Results of the 2017NRMP Applicant Survey by Preferred Specialty and Applicant Type
www.nrmp.org
September 2017
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 2017 NRMP Applicant Survey by Preferred Specialty and Applicant Type. National Resident Matching
Program, Washington, DC. 2017.
Copyright © 2017 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.
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
Introduction
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) conducted a survey of all applicants who participated in the 2017 Main Residency Match®. The first Applicant Survey was sent in2008; Subsequent surveys have been conducted in odd yearssince 2009.
The primary purpose of the survey was to elucidate the factorsapplicants weigh in applying to and ranking programs. The survey was fielded during the 18 days between the Rank OrderList Certification Deadline and Match Week so that applicantMatch outcomes would not influence respondents' answers.
The survey was sent to all applicants who certified a rankorder list (ROL) by the Rank Order List Deadline. A very small number of applicants could certify a blank ROL. Between the Rank Order List Certification Deadline and thetime when the matching algorithm was processed, however,some applicants still could be withdrawn from the Match. The responses of those who certified a blank rank order list andthose who were withdrawn from the Match were not includedin this report.
This report presents survey results by preferred specialty andapplicant type. Preferred specialty is defined as the specialtylisted first on an applicant's ROL. Because preliminarypositions provide only one or two years of prerequisitetraining for entry into advanced specialty training, anapplicant ranking a preliminary position first is treated as nothaving a preferred specialty. Two applicant types arepresented in this report: U.S. allopathic medical school seniors ("U.S. seniors") and independent applicants. Independent applicants include allopathic medical school graduates, U.S. citizen and non-U.S. citizen students and graduates ofinternational medical schools, students and graduates ofschools of osteopathy, students and graduates of Canadianmedical schools, and graduates of Fifth Pathway programs.
Changes from Previous ReportsIn 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 previous versions of the survey, "I ranked a mixof both competitive and less competitive programs" and "I ranked one or more program(s) in an alternative specialty asa "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 when applying to programs. When ranking programs, overall goodness of fit, interview day experience, and desired geographic location were the top three considerations. Applicants also valued such factors as career path, future fellowship training opportunities, housestaff morale, and work/life balance. Although there werre 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. Matched U.S. seniors applied to fewer programs than unmatched U.S. seniors, but the number of applications was similar between matched and unmatched independent applicants. Regardless of applicant type,matched applicants attended more interviews and thus were able to rank more programs than unmatched applicants. Thegreatest number of applications was submitted toDermatology, Orthopaedic Surgery, Plastic Surgery, Neurological Surgery, Radiation Oncology, and Otolaryngology; however, the numbers of interviews obtained and programs ranked in those specialties werecomparable to other specialties.
The NRMP hopes that program directors, medical school officials, and applicants find these data useful as they preparefor and participate in the Match. _________________________The NRMP's data reporting and research activities are guidedby its Data Release and Research Committee. NRMP dataand reports can be found at: www.nrmp.org/match-data/.
1
Yes No Yes No
Anesthesiology 465 568 45.0% 302 488 38.2%Child Neurology 46 59 43.8% 23 49 31.9%
Dermatology 207 257 44.6% 57 117 32.8%Emergency Medicine 789 975 44.7% 262 490 34.8%
Family Medicine 709 784 47.5% 898 1,752 33.9%Internal Medicine 1,442 2,047 41.3% 2,826 3,498 44.7%
Internal Medicine/Pediatrics 169 129 56.7% 45 47 48.9%Interventional Radiology 59 120 33.0% 11 18 37.9%
Neurological Surgery 109 101 51.9% 25 64 28.1%Neurology 203 228 47.1% 276 268 50.7%
Obstetrics and Gynecology 571 595 49.0% 206 258 44.4%Orthopaedic Surgery 367 469 43.9% 45 106 29.8%
Otolaryngology 146 152 49.0% 8 15 34.8%Pathology 118 108 52.2% 196 279 41.3%
Pediatrics 952 950 50.1% 611 704 46.5%Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 121 178 40.5% 109 213 33.9%
Plastic Surgery 77 117 39.7% 7 31 18.4%Psychiatry 446 548 44.9% 466 755 38.2%
Radiation Oncology 85 111 43.4% 10 17 37.0%Radiology-Diagnostic 256 449 36.3% 174 320 35.2%
Surgery-General 524 641 45.0% 222 515 30.1%All Other 131 163 44.6% 53 74 41.7%
No Preferred Specialty 186 598 23.7% 236 256 48.0%Total (All specialties) 8,178 10,347 44.1% 7,068 10,334 40.6%
Response Rate
Independent ApplicantsCompleted Survey Completed Survey
U.S. Seniors
Response Rate
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2015 2
Response RatesIn the 2017 Applicant Survey, 35,968 electronic surveys were sent, and 15,246 complete or partial responses were received. After excluding respondents who were withdrawn after the Rank Order List Deadline (41), the overall response rate was 42.8 percent for applicants ranking the 20 largest preferred specialties detailed in this report, and 44.1 percent forall respondents. Response rates varied by specialty and applicant type (see table below). Specialties with 50 or fewer responses were excluded from this report.
All Specialties Combined
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2015 3
4
Figure 1
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
4.54.74.24.54.34.54.24.43.74.33.64.14.14.54.13.94.34.23.84.04.14.34.14.14.14.04.13.63.93.83.93.54.23.73.43.63.73.43.43.73.53.93.73.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%83%82%67%67%63%63%62%56%56%56%55%54%54%54%53%51%50%46%44%40%37%36%35%33%31%31%29%29%27%26%24%23%22%22%21%16%15%14%12%7%6%4%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence 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
Figure 1
5NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.24.44.34.64.24.43.84.43.84.24.14.44.33.84.44.24.14.04.14.34.04.34.04.14.03.84.04.04.03.74.33.73.63.84.03.53.74.13.74.24.14.04.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
63%56%57%54%49%51%48%52%45%45%40%46%42%37%49%30%43%45%46%36%39%22%30%26%25%30%37%23%25%23%27%19%30%19%21%34%15%12%21%23%
9%8%5%4%
16%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
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
Figure 2
6NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.84.64.64.64.34.54.44.64.64.34.44.24.24.43.83.84.24.33.84.14.14.24.54.24.23.94.24.23.73.94.13.43.94.13.83.63.83.93.53.73.94.13.93.73.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%80%75%74%70%63%63%61%61%59%52%47%47%45%45%44%42%42%41%41%40%36%32%30%29%28%28%28%27%23%22%19%19%19%18%18%13%12%12%11%
7%5%4%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
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
Figure 2
7NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.64.44.54.34.54.54.54.64.34.44.24.34.43.93.94.44.34.24.04.24.24.44.44.24.14.14.13.94.14.23.84.14.33.93.84.14.13.73.94.24.44.13.94.14.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
67%65%53%53%50%50%46%36%47%41%39%34%37%39%35%31%42%35%40%23%29%33%20%23%21%22%23%26%19%19%22%18%20%27%13%13%12%21%
8%15%15%
7%4%6%3%
13%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
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
All SpecialtiesPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies by Applicant Type
Figure 3
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017 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 a mix of competitive and less competitive specialties to have a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
77%
71%
23%
49%
4%
2%
77%
52%
69%
14%
21%
12%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
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, 2017 9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Median number ofapplications submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
35
1612 12
54
6 6 6
Matched Not Matched
0
20
40
60
80
100
Median number ofapplications submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
83
9 8 8
80
2 2 2
Matched Not Matched
U.S. Seniors
Independent Applicants
Figure 5All SpecialtiesLikelihood to Pursue a Strategy If Applicant Did Not MatchBy Applicant Type and Match Outcome*
10NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.4
3.3
3.1
2.6
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.1
4.5
3.9
3.0
3.1
1.9
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
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
4.5
3.4
3.3
3.0
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.7
4.5
3.7
3.6
3.4
2.1
1.8
2.0
2.0
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"
Figure 6All SpecialtiesApplications, Interviews, Offers, and Ranks in Preferred Specialty†
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017 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
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, 2017 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 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-Gynecology
Figure 7All SpecialtiesApplicants' First Choice Specialty†
By Specialty (Cont'd)
NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017 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-Gynecology
Anesthesiology
14NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.64.34.54.44.54.34.43.54.33.74.04.24.54.24.04.44.13.93.83.84.44.14.44.14.04.13.73.93.83.93.64.33.53.63.53.63.53.63.73.64.04.33.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%82%86%63%71%64%72%61%58%59%62%54%56%54%67%56%63%46%47%39%34%35%30%51%32%33%25%35%30%23%29%23%28%22%27%6%6%
32%15%12%14%9%4%
12%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
AnesthesiologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
15NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.64.24.44.34.54.34.43.64.43.84.14.14.54.24.04.34.24.03.83.84.33.94.44.04.14.13.83.93.83.83.74.43.73.73.53.83.63.83.93.84.33.93.84.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%58%65%54%55%51%56%55%44%47%47%46%46%42%53%32%46%38%49%31%29%28%21%32%25%35%23%32%24%21%23%18%30%17%24%13%
7%23%16%17%13%11%
5%6%
11%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
AnesthesiologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
16NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.64.54.44.44.44.64.54.44.54.34.14.43.73.94.34.13.94.24.03.94.64.44.24.04.24.03.73.94.03.63.94.23.53.73.83.03.53.84.14.53.93.74.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%80%77%70%80%58%62%62%62%68%54%51%43%58%47%50%57%37%43%41%35%27%32%44%27%26%23%21%33%19%21%24%19%24%16%19%
4%3%
28%10%
5%6%9%6%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
AnesthesiologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
17NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.54.44.54.34.44.54.64.54.44.34.24.24.43.83.94.34.14.13.93.94.04.64.34.13.94.03.83.94.04.23.93.84.43.63.84.03.53.84.13.94.54.33.83.94.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
71%64%61%53%57%48%50%42%49%47%46%38%34%43%39%36%46%29%40%28%23%24%21%30%23%22%17%17%31%16%24%20%20%26%12%16%
5%5%
17%11%10%
8%5%8%3%
10%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
AnesthesiologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
18NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
69%
24%
52%
6%
1%
80%
60%
63%
18%
28%
12%
6%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
19NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure AN-4AnesthesiologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
1713 12
31
9 9 9
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
60
10 8 8
46
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).
20NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.6
3.9
2.6
2.7
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
4.5
3.5
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
2.5
3.0
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
4.7
3.8
2.8
2.9
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
4.4
3.9
2.9
3.6
2.2
1.8
1.9
1.8
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"
21NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Child Neurology (Neurology)
22NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.84.24.74.74.74.14.43.94.33.73.94.24.44.23.94.24.14.04.24.04.33.94.04.14.04.03.73.93.54.13.64.03.23.33.03.62.73.13.33.03.43.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
93%91%91%71%82%71%56%80%73%62%69%64%44%60%58%60%58%60%69%49%49%38%40%49%38%4%
29%31%36%36%27%18%11%33%24%7%
22%9%
18%9%7%
11%2%0%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
23NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.14.84.14.44.74.84.54.53.94.73.74.24.04.54.34.14.54.44.44.14.44.04.44.34.04.14.44.24.14.03.63.64.23.23.43.84.34.03.74.02.85.03.5
3.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
57%60%66%53%62%66%55%68%55%51%42%53%42%47%49%34%43%58%57%38%62%
9%26%26%30%26%36%26%34%17%32%21%17%28%17%11%13%
9%13%25%
9%4%8%0%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
24NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.54.64.74.24.74.74.54.64.24.63.94.24.34.13.74.24.24.14.03.94.24.43.94.14.23.94.13.93.64.03.14.14.23.23.34.13.03.03.3
4.05.04.02.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%83%81%81%88%79%71%69%71%67%57%43%62%55%64%69%43%71%62%50%48%43%40%45%38%43%36%26%33%29%
2%33%19%12%21%14%19%
2%7%7%0%7%2%2%7%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
25NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.54.54.74.24.44.64.64.64.34.44.14.44.54.23.94.14.64.54.34.24.55.04.54.84.14.14.54.04.04.33.53.93.74.03.64.14.54.04.04.5
4.0
3.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
71%61%47%51%67%65%53%47%59%49%61%35%27%35%43%29%35%43%49%31%33%47%21%11%18%29%24%29%22%18%12%16%22%12%16%16%14%
8%6%6%
16%0%0%4%0%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Child Neurology (Neurology)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
26NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
100%
74%
67%
33%
64%
0%
0%
79%
47%
47%
21%
16%
11%
0%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
27NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure CN-4Child Neurology (Neurology)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
17
12 12
30 30
15 15
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
32
10 9 7
70
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).
28NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.3
3.3
3.5
3.0
2.3
2.3
1.8
1.7
1.2
5.0
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
3.4
4.4
2.9
1.2
1.8
1.3
1.6
2.0
5.0
3.8
4.7
4.0
2.8
1.3
2.6
2.8
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"
29NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Dermatology
30NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.64.14.44.44.54.24.53.64.33.64.04.04.53.84.04.14.43.83.94.14.34.04.04.03.83.93.53.43.83.83.73.82.93.73.53.82.83.53.53.43.23.65.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
78%68%71%53%52%47%59%62%55%51%45%41%43%43%35%39%30%35%28%34%39%31%28%30%24%26%24%21%20%24%16%13%7%9%
12%10%19%5%
13%7%4%7%4%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
DermatologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
31NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.74.14.44.34.64.34.53.74.43.44.34.14.54.13.84.14.24.04.14.14.44.04.44.34.13.83.84.34.03.63.74.64.03.43.94.34.03.93.93.64.54.03.85.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
69%58%63%61%47%45%57%68%39%51%35%40%26%48%30%32%30%38%37%29%38%29%29%33%25%28%25%25%20%23%17%18%14%13%13%12%17%
7%18%15%
7%10%
4%5%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
DermatologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
32NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.54.54.34.64.44.64.64.34.43.94.14.33.73.43.84.33.74.03.84.04.44.24.13.74.34.33.33.94.03.53.83.83.53.53.63.13.33.54.63.73.33.84.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
80%70%73%67%66%72%58%57%59%52%49%40%43%26%50%37%28%42%25%37%34%35%33%21%27%19%27%25%22%23%19%11%12%
8%12%10%24%
4%6%
10%3%7%2%2%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
DermatologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
33NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.64.34.54.14.54.54.74.84.04.54.34.34.54.13.84.24.54.04.04.34.14.14.14.04.13.94.33.54.24.34.14.04.63.84.04.25.03.83.54.44.04.55.05.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
67%67%57%55%50%61%40%41%35%34%35%23%26%22%29%26%23%22%27%25%22%29%20%29%17%13%20%17%14%14%20%12%11%15%
5%5%
15%2%5%
15%10%
4%4%1%1%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
DermatologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
34NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
74%
86%
23%
30%
7%
2%
71%
61%
73%
10%
12%
16%
8%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
35NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure DM-4DermatologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
92
10 9 9
90
5 5 5
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
59
5 5 5
69
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).
36NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
3.6
3.5
2.2
1.7
2.4
1.9
1.4
1.1
4.4
3.6
3.3
2.6
1.5
2.4
1.7
1.7
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
4.3
2.0
3.9
1.6
1.9
2.1
1.6
1.4
1.3
4.6
3.7
3.8
2.2
2.3
2.2
1.7
1.6
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, 2017
Emergency Medicine
38NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.14.53.94.54.34.43.44.43.74.14.04.53.54.13.94.33.73.93.84.44.14.14.24.04.13.54.03.83.93.44.23.73.33.63.53.43.53.53.54.24.03.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%83%80%68%50%61%70%62%42%60%61%53%46%49%38%61%28%56%46%45%20%38%40%40%34%41%31%11%26%31%20%22%10%27%21%25%5%
25%15%9%7%7%5%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Emergency MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
39NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.44.74.04.54.04.64.34.43.64.43.84.23.94.43.73.93.94.33.93.83.84.44.14.14.14.24.23.63.93.93.93.64.33.73.43.73.63.43.43.93.73.74.14.03.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
81%74%64%66%39%54%58%59%42%51%42%51%35%46%35%40%25%50%51%37%17%29%26%27%33%42%22%15%30%29%25%20%19%26%25%25%
6%23%19%14%
9%7%5%3%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Emergency MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
40NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.54.64.64.14.44.44.54.54.43.94.04.24.03.53.83.64.33.64.24.04.04.54.24.23.94.24.13.63.94.13.43.74.03.93.53.63.73.43.73.64.24.03.63.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%79%78%76%69%65%70%54%59%67%37%38%44%22%31%47%27%46%41%46%41%18%36%30%28%22%30%28%10%26%28%19%13%
7%23%16%
4%14%19%10%
5%6%4%5%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Emergency MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
41NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.54.64.64.14.44.54.54.64.44.03.94.34.13.83.73.94.33.93.93.94.14.44.24.24.14.14.23.83.94.33.54.04.33.93.73.84.03.63.43.94.53.84.04.14.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
79%70%69%64%52%59%53%46%48%53%29%27%41%19%31%38%23%38%41%34%26%12%28%26%30%20%20%17%11%24%32%20%16%15%19%14%
6%15%17%11%
8%3%3%3%4%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Emergency MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
42NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
75%
83%
23%
44%
3%
1%
87%
68%
81%
24%
34%
8%
7%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
43NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure EM-4Emergency MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
41
1713 13
60
6 5 5
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
57
11 10 9
67
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).
44NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.5
3.5
2.7
3.1
2.2
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.2
4.6
4.0
2.6
3.6
2.2
1.8
1.5
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
4.5
3.7
2.2
3.3
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.6
4.6
3.6
2.8
3.8
1.9
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.3
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"
45NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Family Medicine
46NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.84.04.63.44.64.44.53.54.43.64.03.84.53.64.03.94.23.84.23.74.34.34.14.34.24.13.63.73.93.93.64.13.83.43.93.93.53.53.73.54.04.04.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%88%73%74%37%69%69%68%47%62%52%55%49%52%25%55%21%51%48%60%13%42%46%32%34%54%44%34%22%27%32%29%27%33%25%67%43%21%13%20%9%7%9%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Family MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
47NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.44.74.14.54.04.64.34.53.84.53.84.23.94.54.03.94.24.24.14.23.94.24.14.24.14.24.13.84.04.24.13.84.43.83.74.14.03.63.84.13.84.04.13.84.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
66%61%49%55%31%50%52%52%42%45%42%47%33%38%27%31%21%44%43%42%19%23%31%27%26%38%36%23%22%21%26%21%23%25%25%53%22%17%17%23%
9%10%
8%4%9%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Family MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
48NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.64.64.24.54.54.64.64.43.94.04.24.03.73.83.94.33.84.14.23.84.64.24.33.74.44.33.94.14.13.53.84.13.93.83.94.33.73.93.94.43.83.74.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
86%77%75%77%55%67%64%55%63%62%23%38%41%15%32%38%17%40%39%41%51%
9%34%21%30%20%34%34%26%27%41%21%27%20%21%21%32%46%13%10%11%
5%4%4%5%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Family MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
49NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.74.64.64.34.54.54.64.64.44.24.14.44.24.04.04.14.34.24.04.24.14.54.44.44.04.24.24.04.34.33.84.24.34.03.94.24.33.94.04.24.54.04.14.24.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
71%66%57%54%40%53%46%37%46%45%23%24%36%17%29%31%19%34%39%23%35%15%22%24%22%19%25%25%19%19%31%21%17%20%17%15%19%37%11%13%16%
9%3%6%5%6%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Family MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
50NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
56%
14%
37%
3%
1%
77%
56%
67%
10%
16%
16%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
51NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure FM-4Family MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
21
1612 11
30
7 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
55
9 8 7
79
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, 2017
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
2.9
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.2
4.5
3.8
2.3
3.4
1.8
1.6
2.3
2.1
1.6
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
2.8
3.2
1.9
1.5
1.8
1.4
1.6
4.6
3.7
3.3
3.7
2.4
1.6
2.2
1.8
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"
53NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Internal Medicine
54NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.34.54.64.64.24.43.64.33.64.04.24.54.53.94.54.33.84.04.24.34.14.24.13.74.13.63.73.94.03.44.23.83.33.43.73.23.53.73.63.93.53.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%82%87%67%83%64%61%60%46%57%53%57%62%59%74%47%68%57%46%45%55%35%38%37%31%23%34%26%24%33%37%23%32%17%21%13%18%13%14%15%8%4%4%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Internal MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
55NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.24.54.24.34.44.64.24.43.84.43.84.24.24.44.43.84.44.24.24.04.24.34.04.34.04.14.03.84.04.14.13.74.33.73.73.84.13.53.84.13.74.24.14.04.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
59%50%58%53%52%50%46%50%44%44%39%47%45%35%60%27%51%48%46%35%47%20%31%26%23%29%41%22%24%24%32%17%38%15%20%37%17%
9%27%26%10%
6%4%5%
22%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Internal MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
56NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.64.64.44.44.34.64.64.34.64.34.24.53.73.74.54.33.94.14.14.34.54.24.23.84.24.23.63.93.83.44.04.13.83.63.93.73.43.53.94.04.03.83.6
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
86%78%73%72%76%59%63%66%62%55%70%55%48%62%37%41%61%45%43%36%39%50%29%31%27%23%29%29%25%26%15%18%26%28%15%16%13%
6%9%
11%10%
3%3%4%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Internal MedicinePercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
57NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.64.34.44.44.44.54.54.64.24.54.34.34.53.93.94.54.34.34.04.24.34.44.44.24.14.14.13.94.24.23.84.24.34.03.94.24.03.74.04.24.34.14.04.14.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
63%64%49%49%52%47%45%34%47%39%43%37%37%47%35%30%53%37%41%21%28%41%16%21%20%21%24%28%17%19%21%16%25%34%10%13%13%23%
6%19%19%
6%4%6%2%
18%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Internal MedicinePercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
58NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
75%
66%
24%
54%
2%
1%
75%
44%
70%
12%
18%
11%
3%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
59NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure IM-4Internal MedicinePercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
30
1512 12
54
4 3 3
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
118
9 8 8
100
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, 2017
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
2.9
3.2
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.1
4.9
3.9
3.2
4.0
2.8
2.1
2.0
2.1
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
4.5
3.3
3.6
2.9
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.8
4.5
3.6
3.8
3.4
2.1
1.9
2.0
2.1
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"
61NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Internal Medicine/Pediatrics
62NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.24.64.54.64.34.53.64.53.73.93.94.74.03.94.24.44.04.13.84.24.34.14.13.64.43.33.73.94.13.53.93.93.23.33.93.23.73.73.44.23.34.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%87%83%66%72%66%63%54%59%60%57%49%56%50%43%62%37%61%45%48%27%38%49%25%34%13%34%18%20%21%32%25%30%29%20%12%29%10%18%15%7%5%5%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
63NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.64.14.44.34.64.24.43.64.43.94.24.24.44.13.74.34.44.24.03.84.14.03.94.03.94.13.64.04.13.83.64.23.93.44.13.93.33.43.83.72.04.73.84.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
67%63%54%61%50%57%51%54%51%56%47%51%46%51%39%35%34%51%42%44%32%22%36%24%29%34%44%22%30%27%39%28%31%30%22%33%21%17%18%20%10%
2%3%5%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
64NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.44.64.24.44.54.64.64.34.43.94.04.43.53.64.04.33.84.24.24.04.33.94.23.84.24.23.53.93.53.24.04.04.03.53.93.33.13.44.03.63.52.73.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
95%91%79%84%67%65%79%75%66%65%67%45%48%36%52%48%33%57%51%46%48%23%33%27%33%30%45%42%14%22%13%18%25%21%31%26%31%
6%10%12%
8%6%1%2%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
65NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.94.64.34.64.14.54.44.54.64.04.44.14.14.23.73.94.14.54.33.53.93.94.24.44.23.84.04.23.74.04.03.44.04.24.33.74.04.03.33.53.85.04.53.94.04.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
77%68%60%64%41%57%61%49%54%47%49%39%39%35%45%40%39%40%44%33%43%23%28%26%28%31%31%32%19%22%23%22%32%29%22%19%24%23%10%18%10%
2%3%8%5%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
66NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
96%
80%
70%
30%
60%
2%
1%
86%
64%
64%
31%
36%
10%
2%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
67NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure MP-4Internal Medicine/PediatricsPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
19
13 1316
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
40
11 9 9
85
1 1 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).
68NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
3.7
2.2
2.0
1.5
1.7
1.1
3.7
2.5
2.7
2.8
1.5
2.0
1.7
1.8
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
3.5
2.7
4.0
1.7
1.4
2.1
1.3
1.4
4.6
3.2
3.0
3.5
2.3
2.8
1.8
1.8
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"
69NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)
70NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.74.84.34.64.54.54.24.63.64.73.74.04.14.54.44.14.44.34.14.04.24.14.24.14.24.34.33.34.13.94.33.54.43.43.83.04.33.74.03.83.03.93.53.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
95%79%84%60%70%54%60%58%49%51%63%54%54%56%56%56%58%44%56%35%53%42%35%51%30%53%21%35%40%21%25%23%16%14%23%2%5%
42%11%11%9%
14%7%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
71NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.04.34.14.04.25.04.64.83.34.33.84.34.04.34.84.24.74.55.03.74.04.54.03.73.04.25.05.03.8
4.03.0
4.01.0
4.01.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%40%70%50%50%30%50%40%40%30%50%40%40%30%50%50%60%20%20%30%50%20%20%30%10%60%10%10%40%
0%0%
20%10%
0%30%10%
0%10%20%
0%0%0%0%0%0%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
72NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.74.54.44.64.54.54.54.24.44.04.44.23.83.84.34.44.03.83.84.24.24.44.24.24.44.73.24.24.53.54.34.43.53.44.84.53.44.03.53.82.04.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
82%75%80%59%75%52%57%50%55%52%61%36%41%43%38%46%41%32%39%38%29%45%30%34%23%21%20%18%32%20%43%23%
7%20%
7%16%
7%4%
34%13%
7%11%
4%4%0%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
73NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.85.04.24.34.34.24.44.74.84.34.04.53.34.54.33.54.04.34.04.03.53.83.54.03.04.04.0
3.03.04.24.04.0
3.0
2.03.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
80%60%60%60%60%50%50%60%50%60%50%40%30%20%30%40%40%30%60%30%20%40%20%30%10%30%10%
0%20%10%60%20%10%
0%0%
20%0%
10%20%
0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
74NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
93%
80%
48%
50%
54%
7%
11%
90%
70%
40%
30%
20%
0%
20%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
75NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure IR-4Interventional Radiology (Integrated)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
33
1511 10
30
8 8 8
Matched Not Matched
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Median number ofapplication submitted
Median number ofinterviews offered
Median number ofinterviews attended
Median number ofprograms ranked
36
9 8 8
45
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).
76NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
3.9
4.0
2.9
3.0
2.0
2.4
1.8
1.4
1.3
4.5
3.7
2.5
2.6
1.7
1.4
1.3
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
4.8
3.6
2.2
3.3
1.2
1.8
1.0
1.4
2.0
3.8
2.4
2.8
2.2
1.6
1.8
1.0
2.0
1.3
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"
77NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Neurology
78NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.64.34.54.74.64.34.63.74.43.64.14.14.54.23.94.34.24.04.24.34.34.04.24.03.84.03.73.83.74.03.54.13.63.23.13.73.13.43.53.73.93.54.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%82%88%68%77%71%63%67%67%59%60%57%59%49%66%51%57%53%52%54%49%43%36%38%30%9%
29%37%33%28%30%24%17%15%23%8%
19%6%
11%12%7%5%1%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
NeurologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
79NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.14.54.24.34.64.54.14.53.84.43.84.34.14.34.33.84.44.24.14.14.14.24.04.34.04.23.93.94.04.04.13.94.43.73.63.63.93.43.64.13.84.33.94.24.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
61%50%65%55%62%55%43%62%47%46%45%48%45%38%57%32%51%45%48%36%54%25%29%27%22%24%35%29%27%21%28%17%22%17%20%16%13%
9%21%24%10%
9%4%5%
18%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
NeurologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
80NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.54.74.34.64.44.54.74.44.74.34.14.44.03.84.24.44.03.94.34.34.44.24.13.84.24.13.83.83.83.43.84.53.43.63.83.43.43.43.83.63.54.84.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%86%80%76%75%73%76%69%63%59%65%55%48%56%53%51%61%55%53%43%53%50%39%44%29%41%31%30%40%25%
8%19%22%12%19%21%13%
4%5%9%4%4%2%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
NeurologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
81NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.64.34.44.54.54.54.44.64.44.64.44.44.53.93.84.44.34.33.94.24.34.34.24.14.14.24.14.04.14.23.84.14.34.03.84.14.13.23.84.14.64.43.84.44.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
68%68%50%55%58%58%50%37%53%38%54%37%39%45%40%36%51%36%44%27%33%46%24%26%22%24%24%29%26%15%19%17%19%23%10%12%12%
6%5%
16%18%10%
5%6%4%
15%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
NeurologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
82NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
96%
84%
70%
23%
53%
2%
2%
78%
50%
76%
20%
25%
9%
3%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
83NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure NE-4NeurologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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 11
15
5 4 4
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
80
10 8 8
67
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).
84NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.4
3.9
3.3
2.4
2.4
1.9
2.0
1.9
1.2
5.0
4.7
3.3
3.3
2.7
1.3
1.0
1.3
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
3.9
3.6
2.9
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.6
4.4
4.2
3.9
3.3
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.4
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"
85NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Neurological Surgery
86NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.14.84.34.54.54.53.84.63.94.43.34.24.04.54.03.54.23.93.84.14.34.23.94.23.74.34.03.74.33.73.83.54.33.54.03.23.34.03.33.84.04.84.54.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
78%83%89%76%75%60%39%78%78%66%49%62%68%63%45%42%53%31%54%47%67%29%25%47%23%55%20%30%56%43%22%13%7%
22%7%5%3%9%
14%10%3%4%2%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Neurological SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
87NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
3.64.64.44.34.64.63.94.34.04.33.64.24.04.24.23.34.43.94.34.14.63.83.34.14.24.54.03.44.23.43.65.04.73.63.35.04.34.04.53.83.55.0
4.74.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
48%58%69%60%71%48%35%67%63%54%33%52%44%40%46%23%46%40%50%27%67%23%21%36%13%40%27%13%38%19%21%
6%8%
17%8%4%8%4%
10%25%
6%9%0%8%
25%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Neurological SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
88NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.24.64.44.64.44.64.53.84.44.14.44.24.13.34.04.33.93.84.34.44.14.24.34.33.83.93.63.94.44.23.94.43.73.73.83.33.03.34.04.53.82.72.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%81%67%83%78%76%67%69%57%45%63%54%64%44%75%45%41%31%51%37%45%56%34%37%19%63%19%20%31%34%42%
6%15%
7%23%
7%4%4%6%
12%5%4%4%3%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Neurological SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
89NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.64.04.54.44.74.44.44.54.04.74.14.54.24.13.64.24.34.23.44.04.64.34.03.44.44.04.33.53.64.5
4.85.04.04.03.55.04.05.04.65.04.04.0
4.6100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
61%59%37%55%59%57%39%39%41%24%55%35%33%41%41%16%31%20%43%18%33%55%13%17%12%35%12%14%10%10%31%
2%8%6%4%6%4%2%8%4%
10%9%2%2%0%
20%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Neurological SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
90NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
93%
77%
76%
25%
47%
9%
7%
74%
61%
74%
22%
22%
17%
9%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
91NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure NS-4Neurological SurgeryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
27
18 17
71
11 11 11
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
95
8 7 7
34
1 1 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, 2017
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.
4.2
3.2
3.4
2.6
2.2
2.4
2.0
1.6
1.2
3.8
3.8
3.1
3.0
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.4
1.5
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
2.2
3.8
2.4
2.1
1.8
1.6
1.3
1.4
4.4
3.0
3.4
2.8
2.6
2.7
2.1
2.4
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"
93NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Obstetrics and Gynecology
94NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.14.54.24.64.24.53.84.33.64.14.14.54.04.04.34.33.83.94.24.44.24.04.24.04.13.64.03.73.93.44.33.63.33.33.63.33.53.63.04.03.84.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%81%82%65%77%63%57%53%67%48%53%52%55%48%66%55%59%55%34%41%42%40%45%27%41%41%40%29%24%20%22%25%22%30%18%31%10%3%
12%10%4%4%2%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
95NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.64.14.53.94.64.24.43.84.43.94.24.04.44.13.64.34.34.03.74.04.33.94.14.14.34.03.74.13.83.63.54.43.73.53.73.73.43.73.93.14.14.24.24.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
69%61%53%58%44%51%40%46%48%44%34%44%40%39%39%28%34%42%44%29%32%29%27%20%27%35%31%23%26%19%22%19%23%21%20%44%11%
5%13%17%
4%6%7%6%
11%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
96NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.74.54.64.24.44.44.64.64.24.44.24.24.33.83.74.14.33.64.04.04.24.54.24.23.94.24.23.73.94.23.33.94.33.63.53.63.63.23.94.04.24.33.83.6
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
92%87%76%78%67%63%63%63%64%57%58%54%49%53%52%41%51%52%35%43%39%40%36%25%37%24%36%37%31%21%32%15%17%17%23%22%10%13%
3%12%
6%4%3%2%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
97NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.54.44.64.34.54.64.54.64.24.14.24.34.43.93.84.34.44.03.94.24.24.44.24.34.24.14.13.74.04.43.74.04.44.13.64.13.94.04.04.24.54.03.73.84.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
72%69%61%61%46%52%46%38%47%36%31%33%37%37%38%25%31%38%41%22%21%27%25%21%27%25%18%21%19%19%28%16%14%22%14%12%
9%27%
2%10%
9%6%6%3%3%7%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Obstetrics and GynecologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
98NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
77%
72%
26%
53%
4%
3%
83%
60%
67%
21%
28%
12%
4%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
99NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure OB-4Obstetrics and GynecologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
45
1613 13
46
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
75
10 9 9
60
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).
100NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
3.7
3.2
3.0
2.2
2.0
1.7
1.7
1.1
4.6
4.2
3.2
3.6
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.6
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
4.6
3.9
3.1
3.4
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.4
1.7
4.5
3.9
3.2
3.5
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.8
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"
101NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Orthopaedic Surgery
102NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.44.74.24.74.14.54.14.63.64.33.54.34.24.54.03.94.54.03.73.53.94.24.04.24.04.04.03.64.03.83.63.44.53.33.43.23.53.03.53.73.53.73.82.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
85%83%84%74%57%59%58%70%59%59%58%61%55%53%43%51%64%30%47%23%52%38%18%32%28%36%18%42%36%27%15%14%9%
20%14%21%16%11%17%7%4%7%2%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
103NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.44.14.33.94.43.94.43.54.43.43.84.24.44.33.64.54.04.03.13.74.23.74.14.04.24.53.24.14.14.13.34.73.23.33.23.33.04.03.63.04.04.85.03.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
59%59%52%54%40%43%33%48%29%41%32%38%37%32%37%15%36%25%36%15%36%20%11%16%20%23%16%18%17%20%13%14%14%
7%8%
16%3%5%
16%6%3%2%6%1%
10%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
104NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.54.64.74.34.64.44.64.54.24.24.24.34.53.83.84.04.03.73.93.94.04.54.24.04.13.93.93.83.94.33.43.64.43.43.53.53.73.83.63.73.94.03.53.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%77%70%80%72%72%56%54%56%57%41%45%53%59%45%46%27%23%37%39%21%47%33%29%25%32%11%14%39%21%22%13%
9%7%
15%8%
10%11%
6%13%
5%6%4%3%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
105NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.64.54.54.44.44.44.44.34.24.34.24.34.33.84.04.24.44.44.13.64.14.34.14.34.23.84.63.53.84.43.73.64.43.43.64.03.83.34.03.34.5
4.04.53.6
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
65%58%56%57%51%61%48%32%36%31%33%35%29%39%19%25%32%15%31%19%10%35%20%18%17%21%14%12%14%18%19%10%11%14%
8%11%
2%11%
4%8%
10%5%0%2%2%
11%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Orthopaedic SurgeryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
106NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
69%
89%
15%
29%
6%
3%
76%
67%
74%
24%
19%
17%
7%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
107NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure OS-4Orthopaedic SurgeryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
81
1712 12
88
6 6 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
91
3 3 3
95
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, 2017
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.
3.7
3.5
3.6
2.7
2.1
2.5
1.8
1.4
1.1
3.6
3.9
3.2
2.8
1.9
2.5
1.5
1.4
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
3.7
3.3
2.4
2.8
1.5
1.9
1.4
1.0
1.9
4.2
3.2
2.9
2.7
2.2
1.7
1.7
1.6
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"
109NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Otolaryngology
110NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.24.74.14.64.54.53.94.63.94.33.54.23.94.43.93.64.33.93.63.44.04.24.03.93.84.04.33.74.13.43.43.24.33.22.93.73.42.53.23.32.74.33.23.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
83%88%90%72%77%68%56%77%82%59%54%66%66%57%46%51%61%47%39%26%61%35%31%30%33%47%23%39%46%26%14%13%12%32%15%6%
15%1%
12%11%2%5%3%2%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
OtolaryngologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
111NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
3.84.83.94.14.24.34.04.43.64.33.04.34.14.44.53.34.54.03.93.74.24.04.3
3.24.34.43.83.74.34.33.53.83.42.7
3.73.03.04.05.05.05.03.54.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%85%90%85%75%70%55%90%80%45%35%55%75%60%55%50%80%40%45%30%80%50%20%
0%30%55%25%30%35%20%15%10%30%40%15%
5%15%
5%15%25%10%13%
5%15%10%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
OtolaryngologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
112NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.34.64.34.64.34.64.64.04.54.34.44.44.03.44.04.03.63.83.74.24.44.04.14.34.04.13.53.44.23.13.44.23.63.63.44.42.73.53.73.93.61.03.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
93%87%77%85%76%85%61%61%60%59%54%47%59%50%63%46%33%39%39%44%21%52%32%19%24%42%30%23%51%21%34%
9%11%12%24%12%
8%5%2%9%2%6%4%1%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
OtolaryngologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
113NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.94.64.04.54.34.64.34.74.74.54.44.34.54.64.13.34.44.33.64.03.64.54.34.03.44.04.05.04.03.54.53.54.04.33.32.75.04.0
3.3
5.05.04.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
95%68%58%74%53%63%53%47%53%42%58%42%42%63%63%21%37%16%42%21%26%53%38%13%26%21%21%16%16%11%21%11%21%16%32%16%
5%5%0%
16%0%
13%5%5%0%5%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
OtolaryngologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
114NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
95%
76%
82%
13%
31%
3%
2%
75%
75%
75%
0%
13%
0%
0%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
115NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure OT-4OtolaryngologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
62
1914 14
67
7 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
14 14 14
67
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).
116NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.1
3.3
3.6
2.9
2.5
2.5
1.7
1.5
1.0
4.5
3.5
4.0
2.3
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.8
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
3.5
2.3
4.5
1.3
2.0
2.3
1.5
1.5
4.8
4.8
4.3
4.7
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
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"
117NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Pathology-Anatomic and Clinical
118NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.64.34.54.64.54.34.43.84.13.74.14.04.44.43.84.44.14.04.14.34.44.44.43.93.54.03.13.83.83.53.43.93.53.63.23.03.33.44.53.33.83.53.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
86%81%87%71%80%74%64%70%66%46%57%50%68%61%86%53%74%35%56%56%69%39%23%46%35%11%18%25%33%36%10%26%15%10%27%5%1%7%
17%4%3%
12%7%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
119NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.24.54.24.34.54.64.14.43.64.33.84.24.24.44.33.74.44.34.14.04.14.23.74.44.03.83.93.64.14.03.63.74.43.63.73.33.63.53.64.13.44.24.44.14.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
62%46%59%49%61%52%48%60%46%39%38%42%47%30%52%24%50%33%42%40%53%29%28%31%22%19%31%18%32%23%13%20%22%12%19%13%
5%7%
14%22%
7%16%
3%4%
19%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
120NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.74.74.74.64.54.34.64.64.64.54.23.94.43.73.84.44.14.03.94.24.44.44.34.03.74.04.33.24.14.03.33.04.24.03.31.05.03.03.44.04.03.53.03.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%74%71%68%69%60%37%55%54%49%54%46%24%58%41%36%67%27%40%34%34%50%35%29%22%19%18%14%17%26%
5%21%
1%11%
7%14%
1%1%5%6%3%6%2%1%5%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
121NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.64.54.44.34.34.44.34.64.54.24.54.24.44.43.94.04.44.24.34.04.04.24.44.44.14.24.14.13.94.14.13.83.84.43.83.83.74.23.94.04.24.24.33.43.94.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
66%63%51%49%54%56%40%29%50%41%50%38%32%47%35%30%47%28%34%18%28%46%26%30%16%26%18%18%14%17%13%20%10%18%
7%15%
4%6%5%8%
16%15%
2%4%4%
16%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
122NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
95%
76%
63%
24%
49%
2%
0%
72%
52%
65%
7%
18%
13%
6%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
123NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure PA-4Pathology-Anatomic and ClinicalPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
2117
11 11
35
8 7 7
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
70
7 7 7
57
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).
124NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.2
2.3
3.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.4
1.8
1.1
5.0
3.0
3.2
1.2
1.2
1.8
2.2
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
4.6
2.8
3.7
2.7
2.2
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.5
4.4
3.1
3.6
2.7
2.5
1.9
1.8
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"
125NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Pediatrics
126NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.24.64.44.64.34.43.94.33.64.14.04.64.14.04.44.33.94.14.14.44.24.14.13.74.33.63.93.84.03.64.23.93.43.73.73.03.33.93.43.73.74.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%86%83%67%73%64%63%59%83%53%57%57%52%57%58%54%57%57%52%51%34%39%40%28%40%19%34%26%34%23%28%31%37%28%28%14%19%8%
15%9%6%5%6%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
127NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.64.24.44.24.64.24.53.84.43.74.14.04.54.23.84.34.24.14.14.14.34.14.34.14.14.13.73.94.03.83.64.33.83.53.83.93.43.74.13.74.33.84.24.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%63%59%60%54%57%54%53%59%48%42%48%45%40%47%36%49%50%52%45%39%26%34%26%30%28%43%20%29%22%30%24%37%28%25%30%18%
8%20%21%
7%8%5%3%
15%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
128NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.64.64.34.54.44.74.64.34.54.14.24.44.03.84.14.34.04.14.24.14.64.14.34.04.34.23.63.94.03.44.04.24.03.53.84.03.23.73.94.03.63.53.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%83%78%75%68%59%62%68%62%60%56%43%48%50%65%45%43%50%48%44%47%29%34%25%37%37%32%32%22%22%10%22%24%26%24%23%15%
8%6%
10%6%3%2%2%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
PediatricsPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
129NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.64.44.54.34.54.54.64.64.34.44.34.24.54.03.94.34.34.23.94.24.34.54.44.34.14.14.23.74.24.23.74.04.34.03.84.24.03.73.84.14.44.23.93.84.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
73%71%59%59%53%52%49%41%55%45%42%37%41%44%49%33%40%40%45%26%37%33%23%21%23%24%25%28%16%21%20%21%22%33%22%16%14%18%
4%14%14%
5%4%5%3%
10%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
PediatricsPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
130NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
81%
72%
26%
55%
3%
1%
84%
58%
63%
14%
28%
9%
3%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
131NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure PD-4PediatricsPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
1612 12
38
4 3 4
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
66
10 9 8
70
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, 2017
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.
4.5
3.0
3.2
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.8
1.8
1.1
4.8
3.7
3.6
3.1
2.2
1.5
2.3
1.9
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
4.6
3.3
3.2
2.9
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.8
4.5
3.6
3.5
3.5
2.3
1.8
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"
133NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
134NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.84.24.54.24.74.44.53.74.53.74.04.14.54.24.04.34.13.94.13.94.44.34.34.14.14.43.63.74.13.63.44.13.83.43.33.73.13.23.83.74.33.84.5
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
97%85%84%67%57%73%73%60%63%57%57%55%57%52%63%57%61%41%47%54%38%43%35%43%40%47%24%45%20%28%20%28%20%13%24%15%17%13%13%14%10%8%6%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
135NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.84.14.44.34.64.34.53.74.43.64.03.94.44.33.94.34.04.04.14.14.23.94.13.94.24.13.63.73.93.63.34.33.73.33.63.93.43.63.93.54.33.83.83.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
71%71%66%59%46%52%60%56%48%55%47%48%47%50%51%38%51%31%49%42%39%24%25%35%31%40%24%41%22%25%21%24%22%14%25%11%13%15%14%16%10%
6%7%5%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
136NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.74.64.24.64.54.54.74.44.34.14.24.33.93.74.14.13.74.14.34.14.54.44.33.44.24.13.64.04.13.33.53.83.43.33.33.73.33.13.94.44.33.84.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%83%85%71%77%66%69%62%67%67%40%53%48%58%44%48%53%37%46%47%50%37%40%41%39%29%24%22%41%23%40%24%14%17%14%19%19%
5%7%9%8%7%5%5%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
137NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.54.54.44.24.54.54.54.64.44.24.14.14.43.73.74.24.14.04.04.24.04.54.44.33.83.93.93.54.14.13.53.74.33.53.54.03.93.73.64.03.34.03.74.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
77%72%60%64%66%61%61%48%51%58%36%41%43%47%37%39%44%29%43%31%40%30%21%29%22%26%17%16%36%25%35%19%16%23%
9%16%14%
7%13%11%10%
6%4%6%4%1%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
138NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
96%
77%
72%
28%
49%
3%
4%
88%
61%
69%
10%
27%
7%
6%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
139NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure PM-4Physical Medicine and RehabilitationPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
33
1713 13
40
7 6 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
40
1210 10
48
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).
140NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
4.2
3.1
2.8
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.1
4.7
4.5
2.4
3.1
1.8
1.8
2.1
1.5
1.5
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
2.8
1.5
1.8
1.5
1.2
1.4
4.8
4.4
3.1
3.9
1.9
1.4
1.6
1.4
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"
141NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)
142NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.24.84.34.64.64.64.04.63.94.43.64.44.24.44.14.14.34.04.14.04.24.24.24.23.94.24.13.44.43.63.53.74.33.83.63.73.73.04.03.34.03.64.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
72%78%85%68%64%64%61%66%47%62%55%59%58%57%46%45%64%39%45%32%49%30%18%36%23%50%19%28%42%24%16%9%
15%42%15%8%
16%4%
11%8%3%7%5%1%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
143NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.44.64.34.54.64.43.64.74.14.33.04.64.24.54.03.84.04.03.93.74.9
3.85.04.03.73.83.04.34.04.03.34.53.73.0
4.52.81.0
4.05.0
3.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
48%52%62%38%48%48%24%48%43%43%14%38%29%29%19%19%33%24%43%14%33%
0%24%17%10%33%24%
5%38%19%19%19%10%29%14%
0%0%
10%19%
5%0%
17%5%0%
14%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
144NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.44.34.74.44.74.64.74.64.14.44.44.64.54.13.74.24.44.04.14.24.14.44.14.04.34.14.43.83.84.23.63.84.53.64.03.93.72.73.74.74.04.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
88%82%66%80%78%82%61%65%73%62%54%57%64%55%57%53%41%32%36%38%34%53%28%35%24%47%15%15%24%19%41%
7%12%14%41%
3%11%
4%4%
15%4%7%3%1%0%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
145NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.74.34.24.44.24.04.54.44.64.84.44.74.13.83.53.84.54.63.84.34.45.04.74.04.24.04.02.03.53.33.04.05.03.63.0
2.0
5.0
3.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
68%59%36%64%45%77%36%45%41%23%36%23%27%32%27%18%23%18%32%23%18%36%29%43%
9%27%
9%14%
9%18%18%14%14%
5%23%
5%0%0%0%5%0%
14%0%0%0%9%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
146NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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
96%
85%
68%
34%
45%
6%
8%
71%
43%
57%
43%
14%
0%
14%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
147NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure PS-4Plastic Surgery (Integrated)Percentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
70
1814 14
72
12 11 9
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
61
10 10 10
56
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).
148NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
3.8
3.1
3.6
3.1
2.1
2.6
1.7
1.6
1.1
4.0
3.4
2.6
3.6
1.7
1.3
1.6
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
3.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
4.4
3.4
3.6
3.6
1.8
2.6
2.2
1.6
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"
149NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Psychiatry
150NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.64.74.14.44.34.54.44.43.64.43.94.03.84.43.94.14.14.33.84.14.04.44.24.04.13.64.13.83.63.93.93.74.03.43.53.53.73.73.63.63.44.23.94.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%83%78%64%62%62%72%62%48%58%64%50%43%53%55%60%42%56%47%55%33%40%45%39%38%6%
38%45%23%27%21%29%10%10%31%19%20%37%13%16%10%10%5%3%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
PsychiatryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
151NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.34.54.24.44.24.54.34.43.74.43.84.24.04.44.13.94.24.34.04.13.94.34.14.24.03.94.13.93.94.13.93.74.23.83.63.83.83.83.74.13.64.04.34.04.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
63%61%53%51%44%51%55%54%39%47%42%47%36%37%46%35%34%45%42%39%38%25%37%27%26%13%42%31%23%21%21%21%15%15%24%32%12%20%18%23%10%11%
5%5%
13%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
PsychiatryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
152NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.94.64.74.64.14.44.44.54.54.44.34.04.14.23.74.04.14.33.74.24.34.04.64.24.33.74.34.13.93.94.13.73.84.33.73.83.64.03.93.84.04.53.74.23.9
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
90%85%74%68%68%64%66%55%60%69%47%33%45%34%39%49%39%47%41%42%52%30%34%33%29%21%37%33%42%21%
4%26%14%
7%8%
23%14%12%29%10%
9%7%1%3%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
PsychiatryPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
153NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.64.54.54.34.44.54.54.64.44.34.04.34.23.93.94.14.34.14.14.14.14.24.24.13.94.14.23.94.24.13.84.04.33.73.94.14.13.83.74.24.34.24.04.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
71%68%54%51%47%51%47%36%46%50%34%29%36%30%29%32%37%40%37%26%33%30%20%25%23%22%28%30%27%18%
9%19%15%12%10%15%10%20%16%12%14%
7%4%6%3%
10%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
PsychiatryPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
154NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
80%
71%
21%
49%
4%
0%
72%
53%
70%
12%
18%
15%
5%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
155NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure PY-4PsychiatryPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
29
1411 10
40
8 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
60
9 8 7
74
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, 2017
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.
4.5
3.2
3.1
2.3
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.2
4.6
3.5
3.2
3.1
2.2
1.8
2.1
1.7
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
4.7
3.5
3.2
2.9
2.0
1.7
1.7
1.4
1.7
4.5
3.5
3.5
3.3
2.4
1.7
2.1
1.9
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"
157NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Radiation Oncology
158NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.64.44.34.54.44.44.43.64.34.03.94.44.44.23.94.63.83.73.84.34.33.84.43.93.83.83.43.83.73.63.54.03.83.43.53.63.33.03.53.03.83.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%80%79%62%67%59%57%68%51%56%48%46%60%43%10%50%7%
35%45%39%67%35%24%56%33%27%22%24%33%32%24%20%7%
18%18%4%
13%12%17%6%6%
13%4%6%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Radiation OncologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
159NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.14.54.24.34.54.83.84.74.04.52.44.04.64.44.84.74.84.04.34.74.54.74.54.64.0
3.53.5
4.03.34.0
4.73.52.5
5.0
4.34.05.0
2.05.0
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
71%29%71%50%86%57%36%50%36%50%36%29%36%36%43%21%36%29%21%43%57%33%29%56%21%
0%14%14%
0%21%29%14%
0%21%14%14%
0%7%0%
29%7%
11%0%7%
14%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Radiation OncologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
160NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.64.64.54.64.44.44.64.34.74.53.93.73.73.83.94.04.04.14.14.34.44.63.63.94.03.63.33.94.03.34.03.83.83.54.24.03.22.94.44.33.32.73.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
82%77%77%73%85%80%68%61%52%56%54%68%41%
9%53%47%13%33%34%42%37%67%38%61%30%37%25%23%28%29%29%14%10%10%19%14%13%
1%8%
14%6%9%4%4%4%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Radiation OncologyPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
161NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.34.55.04.44.74.64.44.24.64.74.74.94.85.03.53.04.73.74.03.33.84.64.04.84.73.84.03.73.73.84.04.54.04.03.53.0
5.05.03.02.05.03.0
5.0100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
62%85%38%62%77%69%69%46%38%23%92%69%31%31%15%31%46%23%23%31%31%69%38%50%23%31%23%23%23%38%15%15%15%38%15%
8%0%8%
15%8%8%
25%8%0%0%8%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Radiation OncologyPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
162NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
77%
27%
54%
0%
3%
100%
75%
88%
13%
50%
13%
13%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
163NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure RD-4Radiation OncologyPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
63
1713 13
81
10 10 9
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
56
3 3 3
40
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).
164NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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.
4.1
3.5
3.2
2.8
1.8
2.4
1.9
1.5
1.1
4.3
3.8
3.3
3.0
3.0
2.0
1.8
1.8
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
4.0
3.0
3.8
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.3
1.0
4.0
4.0
3.7
4.0
2.3
2.0
1.3
2.0
3.3
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"
165NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Radiology-Diagnostic
166NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.54.74.24.44.34.54.34.53.74.43.84.04.24.54.13.94.44.23.93.93.74.43.94.24.03.84.23.84.03.93.73.84.43.23.43.33.73.63.23.63.54.03.74.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
91%78%86%66%67%65%71%64%60%55%65%55%51%51%58%53%58%40%51%37%46%36%28%47%33%33%18%41%36%20%18%29%22%10%29%12%4%
36%14%5%7%
11%4%4%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
167NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.44.74.24.34.34.64.34.43.74.43.94.14.34.54.24.04.54.04.13.83.94.53.94.54.04.34.13.74.13.94.03.84.33.63.63.74.13.53.64.13.84.43.83.94.1
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
70%55%65%54%52%53%54%55%50%47%44%46%40%36%52%32%50%34%51%25%37%19%27%26%26%32%27%34%29%17%19%22%26%14%22%18%
6%21%21%19%10%
5%5%5%
16%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
168NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.54.74.54.44.54.44.64.64.54.44.34.04.43.93.84.24.24.04.13.93.94.64.44.34.24.14.13.83.73.93.43.94.33.73.74.43.63.53.53.64.34.73.84.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
82%80%77%69%74%62%63%55%59%65%58%45%38%53%53%48%42%35%47%42%33%38%31%42%27%31%19%16%41%22%20%28%15%26%
8%25%
4%5%
32%11%
5%7%3%6%3%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
169NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.74.54.54.44.44.44.44.64.54.44.44.34.24.33.84.04.44.24.14.13.94.14.44.34.24.24.24.13.94.14.23.83.94.23.54.14.13.53.83.74.24.23.83.63.64.4
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
71%71%62%56%57%56%47%38%47%48%45%40%39%47%42%39%44%33%42%30%24%34%21%25%22%26%18%20%29%15%24%21%13%26%10%15%
6%10%18%13%10%
4%4%6%3%
13%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Radiology-DiagnosticPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
170NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
68%
30%
55%
5%
7%
81%
63%
65%
16%
29%
6%
6%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
171NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure RO-4Radiology-DiagnosticPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
19
14 14
52
139 9
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
68
12 11 10
59
3 3 5
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, 2017
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.
4.5
4.0
2.9
2.5
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.5
1.1
4.8
4.1
3.2
2.7
1.9
2.5
2.5
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
3.7
2.8
3.1
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
4.9
4.1
3.4
3.2
1.9
1.6
1.8
1.9
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"
173NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Surgery-General
174NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
4.34.74.14.54.34.43.94.43.54.33.54.24.44.54.23.84.54.03.73.84.24.34.04.14.03.94.13.44.03.73.63.44.23.63.23.63.73.13.13.73.43.33.43.7
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
87%84%81%64%69%57%46%56%51%53%52%56%64%54%55%51%59%40%36%36%51%27%28%27%32%35%22%17%33%21%19%16%37%22%16%33%4%7%
12%8%3%4%3%5%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violation
Surgery-GeneralPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
175NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.14.74.24.54.04.63.94.43.74.43.74.34.34.54.43.64.44.24.13.84.04.34.04.34.04.34.13.74.23.94.13.64.43.83.43.73.93.83.73.83.84.44.14.04.3
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
60%55%56%54%46%48%36%52%47%48%36%45%48%39%46%27%47%35%46%30%43%18%20%27%21%33%29%15%34%24%22%12%29%18%17%35%
8%6%
16%19%
7%5%5%4%
13%
Desired geographic locationPerceived goodness of fit
Reputation of programQuality of residents in program
Academic medical center programQuality of educational curriculum and training
Work/life balanceQuality of facultySize of program
Quality of program directorCost of living
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Career paths of recent program graduates
House staff moraleFuture fellowship training opportunities
Social and recreational opportunities of the areaPreparation for fellowship training
Diversity of patient problemsQuality of hospital facilities
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherCultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic location
Future job opportunities for myselfSupport network in the area
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleSize of patient caseload
Quality of ancillary support staffAvailability of electronic health records
Vacation/parental/sick leaveABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceSalary
Community-based settingQuality of ambulatory care facilities
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceAlternative duty hours
Schools for my children in the areaOther benefits
Presence of a previous Match violationH-1B visa sponsorship
Surgery-GeneralPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Selecting Programs for Application
176NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5
4.84.64.44.64.24.54.44.64.54.04.44.44.34.63.63.64.24.13.74.03.84.24.54.34.14.14.14.03.43.74.13.23.84.03.63.33.64.02.93.63.53.94.03.43.8
100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
89%82%72%74%67%59%61%62%57%43%56%62%52%55%40%38%38%35%34%38%33%48%26%25%28%29%23%23%16%19%24%14%14%27%17%15%
3%19%
7%9%5%4%7%2%2%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefits
Surgery-GeneralPercent of U.S. Seniors Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
177NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
4.84.54.34.54.34.54.44.54.54.14.34.34.34.53.93.84.44.34.23.74.14.14.34.54.14.44.04.23.74.04.33.64.04.33.83.74.24.03.83.74.14.03.93.63.84.2
100% 80% 60% 40% 20%0%
60%57%51%53%50%46%45%37%48%28%36%38%38%42%39%27%35%29%42%20%22%35%16%20%18%28%15%21%11%20%25%15%16%28%13%
8%7%
21%4%
10%11%
3%5%3%2%9%
Overall goodness of fitInterview day experience
Desired geographic locationQuality of residents in program
Reputation of programQuality of faculty
Quality of program directorHouse staff morale
Quality of educational curriculum and trainingWork/life balance
Academic medical center programCareer paths of recent program graduates
Balance between supervision and responsibility**Preparation for fellowship training
Size of programCost of living
Future fellowship training opportunitiesDiversity of patient problems
Quality of hospital facilitiesSocial and recreational opportunities of the area
Program's flexibility to pursue electives and interestsOpportunity to conduct research
Job opportunities for my spouse/significant otherFuture job opportunities for myself
Support network in the areaSize of patient caseload
Cultural/racial/ethnic diversity of geographic locationCultural/racial/ethnic/gender diversity at institution
Call scheduleQuality of ancillary support staff
Opportunity to perform specific proceduresSalary
Availability of electronic health recordsABMS board pass rates
Opportunity for international experienceVacation/parental/sick leave
Quality of ambulatory care facilitiesCommunity-based setting
Supplemental income (moonlighting) opportunitiesHaving friends at the program
Opportunity for training in systems-based practiceSchools for my children in the area
Presence of a previous Match violationAlternative duty hours in program
Other benefitsH-1B visa sponsorship
Surgery-GeneralPercent of Independent Applicants Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating* for Each Factor in Ranking Programs
178NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
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 a mix of both competitive and lesscompetitive specialties as a "fallback" plan
I ranked one or more less competitive programsin my preferred specialty as a "safety net"
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%
77%
67%
26%
54%
5%
2%
74%
62%
71%
21%
27%
14%
9%
U.S. Senior Independent Applicant
179NRMP Applicant Survey Results, 2017
Figure SG-4Surgery-GeneralPercentage of Applicants Citing Different Ranking Strategies 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
48
1914 14
60
6 5 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
75
8 7 6
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, 2017
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
4.0
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.7
1.2
4.8
4.3
2.9
3.0
1.8
1.4
1.6
1.6
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
4.6
4.0
3.1
2.9
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
4.7
4.2
3.3
2.9
1.8
1.8
1.5
2.2
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, 2017