results of the 2019 nrmp applicant survey...complete or partial responses were received. after...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Results of the 2019NRMP Applicant Survey by Preferred Specialty and Applicant Type
www.nrmp.org
July 2019
![Page 2: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Requests for permission to use these data, as well as questions about the content of this publication or the National Resident Matching Program data and reports, may be directed to
Mei Liang, Director of Research, NRMP, at [email protected]
Questions about the NRMP should be directed to Mona Signer, President and CEO, NRMP, at [email protected].
Suggested CitationNational Resident Matching Program, Data Release and Research Committee: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey by Preferred Specialty and Applicant Type. National Resident Matching
Program, Washington, DC. 2019.
Copyright © 2019 National Resident Matching Program, 2121 K Street, NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20037 USA. All rights reserved. Permission to use, copy, and/or distribute any documentation
and/or related images from this publication shall be expressly obtained from the NRMP.
![Page 3: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Response Rates ................................................................................................................................................. 2 All Specialties ................................................................................................................................................... 3
Charts for Individual Specialties Anesthesiology .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Child Neurology ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Dermatology .............................................................................................................................................. 30 Emergency Medicine ................................................................................................................................ 38 Family Medicine ........................................................................................................................................ 46 Internal Medicine ..................................................................................................................................... 54 Internal Medicine/Pediatrics ...................................................................................................................... 62 Interventional Radiology ........................................................................................................................... 70 Neurology .................................................................................................................................................. 78 Neurological Surgery................................................................................................................................. 86 Obstetrics and Gynecology ........................................................................................................................ 94 Orthopaedic Surgery ................................................................................................................................ 102 Otolaryngology ........................................................................................................................................ 110 Pathology ................................................................................................................................................. 118 Pediatrics ................................................................................................................................................. 126 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ..................................................................................................... 134 Plastic Surgery ......................................................................................................................................... 142 Psychiatry ................................................................................................................................................ 150
Radiation Oncology ................................................................................................................................. 158 Radiology-Diagnostic .............................................................................................................................. 166 Surgery-General ...................................................................................................................................... 174
![Page 4: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Introduction
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) conducted a survey of all applicants who participated in the 2019 Main Residency Match®. The first Applicant Survey was sent in 2008; subsequent surveys have been conducted in odd years since 2009.
The primary purpose of the survey was to elucidate the factors applicants weigh in applying to and ranking programs. The survey was fielded during the 18 days between the Rank Order List Certification Deadline and Match Week so that applicant Match outcomes would not influence respondents' answers.
The survey was sent to all applicants who certified a rank order list (ROL) by the Rank Order List Certification Deadline. A very small number of applicants certified a blank ROL. Between the Rank Order List Certification Deadline and the time when the matching algorithm was processed, however, some applicants still could be withdrawn from the Match. The responses of those who certified a blank ROL and those who were withdrawn from the Match were not included in this report.
This report presents survey results by preferred specialty and applicant type. Preferred specialty is defined as the specialty listed first on an applicant's ROL. Because preliminary positions provide only one or two years of prerequisite training for entry into advanced specialty training, an applicant ranking a preliminary position first is treated as not having a preferred specialty. Two applicant types are presented in this report: senior students from MD-granting medical schools located in the United States ("U.S. seniors") and independent applicants. Independent applicants include graduates of MD-granting medical schools, U.S. citizen and non-U.S. citizen students and graduates of international medical schools, students and graduates of DO-granting medical schools, students and graduates of Canadian medical schools, and graduates of Fifth Pathway programs.
Changes from Previous Reports
In surveys prior to 2015, applicants were asked to indicate factors used in selecting programs for application and to rate the importance of factors used in selecting programs for ranking. Beginning with the 2015 survey, applicants were asked about the factors that influenced both application and ranking choices and the relative importance of each of those factors.
Additional attributes were introduced in the 2017 survey. "Future job opportunities for myself," "job opportunities formy spouse/significant other," and "schools for my children inthe area" were added to the list of factors used in selecting
programs for application and ranking. Two ranking strategies included in versions of the survey prior to 2017, "I ranked a mix of both competitive and less competitive programs" and "I ranked one or more program(s) in an alternative specialty as a "fallback" plan", were combined into "I ranked a mix of competitive and less competitive specialties to have a “fallback” plan. "
ResultsOverall, desired geographic location, perceived goodness of fit, and reputation of program topped the list of factors that applicants considered most frequently when applying to programs. When ranking programs, overall goodness of fit, interview day experience, desired geographic location, and quality of residnts in the program were the top four considerations. Applicants also valued such factors as career path, future fellowship training opportunities, housestaff morale, and work/life balance. Although there were commonalities among all applicants, differences were observed among specialties. For example, applicants who preferred Internal Medicine programs were more interested in future fellowship training opportunities, but the opportunity to conduct certain procedures was of greater importance to applicants who preferred Neurological Surgery programs.
The median number of applications submitted by independent applicants was much higher than for U.S. seniors, but U.S. seniors obtained more interviews than did independent applicants. When compared with unmatched U.S. seniors, those who matched applied to fewer programs, were offered and attended more interviews, and ranked more programs. Among independent applicants, the number of applications was similar between those who were matched and unmatched, but the matched cohort were offered and attended more interviews and ranked more programs. The greatest number of applications was submitted to Dermatology, Orthopaedic Surgery, Plastic Surgery, Neurological Surgery, Radiation Oncology, and Otolaryngology; however, the numbers of interviews obtained and programs ranked in those specialties (with the exception of Neurological Surgery) were comparable to other specialties.
The NRMP hopes that program directors, medical school officials, and applicants find these data useful as they prepare for and participate in the Match. _________________________The NRMP's data reporting and research activities are guided by its Data Release and Research Committee. NRMP data and reports can be found at: www.nrmp.org/match-data/.
1
![Page 5: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Yes No Yes No
Anesthesiology 527 693 43.2% 352 606 36.7%Child Neurology 59 49 54.6% 35 36 49.3%
Dermatology 235 236 49.9% 67 156 30.0%Emergency Medicine 796 943 45.8% 418 689 37.8%
Family Medicine 733 822 47.1% 974 1,909 33.8%Internal Medicine 1,633 2,037 44.5% 2,784 4,153 40.1%
Internal Medicine/Pediatrics 184 154 54.4% 57 46 55.3%Interventional Radiology 74 104 41.6% 28 31 47.5%
Neurological Surgery 132 130 50.4% 22 48 31.4%Neurology 210 255 45.2% 234 345 40.4%
Obstetrics and Gynecology 683 563 54.8% 256 378 40.4%Orthopaedic Surgery 402 413 49.3% 51 133 27.7%
Otolaryngology 198 195 50.4% 21 40 34.4%Pathology 94 112 45.6% 246 286 46.2%
Pediatrics 931 793 54.0% 604 737 45.0%Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 91 146 38.4% 106 203 34.3%
Plastic Surgery 82 101 44.8% 16 24 40.0%Psychiatry 522 638 45.0% 402 828 32.7%
Radiation Oncology 69 79 46.6% 8 16 33.3%Radiology-Diagnostic 299 406 42.4% 174 321 35.2%
Surgery-General 606 621 49.4% 271 693 28.1%All Others 154 213 42.0% 65 133 32.8%
No Preferred Specialty 159 350 31.1% 168 301 32.8%Total (All Specialties) 8,873 10,053 46.9% 7,359 12,112 37.7%
Response Rate
Independent ApplicantsCompleted Survey Completed Survey
U.S. Seniors
Response Rate
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 2
Response RatesIn the 2019 Applicant Survey, 38,446 electronic surveys were sent to applicants with a certified rank order list, and 16,281 complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order ListDeadline (49), the overall response rate was 42.6 percent for applicants ranking the 21 largest preferred specialties detailed in this report, and 42.3 percent for all respondents. Response rates varied by specialty and applicant type (see table below). Specialties with 50 or fewer responses were excluded from this report.
![Page 6: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
All Specialties Combined
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 3
![Page 7: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
4
Figure 1
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.24.44.54.54.34.43.64.14.34.13.64.14.53.94.44.23.84.04.14.14.44.14.13.74.23.93.93.83.63.43.94.23.53.63.33.73.43.73.53.83.84.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%84%83%68%67%64%64%61%58%57%57%56%56%54%53%53%52%51%46%46%41%38%36%35%35%34%33%33%30%27%27%24%23%23%21%20%16%16%15%13%8%6%5%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
Percent Citing Factor Average Rating
All SpecialtiesPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
![Page 8: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Figure 1
5NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
All SpecialtiesPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.14.24.54.64.34.53.84.34.44.13.74.24.53.84.44.24.14.14.14.14.34.24.13.84.14.14.04.13.73.64.14.33.83.73.54.03.74.03.64.24.04.14.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
65%64%58%46%56%50%54%53%47%48%48%44%45%51%39%30%41%42%42%35%34%29%24%29%19%28%35%32%23%23%21%23%24%27%34%16%13%14%18%20%10%8%5%3%
14%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
![Page 9: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Figure 2
6NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.64.64.34.44.54.34.64.64.54.24.44.23.84.23.84.34.03.84.14.13.74.54.24.24.24.23.93.94.03.43.64.13.73.93.83.53.83.73.93.74.13.94.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%82%77%75%71%65%64%62%61%61%55%50%48%47%47%45%44%44%43%42%42%38%35%33%32%32%31%30%29%25%24%23%21%18%17%17%14%13%13%11%
7%4%4%4%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
All SpecialtiesPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
![Page 10: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Figure 2
7NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
All SpecialtiesPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.54.54.34.54.54.44.64.54.44.24.54.34.04.33.94.34.04.24.24.23.94.44.34.34.24.24.14.24.23.73.84.33.84.14.13.74.03.94.23.94.34.14.14.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%67%54%57%51%49%51%46%47%38%36%35%38%37%34%41%34%35%24%40%30%31%24%21%16%25%22%25%23%20%23%21%15%24%11%18%12%10%19%13%12%
5%6%3%3%
10%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
![Page 11: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
All SpecialtiesPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
Figure 3
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 8
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of competitive and less competitive specialties to have a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
88%
74%
68%
45%
22%
4%
1%
75%
52%
65%
22%
13%
10%
3%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
![Page 12: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
All SpecialtiesMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
Figure 4
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplications submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
39
1713 13
59
7 7 7
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplications submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
78
11 9 9
80
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
![Page 13: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Figure 5All SpecialtiesLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not MatchBy Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
10NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Not participate in SOAP and re-enter the Match nextyear
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue another graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
3.4
3.1
2.6
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.1
4.4
3.8
3.0
3.1
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.1
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Not participate in SOAP and re-enter the Match nextyear
Pursue another graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
3.5
3.1
3.0
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.7
4.6
3.8
3.6
3.4
2.1
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.8
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
![Page 14: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Figure 6All SpecialtiesApplications, Interviews, Offers, and Ranks in Preferred Specialty†
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 11
†Self-reported data
The boxes in a boxplot represent the interquartile range (or IQR, which is the range between the 25th and 75th percentiles) and the line in the box is the median. The upper bound of the whisker is the upper fence, which is 1.5 IQR above the 75th percentile; the lower bound of the whisker is the lower fence, which is 1.5 IQR below the 25th percentile. The circles and asterisks below and above the whiskers are outliers and extremevalues. Scales in these graphs are adjusted to show a close-up of the boxplots. Some extreme values and outliers are not shown in the graphs.
Number of Applications Submitted by Applicants Number of Interviews Offered to Applicants
Number of Interviews Attended by Applicants Number of Programs Ranked by Applicants
![Page 15: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Figure 7All SpecialtiesApplications, Interviews, Offers, and Ranks in Preferred Specialty†
By Preferred Specialty
Number of Applications Submitted by Applicants
Number of Interviews Offered to Applicants
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 12
†Self-reported data
The boxes in a boxplot represent the interquartile range (or IQR, which is the range between the 25th and 75th percentiles) and the line in the box is the median. The upper bound of the whisker is the upper fence, which is 1.5 IQR above the 75th percentile; the lower bound of thewhisker is the lower fence, which is 1.5 IQR below the 25th percentile. The circles and asterisks below and above the whiskers are outliers andextreme values. Scales in these graphs are adjusted to show a close-up of the boxplots. Some extreme values and outliers are not shown in thegraphs.
OS: Orthopedic SurgeryOT: OtolaryngologyPA: PathologyPD: Pediatrics (Categorical)PM: Physical Medicine & RehabilitationPS: Plastic Surgery (Integrated)PY: Psychiatry (Categorical)RD: Radiation OncologyRO: Radiology-DiagnosticSG: Surgery (Categorical)
AN: AnesthesiologyCN: Child NeurologyDM: Dermatology EM: Emergency MedicineFP: Family MedicineIM: Internal Medicine (Categorical)IR: Interventional RadiologyMP: Medicine/Pediatrics NE: NeurologyNS: Neurological SurgeryOB: Obstetrics-Gynecology
![Page 16: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Figure 7All SpecialtiesApplicants' First Choice Specialty†
By Specialty (Cont'd)
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019 13
Number of Interviews Attended by Applicants
Number of Programs Ranked by Applicants
†Self-reported data
The boxes in a boxplot represent the interquartile range (or IQR, which is the range between the 25th and 75th percentiles) and the line in thebox is the median. The upper bound of the whisker is the upper fence, which is 1.5 IQR above the 75th percentile; the lower bound of thewhisker is the lower fence, which is 1.5 IQR below the 25th percentile. The circles and asterisks below and above the whiskers are outliers and extreme values. Scales in these graphs are adjusted to show a close-up of the boxplots. Some extreme values and outliers are not shown in the graphs.
OS: Orthopedic SurgeryOT: OtolaryngologyPA: PathologyPD: Pediatrics (Categorical)PM: Physical Medicine & RehabilitationPS: Plastic Surgery (Integrated)PY: Psychiatry (Categorical)RD: Radiation OncologyRO: Radiology-DiagnosticSG: Surgery (Categorical)
AN: AnesthesiologyCN: Child Neurology DM: Dermatology EM: Emergency MedicineFP: Family MedicineIM: Internal Medicine (Categorical)IR: Interventional RadiologyMP: Medicine/Pediatrics NE: NeurologyNS: Neurological SurgeryOB: Obstetrics-GynecologyOS: Orthopedic Surgery
![Page 17: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Anesthesiology
14NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 18: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Figure AN-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
AnesthesiologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.24.54.44.44.44.43.94.14.44.23.64.14.54.04.34.13.93.83.74.14.44.34.13.84.14.03.93.83.63.64.04.23.33.53.53.33.73.93.64.03.74.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%81%87%67%69%63%72%60%67%64%61%51%57%54%54%54%58%42%49%38%33%33%37%50%34%40%25%37%30%23%32%33%26%32%5%
21%37%5%
16%13%15%8%5%8%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
15NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 19: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Figure AN-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
AnesthesiologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.14.24.44.54.44.43.94.04.54.03.64.14.43.94.44.03.93.73.83.94.24.24.23.94.14.13.73.93.83.64.04.33.43.73.53.53.53.73.54.03.73.84.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
73%71%68%50%51%49%59%51%55%53%47%45%49%45%41%33%43%35%39%27%21%19%24%37%18%32%18%35%22%19%21%28%21%26%11%14%29%4%
15%13%13%9%4%4%7%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
16NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 20: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Figure AN-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
AnesthesiologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.74.64.34.54.54.54.44.64.54.24.34.24.04.13.74.34.23.93.93.83.84.54.34.44.14.24.04.04.13.73.94.33.73.94.13.73.83.84.14.14.23.74.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%81%78%70%74%67%57%71%60%60%52%49%57%42%57%52%49%39%40%42%35%30%37%33%27%42%25%25%25%21%24%31%22%26%20%20%
5%32%
2%11%
7%7%7%3%7%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
17NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 21: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Figure AN-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
AnesthesiologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.64.54.24.54.44.54.54.64.34.14.44.14.14.13.74.04.14.13.94.03.94.44.54.24.23.94.04.14.13.83.84.43.84.03.93.73.43.93.84.34.34.03.84.6
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%65%61%57%59%52%51%54%47%41%39%30%39%34%40%43%39%27%24%37%26%20%30%23%15%29%13%13%23%13%23%22%13%22%12%14%
5%24%
5%11%
8%6%8%3%3%6%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
18NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 22: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Figure AN-3AnesthesiologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
86%
72%
65%
44%
21%
4%
2%
77%
59%
65%
29%
19%
8%
5%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
19NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 23: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Figure AN-4AnesthesiologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
35
1613 13
48
4 4 5
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
58
9 9 9
41
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
20NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 24: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Figure AN-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
AnesthesiologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
4.1
2.7
2.6
2.1
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.1
4.9
4.0
2.9
3.0
2.3
1.7
1.8
1.5
1.2
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
3.8
2.4
3.0
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.5
4.5
4.1
2.9
3.5
2.1
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.7
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
21NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 25: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Child Neurology (Neurology)
22NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 26: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Figure CN-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.84.24.74.34.54.54.33.64.14.34.24.13.94.33.94.64.23.84.34.44.14.64.14.03.54.33.43.94.13.93.33.83.43.53.52.63.63.43.84.04.54.33.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
84%83%91%79%66%69%66%62%52%62%48%43%81%45%55%53%47%47%57%52%57%41%45%21%40%33%31%9%
28%26%24%17%22%16%3%
33%9%
21%17%7%2%
10%5%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
23NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 27: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Figure CN-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.14.44.34.94.54.54.03.94.64.13.74.44.64.04.14.14.04.13.94.24.64.64.33.93.93.54.54.94.34.14.14.73.03.53.53.83.74.54.54.5
4.04.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%72%72%78%63%44%63%66%63%53%66%56%66%50%56%41%41%53%63%38%59%34%38%25%19%31%47%19%25%25%25%22%25%22%9%
25%6%
16%13%25%6%6%3%3%
25%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
24NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 28: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Figure CN-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.54.54.14.54.54.44.64.64.63.94.54.03.74.34.24.24.04.04.54.43.64.54.44.04.43.84.04.14.03.33.24.53.93.74.32.53.03.43.53.34.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%91%79%80%71%75%70%64%63%68%59%36%48%38%43%46%68%45%48%43%54%52%48%52%25%25%30%36%38%29%
5%21%23%
4%20%11%13%
7%4%9%4%5%
11%0%0%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
25NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 29: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Figure CN-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.54.34.44.54.74.74.44.84.64.44.14.64.64.14.14.14.64.34.44.14.34.04.44.04.73.93.94.34.33.84.44.04.83.84.64.34.04.34.03.94.53.7
5.04.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
76%82%53%59%62%59%62%47%59%47%56%35%47%38%38%38%44%41%38%56%35%47%29%24%15%29%24%38%35%32%15%21%15%15%24%29%
9%3%
12%15%21%
6%9%0%3%
15%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
26NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 30: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Figure CN-3Child Neurology (Neurology)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
92%
76%
71%
46%
15%
0%
2%
89%
49%
66%
34%
29%
9%
0%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
27NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 31: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Figure CN-4Child Neurology (Neurology)Median Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
24
18
12 12
20
5 5 4
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
40
8 7 7
60
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
28NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 32: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Figure CN-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Child Neurology (Neurology)Likelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.8
3.1
3.2
2.8
2.1
1.6
1.8
1.5
1.1
3.7
3.7
1.7
3.7
1.7
1.0
1.3
1.0
2.7
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
2.9
3.4
2.8
1.9
2.1
1.9
1.6
1.6
4.7
4.2
3.7
4.1
2.4
1.6
1.9
2.2
2.3
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
29NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 33: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Dermatology
30NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 34: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Figure DM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
DermatologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.64.24.44.54.54.24.53.43.94.43.93.84.24.54.14.14.33.73.73.94.24.34.24.33.44.23.73.73.83.63.13.84.23.53.12.83.83.63.33.13.53.34.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
83%77%78%63%59%58%57%65%48%48%53%51%60%52%55%50%42%47%39%37%44%42%32%38%36%26%38%36%25%30%19%18%20%9%
14%13%7%
29%17%13%8%7%5%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
31NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 35: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Figure DM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
DermatologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.04.24.54.64.44.43.73.74.53.53.34.04.43.84.44.23.93.64.04.34.73.84.53.34.44.34.34.13.63.83.74.53.93.23.54.02.83.74.54.43.75.04.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
53%66%56%48%58%42%48%63%33%45%42%41%34%53%38%22%23%25%30%30%36%17%17%22%14%17%20%31%14%23%20%27%17%17%23%11%11%11%6%
11%3%
13%9%2%8%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
32NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 36: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Figure DM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
DermatologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.54.54.74.34.54.64.24.64.64.43.94.24.13.43.93.94.34.13.83.94.03.44.54.24.14.24.23.83.83.93.23.34.13.33.94.03.23.73.93.33.34.23.93.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
83%77%81%70%77%62%75%65%68%65%55%54%43%47%43%39%55%51%50%35%41%45%24%36%40%38%37%38%27%31%32%18%14%
8%13%16%25%
6%7%
17%6%3%5%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
33NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 37: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Figure DM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
DermatologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.44.64.14.74.64.44.94.74.63.94.34.13.74.53.54.34.14.24.14.13.54.54.64.74.24.64.03.84.14.04.04.23.84.44.33.34.34.34.54.04.3
3.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
60%45%40%51%45%36%53%35%40%31%29%25%29%36%27%33%24%24%16%24%20%35%11%27%15%16%13%16%
9%18%16%13%
7%20%
7%11%13%
7%7%5%7%2%
11%0%4%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
34NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 38: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Figure DM-3DermatologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
84%
70%
78%
32%
15%
8%
5%
67%
39%
60%
9%
12%
16%
9%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
35NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 39: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Figure DM-4DermatologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
90
10 9 9
100
5 5 5
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
52
5 5 4
73
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
36NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 40: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Figure DM-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
DermatologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.0
3.5
3.6
2.1
2.0
2.8
1.7
1.3
1.1
3.8
3.6
3.0
2.5
1.7
2.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.1
2.8
3.3
1.9
1.8
2.5
1.5
1.2
1.1
4.5
3.6
3.6
3.0
1.8
2.5
1.6
1.3
1.5
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
37NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 41: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Emergency Medicine
38NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 42: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Figure EM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Emergency MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.84.03.94.54.54.44.43.63.64.43.93.44.14.44.13.94.33.84.03.74.24.44.14.03.54.24.03.93.83.73.43.74.23.43.63.53.53.33.53.44.03.64.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%86%78%51%70%65%72%65%61%43%63%48%42%55%51%60%33%55%47%49%19%37%37%42%32%11%33%45%32%34%28%28%24%11%27%24%32%5%
12%11%9%6%6%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
39NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 43: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Figure EM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Emergency MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.83.93.84.64.64.34.53.73.64.43.73.44.24.33.93.64.33.73.83.34.14.34.13.93.34.24.34.03.83.53.43.84.23.63.63.73.73.33.63.33.93.74.54.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
80%79%65%37%70%59%64%66%52%28%62%36%46%61%47%45%23%48%46%35%13%30%32%33%22%11%23%50%32%31%24%24%23%13%33%19%31%5%
18%13%9%
10%6%1%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
40NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 44: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Figure EM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Emergency MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.54.64.64.14.44.44.54.54.54.04.04.14.13.83.73.54.34.23.74.13.73.64.44.24.24.24.24.03.94.03.43.74.23.73.73.43.53.63.53.93.94.43.74.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%80%78%75%68%66%64%67%56%51%37%38%28%43%51%30%32%44%47%42%41%15%10%32%29%33%30%29%23%28%29%27%23%
9%20%14%
4%26%16%
9%4%4%5%4%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
41NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 45: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Figure EM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Emergency MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.54.64.64.04.44.54.34.64.44.13.83.84.33.83.73.64.44.03.83.93.73.54.54.14.14.24.33.93.94.33.63.54.23.63.94.03.83.93.94.03.53.83.84.84.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
83%73%67%71%52%56%60%55%53%44%23%23%15%42%38%21%33%38%35%38%28%
9%10%26%19%25%20%18%23%27%32%25%15%14%14%14%
5%25%23%12%
6%4%7%4%1%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
42NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 46: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Figure EM-3Emergency MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
88%
70%
77%
41%
21%
4%
1%
81%
63%
70%
33%
22%
7%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
43NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 47: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Figure EM-4Emergency MedicineMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
46
19
14 14
56
6 6 6
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
62
11 10 10
77
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
44NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 48: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Figure EM-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Emergency MedicineLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.6
3.6
2.7
3.2
2.3
2.1
1.7
1.6
1.1
4.7
4.1
2.6
3.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
1.5
1.3
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.7
3.8
2.2
3.5
1.5
1.8
1.5
1.2
1.7
4.6
3.5
2.7
3.9
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.7
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
45NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 49: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Family Medicine
46NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 50: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Figure FM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Family MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.84.03.54.64.64.34.43.63.64.33.83.44.04.44.04.04.23.74.13.74.34.44.04.23.74.24.23.83.93.73.33.94.24.03.73.33.93.53.63.63.83.94.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%89%72%35%72%71%71%68%58%31%62%55%46%54%54%55%23%55%46%63%12%46%41%32%35%39%43%55%25%25%33%31%33%25%67%27%21%39%15%20%9%8%7%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
47NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 51: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Figure FM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Family MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.13.84.54.64.44.53.83.84.43.93.74.34.53.84.14.24.04.23.84.24.34.14.23.84.24.24.04.23.73.64.04.44.13.63.64.13.64.03.54.24.24.44.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
71%73%47%25%59%50%58%56%48%25%53%37%41%48%43%34%19%40%44%42%13%29%26%31%21%29%34%42%19%25%24%28%26%21%54%23%17%27%15%19%11%10%8%2%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
48NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 52: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Figure FM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Family MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.64.64.14.54.54.44.74.53.94.04.34.13.83.93.64.24.13.84.23.83.84.64.34.14.34.33.94.14.33.43.74.23.83.93.93.64.13.73.94.13.93.94.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%83%77%77%55%60%66%62%61%52%22%42%19%44%42%19%32%43%41%41%54%
9%30%34%33%28%34%35%22%25%46%25%21%18%19%23%31%15%45%13%10%
3%6%5%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
49NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 53: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Figure FM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Family MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.64.64.24.64.64.44.74.64.24.04.34.34.04.13.94.34.04.14.24.03.94.54.34.34.34.24.04.34.33.84.04.43.94.04.13.84.13.94.33.94.34.24.04.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
74%68%57%59%39%51%53%52%46%37%19%25%15%36%34%18%29%31%24%36%38%
9%23%20%17%26%21%23%19%19%29%25%17%18%14%18%21%13%35%11%11%
6%7%6%2%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
50NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 54: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Figure FM-3Family MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
90%
80%
58%
33%
14%
3%
1%
77%
60%
65%
18%
8%
13%
3%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
51NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 55: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Figure FM-4Family MedicineMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
24
1612 12
62
6 6 6
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
50
11 9 9
88
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
52NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 56: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Figure FM-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Family MedicineLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.6
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.2
4.4
3.8
3.1
3.5
2.3
1.8
2.0
1.9
1.4
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.7
3.5
2.7
3.3
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.7
4.7
3.9
3.4
3.8
2.5
1.6
1.9
1.6
1.9
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
53NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 57: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Internal Medicine
54NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 58: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Figure IM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.64.34.64.54.64.24.43.64.54.34.33.64.14.53.94.64.23.84.04.34.14.44.24.13.64.23.73.73.83.53.34.04.23.33.73.23.73.43.83.43.83.94.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%83%86%83%67%65%61%60%56%73%58%60%45%54%58%50%67%55%48%46%57%39%33%35%33%37%33%22%28%35%26%23%29%29%12%15%12%19%16%17%9%4%4%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
55NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 59: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Figure IM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.34.34.54.64.34.53.84.44.54.23.74.24.53.84.54.34.24.14.24.14.34.34.03.94.14.14.04.13.83.64.24.43.73.63.44.03.84.13.74.24.14.14.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
59%57%57%51%52%47%51%49%44%59%44%47%43%52%35%25%50%44%41%32%43%30%21%29%17%28%40%29%21%24%18%21%29%35%38%13%10%14%23%24%10%7%5%3%
19%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
56NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 60: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Figure IM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.54.64.54.44.34.44.34.64.64.74.44.64.23.84.53.74.34.03.94.14.33.74.64.24.34.24.23.83.93.83.53.74.13.74.03.83.43.53.84.03.64.23.94.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
86%80%75%71%76%65%59%59%60%65%70%56%62%47%44%63%36%47%41%40%39%51%37%29%30%32%30%30%27%28%16%20%19%22%12%22%15%
8%7%
11%9%5%2%2%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
57NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 61: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Figure IM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.64.54.54.44.54.54.44.64.54.54.44.64.44.04.53.94.34.04.34.14.23.94.44.24.34.24.24.14.24.23.83.94.43.84.24.23.64.03.94.34.04.44.24.34.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
63%63%48%52%52%46%46%42%45%35%42%39%46%36%31%53%32%37%21%40%27%40%23%18%14%24%22%27%22%20%21%18%14%31%
8%23%13%
6%20%17%17%
6%7%3%3%
15%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
58NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 62: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Figure IM-3Internal MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
87%
72%
64%
49%
23%
3%
1%
73%
45%
65%
20%
11%
10%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
59NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 63: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Figure IM-4Internal MedicineMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
32
1613 13
29
97 7
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
116
10 9 9
95
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
60NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 64: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Figure IM-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Internal MedicineLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.4
3.0
3.2
2.4
2.3
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.1
4.5
3.4
2.5
2.9
1.6
1.9
1.6
1.5
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.5
3.3
3.5
2.9
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.7
1.8
4.6
3.7
3.8
3.4
2.0
1.8
2.0
2.0
2.0
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
61NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 65: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Internal Medicine/Pediatrics
62NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 66: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
Figure MP-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.14.64.64.64.24.43.73.94.43.93.44.14.43.84.34.44.04.14.14.24.43.94.03.64.13.63.74.04.03.34.04.03.83.92.93.83.63.93.33.13.74.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
93%88%86%84%66%67%63%58%63%48%60%60%57%51%58%64%43%62%54%54%32%52%37%30%40%21%45%20%26%20%27%19%21%33%13%31%12%28%19%19%6%5%4%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
63NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 67: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
Figure MP-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.73.94.34.54.54.14.53.74.44.53.83.54.24.34.04.44.53.94.24.14.04.43.94.53.44.54.13.94.33.73.73.84.33.83.94.34.13.54.33.84.04.0
4.3100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
61%70%61%58%58%49%65%53%60%42%58%42%46%58%44%40%32%56%35%42%30%39%18%30%19%28%40%32%23%16%26%25%28%32%23%32%14%19%23%23%16%7%5%0%
16%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
64NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 68: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
Figure MP-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.64.74.24.54.54.44.74.64.64.14.24.23.83.93.74.44.13.94.24.13.74.54.43.94.54.33.84.14.13.33.54.04.04.04.02.83.83.83.93.74.34.24.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%88%79%79%72%78%60%65%69%65%66%53%39%45%46%36%38%55%50%51%47%28%21%36%38%31%41%40%32%21%13%18%25%28%28%18%27%
7%9%
10%11%
6%2%6%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
65NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 69: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Figure MP-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.44.44.14.64.54.24.74.54.13.94.63.83.94.13.54.44.04.04.44.03.74.54.43.84.13.74.13.84.53.83.94.34.34.24.33.54.63.64.35.02.03.3
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
71%73%54%62%56%62%56%48%48%52%44%23%40%35%46%40%40%54%23%44%31%25%21%17%19%19%31%21%23%19%21%27%33%31%27%15%13%13%12%15%10%
4%4%8%0%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
66NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 70: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
Figure MP-3Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
87%
76%
67%
44%
30%
2%
1%
82%
58%
72%
32%
25%
4%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
67NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 71: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Figure MP-4Internal Medicine/PediatricsMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
26
1713 12
25
13 1210
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
40
10 9 9
63
4 3 4
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
68NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 72: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
Figure MP-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Internal Medicine/PediatricsLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
3.1
2.9
3.6
2.5
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.2
4.1
2.9
3.1
3.1
2.6
2.4
1.9
2.1
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.8
3.5
2.4
3.6
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.6
4.5
3.8
2.8
3.9
1.9
2.2
2.1
2.8
1.8
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
69NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 73: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)
70NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 74: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Figure IR-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.54.34.54.34.54.24.53.64.34.44.13.54.14.54.24.34.23.93.54.34.24.54.24.23.53.34.34.03.93.33.43.84.43.32.33.23.23.13.14.03.33.54.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%88%93%80%57%64%59%67%64%57%63%50%51%55%43%47%50%46%51%32%51%26%43%46%33%32%20%67%34%21%26%21%16%21%4%5%
33%8%
13%13%3%5%3%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
71NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 75: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
Figure IR-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.04.84.44.64.24.63.84.53.34.14.44.13.44.24.03.74.34.34.33.64.33.53.63.73.73.94.54.14.24.03.63.34.03.33.52.83.34.03.53.83.05.03.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
82%61%86%46%61%61%61%57%61%50%50%43%50%57%50%46%43%50%54%29%25%21%29%50%36%36%18%54%39%25%18%25%25%21%7%
18%21%7%
14%14%11%7%4%0%
11%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
72NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 76: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
Figure IR-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.54.64.54.54.64.64.34.54.84.64.14.64.03.84.53.94.34.33.93.74.43.74.64.04.54.34.44.14.14.43.52.94.12.74.04.03.54.04.33.3
4.03.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%87%75%63%83%69%68%70%62%62%65%44%45%46%63%48%41%41%38%56%30%48%31%45%30%39%20%14%38%23%54%28%18%23%
8%7%3%
37%1%
13%4%0%4%1%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
73NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 77: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
Figure IR-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.14.34.34.24.44.24.14.44.24.34.14.03.83.54.03.54.43.83.53.54.03.73.43.63.83.83.84.13.83.82.63.33.32.73.35.03.63.04.34.03.05.04.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
85%78%52%74%89%52%67%44%52%44%48%41%41%44%41%37%44%44%33%59%22%26%22%26%33%44%15%15%48%33%52%30%15%30%11%15%15%37%
4%15%
4%7%7%4%0%
11%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
74NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 78: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
Figure IR-3Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
91%
73%
51%
55%
53%
6%
8%
86%
68%
54%
50%
36%
7%
7%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
75NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 79: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
Figure IR-4Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Median Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
46
1614 13
49
14 13 13
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
64
12 11 11
72
7 7 7
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
76NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 80: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
Figure IR-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Likelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.4
3.6
3.4
2.9
2.2
2.2
1.5
1.4
1.1
5.0
4.2
2.4
3.4
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.4
4.9
2.7
2.4
1.5
2.0
1.8
1.1
1.3
4.4
3.9
2.9
2.4
1.4
1.5
1.1
1.5
1.4
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
77NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 81: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
Neurology
78NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 82: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
Figure NE-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
NeurologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.34.74.54.64.24.43.64.14.54.03.74.04.53.94.34.23.84.24.14.04.24.13.93.74.03.73.83.83.63.43.94.33.73.42.63.63.23.43.54.03.74.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%85%88%80%72%69%62%66%61%71%57%57%64%53%50%52%62%52%48%56%56%38%41%36%38%40%29%15%25%25%28%25%28%14%6%
14%12%15%17%13%11%4%3%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
79NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 83: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
Figure NE-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
NeurologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.04.64.14.54.44.54.04.43.64.24.54.13.84.14.33.64.24.24.14.14.23.84.34.04.03.64.14.14.04.13.53.44.14.33.43.83.13.93.74.13.64.14.45.03.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
64%60%66%63%57%49%54%58%51%52%50%46%47%52%36%28%47%39%46%36%45%28%25%28%17%31%40%23%21%18%18%21%26%23%14%11%8%
13%19%18%7%7%2%2%
20%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
80NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 84: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
Figure NE-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
NeurologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.64.64.44.64.54.44.64.64.64.24.44.13.94.24.04.24.03.84.34.34.04.54.14.24.14.13.73.83.73.53.63.83.44.03.43.23.03.63.73.64.04.44.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%84%79%79%76%74%72%60%69%62%66%51%53%53%51%56%47%43%41%44%55%48%41%34%32%34%30%25%30%26%10%26%18%
7%11%23%17%
7%1%
13%7%4%5%5%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
81NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 85: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
Figure NE-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
NeurologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.64.34.54.34.64.44.14.64.44.54.14.44.33.94.33.74.23.84.14.14.24.04.54.04.34.04.14.03.94.03.84.04.33.84.23.83.53.84.34.43.33.63.74.34.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%70%51%58%64%49%58%45%51%29%56%38%45%35%38%44%39%34%25%47%32%42%25%20%11%24%19%30%27%14%17%15%10%16%
8%14%11%
5%7%
11%14%
5%5%1%2%
13%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
82NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 86: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Figure NE-3NeurologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
91%
75%
70%
52%
25%
4%
2%
72%
45%
64%
23%
15%
8%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
83NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 87: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
Figure NE-4NeurologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
28
1713 12
40
8 7 7
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
71
11 9 9
70
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
84NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 88: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
Figure NE-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
NeurologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.3
3.7
3.1
2.5
2.3
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.1
4.0
3.3
2.3
1.5
2.5
2.3
1.3
2.0
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
4.0
3.4
2.9
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.5
4.5
4.3
4.2
3.0
1.9
1.5
2.1
2.1
1.7
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
85NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 89: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
Neurological Surgery
86NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 90: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
Figure NS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Neurological SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.24.84.34.64.64.43.94.63.43.74.34.13.94.34.43.84.24.03.74.04.34.04.04.13.73.33.93.94.23.53.23.03.43.63.53.32.64.23.13.53.43.91.53.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
77%79%88%73%74%66%44%70%52%44%62%58%78%60%53%45%60%42%58%50%70%22%35%30%23%37%20%52%60%26%10%12%18%6%2%
22%6%5%
13%9%4%6%2%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
87NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 91: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
Figure NS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Neurological SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
3.84.74.04.54.64.83.54.53.34.34.44.03.84.24.63.74.34.14.14.14.44.03.84.44.03.13.84.44.34.2
3.34.04.53.03.73.04.0
4.03.04.03.5
4.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
44%67%67%61%67%50%22%67%39%44%61%50%50%56%50%17%44%39%50%39%44%22%33%28%11%39%28%50%39%28%0%
17%17%11%6%
17%6%6%0%
11%6%6%
11%0%
11%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
88NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 92: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
Figure NS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Neurological SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.44.64.34.44.54.24.64.64.54.24.44.53.63.84.13.93.83.94.24.43.44.63.84.24.13.94.23.54.13.43.54.53.83.43.72.02.83.34.34.04.01.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%76%65%80%80%64%76%45%68%65%56%54%45%53%44%31%61%31%29%42%45%65%36%26%29%24%18%21%52%26%30%10%12%
2%20%12%
8%5%3%
10%3%2%2%1%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
89NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 93: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
Figure NS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Neurological SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.24.84.24.84.73.54.84.74.34.04.34.83.33.94.34.43.03.94.44.33.33.5
4.24.03.74.64.74.74.0
3.04.33.0
4.04.0
3.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
82%71%29%53%65%47%59%35%53%53%47%59%35%24%35%47%24%29%18%47%29%47%18%12%
0%29%
6%18%47%18%18%
6%0%0%
12%18%
6%0%0%6%6%0%
12%0%0%6%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
90NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 94: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
Figure NS-3Neurological SurgeryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
81%
67%
68%
46%
23%
8%
1%
64%
55%
68%
18%
18%
5%
5%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
91NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 95: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
Figure NS-4Neurological SurgeryMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
66
26
18 17
71
1613 13
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
101
8 711
78
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
92NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 96: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
Figure NS-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Neurological SurgeryLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.3
3.5
3.6
2.9
2.2
2.4
1.7
1.6
1.2
4.2
3.3
3.9
2.4
2.3
2.7
1.5
1.1
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
3.8
3.6
2.3
2.8
1.7
1.8
1.2
1.8
1.2
4.9
4.1
3.0
2.4
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.8
1.4
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
93NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 97: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
Obstetrics and Gynecology
94NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 98: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
Figure OB-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.04.34.64.54.24.43.64.14.34.23.74.04.53.84.34.33.83.94.14.24.34.14.23.74.33.94.03.93.63.33.94.23.43.72.83.73.53.73.43.93.84.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%84%82%72%67%63%59%57%58%67%54%62%69%52%50%53%58%59%37%44%48%48%39%28%38%37%44%43%24%21%28%18%20%21%32%27%4%
12%13%12%9%5%4%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
95NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 99: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
Figure OB-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.24.74.03.84.64.64.14.43.74.14.43.93.54.24.43.94.34.23.93.94.04.14.24.23.93.84.24.34.14.03.53.53.84.53.73.83.53.83.54.13.94.33.34.23.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%76%57%41%68%58%50%59%45%39%54%41%53%52%50%34%36%49%41%33%31%33%32%22%22%40%40%46%32%23%23%21%18%19%47%23%5%
13%13%15%7%6%3%6%9%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
96NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 100: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
Figure OB-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.54.74.24.44.44.34.64.64.44.34.44.23.74.33.94.44.03.74.04.13.74.54.24.24.24.24.03.94.23.23.64.33.83.93.62.23.64.03.83.83.93.94.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
92%86%79%81%66%65%64%63%63%61%57%56%56%48%42%48%50%51%44%41%43%42%42%37%38%26%40%42%26%24%33%19%25%16%23%17%11%
2%15%10%
5%4%4%3%6%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
97NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 101: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
Figure OB-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.44.74.14.54.54.24.74.44.24.04.34.33.74.13.94.43.94.04.14.03.84.34.14.14.34.34.24.14.43.63.64.43.73.73.84.34.03.84.33.64.83.64.04.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
80%71%59%65%47%55%54%43%50%43%30%33%34%39%32%34%38%43%27%39%28%29%37%27%19%21%28%30%26%20%37%19%20%19%16%15%10%
3%23%11%
6%3%4%3%4%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
98NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 102: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
Figure OB-3Obstetrics and GynecologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
89%
74%
73%
50%
28%
3%
1%
80%
60%
67%
28%
22%
7%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
99NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 103: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
Figure OB-4Obstetrics and GynecologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
51
1513 13
55
8 7 7
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
79
11 9 9
77
4 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
100NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 104: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
Figure OB-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Obstetrics and GynecologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
3.8
3.4
3.1
2.2
2.1
1.7
1.7
1.1
4.5
3.9
3.1
3.5
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.2
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.8
4.2
3.0
3.4
1.5
1.8
1.4
1.3
1.6
4.8
4.0
3.2
3.6
1.7
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.6
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
101NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 105: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
Orthopaedic Surgery
102NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 106: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
Figure OS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.74.24.04.74.44.14.53.64.14.34.23.54.24.43.84.63.93.63.53.93.74.34.13.83.83.94.14.03.73.23.03.74.13.13.02.63.33.33.53.43.73.83.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
83%83%83%58%68%57%53%64%52%49%58%53%58%61%52%49%63%35%44%23%50%21%35%35%31%41%21%42%34%29%14%16%18%7%
19%17%12%16%18%9%6%8%5%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
103NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 107: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/107.jpg)
Figure OS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
3.84.73.94.24.64.74.14.53.74.14.34.13.54.24.73.34.34.33.74.14.23.84.54.14.43.53.74.14.24.03.83.64.24.33.44.35.04.03.24.53.84.5
5.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
51%57%47%43%57%53%33%55%33%31%43%39%33%43%33%14%45%18%29%22%39%8%
16%22%14%22%20%35%20%16%12%16%12%14%14%16%6%2%
12%12%10%4%0%2%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
104NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 108: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/108.jpg)
Figure OS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.44.44.74.24.34.54.14.44.54.14.24.54.43.64.13.73.93.93.53.53.93.74.33.94.23.94.04.03.74.12.93.03.93.13.53.62.83.43.63.63.74.14.04.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%77%77%79%75%61%73%60%64%61%43%54%60%60%48%36%45%26%43%39%23%49%45%34%30%30%14%19%35%25%26%15%10%
6%15%
9%11%
9%12%14%
7%3%5%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
105NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 109: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/109.jpg)
Figure OS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.33.94.63.94.84.64.14.64.64.14.44.84.24.04.23.34.63.53.53.04.13.24.44.74.05.03.84.34.63.94.0
4.33.83.03.04.04.33.73.5
3.7
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
65%39%33%48%39%39%41%17%28%28%22%24%30%24%13%20%15%15%13%26%
2%30%11%15%13%13%
4%13%15%11%17%
7%0%9%
13%7%2%2%
15%13%
4%0%7%0%0%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
106NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 110: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/110.jpg)
Figure OS-3Orthopaedic SurgeryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
87%
72%
82%
31%
14%
6%
3%
65%
43%
75%
10%
14%
20%
12%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
107NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 111: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/111.jpg)
Figure OS-4Orthopaedic SurgeryMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
84
1613 13
92
6 6 6
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
80
2 2 2
90
2 2 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
108NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 112: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/112.jpg)
Figure OS-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Orthopaedic SurgeryLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.0
3.2
3.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
1.6
1.5
1.1
4.2
3.6
3.3
2.8
2.5
2.3
1.7
1.3
1.1
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.4
2.9
3.9
2.7
1.9
2.0
1.8
1.3
2.2
4.1
3.5
3.5
3.2
2.1
2.3
1.6
1.8
1.5
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
109NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 113: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/113.jpg)
Otolaryngology
110NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 114: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/114.jpg)
Figure OT-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
OtolaryngologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.14.64.54.54.14.53.64.14.14.13.84.24.33.74.33.93.63.34.13.84.14.03.93.54.03.94.03.32.83.43.74.63.23.52.83.33.44.03.43.43.83.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%85%86%69%63%58%55%67%51%54%47%55%75%59%49%47%63%41%37%21%57%30%36%27%34%42%23%46%42%21%12%13%16%7%6%
27%4%8%
19%6%6%5%3%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
111NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 115: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/115.jpg)
Figure OT-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
OtolaryngologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
5.04.94.33.84.74.64.04.84.04.44.44.44.34.24.54.04.84.33.63.84.14.24.84.54.84.34.84.74.64.23.04.04.04.53.53.32.53.84.03.73.35.0
5.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
55%80%60%75%80%50%45%75%50%65%75%65%30%70%65%40%40%45%45%25%65%25%25%50%20%30%20%55%35%25%5%
15%25%20%30%20%10%20%15%30%15%5%0%5%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
112NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 116: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/116.jpg)
Figure OT-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
OtolaryngologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.44.54.74.34.34.64.24.44.54.54.24.34.33.64.13.94.03.73.53.44.13.64.33.83.93.93.94.13.73.83.02.94.13.53.63.42.84.04.03.93.73.73.64.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%81%79%78%82%53%80%56%60%62%55%60%65%57%52%42%64%42%45%37%21%53%53%41%35%27%29%28%42%16%37%18%12%
4%29%12%
8%2%3%
10%5%2%3%3%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
113NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 117: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/117.jpg)
Figure OT-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
OtolaryngologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.54.64.44.94.64.74.44.64.24.24.64.24.24.34.04.43.93.93.34.53.04.64.65.03.84.54.24.04.74.55.04.04.03.54.03.04.3
4.5
5.0
4.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%81%48%62%43%52%33%33%43%38%48%43%43%24%43%38%19%24%33%33%14%38%10%33%24%14%24%19%24%14%29%10%
5%10%10%10%
5%10%14%
0%10%
0%0%5%0%5%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
114NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 118: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/118.jpg)
Figure OT-3OtolaryngologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
87%
74%
79%
39%
17%
2%
2%
86%
73%
68%
32%
36%
5%
5%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
115NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 119: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/119.jpg)
Figure OT-4OtolaryngologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
65
1613 13
69
8 7 7
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
85
6 6 5
90
4 4 4
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
116NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 120: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/120.jpg)
Figure OT-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
OtolaryngologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
3.2
3.6
2.8
2.5
2.5
1.5
1.4
1.0
4.5
3.6
3.2
3.8
2.2
2.2
1.6
1.5
1.1
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
5.0
3.6
3.3
3.3
1.9
2.4
1.6
1.4
2.4
4.4
4.1
3.5
3.3
2.3
1.6
1.6
1.3
2.4
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
117NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 121: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/121.jpg)
Pathology-Anatomic and Clinical
118NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 122: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/122.jpg)
Figure PA-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.64.24.64.54.74.34.63.74.54.54.33.84.04.63.84.54.14.04.34.44.14.44.03.73.63.93.44.33.93.53.63.94.53.03.53.33.33.34.43.44.34.04.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
81%89%87%71%69%68%74%74%60%80%51%68%64%51%56%52%64%39%50%46%59%31%48%49%34%33%21%15%24%39%35%33%11%23%5%
12%10%3%
16%9%9%9%
12%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
119NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 123: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/123.jpg)
Figure PA-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.34.44.34.64.24.53.94.44.44.23.94.24.43.84.44.24.34.04.13.94.34.33.73.84.03.94.24.13.84.03.74.43.63.53.23.63.54.13.94.23.74.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
62%54%61%60%51%54%50%59%49%62%39%50%47%46%32%27%54%31%41%36%47%29%28%34%14%19%36%19%26%17%19%21%10%23%13%10%2%3%
15%15%7%
11%4%3%
19%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
120NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 124: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/124.jpg)
Figure PA-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.64.54.34.24.54.54.74.64.74.24.74.24.04.53.74.03.83.94.34.53.64.54.24.44.13.73.94.23.53.33.54.33.83.55.03.04.33.53.33.34.73.83.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%79%69%74%68%58%68%67%58%59%56%56%56%39%47%71%48%30%37%46%40%49%30%39%26%37%24%13%30%31%10%24%21%19%10%
4%1%4%3%
12%3%3%7%9%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
121NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 125: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/125.jpg)
Figure PA-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.54.44.24.54.64.34.54.54.44.44.54.23.94.44.04.23.94.14.14.23.94.64.24.44.04.04.24.24.33.63.64.34.23.93.63.23.74.04.13.94.34.34.04.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
63%64%52%52%53%36%54%41%46%29%45%39%44%27%40%54%36%24%22%33%28%45%13%24%13%33%23%20%23%16%10%18%13%18%
7%6%3%3%6%8%
11%3%9%3%1%
16%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
122NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 126: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/126.jpg)
Figure PA-3Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
91%
76%
57%
36%
14%
5%
0%
75%
45%
62%
15%
12%
8%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
123NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 127: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/127.jpg)
Figure PA-4Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
2017
10 1012 11
8 8
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
63
11 9 8
60
3 3 3
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
124NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 128: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/128.jpg)
Figure PA-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
3.8
2.2
3.3
2.0
1.7
2.2
2.1
1.7
1.1
5.0
2.0
5.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
2.9
3.5
2.5
2.2
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.6
4.5
3.5
3.9
3.2
2.6
1.8
2.3
1.5
2.1
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
125NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 129: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/129.jpg)
Pediatrics
126NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 130: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/130.jpg)
Figure PD-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.14.54.54.54.24.43.64.04.23.93.94.04.64.04.44.33.94.14.04.24.54.04.23.74.33.63.93.93.63.34.04.23.53.83.13.63.43.73.43.83.84.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%83%86%74%65%63%65%52%60%61%51%57%79%51%53%55%56%54%52%51%33%41%37%30%39%36%36%19%35%24%35%28%23%34%14%22%8%
21%14%11%8%4%6%1%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
127NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 131: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/131.jpg)
Figure PD-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.64.24.24.54.64.24.53.84.34.44.13.94.34.53.94.44.34.14.24.14.24.44.34.23.94.14.03.94.03.73.63.94.33.73.83.54.03.83.93.54.14.14.64.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
68%66%61%49%58%50%52%48%49%47%50%49%60%50%39%32%49%46%46%38%34%35%23%23%22%28%40%26%26%21%27%26%23%36%28%25%7%
17%17%20%9%5%6%2%
14%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
128NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 132: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/132.jpg)
Figure PD-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.74.64.24.34.44.34.64.74.44.14.44.13.84.24.04.34.13.84.24.03.74.64.44.24.34.33.93.83.93.43.84.13.93.73.93.23.83.73.73.63.94.04.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%85%82%76%71%65%57%63%60%66%59%45%50%46%47%47%65%51%45%51%51%30%38%35%38%26%36%34%38%22%11%27%28%28%19%19%19%
6%10%11%
8%4%3%6%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
129NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 133: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/133.jpg)
Figure PD-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.74.54.54.34.54.54.34.64.64.34.24.54.33.94.34.04.44.14.14.24.13.94.64.54.44.24.24.24.14.13.63.74.33.84.03.93.24.13.84.04.14.63.74.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
78%74%62%60%55%52%51%48%51%45%41%41%46%42%37%41%51%40%24%46%38%33%27%22%18%24%25%29%27%21%20%25%22%36%17%18%14%
5%14%10%11%
5%3%5%4%9%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
130NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 134: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/134.jpg)
Figure PD-3PediatricsPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
90%
77%
65%
53%
24%
2%
0%
77%
54%
60%
26%
11%
9%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
131NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 135: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/135.jpg)
Figure PD-4PediatricsMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
27
18
13 13
53
3 2 2
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
65
13 11 10
61
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
132NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 136: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/136.jpg)
Figure PD-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
PediatricsLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.6
2.9
3.1
2.3
2.3
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.1
4.7
4.2
3.7
2.7
1.6
2.1
2.5
1.8
1.3
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.7
3.5
3.2
3.0
1.7
1.8
1.5
1.4
1.7
4.5
3.6
3.5
3.7
2.1
1.7
2.1
2.2
2.0
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
133NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 137: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/137.jpg)
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
134NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 138: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/138.jpg)
Figure PM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.74.24.44.64.74.34.63.64.14.54.23.84.04.74.24.54.23.64.33.74.04.34.24.23.84.64.13.74.23.63.33.84.23.43.53.43.53.23.83.22.73.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%88%88%52%61%54%73%61%59%62%58%58%57%58%54%58%59%34%53%49%36%30%37%44%31%48%18%44%30%29%28%28%22%18%11%14%13%19%13%14%11%3%2%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
135NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 139: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/139.jpg)
Figure PM-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.04.04.54.54.44.53.74.34.54.23.54.14.54.24.54.24.04.23.83.94.44.44.13.94.24.33.83.93.83.44.14.63.33.53.23.73.73.94.04.34.03.24.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
77%79%73%49%69%67%77%63%60%64%67%60%58%55%52%49%56%35%41%57%34%28%30%33%26%48%24%54%16%26%27%25%26%18%14%13%20%18%14%13%8%6%4%5%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
136NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 140: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/140.jpg)
Figure PM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.54.54.34.54.44.34.64.74.44.24.54.23.74.23.74.24.13.84.23.93.94.34.24.14.44.13.54.34.43.53.64.43.63.83.53.43.54.03.73.22.74.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%81%72%78%82%72%68%73%69%64%46%45%60%47%49%55%49%35%44%46%48%36%49%34%31%42%21%22%26%26%34%22%21%11%
9%21%15%16%
5%5%
11%6%4%6%7%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
137NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 141: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/141.jpg)
Figure PM-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.74.64.34.64.64.54.64.64.34.34.54.33.84.23.84.14.14.14.43.93.84.54.44.44.14.33.84.34.43.33.64.33.33.64.13.43.83.44.14.05.03.04.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%79%67%70%57%69%62%70%63%43%28%45%62%37%46%55%31%30%48%39%49%31%36%26%27%35%26%21%12%19%39%20%19%15%10%15%15%12%
5%13%10%
5%3%2%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
138NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 142: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/142.jpg)
Figure PM-3Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
90%
70%
73%
44%
26%
2%
1%
82%
63%
65%
26%
18%
7%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
139NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 143: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/143.jpg)
Figure PM-4Physical Medicine and RehabilitationMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
40
18
13 13
55
97 6
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
50
1511 11
44
4 4 4
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
140NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 144: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/144.jpg)
Figure PM-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.6
4.0
2.8
3.1
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.5
1.1
5.0
3.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.5
4.1
2.5
3.3
1.6
1.7
1.3
1.0
1.5
4.3
4.2
3.4
2.9
2.3
2.2
1.2
1.0
2.2
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
141NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 145: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/145.jpg)
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)
142NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 146: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/146.jpg)
Figure PS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.84.34.64.74.74.14.73.74.14.54.23.84.54.53.94.54.13.43.64.23.84.14.14.23.33.94.24.23.83.43.63.54.23.33.52.83.53.24.03.33.54.53.7
80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0%
78%75%79%69%69%53%55%69%42%48%58%61%62%60%57%47%53%44%47%38%58%26%32%40%29%30%26%52%47%22%10%13%8%6%4%
32%5%
13%17%10%4%3%5%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
143NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 147: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/147.jpg)
Figure PS-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
3.84.14.04.44.54.13.84.72.83.14.24.03.84.14.83.54.64.33.43.63.84.54.23.53.53.03.33.94.75.04.02.82.03.03.02.35.04.02.7
3.03.5
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
77%62%69%69%69%69%46%69%62%54%69%54%62%54%54%31%54%23%54%54%38%15%38%31%15%23%23%54%46%8%8%
38%8%8%8%
23%8%8%
23%0%8%
15%0%0%8%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
144NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 148: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/148.jpg)
Figure PS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.44.74.44.74.74.14.74.64.54.24.64.53.63.93.94.24.03.63.74.23.54.34.34.33.84.14.34.03.93.73.84.43.34.53.45.05.03.53.8
4.55.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%81%69%80%75%59%73%58%52%60%57%57%54%49%37%40%53%40%47%33%31%53%25%30%27%36%20%20%43%20%44%
9%6%6%
37%7%
10%1%1%
19%5%0%2%2%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
145NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 149: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/149.jpg)
Figure PS-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.44.04.34.24.14.44.04.64.74.64.04.14.32.83.74.04.34.03.24.04.03.04.0
3.34.03.64.74.04.22.5
2.52.05.0
5.0
3.05.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
79%86%50%57%79%64%64%21%71%50%50%36%50%29%36%43%71%21%
7%36%
7%29%14%36%
0%21%14%36%43%14%43%14%
0%0%
14%14%
7%0%0%7%0%7%7%0%0%
14%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
146NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 150: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/150.jpg)
Figure PS-3Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
94%
79%
70%
44%
33%
5%
7%
81%
50%
69%
38%
31%
13%
13%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
147NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 151: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/151.jpg)
Figure PS-4Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Median Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
76
21
15 15
74
7 7 8
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
74
12 11 11
60
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
148NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 152: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/152.jpg)
Figure PS-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Likelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.4
3.3
3.6
3.0
2.4
2.5
1.8
1.8
1.1
4.4
3.9
3.9
3.9
2.1
2.6
1.9
1.6
1.4
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
3.1
2.4
3.1
2.3
1.6
2.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
4.5
4.0
2.6
3.2
1.6
1.3
1.6
1.9
1.7
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
149NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 153: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/153.jpg)
Psychiatry
150NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 154: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/154.jpg)
Figure PY-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PsychiatryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.14.24.44.44.44.43.93.84.33.83.54.04.54.04.14.33.94.13.94.24.44.04.24.04.23.53.83.83.73.53.84.03.53.43.63.63.43.83.64.03.74.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%83%77%64%61%62%74%59%58%54%54%43%41%44%46%54%37%54%43%50%28%49%37%36%39%46%39%5%
25%22%27%32%18%10%23%10%32%19%16%13%10%7%5%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
151NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 155: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/155.jpg)
Figure PY-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PsychiatryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.73.94.14.54.64.54.53.94.04.53.93.64.24.54.04.24.44.14.24.04.14.34.14.24.04.13.84.14.23.83.64.24.03.93.83.73.83.64.03.64.24.14.14.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
71%70%53%40%51%50%60%50%48%38%43%30%40%51%35%38%31%43%39%43%32%37%23%33%26%36%37%13%24%21%24%26%20%12%34%8%
20%12%18%19%10%11%6%5%
13%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
152NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 156: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/156.jpg)
Figure PY-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PsychiatryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.54.64.54.14.44.44.44.54.54.33.94.04.14.03.93.74.34.13.84.23.83.84.44.24.04.24.13.73.93.53.63.73.93.43.43.53.83.73.53.93.53.74.04.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%83%81%73%68%68%64%73%62%59%52%35%38%48%47%43%39%50%43%44%55%28%55%33%38%30%42%37%30%26%
9%35%27%
7%10%14%18%31%16%13%
9%6%6%5%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
153NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 157: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/157.jpg)
Figure PY-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
PsychiatryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.74.54.14.54.44.64.64.54.43.84.24.34.24.03.84.34.24.14.34.14.04.54.44.34.44.24.24.24.23.83.94.33.94.14.13.84.13.84.43.94.54.73.84.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
74%71%57%58%46%53%53%55%48%40%32%23%26%40%38%31%32%39%29%39%35%27%35%21%21%25%27%31%23%21%13%24%19%11%
7%18%11%18%20%14%10%
6%7%3%3%8%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
154NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 158: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/158.jpg)
Figure PY-3PsychiatryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
85%
73%
72%
44%
24%
4%
1%
72%
49%
67%
20%
13%
12%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
155NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 159: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/159.jpg)
Figure PY-4PsychiatryMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
37
1311 11
45
7 7 8
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
79
9 8 8
80
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
156NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 160: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/160.jpg)
Figure PY-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
PsychiatryLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.8
1.2
4.4
3.3
3.1
3.2
2.3
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.3
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
3.6
3.0
3.2
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.4
1.8
4.6
3.8
3.7
3.4
2.4
1.8
2.0
1.9
1.8
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
157NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 161: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/161.jpg)
Radiation Oncology
158NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 162: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/162.jpg)
Figure RD-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiation OncologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.54.64.24.44.24.33.53.74.24.33.73.74.33.93.64.03.74.14.23.94.34.63.83.04.23.73.63.53.32.63.93.72.83.72.03.82.93.33.23.54.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
85%85%90%63%70%62%79%75%66%15%65%69%59%54%59%55%7%
34%55%48%70%45%45%59%34%32%31%32%38%34%24%17%21%17%7%
14%3%
15%24%11%8%8%4%7%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
159NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 163: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/163.jpg)
Figure RD-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiation OncologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.74.34.54.74.35.04.83.75.04.74.33.54.55.02.5
4.03.84.04.7
5.05.03.54.03.53.54.05.05.05.05.04.03.0
4.04.04.0
4.04.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
50%100%67%67%
100%67%67%83%50%17%50%50%67%67%50%33%0%
33%67%33%50%0%
17%50%33%33%33%33%83%17%17%17%17%33%50%0%0%0%
17%33%33%0%0%
17%33%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
160NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 164: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/164.jpg)
Figure RD-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiation OncologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.34.54.44.64.54.64.34.44.54.54.5
3.93.72.03.74.14.14.04.24.32.84.64.44.63.84.03.73.93.22.83.33.63.63.33.71.51.53.03.52.54.03.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
94%84%82%75%76%75%76%68%59%57%47%65%
0%41%46%
1%50%25%47%47%38%63%15%40%31%56%31%29%35%34%29%15%21%24%12%10%10%
3%3%
22%7%4%6%1%7%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
161NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 165: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/165.jpg)
Figure RD-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiation OncologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
5.04.63.84.23.84.74.54.04.84.35.04.5
3.83.5
3.85.02.53.74.74.34.03.74.04.72.54.03.84.03.74.5
4.05.03.5
2.0
4.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
57%71%71%71%57%43%71%43%71%57%43%57%
0%57%29%
0%57%14%29%43%43%57%29%43%14%43%29%43%57%14%43%29%
0%14%14%29%
0%0%
14%0%0%
14%0%0%0%
29%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
162NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 166: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/166.jpg)
Figure RD-3Radiation OncologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
88%
67%
62%
43%
16%
1%
5%
75%
75%
75%
50%
25%
0%
0%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
163NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 167: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/167.jpg)
Figure RD-4Radiation OncologyMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
65
25
15 14
86
2 2 3
Matched Not Matched
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
65
12 12 1210
06
8
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
164NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 168: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/168.jpg)
Figure RD-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Radiation OncologyLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.4
3.4
2.9
2.6
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0
1.0
4.0
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.6
3.2
3.4
2.2
1.6
2.2
1.4
1.4
2.5
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
165NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 169: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/169.jpg)
Radiology-Diagnostic
166NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 170: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/170.jpg)
Figure RO-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.24.34.54.64.54.43.84.04.44.13.74.04.54.14.54.23.84.04.04.04.44.34.23.94.03.94.03.73.73.63.94.32.83.73.63.63.43.93.84.13.84.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%81%82%70%63%63%70%58%68%52%55%55%62%57%42%54%56%36%50%40%41%28%40%49%34%45%21%28%31%23%30%28%16%24%16%12%36%3%
13%9%8%
13%6%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
167NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 171: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/171.jpg)
Figure RO-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.64.14.14.44.64.34.53.94.14.34.33.74.14.53.84.34.24.04.04.03.94.04.14.14.04.04.24.04.23.93.64.04.23.24.23.84.43.84.03.84.24.54.54.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
81%65%60%44%50%47%61%53%57%42%44%46%44%46%40%36%41%33%43%27%29%23%32%35%22%30%21%26%30%15%22%28%15%25%19%11%26%8%
20%11%12%12%6%2%9%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
168NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 172: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/172.jpg)
Figure RO-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.74.74.64.44.44.54.44.74.64.44.24.54.23.94.13.84.24.24.04.24.13.84.64.34.44.23.94.23.84.13.63.84.33.44.13.63.93.53.74.03.74.24.34.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
86%81%77%73%73%66%62%67%59%53%59%50%47%44%56%42%57%34%43%45%34%35%48%35%31%43%20%19%29%21%20%29%27%25%11%12%
2%35%
6%10%
6%6%
10%4%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
169NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 173: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/173.jpg)
Figure RO-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.64.54.34.44.64.44.74.64.24.44.54.24.04.23.94.43.94.24.14.04.04.24.34.44.03.94.14.64.23.84.04.43.94.54.54.03.74.14.24.64.44.24.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
73%71%68%63%59%51%53%52%50%45%39%40%45%36%48%38%38%30%31%47%30%26%34%31%15%28%19%14%27%14%23%29%19%23%11%16%
7%27%11%13%
7%5%
10%3%4%9%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
170NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 174: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/174.jpg)
Figure RO-3Radiology-DiagnosticPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
89%
72%
68%
51%
25%
6%
5%
77%
63%
72%
26%
17%
7%
6%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
171NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 175: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/175.jpg)
Figure RO-4Radiology-DiagnosticMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
46
1914 14
63
9 9 9
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
80
11 10 10
83
4 4 4
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
172NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 176: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/176.jpg)
Figure RO-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Radiology-DiagnosticLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.3
3.9
2.8
2.7
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.5
1.1
4.0
4.6
2.9
2.6
2.3
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.5
3.9
3.0
3.0
1.7
1.8
1.5
1.3
1.5
4.3
3.9
3.4
3.2
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.6
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
173NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 177: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/177.jpg)
Surgery-General
174NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 178: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/178.jpg)
Figure SG-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Surgery-GeneralPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.24.34.54.43.94.53.44.24.34.43.64.24.53.74.54.23.63.84.14.14.24.24.13.44.24.04.13.63.13.23.84.23.53.62.93.13.33.63.53.63.74.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
85%84%84%75%68%61%49%61%53%64%60%72%53%57%56%48%69%47%38%39%61%31%32%29%34%25%28%40%31%24%16%16%19%37%31%24%10%5%
12%9%5%4%4%9%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
175NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 179: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/179.jpg)
Figure SG-1
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Surgery-GeneralPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.24.63.94.14.54.64.14.53.64.24.44.23.84.24.43.54.44.14.23.84.14.04.24.03.73.53.84.24.13.83.33.43.84.33.63.83.24.13.54.03.93.94.13.83.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
48%60%59%43%59%47%37%49%36%48%46%48%38%53%37%20%45%34%39%27%38%18%19%25%12%21%30%40%32%20%13%15%15%24%37%16%7%7%
13%17%3%2%4%2%
12%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programAcademic medical center program
Quality of residents in programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of faculty
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Quality of program directorCareer paths of recent program graduates
Size of programBalance between supervision and responsibility**
House staff moraleSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Preparation for fellowship trainingDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesProgram's flexibility to pursue electives and interests
Opportunity to conduct researchCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaCall schedule
Cultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institutionOpportunity to perform specific procedures
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Vacation/parental/sick leaveSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Community-based settingOpportunity for international experience
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Having friends at the programOpportunity for training in systems-based practice
Alternative duty hoursSchools for my children in the area
Other benefitsPresence of a previous Match violation
H-1B visa sponsorship
176NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 180: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/180.jpg)
Figure SG-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Surgery-GeneralPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.94.64.44.64.24.54.54.14.54.74.54.54.54.43.64.13.74.23.93.74.04.33.54.44.24.24.14.24.13.84.13.33.44.13.63.83.83.03.83.63.83.63.73.64.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%86%75%77%72%71%68%46%61%66%63%67%65%53%42%47%42%39%38%35%37%58%25%32%30%27%25%27%29%23%25%15%14%35%22%13%
5%8%
17%10%
6%3%3%3%9%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
177NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 181: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/181.jpg)
Figure SG-2
Average RatingPercent Citing Factor
Data are presented in descending order of percentage of applicants citing each factor for U.S. seniors in all specialties*Ratings on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (extremely important)** Appropriate balance between faculty supervision and resident responsibility for patient care
Surgery-GeneralPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.34.64.34.64.54.24.64.54.44.34.54.33.84.33.84.23.94.24.14.13.54.44.04.24.04.14.34.04.33.63.44.24.14.04.13.04.04.14.23.14.64.63.74.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%68%41%58%52%52%56%31%49%38%35%40%45%40%28%37%26%32%13%42%22%36%19%16%
9%19%16%21%26%22%25%17%12%25%11%
9%7%4%
21%8%
12%3%3%3%3%6%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of program director
Quality of facultyWork/life balance
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingHouse staff morale
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Preparation for fellowship trainingBalance between supervision and responsibility**
Cost of livingFuture fellowship training opportunities
Size of programDiversity of patient problems
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Call scheduleJob opportunities for my spouse/significant other
Support network in the areaFuture job opportunities for myself
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Size of patient caseloadQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceAvailability of electronic health records
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesSupplemental income (moonlighting) opportunities
Community-based settingHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours in program
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
178NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 182: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/182.jpg)
Figure SG-3Surgery-GeneralPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
I ranked the programs in order of my preferences
I ranked all programs that I was willing to attend
I ranked all programs at which I interviewed
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
I ranked a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked the programs based on the likelihood ofmatching (most likely first, etc.)
I ranked one or more programs where I appliedbut did not interview
88%
78%
64%
52%
21%
5%
1%
77%
54%
62%
21%
17%
9%
7%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
179NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 183: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/183.jpg)
Figure SG-4Surgery-GeneralMedian Number of Applications, Interviews, and Programs Ranked by Applicant Type
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
51
1814 14
68
8 7 7
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
84
10 9 9
100
3 3 4
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).
180NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019
![Page 184: Results of the 2019 NRMP Applicant Survey...complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (49), the](https://reader030.vdocument.in/reader030/viewer/2022040320/5e4fae830850571f8d0e3539/html5/thumbnails/184.jpg)
Figure SG-5
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Surgery-GeneralLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not Match*By Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue non-clinical training
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
4.5
4.1
3.2
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.6
1.8
1.1
4.6
4.4
2.8
2.8
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.0
Matched Not Matched
1 2 3 4 5
Participate in SOAP for a position in my preferredspecialty
Participate in SOAP for a preliminary year positionand re-enter the Match next year
Pursue research and re-enter the Match next year
Participate in SOAP for a position in a lesscompetitive back-up specialty
Pursue non-clinical training
Re-enter the Match next year
Pursue a graduate degree
Pursue graduate medical education training outsidethe U.S.
Delay graduation and re-enter the Match next year
4.5
4.1
2.7
3.0
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.3
1.3
4.6
4.1
3.3
2.7
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.6
Matched Not Matched
*Match outcome is based on preferred specialty (i.e., specialty listed first on rank order list of programs, excluding preliminary programs).Likelihood is measured on a scale of 5 where 5="extremely likely" and 1="not at all likely"
181NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2019