INVISTA NO SEU SUCESSO:
Residency applicants are advised to prioritize strategic preparation and leverage tailored resources to maximize their chances during the competitive match process. For exam readiness, tools like Amboss and NBME aid Step 3 success, while mock interviews and professional coaching ensure poise during high-stakes interactions. Understanding the NRMP match algorithm through official videos or practical analogies helps applicants make informed ranking decisions. To overcome common pitfalls like delayed documents or technical issues, direct program outreach and testing platforms like Thalamus are essential.
Applicants with significant hurdles, such as older Year of Graduation (YOG) or limited US clinical experience, must adopt targeted strategies. These include securing US-based Letters of Recommendation (LORs), emphasizing compatibility with program goals in Letters of Interest (LOIs), and focusing on fellowship-compatible programs for older graduates. Networking plays a vital role, particularly in fields like Anesthesia or Pediatrics, where leveraging connections can yield interviews even for competitive spots. Discussions across various threads highlight the critical balance between academic priorities and personal factors like family proximity or program culture.
Finally, adaptability during the season proves indispensable. From handling social event conflicts to preparing for virtual interviews, applicants must remain flexible and proactive. Applicants are encouraged to address program concerns with authentic anecdotes, maintain professionalism through smart casual attire, and demonstrate cultural fit by asking thoughtful questions about resident life. Persistence in sending late LOIs and monitoring cancellations can create unexpected opportunities. With careful planning and emotional resilience, applicants can navigate challenges and make the most of their residency journey.
Resources
Amboss and NBME for Step 3 preparation (Post 2).
NRMP videos for understanding the Match algorithm (Post 4).
Residency Explorer, Frieda, and program websites for program-specific details and YOG cut-offs (Post 71).
Big Interview and mock interviews with mentors for interview preparation (Posts 27, 129).
ACGME website for finding newly accredited residency programs (Post 100).
Residency Match Spreadsheets for interview questions and program updates (Posts 150, 137).
Thalamus for interview scheduling, despite technical limitations (Posts 50, 58).
Scores and Performance Metrics
Applicants with 7+ interviews have high match success rates (Post 99).
High Step scores (e.g., 259 in Step 2) with weak program targeting may still result in limited interviews (Post 145).
Year of Graduation (YOG) heavily impacts older graduates (Post 145).
Methods and Strategies
Tailor Letters of Interest (LOIs) to showcase specific program interest (Post 64).
Leverage connections to secure interviews and enhance visibility in competitive fields (Post 151).
Prioritize poise during interviews to offset potential missteps (Post 143).
Use dual devices or multitasking to attend overlapping social events (Post 140).
Opportunities
Pre-match offers guarantee positions but require careful consideration of program culture (Posts 151, 60).
New programs, like Nova Southeastern University Pediatrics, may have open slots (Post 138).
Late interviews can still lead to success due to cancellations or program adjustments (Posts 29, 57).
Tips and Tricks
Personalize interview introductions to align with interviewer engagement (Post 152).
Highlight cultural fit with specific examples when discussing program interest (Post 154).
Prepare questions focusing on work-life balance and program mentorship during social events (Posts 120, 155).
Follow-up with coordinators for locked or waitlisted interview slots (Posts 46, 89).
Post 1: Marshfield Clinic
Click Here
Summary: This post is a brief query asking if anyone has interviewed at Marshfield Clinic and encouraging private messages for further discussion.
Analysis: The sole comment asks about the number of spots left, indicating anxiety among applicants regarding interview opportunities. This highlights a competitive environment, where candidates are actively tracking the availability of slots.
Post 2: How do I get rid of impostor syndrome?
Click Here
Summary: The poster struggles with impostor syndrome after failing Step 3 and previously having a Step 1 attempt. They have an interview soon and feel undeserving, expressing guilt about taking a spot over other candidates.
Analysis:
Comments offer support and practical advice, emphasizing resilience, integrity, and self-confidence. One user highlights how setbacks can pave the way for success, with spiritual encouragement such as "what’s meant to be yours can’t be taken." Others suggest focusing on interviews rather than disclosing failures. Specific advice includes using Amboss and NBME over UWorld for Step 3 preparation. The discussion reflects a supportive community offering both emotional reinforcement and actionable strategies.
Post 3: Waitlist
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about the likelihood of receiving an interview when on a pooled waitlist for residency programs, especially for candidates from previous seasons.
Analysis: Responses vary based on program competitiveness. Some users shared success stories of getting interview slots after calling programs, while others received no updates. This reflects the unpredictable nature of waitlists, influenced by program demand and applicant persistence. Emergency Medicine (EM) waitlists seem more responsive, as mentioned by one user who secured an interview within days.
Post 4: Help me understand how match works
Click Here
Summary: The post seeks clarity on the residency match algorithm, especially how ranking systems interact between applicants and programs.
Analysis:
Detailed comments explain the match algorithm, emphasizing that it prioritizes applicant preferences while considering program rankings. Analogies, like a rollercoaster queue, help demystify the process. NRMP videos are frequently recommended for clarity. The discussion also explores ethics and efficiency, with users debating if algorithms could better avoid leaving candidates unmatched.
Post 5: UNLV interview
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice about UNLV interview expectations, especially regarding technical or conversational formats.
Analysis: A lone commenter suggests connecting privately, showing limited public insight into the program's interview style. This highlights a potential lack of shared knowledge about this specific program among the subreddit.
Post 6: ROL for EM
Click Here
Summary: The poster shares their rank order list (ROL) for Emergency Medicine (EM), prioritizing programs with high acuity, research opportunities, and flexibility for academics. They request feedback on program rankings, especially within the top eight choices.
Analysis:
Comments discuss specific programs, such as GWU (possibly striking), Hackensack's supportive culture, and Baystate’s reputation for rigid faculty relations. Users emphasize the importance of personal experiences during interviews, suggesting that comfort and vibes are often decisive. Location-specific advantages and program reputations also dominate the discussion.
Post 7: Anyone interviewed at UAB Montgomery?
Click Here
Summary: This brief post inquires about the UAB Montgomery Internal Medicine interview experience.
Analysis: The comments reveal general queries about specialties and availability of spots, reflecting interest but limited firsthand experiences. The lack of detailed feedback indicates either confidentiality among interviewees or limited engagement with the program.
Post 8: Rank order list
Click Here
Summary: A US IMG applicant seeks guidance on finalizing their ROL for internal medicine programs.
Analysis:
Comments highlight that many listed programs are community hospitals with comparable quality. Prematch programs like LICC and Raritan require separate considerations. Advice focuses on location, cost of living (COL), and program vibes. The discussion emphasizes individual priorities over objective rankings, reflecting the nuanced decision-making involved in ROL creation.
Post 9: ROL Help
Click Here
Summary: A US IMG applicant with strong board scores seeks feedback on their ROL, aiming for fellowship opportunities in Cardiology or Gastroenterology.
Analysis: Limited comments, with one user mentioning additional publications. This thread lacks detailed insights into the programs listed, indicating either fewer engaged participants or highly specific applicant scenarios that limit broader input.
Post 10: Help with ROL
Click Here
Summary: A USDO applicant shares their ROL for internal medicine, requesting input. The list spans geographically diverse programs with no specific order of preference.
Analysis:
Key factors discussed include geographical preferences (e.g., avoiding winter), program reputation, and balancing academic vs. community training. Scripps Mercy and UCSF Fresno received positive mentions for location and training quality, respectively. The discussion underscores personal preferences in shaping ROLs, even when programs are objectively comparable.
Post 11: NYP Brooklyn Methodist
Click Here
Summary: A query about NYP Brooklyn Methodist for internal medicine.
Analysis:
Minimal responses include offers for private communication and a question about scheduling systems. This limited engagement suggests a niche program or confidentiality among applicants.
Post 12: Anyone disappointed by their IVs?
Click Here
Summary: The poster expresses mixed feelings—gratitude for interviews received but disappointment about missing top choices.
Analysis:
Comments explore the competitive nature of IM programs, with users sharing personal struggles, such as rejection despite strong credentials. Advice ranges from sending letters of interest (LOIs) to emphasizing personal growth over failures. The discussion conveys both empathy and realism, reflecting shared challenges in the match process.
Post 13: RANK ORDER LIST
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks input on ranking academic internal medicine programs, with no geographical preference and an interest in fellowships.
Analysis:
Comments highlight program-specific nuances, such as language requirements (e.g., Spanish at Texas Tech), malignant reputations, and fellowship opportunities. Einstein Philly and Oklahoma were noted for resident wellness, while Shreveport vs. St. Francis debates emphasized city size and fellowship availability. Insights align with the applicant's academic focus.
Post 14: ID Fellowship
Click Here
Summary: The post seeks advice on pursuing an Infectious Disease (ID) Fellowship as an older graduate, including potential career pathways.
Analysis: A single "F" comment suggests minimal engagement, perhaps reflecting niche interest or limited clarity in the post's phrasing.
Post 15: Willisknighton Internal Medicine residency
Click Here
Summary: A brief query asking for insights about Willisknighton Internal Medicine residency interviews.
Analysis: Responses confirm that all interview spots are filled, reflecting widespread interest but limited opportunity. This underscores the high competition for spots at lesser-known programs.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 16: Anyone interviewed at Wright Center please connect
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks connections with those who have interviewed at the Wright Center for an internal medicine (IM) residency.
Analysis: A single unhelpful comment (“F”) reflects minimal engagement with the post. The lack of detailed responses suggests that either interviewees are withholding information or the program has limited visibility or appeal.
Post 17: Anyone got an invite from Jamaica Hospital NY
Click Here
Summary: The post is a short inquiry about receiving interview invitations from Jamaica Hospital in New York, specifically for internal medicine (IM).
Analysis:
Responses vary between vague and dismissive. The dialogue reveals no substantive information about the program, beyond one commenter who mentions applying for family medicine (FM) and liking the program solely due to proximity. Questions about interview slots and available positions highlight widespread applicant concern over availability but provide no definitive answers.
Post 18: Interview on Thalamus - Scheduled for 10 Minutes Instead of 15
Click Here
Summary: The user questions if a 10-minute interview schedule on Thalamus, rather than the usual 15 minutes, is an error. They are unsure whether to contact the program coordinator over the weekend or to adjust to the change.
Analysis:
Comments reassure the user that interview durations can vary, ranging from 10 to 30 minutes depending on program preferences. While the brevity of the interview may cause concern, respondents suggest proceeding with the provided schedule. The lack of urgency from commenters reflects an understanding that programs adapt interview structures based on logistics rather than applicant performance.
Post 19: Interview Question
Click Here
Summary: The post asks about the purpose behind the commonly posed interview question: “If you could have dinner with any person, alive or dead, who would it be?” The user suspects it may be a psychological trick.
Analysis:
Responses clarify that this question is intended to gauge personal values, interests, and character. Users recommend choosing someone whose values align with those of a good physician or resident, emphasizing that the explanation behind the choice is more important than the individual named. Some humorous replies (e.g., Kanye West) highlight the community’s lighter side while stressing the importance of avoiding controversial figures.
Post 20: How to Contact Programs Through ERAS?
Click Here
Summary: The user is confused about how to contact residency programs via ERAS when some invites don’t appear in the ERAS message center. They seek alternative methods for communication.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend searching for program coordinator (PC) emails through platforms like Frieda or program websites. This reflects a common workaround for communication gaps within the ERAS system, particularly for resolving logistical issues. While the post highlights a technical frustration, responses underscore the importance of proactive research and direct communication outside ERAS.
Post 21: 30 IVs, Do I Rank Them All?
Click Here
Summary: The user received 30 interviews across radiology (Rads), internal medicine (IM), emergency medicine (EM), and prelim programs but feels overwhelmed. They ask whether ranking only their top programs is a viable strategy.
Analysis:
Responses stress aligning the rank order list (ROL) with the applicant’s true career goals. If Radiology is the priority, Rads and prelim programs should be ranked highest. Commenters critique the user for attending interviews they don’t intend to rank, as it limits opportunities for others. This post sparks discussions about application ethics, interview focus, and the financial implications of ranking more than 20 programs.
Post 22: Please Help to Rank Programs (Internal Medicine)
Click Here
Summary: The user lists five IM programs, seeking advice on ranking. The programs include Brooklyn Hospital Center, NYMC Metropolitan, Jacobi, Richmond Medical Center, and Lincoln.
Analysis:
Comments provide input on program reputations, with Jacobi standing out for fellowship opportunities and Lincoln being criticized as “famously toxic.” Respondents encourage applicants to align rankings with career goals (e.g., fellowship vs. general practice) and personal preferences. Program-specific feedback emphasizes the importance of program culture and workload when finalizing ROLs.
Post 23: South Brooklyn IV
Click Here
Summary: The user asks about interview invites from Coney Island Hospital for internal medicine.
Analysis:
The sole comment clarifies the specialty but provides no further insights into the program or its interview timeline. This lack of engagement may indicate limited popularity or awareness of the hospital within the subreddit community.
Post 24: 2nd Look Invite vs. Open House
Click Here
Summary: The user asks whether a 2nd look invitation is equivalent to an open house visit and whether attending such events increases match chances.
Analysis:
Respondents explain that both events provide opportunities to connect with programs but are distinct. A 2nd look is typically for shortlisted candidates and may subtly influence rankings if held before ROL submission. Attending these events could signal genuine interest, but there’s no guarantee of an impact on final rankings.
Post 25: Offering IV Prep Help!
Click Here
Summary: A PGY1 from a university program offers interview preparation sessions to help prospective candidates improve their chances of matching.
Analysis:
The post receives overwhelming interest, with numerous users expressing eagerness for assistance. This reflects the high demand for interview preparation resources within the competitive residency process. The initiative demonstrates the collaborative spirit within the community, with experienced candidates supporting others navigating the stressful match process.
Post 26: Only 2 Prelim Interviews—Is It Too Late for More?
Click Here
Summary: The user expresses concern about having only two preliminary surgery interviews and wonders if more invitations might still arrive.
Analysis:
Commenters reassure the user that prelim surgery invitations often extend into December and January. Additionally, SOAP positions provide backup options for unmatched applicants. This discussion emphasizes patience and persistence, particularly for applicants in highly competitive specialties like surgery.
Post 27: Interview Help
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice on the best ways to prepare for residency interviews.
Analysis:
Responses highlight the importance of practicing common questions, refining answers, and rehearsing with peers. Suggestions include working with professional coaches or using personalized techniques, such as mirror practice. The discussion reflects a collective focus on improving communication skills to excel in high-pressure interviews.
Post 28: ROL Florida
Click Here
Summary: A Florida-focused applicant shares their IM ROL, listing a mix of HCA programs and non-HCA options.
Analysis:
Feedback critiques HCA programs, with concerns about financial motivations and potential impact on loan forgiveness. Lakeland and FIU/Baptist receive praise for training quality. Discussions explore the nuances of ranking programs based on financial considerations, reputation, and personal priorities. The thread underscores the mixed perceptions of for-profit hospitals like HCAs.
Post 29: Late Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if visa-requiring IMGs have received interviews as late as December or January and still matched.
Analysis:
Responses affirm that programs continue interviewing through January, especially for international candidates. Programs rarely waste interviews, suggesting applicants should remain optimistic if invited late in the cycle. This highlights the unpredictable nature of interview timelines for IMGs.
Post 30: When to Send a Thank You Letter
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about the best time to send thank-you letters post-interview and whether a lack of responses indicates poor performance.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend sending letters within 48 hours while acknowledging that many programs don’t respond. Anecdotes suggest that a positive reply may indicate strong impressions but isn’t guaranteed. Opinions on the necessity of thank-you letters are divided, with some considering them essential for etiquette and others deeming them unnecessary if discouraged by programs. The discussion reflects the anxiety surrounding minor details in the competitive residency process.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 31: How Bad is it That I Missed a Social Event?
Click Here
Summary: The poster forgot to attend a residency social event they signed up for and wonders if it negatively impacts their chances. They also ask about the importance of such events.
Analysis:
Comments suggest attending future events if possible but note that missing one event isn’t necessarily detrimental. Social events allow applicants to ask questions about programs and demonstrate interest, but attendance is often informal and unmonitored. Some users mentioned joining events from unconventional locations (e.g., cars), highlighting flexibility. The overall sentiment is that skipping a social event isn’t catastrophic unless the program places a strong emphasis on participation.
Post 32: Does Anyone Else Get into a Depressed/Anxious Slump After Each Interview?
Click Here
Summary: The user feels a wave of anxiety and self-doubt after interviews and asks if others experience the same.
Analysis:
Responses validate these emotions, attributing them to post-interview adrenaline crashes and high stakes. Users shared coping mechanisms, like adopting a “win some, lose some” mindset or focusing on self-worth regardless of outcomes. Many agreed that imperfect answers during interviews can lead to overthinking but emphasized confidence as key to success. A recurring theme was separating emotions from actual performance to avoid self-sabotage.
Post 33: ROL Opinions — Ranking Order
Click Here
Summary: The user lists seven internal medicine programs and seeks advice on ranking them. Their primary goal is to pursue a Pulmonary and Critical Care fellowship.
Analysis:
Commenters discuss the fellowship compatibility of programs like FIU/Baptist and critique HCA programs for perceived toxicity. While RGH was praised for its in-house fellowships, Jacobi NCB was highlighted as a demanding but valuable training ground. Several users emphasized ranking programs based on personal interviews and fellowship prospects rather than hearsay. The thread reflects the complexity of aligning personal goals with program reputations.
Post 34: Is Getting a Written Letter Mailed in from an APD Good?
Click Here
Summary: The user received a personalized letter from an Associate Program Director (APD) after their interview and wonders if this is a positive indicator or a routine gesture.
Analysis:
Responses note that while personalized communication is often positive, it’s not definitive of a match. Some speculate that programs use such gestures to boost applicant rankings in return. Others recommend interpreting it cautiously since post-interview communication may simply reflect goodwill rather than actual ranking. The post highlights the nuanced interpretations of post-interview feedback in residency applications.
Post 35: NYMC-Metropolitan IM IV
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks insights about NYMC-Metropolitan’s internal medicine interviews.
Analysis:
The sole comment indicates that the user didn’t receive a rejection or invite despite signaling the program. The lack of detailed responses reflects limited applicant experiences or hesitance to share specifics.
Post 36: Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Click Here
Summary: The post inquires about the availability of internal medicine spots at Cleveland Clinic’s main campus.
Analysis:
A comment clarifies the specialty (internal medicine) but provides no further information. The thread indicates either a limited applicant pool engaging with the program or a preference for keeping details confidential.
Post 37: Interview Invitation
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if interviews are still being extended in mid-November.
Analysis:
Comments affirm that internal medicine programs continue sending invitations late into the cycle, particularly as applicants cancel or withdraw. Respondents share personal experiences of receiving late invites without signaling or sending letters of interest (LOIs). This thread offers encouragement to applicants, emphasizing that perseverance can yield positive results even late in the season.
Post 38: Advice Appreciated! - Location vs. Vibes
Click Here
Summary: The user struggles with prioritizing a program close to family versus one with better vibes and benefits. They plan to have children during residency.
Analysis:
Respondents emphasize the long-term value of family support, especially when raising children. However, others argue that vibes and program culture are critical since residency is demanding and long. Some suggest weighing practical factors like daycare availability and spouse preferences. The discussion reflects the broader challenge of balancing personal life with professional growth during residency.
Post 39: Thank You Email After IM Interview Thoughts?
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if sending a thank-you email is appropriate when the program explicitly states it’s unnecessary.
Analysis:
Comments advise respecting the program’s instructions and refraining from sending thank-you emails unless clarification is needed. This aligns with the consensus that disregarding guidelines might negatively impact an applicant’s impression. Programs often discourage thank-you emails to streamline communication and reduce unnecessary follow-ups.
Post 40: Answering the Same IV Questions with the Same Response to Different Interviewers?
Click Here
Summary: The user wonders if repeating identical answers to multiple interviewers during the same session is acceptable.
Analysis:
Respondents share mixed experiences, with some noting that refining answers over repeated interviews can improve delivery. Others suspect that repeated questions may aim to check for consistency or explore different aspects of a response. Overall, users advise tailoring answers slightly to demonstrate adaptability without contradicting oneself.
Post 41: Waitlisted Interview Possible Chance of Interviewing?
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks reassurance about securing an interview after being waitlisted.
Analysis:
Comments provide hope, with multiple users sharing success stories of being offered interviews off waitlists within days. The responses reflect the dynamic nature of waitlist systems, where persistence and timing can lead to unexpected opportunities.
Post 42: Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital of Plano
Click Here
Summary: The post discusses whether hold notifications from the hospital imply rejection.
Analysis:
Comments confirm that the program has sent both hold notifications and rejections, suggesting applicants on hold may still have a chance. The thread emphasizes that while a hold is better than a rejection, it requires continued patience and proactive follow-up.
Post 43: Help Regarding Thalamus
Click Here
Summary: The user is unsure whether a residency social event hosted on Thalamus functions like Zoom, particularly in terms of camera setup.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend using Chrome for compatibility with Thalamus and testing the platform beforehand. The thread reflects applicants’ need for technical guidance during virtual interviews and social events, emphasizing preparation to avoid logistical issues.
Post 44: Got an Interview and All Spots Filled!
Click Here
Summary: The user received an interview invite only to find out all slots were already filled, forcing them onto a waitlist.
Analysis:
Respondents label this a match violation, as programs are not supposed to overbook interview slots. Frustration arises over the lack of accountability for programs, with many applicants feeling disrespected by such practices. The thread highlights systemic flaws in the residency interview process and the burden they place on applicants.
Post 45: Help ROL IM
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks help ranking five IM programs, prioritizing their goal of pursuing a Hem/Onc fellowship.
Analysis:
Comments provide varied perspectives on programs like Rochester General, praised for its learning environment despite a rough surrounding area, and UCSF Fresno, which received conflicting reports about its program director’s stability. Lincoln was negatively associated with past resident suicides, while Brooklyn drew mixed reviews. Users stress balancing program culture, fellowship opportunities, and personal interactions during interviews to make an informed decision.
Post 46: IV Dates Locked
Click Here
Summary: The user received an interview invitation but finds preferred dates locked. They’ve already scheduled an inconvenient date but are unsure if they should continue to pursue the locked slots.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest keeping the scheduled date while following up with the program coordinator to request changes. Programs often lock alternate dates for second-round interviews, so applicants are advised to monitor for updates. The thread underscores the importance of flexibility and persistence in navigating logistical hurdles during the interview season.
Post 47: LOIs
Click Here
Summary: The post discusses the structure and efficacy of Letters of Interest (LOIs) sent to residency programs.
Analysis:
Successful LOIs typically follow a concise format: 1) Introduction, 2) Applicant strengths, 3) Why the program appeals. Commenters shared mixed experiences—some saw tangible results, while others felt the effort yielded little response. Programs rarely respond to LOIs unless strongly interested, leaving applicants unsure of their effectiveness. Still, many agree it’s worth the effort to demonstrate interest.
Post 48: Well There Goes My Sanity
Click Here
Summary: The user’s interview at a highly desired program was canceled just three days before the scheduled date, leaving them feeling hopeless.
Analysis:
Commenters express sympathy and outrage, labeling this behavior a match violation. They debate the pros and cons of reporting such incidents, with some suggesting waiting until rank lists are submitted to avoid potential retaliation. The thread reveals frustration with the systemic power imbalance between applicants and programs, where applicants have little recourse against program mismanagement.
Post 49: Program Director Asked About Step 3
Click Here
Summary: The user informed a program director they planned to take Step 3 in December but was later denied a visa. They’re unsure whether to disclose this change or wait until it’s brought up.
Analysis:
Advice ranges from staying silent to being proactive by informing the program about the visa issue. Some users argue that Step 3 shouldn’t heavily influence residency decisions, especially if the applicant demonstrates competence in other areas. The thread reflects anxiety over transparency versus strategic omission when unforeseen circumstances arise.
Post 50: A Caution to the Unaware - Thalamus
Click Here
Summary: The user warns others about schedule discrepancies on Thalamus that could lead to missed interviews and urges applicants to double-check times.
Analysis:
Respondents agree that Thalamus has usability issues, including time zone errors and unclear scheduling. Programs’ unfamiliarity with the platform exacerbates these problems, leaving applicants to navigate ambiguities. This thread underscores the need for vigilance when using scheduling tools, particularly for time-sensitive events like residency interviews.
Post 51: Interview at a New Residency Program
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice on evaluating new residency programs during interviews.
Analysis:
Suggestions include asking about mentorship, resident feedback systems, and anticipated challenges for the inaugural cohort. Commenters stress the importance of assessing organizational structure and support, as new programs may face growing pains. The thread provides a framework for evaluating less-established opportunities in the residency match process.
Post 52: How to Approach Asking Interviewer Questions?
Click Here
Summary: The user struggles to craft meaningful questions for interviewers, especially after pre-interview socials and presentations.
Analysis:
Top advice includes focusing on program values, mentorship opportunities, and unique aspects of faculty interests. Some commenters shared personal strategies, like framing questions around curiosity or shared experiences. The discussion highlights how thoughtful questions can demonstrate genuine interest and leave a positive impression on interviewers.
Post 53: Visa-Requiring IMGs - How Many Invites in Pediatrics?
Click Here
Summary: The user, a visa-requiring IMG, reports receiving three pediatric interview invites and invites others to share their experiences.
Analysis:
The thread lacks substantive responses, with one commenter privately messaging the poster. This reflects the niche and competitive nature of pediatrics for visa-requiring IMGs, where applicants may prefer private discussions over public posts.
Post 54: What is the Real Point of Second Looks?
Click Here
Summary: The user questions whether attending second looks before rank list submission influences program decisions and asks about their purpose.
Analysis:
Comments suggest second looks are officially meant to help applicants evaluate programs but may unofficially signal interest to programs. Ethical concerns arise when programs host second looks before rank list submission, potentially using them to reassess candidates. The thread reflects skepticism about the transparency and fairness of this practice.
Post 55: Can’t Tell If I’m Bad at Interviewing
Click Here
Summary: The user is unsure about their interview performance, receiving little feedback from interviewers and fearing poor outcomes.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend mock interviews with peers or mentors to gain constructive feedback. They also note that poker-faced interviewers don’t necessarily indicate a bad interview. Programs rarely provide direct feedback, leaving applicants to rely on self-reflection and external guidance.
Post 56: Anyone Interviewed at Rush for Psych?
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks insights about psychiatry interviews at Rush University.
Analysis:
One commenter offers to share details via direct message, keeping the discussion private. This suggests an active but discreet exchange of information among applicants to preserve competitiveness.
Post 57: Interviewing Late in the Season
Click Here
Summary: The user worries about being disadvantaged when interviewing in December or January.
Analysis:
Commenters reassure the user, explaining that interview timing rarely affects ranking. Larger programs often score candidates immediately, while others value the recency effect closer to rank list submission. The thread emphasizes preparation and connection with interviewers as more critical than timing.
Post 58: Thalamus
Click Here
Summary: The user reports experiencing technical issues with Thalamus, including mic and camera malfunctions, potentially impacting interviews.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest troubleshooting by switching browsers, particularly to Chrome or Edge, as Thalamus often malfunctions on less-supported platforms. The thread underscores the importance of tech readiness to ensure smooth virtual interviews, especially given widespread reliance on platforms like Thalamus.
Post 59: KU Wichita IM Program
Click Here
Summary: The user, a non-US IMG with one interview at KU Wichita, seeks insights about the program’s behavioral and ethical questions.
Analysis:
The discussion reveals limited knowledge about the program, with some commenters focusing on interview logistics and availability rather than content. This reflects the niche nature of specific programs and applicants’ challenges in gathering detailed information.
Post 60: St. John’s Episcopal Family Medicine Residency
Click Here
Summary: The user received a pre-match offer from St. John’s Episcopal Family Medicine and seeks advice on whether to accept it, given their strong NYC ties and multiple interviews.
Analysis:
Commenters highlight the certainty of pre-match offers, noting their appeal for ensuring a spot versus the uncertainty of ranked matches. Concerns about the program’s probationary status are raised, urging the user to weigh guaranteed placement against potential red flags. The thread reflects the high stakes of pre-match decisions in the competitive residency process.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 61: Normalize $25-$40 Uber Eats for Virtual Resident Gatherings
Click Here
Summary: The post humorously discusses the awkwardness of virtual resident hangouts during interviews, where residents enjoy catered meals while applicants observe. The user suggests providing Uber Eats vouchers to applicants for a more inclusive experience.
Analysis:
Commenters agree that such virtual meetings often feel uneven and awkward, with applicants hesitant to eat on camera. Several note that pre-pandemic in-person events included meals, making vouchers a logical adaptation for virtual formats. Others share stories of forgotten vouchers or emphasize maintaining professionalism during these interactions. The discussion highlights how small gestures can improve applicant experiences.
Post 62: Interview Questions
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks insight into commonly asked questions during Internal Medicine (IM) interviews as they prepare for their first interview.
Analysis:
Responses emphasize recurring themes: “Tell me about yourself,” “Why this program?” and situational questions about challenging cases, achievements, and failures. Additionally, applicants are often asked about long-term goals and personal interests. The advice reflects a need for well-prepared yet authentic responses, with commenters offering encouragement and best wishes.
Post 63: Shortest Rejection Email of All Time?
Click Here
Summary: The user humorously highlights a curt rejection email, prompting others to share similar experiences.
Analysis:
Most commenters prefer brief rejections over flowery emails that raise false hope, noting that concise communication is more efficient during a stressful season. Some critique overly formal or vague rejections as disingenuous, while others joke about comically short alternatives, reflecting the community’s collective frustration with rejection.
Post 64: Letters of Interest
Click Here
Summary: A non-US IMG with limited interviews seeks advice on drafting effective Letters of Interest (LOIs) to secure more invitations.
Analysis:
Commenters advise tailoring LOIs to specific programs and sending them promptly to both program directors (PDs) and coordinators. Many stress the importance of demonstrating enthusiasm and program fit. While some believe it’s late in the season, others share examples of successful LOIs sent in November. This reflects the general consensus that LOIs are a low-risk, potentially high-reward effort.
Post 65: Rank Order for Two Specialties
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks clarification about ranking two specialties, wondering if separate rank lists are allowed.
Analysis:
Commenters confirm that all programs, regardless of specialty, must be placed on a single rank order list. The thread reflects the importance of strategic ranking, particularly for applicants pursuing dual specialties who must weigh career preferences and probabilities.
Post 66: No Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if they should consider the season over after receiving no interview invitations.
Analysis:
Commenters offer mixed perspectives, with some highlighting that interview waves may continue through November and December, especially as cancellations create openings. Others acknowledge that the majority of interviews are already sent. The thread captures the emotional toll of waiting and underscores the need for resilience and proactive follow-ups.
Post 67: 16 Rejections So Far
Click Here
Summary: A non-US IMG with strong research credentials laments receiving numerous rejections despite their profile, seeking advice for future cycles.
Analysis:
Commenters probe potential weaknesses, including limited US clinical experience (USCE) or suboptimal program targeting. Many emphasize the importance of applying broadly to IMG-friendly programs and tailoring applications to specific program goals. The discussion highlights the complex interplay of qualifications, fit, and luck in the match process.
Post 68: Anyone Offering to Prepare for Peds Interviews?
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks resources or individuals offering interview preparation for pediatric residency.
Analysis:
While responses are sparse, those who express interest highlight the demand for targeted interview coaching. This reflects the competitive nature of pediatrics and the shared need for preparation among IMGs and other applicants.
Post 69: Do People Look Down on Internists Who Did the Primary Care Track?
Click Here
Summary: The user asks whether completing a Primary Care Track versus a categorical residency affects career prospects as a hospitalist or internist.
Analysis:
Commenters clarify that while primary care tracks may limit inpatient exposure, they do not significantly affect reputation or career prospects, especially for outpatient-focused roles. Applicants with hospitalist aspirations are encouraged to seek additional inpatient training opportunities. The thread underscores the need to align residency training with long-term career goals.
Post 70: IMG General Surgery Applicants
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about interview experiences and statistics for IMGs applying to General Surgery (Prelim and Categorical).
Analysis:
The discussion reveals limited opportunities for IMG general surgery applicants, with many sharing frustrations about the highly competitive and niche nature of this specialty. The lack of structured resources like Excel tracking sheets for IMGs applying to surgery highlights the need for more organized support systems in these fields.
Post 71: YoG Cut-off
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks information on identifying Years of Graduation (YoG) cut-offs for residency programs.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend using resources like program websites, Frieda, and Residency Explorer, though they warn that some information may be outdated. Writing directly to programs is suggested for clarity. The thread underscores how YoG limits remain a significant obstacle for older graduates.
Post 72: Match Rate
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if the match rate will increase or decrease this year.
Analysis:
Commenters explain that match rates have remained relatively constant due to proportional growth in applicants and positions. Some note that obsessing over statistics offers limited utility during application season, suggesting applicants focus on controllable factors like interviews and rank lists.
Post 73: PD’s Answered TY Letter
Click Here
Summary: The user wonders if receiving a response to their Thank You Letter from a program director (PD) signals genuine interest.
Analysis:
Commenters caution against reading too much into responses, noting that most PDs reply as a courtesy rather than as an indication of ranking or match likelihood. The thread reflects applicants’ uncertainty about post-interview communications and the broader game of managing expectations.
Post 74: Is It Weird to Mention Things You’ve Researched About Your Interviewer?
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if referencing background research about interviewers is appropriate during residency interviews.
Analysis:
Most commenters agree that referencing relevant research or achievements of the interviewer shows initiative, provided it is done naturally and contextually. They caution against over-personalization, which might seem intrusive. The discussion reflects the fine line between demonstrating preparation and appearing overly rehearsed.
Post 75: In-Person Interview with Group Activity Session
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks clarity on group activity sessions during in-person interviews, particularly their format and purpose.
Analysis:
Commenters describe activities like team-based problem-solving exercises designed to evaluate interpersonal skills, collaboration, and critical thinking. These sessions often aim to identify red flags like dominance or poor teamwork. The thread reflects applicants’ anxiety about group dynamics and the importance of preparation for these relatively unique interview components.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 76: Can Anyone Help Me Prepare Peds Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks assistance in preparing for pediatric residency interviews, and others in the comments express similar needs.
Analysis:
The responses highlight a recurring demand for interview preparation resources, especially among applicants to pediatrics. This underscores a gap in accessible, personalized coaching or peer-led support for specialties like pediatrics. Some commenters offer direct help, reflecting the supportive nature of the residency applicant community.
Post 77: Rochester General Hospital
Click Here
Summary: The user invites applicants who interviewed at Rochester General Hospital to DM them, sparking a conversation about signaling and interview timelines.
Analysis:
Many commenters discuss their stats and signaling preferences. A notable response highlights that spots might reopen due to cancellations, offering hope for applicants still waiting. The thread illustrates the strategic value of program signaling and how cancellations play a role in reshaping opportunities during the interview season.
Post 78: Woodhull- IM
Click Here
Summary: The post seeks updates on the Internal Medicine program at Woodhull.
Analysis:
The comments reflect uncertainty, with users speculating that most interview slots may already be filled. This is consistent with the overall trend in November when the bulk of invites are typically sent, leaving fewer openings. The responses suggest applicants need to monitor programs closely for late changes or cancellations.
Post 79: Providence St. Mary - Internal Medicine, Apple Valley, CA
Click Here
Summary: The user announces receiving an interview invite from Providence St. Mary, prompting others to inquire about their timeline and signaling strategy.
Analysis:
One commenter confirms having interviewed at this program in October, suggesting a structured timeline. The post showcases the ongoing role of letters of interest (LOIs) and signaling in garnering attention from programs, although success appears variable.
Post 80: Top 10 Largest Prelim IM Programs in the US
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks a list of the largest Preliminary Internal Medicine programs in the US.
Analysis:
The sole response directs the user to NRMP’s Main Match Results, requiring a manual search. This post reflects the lack of centralized resources for specific program data, emphasizing the need for applicants to conduct time-intensive research on niche residency questions.
Post 81: Henry Ford Jackson/Allegiance
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about interview insights at Henry Ford Jackson/Allegiance, but no significant information is provided in the comments.
Analysis:
The thread remains sparse, suggesting this program may not be widely discussed or prominent among applicants. Applicants targeting less-discussed programs may face challenges in finding peer insights and should rely on direct outreach or online reviews for more information.
Post 82: Thalamus is Absolute Dogshit, Change My Mind
Click Here
Summary: The post criticizes Thalamus, the residency scheduling and interview platform, citing frequent glitches, lag, and compatibility issues.
Analysis:
The comments reveal widespread dissatisfaction with Thalamus, with many sharing similar technical problems. Solutions like switching to Microsoft Edge or ensuring a stable internet connection are suggested. Some users express frustration that programs don’t simply use Zoom, which is perceived as more reliable. This reflects the challenges applicants face in navigating flawed technology during high-stakes interviews.
Post 83: Any Invites Sent for UCLA Harbor?
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires whether UCLA Harbor has sent out interview invitations for Emergency Medicine (EM), with commenters sharing updates on other specialties.
Analysis:
Comments confirm that UCLA Harbor’s EM invites are pending, while invites for other specialties like General Surgery and Anesthesiology have been sent. The thread highlights the variability in timelines across specialties, encouraging applicants to track updates on a specialty-specific basis.
Post 84: Ranking a Non-IMG Friendly Peds Program
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice on ranking a non-IMG friendly pediatric program, expressing concerns about their chances of matching.
Analysis:
Commenters emphasize focusing on interview performance rather than obsessing over program statistics, noting that an invitation itself signals interest. The discussion reflects the anxiety IMG applicants face and the importance of maintaining confidence in competitive scenarios.
Post 85: HELP! INV OVERLAP
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice on resolving a scheduling conflict between two interview dates.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest rescheduling through Thalamus or directly contacting program coordinators for alternate dates. The responses underscore the importance of prompt communication to address scheduling conflicts during the competitive interview season.
Post 86: Interviewing at UAB Montgomery
Click Here
Summary: The user asks for tips on interviewing at UAB Montgomery, but the thread lacks substantial responses.
Analysis:
Sparse feedback may indicate a limited applicant pool for this program or a lack of familiarity. Applicants targeting smaller or less-known programs might need to rely on direct networking for insights.
Post 87: Can Anyone Let Me Know If There’s Any Interview Spots Left?
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about open pediatric interview spots at specific IMG-friendly programs in Michigan and Chicago.
Analysis:
While commenters express similar interest, no definitive answers are provided. This highlights the competitive nature of pediatric residency slots for IMGs and the importance of staying proactive in monitoring program availability.
Post 88: Southeast Health Alabama
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about recent interviews at Southeast Health Alabama, with one commenter confirming an upcoming interview.
Analysis:
The thread reflects limited engagement, potentially due to the program’s regional focus or smaller applicant pool. This underscores the challenges of gathering feedback for less-known or region-specific programs.
Post 89: Social Event Question
Click Here
Summary: The user asks whether they should contact a program coordinator or director to request additional slots for a fully booked social event.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend reaching out to the program coordinator and checking regularly for reopened slots due to cancellations. This illustrates how applicants must balance initiative and patience when navigating the logistical challenges of residency events.
Post 90: Interviewer Knew I Was Dual Applying?
Click Here
Summary: The user recounts an interview where the interviewer mentioned their dual-specialty applications, leaving them puzzled about how this was discovered.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest the interviewer might have inferred this from application content (e.g., leadership roles or affiliations in multiple specialties) or through professional networks. The post underscores the need for applicants to craft their materials carefully and prepare responses for such questions to avoid being caught off guard.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 91: US IMG Match 2025 Radio Silence
Click Here
Summary: A US IMG shares their frustration over not receiving interview invites for Pediatrics (Peds) and Emergency Medicine (EM). They describe their efforts, including letters of interest (LOIs), but feel isolated and disheartened.
Analysis:
The thread highlights key challenges: application dilution by dual-specialty focus, board exam attempts, and the quality of SLOEs (Standardized Letters of Evaluation) as pivotal factors. While applicants empathize, seasoned commenters point to SLOE concerns and the competitiveness of EM, especially for US IMGs with exam setbacks. This emphasizes the importance of strong, well-targeted applications and mentorship.
Post 92: Howard IM Interview Itinerary
Click Here
Summary: The post inquires about the Internal Medicine (IM) interview itinerary at Howard University, but no specific responses are provided.
Analysis:
The lack of detailed feedback might indicate a limited pool of applicants familiar with this program. Applicants could benefit from directly contacting the program or consulting online resources like Reddit archives or Residency Explorer for more information.
Post 93: Offering IV Prep Help!
Click Here
Summary: A current PGY-1 offers interview preparation assistance, expressing enthusiasm to help applicants succeed.
Analysis:
The overwhelming interest from commenters reflects the high demand for mock interview sessions and personalized feedback during the competitive residency process. Such offers can significantly improve confidence and performance, particularly for IMGs and non-traditional applicants.
Post 94: FM/Peds Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user, applying to Family Medicine (FM) and Pediatrics, has yet to hear back from most programs despite applying broadly.
Analysis:
Commenters report mixed outcomes, with some receiving invites and others still waiting. This highlights the variability in response times by programs and underscores the importance of patience during this phase. Sending tailored LOIs and leveraging connections can improve chances for applicants still awaiting interviews.
Post 95: Still Time Left for Interviews
Click Here
Summary: A user reassures applicants that interviews may still be offered into January or February, urging patience.
Analysis:
Commenters express skepticism about March invites, noting that rank list submissions close in early March. The post offers a reminder that late cancellations may open opportunities, but these are rare. Strategic follow-ups and LOIs remain critical for maximizing interview chances.
Post 96: Maimonides Interview Dates
Click Here
Summary: The user asks about open interview dates for Maimonides Medical Center, receiving updates on limited January availability.
Analysis:
Responses suggest that more invites may be issued, but the cycle is nearing its conclusion. This emphasizes the need to monitor platforms like Thalamus and act quickly when slots become available.
Post 97: NYMC-Metropolitan Hospital IM IV
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks insights about the Internal Medicine interviews at NYMC-Metropolitan Hospital.
Analysis:
While the thread confirms that invites have been sent, it lacks detailed feedback about the program’s interview process. Applicants targeting this program might benefit from contacting peers directly or leveraging alumni networks for preparation tips.
Post 98: Pre-Match Process
Click Here
Summary: A non-US IMG asks about the pre-match process, and a commenter explains how programs may contact applicants directly via email or phone.
Analysis:
The thread clarifies that pre-match opportunities are rare but offer a secure match for IMGs who receive them. This insight emphasizes the value of applying to programs known for extending pre-match offers, especially for those with unique challenges.
Post 99: DO Applicants and IM Interview Numbers
Click Here
Summary: A DO applicant with 8 interviews for IM seeks reassurance about their chances of matching.
Analysis:
The general consensus is that 8 interviews provide a strong likelihood of matching, especially for DO applicants in Internal Medicine. Commenters cite NRMP match data showing high match rates for applicants with 7+ interviews, emphasizing the importance of interview performance over sheer numbers.
Post 100: Neurology
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks information about newly opened neurology programs to increase their chances of obtaining interviews.
Analysis:
The thread advises using tools like the ACGME website to identify new programs, reflecting the proactive strategies applicants must employ when faced with limited opportunities. Networking and LOIs can further boost chances in this competitive specialty.
Post 101: Jacobi Peds
Click Here
Summary: The user asks for advice on preparing for a social event at Jacobi Pediatric Residency, but comments suggest minimal preparation is needed.
Analysis:
Social events are often informal and focus on gauging cultural fit. Applicants should aim to engage naturally while maintaining professionalism, as these gatherings are less about technical knowledge and more about personality and communication skills.
Post 102: SUNY Downstate IM IVs
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about interview invites and tips for SUNY Downstate IM, receiving confirmation of open slots.
Analysis:
Commenters confirm availability on Thalamus, encouraging applicants to act swiftly. This highlights how real-time updates can inform decisions, especially for competitive programs.
Post 103: Headphones During Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if using headphones or earphones during interviews is acceptable, citing technical issues with their laptop.
Analysis:
Responses indicate that headphones are generally acceptable, but low-profile options like earbuds are preferred for professionalism. Applicants should test their setups to ensure clear audio and avoid technical distractions during interviews.
Post 104: Status of Psychiatry Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks updates on psychiatry interview statuses for several programs.
Analysis:
A commenter confirms that certain programs have completed their invites. This underscores the importance of program-specific tracking and following up promptly to avoid missed opportunities.
Post 105: Letter of Intent to Rank
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks advice on the timing and wording of letters of intent to rank (LOIs).
Analysis:
Commenters suggest sending LOIs in late January and being explicit about the program being the applicant’s top choice. They caution against using vague language or lying, as dishonesty can damage credibility. This advice reflects the fine balance between sincerity and strategic communication in the residency process.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 106: I Failed Step 3
Click Here
Summary: A user shares their distress about failing Step 3, especially after already having a Step 1 attempt. They are unsure whether to update scores or disclose the failure to programs where they have interviews.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend retaking the exam promptly and focusing on passing before the ranking deadline. Opinions are split on whether to disclose the failure: while some argue honesty avoids future issues, others suggest withholding updates since Step 3 isn’t required for matching. The thread highlights the importance of strong preparation resources like UWorld and CCS cases for a better outcome.
Post 107: Sovah Health or MUSC Family Medicine
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks feedback on interviews at Sovah Health or the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) for Family Medicine.
Analysis:
Responses confirm that some applicants have received invites but provide limited details. This post reflects the networking gap in smaller programs where firsthand accounts are harder to find. Applicants might benefit from engaging directly with program coordinators or alumni.
Post 108: Methodist Woodlands IM
Click Here
Summary: A user inquires about Internal Medicine interviews at Methodist Woodlands.
Analysis:
Responses confirm interviews were scheduled through email, indicating that Thalamus wasn’t used, which is notable for applicants accustomed to centralized scheduling. Proactive follow-ups with program coordinators can be key in such cases.
Post 109: Can You Tell an Interviewer They’re Your Top Choice?
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if it’s appropriate to express to interviewers that their program is their top choice.
Analysis:
The consensus is to avoid declaring a top choice during the interview, as preferences can change and such statements may later appear dishonest. Instead, applicants are encouraged to express enthusiasm and interest, saving explicit declarations for letters of intent sent post-season. The thread underscores the importance of maintaining integrity throughout the Match process.
Post 110: Assessing Interviews
Click Here
Summary: The user asks how to assess whether an interview went well and what signs indicate a good outcome.
Analysis:
Commenters note that engaged, conversational interviewers are often a positive sign, but caution against overanalyzing post-interview feelings since outcomes depend on many factors. Keeping a post-interview journal for personal reflections can help applicants rank programs later.
Post 111: What to Expect in Residency Interviews
Click Here
Summary: A first-time applicant seeks guidance on what to expect during their initial residency interview.
Analysis:
Responses describe a variety of formats, including one-on-one interviews, group problem-solving scenarios, and panel discussions. Advice includes preparing for common questions and engaging in informal social events. Insights into formats like Thalamus can help applicants feel more confident.
Post 112: Matching at #1
Click Here
Summary: A user wonders how many applicants match at their #1 ranked program or within their top five.
Analysis:
Data shared by commenters suggests 75-80% of applicants match within their top three to five choices, though rates may vary by specialty and applicant profile (e.g., IMGs, DOs). This highlights the importance of realistic ranking strategies while aiming high.
Post 113: Psych IV Counts and Expectations
Click Here
Summary: The user discusses their regret for not applying to psychiatry, asking others about their interview counts and expectations.
Analysis:
Responses vary widely, with US IMGs and non-US IMGs sharing fewer interviews compared to US MDs, reflecting psychiatry’s growing competitiveness. Applicants highlight the value of early preparation, including psych-specific experiences and signals, to stand out.
Post 114: Emergency Medicine Interview Updates
Click Here
Summary: A user asks whether more Emergency Medicine interviews are likely after November.
Analysis:
Responses indicate that most EM interviews are sent early in the cycle, with only a few trickling in later as applicants withdraw. Strategic use of late LOIs might help secure openings from cancellations, but expectations should remain modest.
Post 115: Bringing Luggage to an In-Person Interview
Click Here
Summary: The user worries about appearing unprofessional by bringing luggage to an in-person interview.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest contacting the hotel or program coordinator to arrange storage. Bringing luggage is common and generally not judged negatively, especially for applicants traveling long distances. Programs often accommodate such logistical needs.
Post 116: Virtual Social Event Preparation
Click Here
Summary: A user asks how to prepare for a virtual residency social event.
Analysis:
Social events are described as informal opportunities to engage with residents and ask questions. Commenters recommend dressing professionally while maintaining a relaxed demeanor. Asking thoughtful questions about program culture or daily life helps applicants stand out.
Post 117: Pre-Match Interviews for IM
Click Here
Summary: The user inquires about pre-match interview activity for Internal Medicine.
Analysis:
Responses reveal that some programs have completed pre-match interviews, while others like Interfaith remain active. This highlights the unpredictability of pre-match activity, emphasizing persistence and targeted communication with program coordinators.
Post 118: FSU Cape Coral IM
Click Here
Summary: The user requests insights from others who interviewed at FSU Cape Coral for Internal Medicine.
Analysis:
Replies confirm a lack of available December slots but suggest possible January openings. Regular monitoring and proactive follow-ups are crucial for securing interview opportunities at competitive programs.
Post 119: Unique Questions for PDs and Faculty
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks suggestions for non-generic questions to ask program directors (PDs) during interviews.
Analysis:
Commenters recommend tailoring questions to the program, such as asking about anticipated challenges or new initiatives, to demonstrate genuine interest. Preparing thoughtful, program-specific questions can help applicants leave a lasting impression.
Post 120: Social Event Questions
Click Here
Summary: The user asks for suggestions on what to ask during a residency program’s social event.
Analysis:
PGY-3 commenters emphasize that social events are designed to assess cultural fit and interpersonal skills rather than technical knowledge. Applicants are encouraged to be friendly, ask about local life, and engage in conversations about resident experiences. Avoid overthinking and focus on building rapport.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 121: Jacobi IM Social Event
Click Here
Summary: The user asks about scheduling a social event for Jacobi Internal Medicine. They wonder whether the program provides a link prior to the interview.
Analysis:
Comments confirm that Jacobi sends the social event link a week before the interview, typically the day prior. This highlights the common practice of programs organizing such events as informal introductions. Applicants should regularly check their emails and prepare questions for these events.
Post 122: Post-IV Concerns
Click Here
Summary: A user worries that their 15-minute interview ended early, despite them asking questions to fill the time.
Analysis:
Responses reassure the user that short interviews are common, as some interviewers prioritize leaving time for applicants’ questions. The thread emphasizes focusing on quality over quantity, encouraging applicants to use available time to demonstrate interest and curiosity about the program.
Post 123: TidalHealth IM
Click Here
Summary: A user inquires about Internal Medicine interviews at TidalHealth in Maryland.
Analysis:
Minimal engagement in the thread suggests a lack of updates or transparency about interview status. Applicants targeting such programs should consider directly contacting coordinators for clarification.
Post 124: Low Step 2 Score with a University Program IV
Click Here
Summary: A user with a low Step 2 score but a strong recommendation worries whether they’ll be ranked after receiving an interview.
Analysis:
Commenters stress that receiving an interview signals legitimate interest from the program. The thread advises focusing on interview preparation and framing weaknesses like low scores as learning experiences. Applicants are reminded to trust the process and make the most of rare opportunities.
Post 125: Should I Buy a Car Before the Match?
Click Here
Summary: The user debates purchasing a car in Houston, TX or waiting until after the Match in case they relocate.
Analysis:
Responses are split: some suggest buying now due to rising costs and convenience, while others highlight potential relocation challenges, especially to areas like NYC where cars are impractical. The decision hinges on current necessity versus flexibility.
Post 126: NYMC St. Michael’s
Click Here
Summary: A user seeks updates on NYMC St. Michael’s invitations and shares they signaled the program without a response.
Analysis:
Limited replies reveal little about the program’s interview status, underscoring the difficulty in tracking lesser-known programs. Proactively checking platforms like Thalamus and emailing coordinators may yield better clarity.
Post 127: Manatee Memorial IM
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if Manatee Memorial or other IM programs have sent invitations.
Analysis:
Feedback indicates that Manatee Memorial’s interview process was informal and unprofessional, which raised concerns about program culture. Applicants should note such reviews when crafting rank order lists and consider asking direct questions during interviews to gauge program dynamics.
Post 128: Sending an LOI After Rejection
Click Here
Summary: The user wonders whether sending a Letter of Interest (LOI) after rejection is advisable.
Analysis:
The majority discourage this, equating it to desperation. However, one commenter shared a rare success story of a rejection reversal due to an LOI. The key takeaway is that this strategy is high-risk, low-reward, and applicants should allocate energy toward stronger opportunities.
Post 129: Residency Interview Prep Courses
Click Here
Summary: The user seeks recommendations for interview preparation courses.
Analysis:
Suggestions include leveraging resources like Big Interview or engaging directly with mentors and residents. Many interview prep services exist, but applicants should consider free or school-sponsored options to minimize expenses.
Post 130: Sending a Second LOI
Click Here
Summary: A user contemplates sending a second Letter of Interest (LOI) to programs where they haven’t received a response.
Analysis:
Most commenters advise against it, cautioning that multiple LOIs may appear needy. However, some success stories highlight the low risk of sending follow-up LOIs. If pursued, applicants should wait 4–6 weeks between letters and focus on specific updates or new qualifications.
Post 131: UMass Chan Baystate
Click Here
Summary: A user signaled UMass Baystate but hasn’t received a response and seeks updates on invitations.
Analysis:
Comments suggest that most invitations and rejections have been sent, with remaining applicants likely on a waitlist. Programs with significant waitlists might send additional invites in late November or December.
Post 132: Yale Waterbury Invitations
Click Here
Summary: The user asks if Yale Waterbury has sent out invitations for Internal Medicine.
Analysis:
Non-US IMGs report receiving invitations as recently as last week, with a few spots still available. Applicants without responses are advised to remain patient or follow up with program coordinators to confirm waitlist status.
Post 133: Insufferable Comments About Med-Peds
Click Here
Summary: A Med-Peds applicant vents about a disparaging comment from an IM applicant, who downplayed Med-Peds as a specialty.
Analysis:
The post highlights the prejudice some specialties face and the strength required to advocate for one’s choice. Many commenters share support for Med-Peds as a demanding and versatile specialty, emphasizing applicants’ competence.
Post 134: Sending LOIs to Programs with Full Spots
Click Here
Summary: The user asks whether to send an LOI to a program with fully booked spots, hoping cancellations open new opportunities.
Analysis:
Replies suggest sending the LOI as there’s nothing to lose, especially as cancellations often create openings later in the season. Some programs may even provide feedback on applications, making this a potentially valuable effort.
Post 135: IMGs Applying to OBGYN
Click Here
Summary: An IMG applicant reports only one interview for OBGYN and seeks updates from others.
Analysis:
The thread paints a grim picture for IMG OBGYN applicants, with many reporting zero interviews. Commenters speculate that current political climates and OBGYN’s competitiveness have exacerbated the challenges. Applicants may benefit from strategic backup options like dual-specialty applications.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 136: MDD Episode During Match Season
Click Here
Summary: The original poster (OP) offers a reminder to eat even when not feeling hungry, addressing the emotional toll of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) during the residency application process.
Analysis:
Commenters resonate with the sentiment, sharing their experiences of burnout and rejection. The thread emphasizes the importance of self-care during stressful periods, with supportive responses helping to build community solidarity among applicants.
Post 137: Delayed MSPE Upload
Click Here
Summary: OP shares frustration about Straker Translation’s delay in uploading their MSPE, asking for advice on whether to send it independently or via their medical school.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest MSPE delays are rare but emphasize using the school for document submission. Another highlights dissatisfaction with Straker’s services, signaling a broader need for applicants to research translation companies.
Post 138: New Pediatrics Program Announcement
Click Here
Summary: The Program Director of Nova Southeastern University’s Pediatrics Residency shares program details and ongoing interview opportunities. The program focuses on community health and advocacy, accepts MD/DO/IMG candidates, but cannot sponsor visas.
Analysis:
The post’s detailed response to applicant questions showcases the value of direct communication between programs and applicants. The inability to sponsor visas limits some IMGs, but the program’s educational focus and personalized mentorship attract considerable interest.
Post 139: Help with LOI Explanation
Click Here
Summary: OP worries their Psych USCE may give the impression they’re applying to Internal Medicine as a backup and asks whether to explain this in their Letters of Interest (LOIs).
Analysis:
This thread lacks actionable advice. However, clarifying genuine interest in IM and connecting past experiences to future goals in the LOI can help mitigate concerns of backup applications. Professional tone and alignment with program values are critical.
Post 140: Social Event Scheduling Conflict
Click Here
Summary: OP has overlapping social events for EM and FM programs and is unsure which to attend, fearing attendance may influence rankings.
Analysis:
Replies highlight that most programs explicitly state that social event attendance is optional and does not affect rankings. However, some suggest splitting attendance or using dual devices to maximize interaction, emphasizing flexibility and preparation for interviews.
Post 141: MedStar Baltimore Psych Updates
Click Here
Summary: OP asks if the new MedStar Baltimore Psychiatry program has started sending interview invites.
Analysis:
Responses confirm invitations are being sent, with remaining slots available. A USMD applicant with strong Step 2 scores and minimal publications received an invite, suggesting the program is accommodating a diverse applicant pool.
Post 142: Timing of LOIs
Click Here
Summary: OP asks whether it is too late to send LOIs to programs.
Analysis:
Commenters agree it is not too late as long as rejections haven’t been issued. This highlights that mid-November remains a strategic time for LOIs, as programs may still review applications or fill spots from cancellations.
Post 143: Behavioral Interview Question Concerns
Click Here
Summary: OP worries their response to a behavioral interview question about miscommunication—where they mistakenly drew blood from the wrong patient—may have raised a red flag.
Analysis:
Replies focus on damage control, suggesting that the acknowledgment of the error and communication with the patient and attending physician were positives. However, OP’s post-response nervousness may weigh more heavily, emphasizing the importance of poise during interviews.
Post 144: University of Arizona Phoenix Program
Click Here
Summary: OP asks if University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix/Banner Del Webb Program has sent out interview invites.
Analysis:
Commenters confirm invites were sent as early as mid-October, but responses suggest others have yet to hear back. This reflects typical variability in program timelines and the importance of patience.
Post 145: Non-US IMG Struggling Despite Strong Scores
Click Here
Summary: OP, a non-US IMG with high Step scores but a 14-year graduation gap, wonders why they’ve only received one IM interview.
Analysis:
Commenters emphasize the impact of Year of Graduation (YOG) filters and the potential mismatch caused by dermatology-focused letters of recommendation. Strategies include targeted program selection, networking, and emphasizing IM-specific goals to overcome these hurdles.
Post 146: Expecting More Interviews from Signals
Click Here
Summary: OP, with strong Step scores, asks if more interviews can be expected from silver signals after receiving mixed results from gold signals.
Analysis:
Questions about YOG and visa requirements reveal these factors likely affect OP’s chances. The thread highlights that signals aren’t guarantees and applicants should continue outreach to programs for updates.
Post 147: Improving for Next Match Cycle
Click Here
Summary: OP, an IMG with no USCE or interviews, seeks advice on how to improve their application for the next cycle.
Analysis:
Replies consistently recommend securing US Clinical Experience (USCE), especially through observerships or externships, obtaining US-based LORs, and taking Step 3 to strengthen their profile. Revising the ERAS application and personal statement is also crucial.
Post 148: No PD or Chair in Interview Process
Click Here
Summary: OP notices the PD and Chair are absent from their upcoming interviews and wonders if this is normal.
Analysis:
Comments clarify that larger programs or those with structured committees often delegate interviews to faculty or residents. Direct interactions with PDs might occur in less formal settings, reducing applicant anxiety over their absence.
Post 149: PGY-1 Offering Interview Prep
Click Here
Summary: A PGY-1 resident offers to help prospective candidates prepare for interviews, receiving a flood of interested replies.
Analysis:
The high engagement reflects the demand for personalized guidance during interview season. Such peer-led initiatives provide accessible support but underscore the need to vet services for quality and reliability.
Post 150: Preparing for Top Choice Interview
Click Here
Summary: OP, preparing for their first interview at their top-choice program, seeks tips to maximize their chances.
Analysis:
Responses recommend watching mock interviews, rehearsing common questions, and consulting resources like spreadsheets of past interview questions. The importance of early practice and showing genuine enthusiasm is emphasized, particularly for high-stakes interviews.
Parte superior do formulário
Post 151: Prematch vs 3 Anesthesia IVs and 1 IM IV
Click Here
Summary: OP, a Non-US IMG with a 2014 YOG and extensive experience as a home-country anesthesiologist, received 3 anesthesia interviews and 1 prematch offer for IM. The IM program is known for being malignant, while OP’s passion lies in anesthesia. Despite financial constraints and strategic signaling, they seek guidance on pursuing anesthesia versus taking the prematch.
Analysis:
Commenters overwhelmingly encourage OP to follow their passion for anesthesia, highlighting that securing multiple interviews in this specialty shows genuine interest from programs. Stories of successful matches after declining prematch offers provide reassurance. The thread emphasizes avoiding malignant programs, especially in a field that doesn’t align with OP’s career goals.
Post 152: Introduction Timing in Interviews
Click Here
Summary: OP is concerned about their two-minute introduction during interviews and seeks advice on whether shorter answers are better.
Analysis:
Commenters suggest tailoring responses based on interviewer body language and engagement. Many recommend a concise intro covering education, work experience, and personal interests, with room for elaboration if the conversation allows. The importance of reading the interviewer’s vibe is emphasized to balance brevity with authenticity.
Post 153: Cleveland Clinic Main IM Interview
Click Here
Summary: OP inquires about interview questions and preparation tips for the Cleveland Clinic Main IM program.
Analysis:
While the thread is sparse, another user’s question about remaining spots underscores the competitiveness of top-tier programs. Candidates should focus on program-specific strengths and tailor their preparation to Cleveland Clinic’s reputation for academic rigor and patient care.
Post 154: Highlighting Culture vs. Academics in Interviews
Click Here
Summary: OP asks whether to prioritize culture or academic aspects when answering "Why our program?" for a program emphasizing mentorship and family atmosphere.
Analysis:
Replies suggest balancing personal interests with academic strengths, emphasizing what makes the program unique. Mentioning culture with specific examples or anecdotes is recommended, as generic responses about academics or clinical exposure may fail to stand out. Tailored, heartfelt answers resonate more with interviewers.
Post 155: Preparing for Virtual Social Events
Click Here
Summary: OP asks about expectations for their first virtual social event, including attire, questions to ask, and general dynamics.
Analysis:
Commenters describe social events as casual opportunities to engage with residents, suggesting questions about work-life balance, daily responsibilities, and living costs. Attire recommendations vary by specialty, but smart casual is a safe choice. Negative or overly probing questions are discouraged, as they may leave a poor impression.