yes we know its competitive, but...

[peehdee]

ok we all know having the top grades and AOA etc. are most competitive. But there are also people who make it to rad without those high marks. so the question is who are these people? what 'other' things did they have that made up for their lack of AOA high board scores, honors...

would anyone like to list 'sub par' applicants (on paper that is) who got into rad?
and what was it that got them past the initial screening with simple numbers...
research? being president of their med school? being older? knows the program director?


thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MedGeek42]

Applying to enough programs.

Realistically, there were about 300 AOA applications and 900 spots. You don't need AOA to become a radiologist.

You probably do for radiology at Mass General, but that's another story.

Realistically, if your grades are over and you don't have a chance to raise your board score anymore, do a year of research and get a paper out.

 

[Capsaicin]

If you have a home program, get deeply involved in research as early as possible. Be the guy that everybody loves and respects. Play a key role, and make sure phone calls are made on your behalf.

I have a friend who matched at a big name midwestern program this way, virtually no honors, <230 Step 1. The guy is smart as hell, but didn't study in med school...he certainly had the last laugh now, and he will be one of their best residents, no doubt.

 

[Idiopathic]

he will be one of their best residents, no doubt.

Why, cause he couldnt bring himself to study physiology like the rest of us?

I hate this stereotype. People who work hard, work hard...that is pretty much all there is to it.

Carry on.

 

[scootad.]

rads is not a small field. there are tons of programs out there, and as was said earlier you dont need to be AOA, top of the class, great boards to get into just any rads program. in fact, at some of my interviews (esp. community programs) I saw IMGs, DOs. My classmates with avg board/grades were getting interviews at community programs.

Its only if you want mgh, bwh, penn, ucsf, hopkins, stanford, mir that you need AOA top grades etc.

honestly, rads just isnt that competitive or anywhere near as competitive as its made out to be.

 

[U4iA]

honestly, rads just isnt that competitive or anywhere near as competitive as its made out to be.

i have a question.. how can you compare the competitiveness of rads vs ent or ophtho? there are fewer ophtho spots than rads, and even fewer oto spots.. but there is also a proportional decrease in the number of applicants.. (i'm using washu's residency web to get my information).. all in all, the data seems to indicate that all three specialties are about equal in competitiveness (mid to low 80% match rate in the last few years)..

so my question is - do you think all three of these specialties are not anywhere near as competitive as they are made out to be? or does something distinguish radiology in your mind from the others?

 

[WatchingWaiting]

i have a question.. how can you compare the competitiveness of rads vs ent or ophtho? there are fewer ophtho spots than rads, and even fewer oto spots.. but there is also a proportional decrease in the number of applicants.. (i'm using washu's residency web to get my information).. all in all, the data seems to indicate that all three specialties are about equal in competitiveness (mid to low 80% match rate in the last few years)..

so my question is - do you think all three of these specialties are not anywhere near as competitive as they are made out to be? or does something distinguish radiology in your mind from the others?

The mean Step I score of people who matched into all of these fields (rads, ENT, optho) is in the low to mid 230s. As with any normal distribution, that means there are going to be a decent number of programs where the average match is going to have board scores in the 220s and even lower. Hence, if you want a community program, rather than an academic powerhouse, it is not that hard to match into radiology. I think more than a few people coming out of top schools sitting on an above-average, but not spectacular, Step 1, and good, but not awesome, clinical evaluations, find themselves saying, would I rather do Rads at podunk community program or medicine at MGH or Stanford or UCSF? Then, radiology seems like a really hard match. Go read UCSF's radiology residency match page: they flat out say that if you have less than a 240 Step 1, you are going to be filtered out unless you have publications, are at the top of your class, and came from a top med school.

 

[carrigallen]

so my question is - do you think all three of these specialties are not anywhere near as competitive as they are made out to be? or does something distinguish radiology in your mind from the others?

I would say ENT was somewhat more competitive than ophtho. My assessment is based on the average applicant information that is published each year by these early-match fields. In my view, ENT and Neurosurgery are probably slightly behind Plastics, Derm, Radonc, and Ortho in terms of competitiveness.

My rough guess would be that urology, ophtho, and radiology are probably somewhat similiar in terms of competiveness. In general, radiology is a broad field, and my understanding is that you will usually match if you are qualified and not particular about where you apply.

 

[peehdee]

so back to the original question....

does anyone have more examples of applicants who were subpar on paper that got in? if you know thier grades, board scores etc... that would help

:-D

 

[siamesekat]

so back to the original question....

does anyone have more examples of applicants who were subpar on paper that got in? if you know thier grades, board scores etc... that would help

:-D

well, I'm hoping to be an one of these examples come this time next year. I mean, so far in third year, I've managed to scrape by with subpar shelf exam scores and clinical grades....(btw, subpar on shelf exams is like ~70?) My board scores - nothing to sneeze at - very mediocre compared to all these 245/250's....sigh. If anything, I'd like to know where the current MS4's that are labeled "average" are applying.....but I guess no one will say a peep until March 17th rolls around, huh?

 

[jhstuck]

I made 222 on step 1. I made 253 on step 2 but i took it so late that I only 2 programs downloaded it off ERAS before making their rank lists. So my programs only saw a 222 and very average class ranking (like 25 out of 60). I matched into radiology today (don't know where yet). According to a lot of the unfilled spots data generated by the NRMP radiology is not nearly as competitive this year as it has been in the last few years.
Also if you want to know where I applied. I chose every program in the SE (all programs in tenn, al, La, fla, ga, miss, ark, texas, SC, NC) and a few programs outside south (ones that I heard were less cometitive : Geisinger in Danville, PA, St. Joseph's in Az. and like 3 others)

 

[bigfrank]

According to a lot of the unfilled spots data generated by the NRMP radiology is not nearly as competitive this year as it has been in the last few years.

Can anyone verify this? I know it's unethical to share the names of the spots that didn't fill (I've heard...), but can anyone share NUMBERS?

 

[scootad.]

# of unfilled spots increased dramatically from last year from 5 (0.5%) to 49 (5%).

thats an amazing change for just one year. pediatrics, anesthesia, emergency medicine, and psychiatry (for G-d's sakes!) had better unfilled percentages!! I guess my previous post in this thread was the voice of reason if I may say so myself.

differing theories include fear of outsourcing, people realizing the rads lifestyle aint what its cracked up to be. but others think it has to do with the large drop in total # of applications this year (down 200) coinciding with people pan-applying (higher # of avg applications per applicant with many applying to 40+ programs), and programs being cocky and not ranking enough people.

 

[bigfrank]

# of unfilled spots increased dramatically from last year from 5 (0.5%) to 49 (5%).

thats an amazing change for just one year. pediatrics, anesthesia, emergency medicine, and psychiatry (for G-d's sakes!) had better unfilled percentages!! I guess my previous post in this thread was the voice of reason if I may say so myself.

differing theories include fear of outsourcing, people realizing the rads lifestyle aint what its cracked up to be. but others think it has to do with the large drop in total # of applications this year (down 200) coinciding with people pan-applying (higher # of avg applications per applicant with many applying to 40+ programs), and programs being cocky and not ranking enough people.

I think all of these are possible. I think [perhaps] the number of applications may have hit the pinnacle last year or the year before and then people got "scared off." Several of my classmates were initially considering radiology until they "got their boards back" and then switched to anesthesiology, EM, etc. Maybe a fear of outsourcing like you said, but I dunno -- the cRNAs haven't scared the MDA applicants. And programs, good lord, they're getting cocky. I agree.

Thank you for your input scootad.

 

[iatrosB]

differing theories include fear of outsourcing, people realizing the rads lifestyle aint what its cracked up to be. but others think it has to do with the large drop in total # of applications this year (down 200) coinciding with people pan-applying (higher # of avg applications per applicant with many applying to 40+ programs), and programs being cocky and not ranking enough people.

With any luck, everyone will be scared off for the next four years

 

[superdevil]

With any luck, everyone will be scared off for the next four years

exactly what i was thinking...

 

[U4iA]

With any luck, everyone will be scared off for the next four years

i hope not, a shortage of radiologists would only create a greater incentive for outsourcing..

 

[superdevil]

i hope not, a shortage of radiologists would only create a greater incentive for outsourcing..

but aren't quite a few of those unmatched spots filled during the "scramble"? if so, then it wouldn't matter. were those statistics for spots that couldn't be filled, or just weren't immediately matched?

 

[iatrosB]

i hope not, a shortage of radiologists would only create a greater incentive for outsourcing..

Yeah, if only I could find that darn crystal ball!!

 

[bigfrank]

I'm sure by match day there will be ZERO unfilled spots in rads.....

 

[U4iA]

but aren't quite a few of those unmatched spots filled during the "scramble"? if so, then it wouldn't matter. were those statistics for spots that couldn't be filled, or just weren't immediately matched?

true.... i wasn't really thinking..