a middle initial of X" or "everyone who applied after November 1st". If I have a minimum cutoff of 220 on the USMLE, then I can create a filter for that, then reject all of the applications in the filter -- but it's not the filter that rejected you, and from a software standpoint you can't tell if someone closely reviewed your application or simply rejected it after finding out your USMLE score was too low.
Or otherwise they should make ERAS free. After all its just like an email server. They should probably just take some sign up fees but no fee per program applied. Because if I am to be filtered by some software and not going to be reviewed by a human, then i think it doesnt matter if a program receives 150 apps or 15000 apps.
It should not be free, and it totally matters. If it was free, people would apply to every single program. Why not? Costs nothing, right? Might as well apply to MGH and BWH.
If I got 15000 apps, you can be sure I would simply choose a USMLE cutoff and reject everyone below it. I would have no choice -- there would be no way to review all of those applications. Or, I'd create a secondary application, with a fee, to weed out those who are really interested.
ERAS is a godsend to programs and applicants. I remember not too long ago when fellowships did not participate in ERAS. My residents spent hours typing each application -- the same information over and over again, in different formats. And each application had a fee, so this is no more expensive.
ERAS is not applicant friendly.
You are wrong. You have not experienced the alternative. Again, imagine applying to 50 programs, each with their own application. Each application would need to be typed, unless you were lucky enough to get a PDF file you could type into. You'd need to send your transcript, USMLE's, and letters to each program individually. We'll all want originals, so you'll be paying whatever fee the USMLE requires for each transcript. And if you take a new step, you'll need to send it again, probably for another fee. Let's not forget that your letter writers will need to make 50 copies of their letter, sign each of them in ink, and mail them in individual envelopes -- which if you know what you're doing, will be sent via trackable mail so you know when they arrive (which costs). And you'll have no way to track all of this, since it won't be online. And programs will get all of those applications on paper, so you can be sure that some will get lost, and we probably won't even bother to reject the bad applications, simply throw them away (which I understand may be happening under the current system, but would be worse).
Trust me, ERAS is wonderful.
