omfs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Unless you go to a school like Columbia where dental and med students take basic science courses together, this is not the case
Apples and oranges. My med school experience at U Mich was punctuated with lots of small group critical thinking blocks, gross anatomy definitely was not watered down. My second year of dental school I was learning about RPD classification and physical properties of dental materials. 2nd yr at UMich was a systems based approach - Pulmonary section, cards section, etc. Exams included performing physicals on live patients. Dental school - all 4 yrs- was more like boot camp with (un)healthy doses of brow beating.
Try not to make blanket/unfounded statements on SDN , you may get hell reigned upon you.
Apples and oranges...

It's fundamentally weird that you would equate basic sciences performance, in a classroom, with an applicant's potential as a resident. Especially since above you're arguing that distant, historical, physical science, classroom performance would have better predictive power in determining if an individual applicant to an Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery residency has what it takes to succeed.

You also managed to delightfully counterpose a baseless assertion ("Unless you go to a school like Columbia...this is not the case") with an admonition to the original poster for doing the same ("Try not to make blanket/unfounded statements on SDN , you may get hell reigned upon you.") There's even a decent body of medical education literature that disagrees with your assertion (Just about every paper et. al published since 1970 comparing medical student pre-clinical grades/USMLE scores to residency/boards performance.)

Plus, I'm reading a rare 13/15 "Not-as-I-do's" on my Cognitive-Dissonometer.

not gonna turn this into a pissing contest. I read what you wrote. that's how I interpreted it
Um...15/15

Children, pre-dents, lost in the wood deer in headlight dental students... perhaps some things are beyond your level of comprehension and should be left alone. Teach thy tongue to say I do not know, and thou shalt progress, thus avoiding the aforementioned pissing contest.
And to that end, I bid you, 'adieu'.

Damn, I only had one payment left.

you should learn to develop a thick skin.

...probably not as watered down as some of the programs you silver spooners attend...You sound like a bitter pre-dent or struggling D1 by the way.

vTqoCtS.png

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
  • Care
Reactions: 5 users
can i apply to 4 and 6 years all together or is it a separate application?
how can I study for CBSE when your school dont have med curriculum??

Is there application fee for each school and plus supplemental fee too like aadsas? also essays (personal statement)?

I'm going to toss out a free piece of advice for dental school, residency and beyond. I would personally be much more interested in literally any applicant who knew how to use this advice over one who didn't, regardless of their ranks, GPAs scores, etc...

If you ever have a question about something that:
1. Has a well-defined answer and;
2. Is easily found with a Google search

Avoid asking this question at all costs, as it will only make you look bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You could always go back to taking more undergraduate classes after you are done with your dental education, or even taking undergrad. classes concurrently with dental school. Opportunity cost analysis though..

The only problem with that would be that there are also restrictions about accepting mental patients into medical schools as well.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
So someone with a undergrad science GPA of 3.0-3.1 would not have a chance at OMFS?

I hope you wouldn't believe that based on this dumpster fire of a thread. Why not look at some actual data? (Numbers insignificantly fudged to protect the innocent)

In the application cycles for which I have data, a 3.1 undergrad GPA would put you at about the 6th percentile of the summed pool. The dataset for undergrad GPA has a sizeable negative skew towards higher GPAs, which makes bootstrap sense as all of the applicants went through a previous GPA filter: dental school admission.

However, according to our data, 33% of the <3.1 applicants received interviews; compare this to the 20% interview rate for the >3.1 population.

What gives, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I hope you wouldn't believe that based on this dumpster fire of a thread. Why not look at some actual data? (Numbers insignificantly fudged to protect the innocent)

In the application cycles for which I have data, a 3.1 undergrad GPA would put you at about the 6th percentile of the summed pool. The dataset for undergrad GPA has a sizeable negative skew towards higher GPAs, which makes bootstrap sense as all of the applicants went through a previous GPA filter: dental school admission.

However, according to our data, 33% of the <3.1 applicants received interviews; compare this to the 20% interview rate for the >3.1 population.

What gives, right?
Could you expand on this or give your logic as to why the numbers are what they are? I'm honestly not sure why it would be like that.
 
Could you expand on this or give your logic as to why the numbers are what they are? I'm honestly not sure why it would be like that.

I'd like to go with "I have a chip on my shoulder and know my own abilities and have a better understanding of what I am capable of and will review lectures most nights" as the safest assumption.

Dental school is a GRIND. If you don't find a way to review every-night, attend lectures (and pay attention, time is so limited), practice in preclinic a couple times a week outside of class, and try and sleep/gym and eat healthy, the chance of burnout is high. Cramming just doesn't work like it used too in college.
 
I'd like to go with "I have a chip on my shoulder and know my own abilities and have a better understanding of what I am capable of and will review lectures most nights" as the safest assumption.

Dental school is a GRIND. If you don't find a way to review every-night, attend lectures (and pay attention, time is so limited), practice in preclinic a couple times a week outside of class, and try and sleep/gym and eat healthy, the chance of burnout is high. Cramming just doesn't work like it used too in college.
Agree with everything you said. But the main thing I was questioning is the reasoning behind this part: "However, according to our data, 33% of the <3.1 applicants received interviews; compare this to the 20% interview rate for the >3.1 population."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's fundamentally weird that you would equate basic sciences performance, in a classroom, with an applicant's potential as a resident. Especially since above you're arguing that distant, historical, physical science, classroom performance would have better predictive power in determining if an individual applicant to an Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery residency has what it takes to succeed.

You also managed to delightfully counterpose a baseless assertion ("Unless you go to a school like Columbia...this is not the case") with an admonition to the original poster for doing the same ("Try not to make blanket/unfounded statements on SDN , you may get hell reigned upon you.") There's even a decent body of medical education literature that disagrees with your assertion (Just about every paper et. al published since 1970 comparing medical student pre-clinical grades/USMLE scores to residency/boards performance.)

Plus, I'm reading a rare 13/15 "Not-as-I-do's" on my Cognitive-Dissonometer.


Um...15/15



Damn, I only had one payment left.





vTqoCtS.png
you definitively have too much time on your hands, chump
find some hobbies instead of deconstructing posts. Makes you look like an elitist schmuck.
 
you definitively have too much time on your hands, chump
find some hobbies instead of deconstructing posts. Makes you look like an elitist schmuck.

My bad, this is all my fault. I thought when you said "thick skin" earlier, you meant "the ability to deal with criticism". I didn't know you were talking about your webbed neck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
I hope you wouldn't believe that based on this dumpster fire of a thread. Why not look at some actual data? (Numbers insignificantly fudged to protect the innocent)

In the application cycles for which I have data, a 3.1 undergrad GPA would put you at about the 6th percentile of the summed pool. The dataset for undergrad GPA has a sizeable negative skew towards higher GPAs, which makes bootstrap sense as all of the applicants went through a previous GPA filter: dental school admission.

However, according to our data, 33% of the <3.1 applicants received interviews; compare this to the 20% interview rate for the >3.1 population.

What gives, right?
Thanks for your reply. Can you tell me where that data came from? Do you have a source for it?
 
Damn two omfs with posts I like reading going at it. Feels bad
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
All users are reminded to maintain a level of professionalism within the forums.
 
Agree with everything you said. But the main thing I was questioning is the reasoning behind this part: "However, according to our data, 33% of the <3.1 applicants received interviews; compare this to the 20% interview rate for the >3.1 population."

These are just uncontrolled, observational statistics. There really isn't any reason or logic behind them that we can derive from this other than correlation. There are a variety of ideas we could theorize as to why it appears we preferred applicants with a low undergraduate GPA. Statistical noise is probable since the low undergrad set is a tiny fraction of the overall dataset (~5%), and other factors are causing both the low undergrad GPA and the high percentage of interviews (Perhaps they have other unique qualities that makes them an attractive candidate). See "Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy." It does appear that, for us, low undergrad GPA applicants who receive interview invites have significantly higher ranks and boards scores than the overall applicant pool, on par with the average pool of applicants that receive interview invites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for your reply. Can you tell me where that data came from? Do you have a source for it?
Anonymized, unpublished, OMS application data I gathered to mine for hypothesis generation

Damn two omfs with posts I like reading going at it. Feels bad
Between attending-level OMS on the internet, a brief trade of insults is the equivalent of seeing your neighbor on the way home from work and saying "Crazy weather today, right?" Anything less might even be considered rude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
I think it's worth highlighting that the appearance of inviting more applicants with lower uGPA does not necessarily mean you prefer applicants with lower uGPA. It seems highly unlikely that any residency program would actively seek out applicants with lower uGPA. Wouldn't a more likely explanation or confounding variable be age? Low uGPA dental school applicants tend to be nontraditional applicants or reapplicants which by definition means they are typically older than the traditional applicant and therefore may carry a greater degree of maturity and a past work experience in a team setting that is better suited for an OMFS residency. Lower uGPA means they probably partied a lot in college and are probably way cooler.
 
Last edited:
Look up something called UFAP or UFAPS to study for the CBSE. Be prepared to spend $$$.

For the 6 yr programs, think of it like this. You are not just applying to residency, but also to medical school. Therefore, like med student applications, your undergrad GPA will be taken into account. However, your undergrad performance will definitely not be as scrutinized as a regular medical student's application will be. At least you don't have to take the MCAT. If your undergrad GPA is just horrible, you can always just apply to 4 year programs.
It seems four year programs still require your undergrad transcripts. However, is it safe to assume four year programs do not weigh undergrad grades highly?
 
OMFS PD at my school told our OMFS Society during a meeting that there is, in fact, a cut off for your undergrad GPA and if I can recall correctly, I believe he said 3.2 is the cut off. I remember because one of my buddies has a not so stellar undergrad (around ~3.0-3.2) but he did very well in his masters so he raised that question to him.
what is your home program
 
Top