Advised to contact top programs but feeling weird about doing so - seeking additional help

[ManUfan]

Just wrapped up my IM interviews and a mentor told me that despite all the talk on the interview trail about not contacting programs post-interview, I should still tell my top few that I'm very interested in them (without mentioning specific ranking intent). Problem is, this feels super weird to me. So many PDs at my interviews were telling us applicants not to contact them after interviews and I don't want to annoy them by sending these emails. At the same time, I don't want to be the one applicant who doesn't do these. Don't want my top programs to think I don't care about them.

Anyone have any advice? I've been trying to figure this out on my own for the past few days and getting nowhere. Leaning towards not sending any but I'm an average applicant and am scared to potentially be doing something improper.

Edit: my mentor is an interventional cards guy (an interest of mine). we recently spoke and he mentioned that his initial advice to me is more applicable to fellowship than IM residency. Thought it might be helpful to update for those reading.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted480308]

Just wrapped up my IM interviews and a mentor from my home program told me that despite all the talk on the interview trail about not contacting programs post-interview, I should still tell my top few that I'm very interested in them (without mentioning specific ranking intent). Problem is, this feels super weird to me. So many PDs at my interviews were telling us applicants not to contact them after interviews and I don't want to annoy them by sending these emails. At the same time, I don't want to be the one applicant who doesn't do these I-love-you letters. Don't want my top programs to think I don't care about them.

Anyone have any advice? I've been trying to figure this out on my own for the past few days and getting nowhere. Leaning towards not sending any but I'm an average applicant and am scared to potentially be doing something improper.

If a program said not to, leave them alone

 

[DrMcCoy]

No one said specifically not to send those letters. Programs would say things like "no thank you letters are needed because we are trying to discourage communication after the match, etc."

I am not sure if I will be hurt by not sending a letter to my top programs. That's the question really.

 

[mvenus929]

No one said specifically not to send those letters. Programs would say things like "no thank you letters are needed because we are trying to discourage communication after the match, etc."

I am not sure if I will be hurt by not sending a letter to my top programs. That's the question really.

You probably won't be hurt, but it probably won't do anything either.

 

[deleted480308]

No one said specifically not to send those letters. Programs would say things like "no thank you letters are needed because we are trying to discourage communication after the match, etc."

I am not sure if I will be hurt by not sending a letter to my top programs. That's the question really.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

This really is the definition of irony. We tell you this so you don't worry about contacting us. Yet here you are worrying.

 

[hallowmann]

This really is the definition of irony. We tell you this so you don't worry about contacting us. Yet here you are worrying.

Part of the problem is the mixed messages we receive. Basically a bunch of PDs are like, don't worry about thank yous and interest, we like to limit communication, then faculty at the same programs might send you a thank you, then other PDs and advisors tell you how important it is to show your interest in the top programs on your list as they want people who want to be there. Honestly, the whole thing makes me kind of annoyed, because there should just be a standardized way set up, but programs will keep just doing things the way they want.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

I think some of those advisers are using an old playbook. But it also depends upon the field. In IM, many programs have agreed that the whole post-interview communication process is silly, state so at their interview days. If so, they are presumably not lying to you.

I routinely get emails telling me that "I'm ranking you highly", or "in my top group of programs", or similar nonsense. And I get "I'm ranking you #1" emails also -- but I've had plenty of those where the person matches elsewhere (and could have been with me), to really believe them. And in any case, my best ranking strategy is to rank people in the order I want them.

This all may be different for very competitive or very small fields or programs. In that case, all of the candidates make be interchangeable on paper -- all stellar board scores, clinical performance, research, etc. Then, personality / fit / desire to be there might be the best deciding factor. And in a small program, fit becomes more important -- one "odd duck" in a class of 30 interns isn't a problem, but one in a class of 2 could be.

In any case, I think this post interview communication stuff has less effect than you think it does.

 

[hallowmann]

I think some of those advisers are using an old playbook. But it also depends upon the field. In IM, many programs have agreed that the whole post-interview communication process is silly, state so at their interview days. If so, they are presumably not lying to you.

I routinely get emails telling me that "I'm ranking you highly", or "in my top group of programs", or similar nonsense. And I get "I'm ranking you #1" emails also -- but I've had plenty of those where the person matches elsewhere (and could have been with me), to really believe them. And in any case, my best ranking strategy is to rank people in the order I want them.

This all may be different for very competitive or very small fields or programs. In that case, all of the candidates make be interchangeable on paper -- all stellar board scores, clinical performance, research, etc. Then, personality / fit / desire to be there might be the best deciding factor. And in a small program, fit becomes more important -- one "odd duck" in a class of 30 interns isn't a problem, but one in a class of 2 could be.

In any case, I think this post interview communication stuff has less effect than you think it does.

I hope so.

To be fair, most programs that I'm referring to that want communication have class sizes of 6-12, with tracks that may be as small as 2, so maybe that is the difference.

 

[ManUfan]

@aProgDirector - Sorry if this question came off as obnoxious but I agree with hallowmann. I was prepared not to send any of these letters to anyone, but then a mentor told me to send a letter of intent to my home program.

Hearing that was what confused the heck out of me. Tbh, I'm still confused.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

It's pretty crappy of a program to say that post interview communication isn't needed/wanted, and then actually use it anyway. Regardless, contacting programs is very unlikely to hurt. It's also unlikely to help, unless you have a specific reason / interest in a program, or (maybe) for your #1 rank (if you tell them that). But I've been lied to about #1 ranks, or someone "changes their mind". There's always a thread about that here as the season progresses -- Someone sends a #1 email but then decides not to rank them #1, "what do I do?".

 

[DancingDoggie]

This really is the definition of irony. We tell you this so you don't worry about contacting us. Yet here you are worrying.

At a recent interview at a "top 5" academic program in a surgical subspecialty, the program director spent a good 5 minutes at the end of his group presentation talking about how they follow match rules, and how second looks and love letters will do nothing to change our position on their rank list.

... Not even 30 minutes later, he ends my 1-on-1 interview with "Thank you so much for coming. If you decide that you want to come here, be sure to let our chair know." I blinked and asked for clarification, and he repeated what he said. Talked to other applicants, and seemed like a small number of us received this message while others didn't. Very shady.

I dropped them near the bottom of my rank list. There were other things about the interview day that bothered me, but I decided I couldn't trust someone like this to be my PD.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[mimelim]

I think some of those advisers are using an old playbook. But it also depends upon the field. In IM, many programs have agreed that the whole post-interview communication process is silly, state so at their interview days. If so, they are presumably not lying to you.

I routinely get emails telling me that "I'm ranking you highly", or "in my top group of programs", or similar nonsense. And I get "I'm ranking you #1" emails also -- but I've had plenty of those where the person matches elsewhere (and could have been with me), to really believe them. And in any case, my best ranking strategy is to rank people in the order I want them.

This all may be different for very competitive or very small fields or programs. In that case, all of the candidates make be interchangeable on paper -- all stellar board scores, clinical performance, research, etc. Then, personality / fit / desire to be there might be the best deciding factor. And in a small program, fit becomes more important -- one "odd duck" in a class of 30 interns isn't a problem, but one in a class of 2 could be.

In any case, I think this post interview communication stuff has less effect than you think it does.

It is NOT different here and I'm in the definition of a competitive small field. Fit matters more than anything once a certain academic threshold is reached, sending post-interview communication doesn't change 'fit'. It is all useless.

 

[bdth]

It's pretty crappy of a program to say that post interview communication isn't needed/wanted, and then actually use it anyway. Regardless, contacting programs is very unlikely to hurt. It's also unlikely to help, unless you have a specific reason / interest in a program, or (maybe) for your #1 rank (if you tell them that). But I've been lied to about #1 ranks, or someone "changes their mind". There's always a thread about that here as the season progresses -- Someone sends a #1 email but then decides not to rank them #1, "what do I do?".

Isn't is possible for a candidate to rank a program #1 and still not match there even if that program ranked them to match?

For example, assume an intern class is 40 at each of the following programs. Candidate's #1 program ranks him 40. His #2 program ranks him 1. The "better" match that maximizes utility in this case would be the latter. Is this possible or no? I've heard that it is, but I'm not an expert.

Edit: nevermind, I just watched the video on the NRMP website and apparently this wouldn't happen. Quite useful!

 

[xbmcmed]

Isn't is possible for a candidate to rank a program #1 and still not match there even if that program ranked them to match?

For example, assume an intern class is 40 at each of the following programs. Candidate's #1 program ranks him 40. His #2 program ranks him 1. The "better" match that maximizes utility in this case would be the latter. Is this possible or no? I've heard that it is, but I'm not an expert.

Edit: nevermind, I just watched the video on the NRMP website and apparently this wouldn't happen. Quite useful!

Your "edit" is correct, you would rank to your #1. They will only rank you to your #2 program if you cannot rank at your #1.

 

[mvenus929]

Your "edit" is correct, you would rank to your #1. They will only rank you to your #2 program if you cannot rank at your #1.

Though couples matches can throw that off a bit.

 

[Walletectomy]

Do PDs give a **** at all about receiving an email endorsing a candidate from faculty that the PD doesn't know? An attending I've worked with extensively has been extremely complimentary and told me they think I would be an incredible asset to any program and I'm just like, "****, if only PDs at my top programs had some way of knowing this.."

 

[AdmiralChz]

Do PDs give a **** at all about receiving an email endorsing a candidate from faculty that the PD doesn't know? An attending I've worked with extensively has been extremely complimentary and told me they think I would be an incredible asset to any program and I'm just like, "****, if only PDs at my top programs had some way of knowing this.."

That's why LORs exist.

 

[Walletectomy]

The vast majority of candidates get good LORs, I don't feel like that stands out as much as an email specifically endorsing someone enthusiastically but then again, what do I know?