Results Of The 2020 NRMP Program Director Survey
Results of the 2020 NRMPProgram Director SurveyAugust 2020www.nrmp.org
Questions about the contents of this publication may be directed to National Resident MatchingProgram, (202) 400-2233 or datarequest@nrmp.org.Questions about the NRMP should be directed to Donna L. Lamb, D.HSc., M.B.A., B.S.N.,President and CEO, National Resident Matching Program, (202) 400-2233 or admin@nrmp.org.Suggested CitationNational Resident Matching Program, Data Release and Research Committee: Results of the2020 NRMP Program Director Survey. National Resident Matching Program, Washington, DC.2020.Copyright 2020 National Resident Matching Program. All rights reserved. Permission to use,copy and/or distribute any documentation and/or related images from this publication shall beexpressly obtained from the NRMP.
Table of ContentsIntroduction . 1All SpecialtiesCharts for Individual SpecialtiesAnesthesiology . 9Child Neurology . 16Dermatology . 23Emergency Medicine . 30Family Medicine . 37Internal Medicine . 44Internal Medicine/Pediatrics . 51Interventional Radiology. 58Neurological Surgery . 65Neurology . 72Obstetrics and Gynecology . 79Orthopaedic Surgery . 86Otolaryngology . 93Pathology . 100Pediatrics . 107Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation . 114Plastic Surgery . 121Psychiatry . 128Radiation Oncology . 135Radiology-Diagnostic . 142Surgery . 149Transitional Year . 156
IntroductionIn March 2020, the National Resident Matching Program(NRMP) conducted its biennial survey of the directors of allprograms participating in the Main Residency Match . Theprimary purpose of the survey was to shed light on the factorsthat program directors use to (1) select applicants to interviewand (2) rank applicants for the Match.In the 2020 Program Director Survey, several new questionswere added to learn more about the recruitment process atthe program level including whether programs would offermore invitations than interview slots as well as reasons forthat practice; time allowed for applicants to respond tointerview invitations; and how programs scheduledinterviews.The survey was fielded during the 18 days between the RankOrder List Deadline and Match Week so that program match Numbers of responses are presented in most of the graphs,and some graphs use data from multiple survey questions. Inoutcomes would not influence respondents' answers.those cases, different N's are listed. Numbers of applicantsThe survey solicited information on:ranked and positions in the Match are extracted from the the number of applications received, screened, and NRMP database. Graphs are suppressed for questions withreviewed, as well as the number of applicants interviewed fewer than five responses.and ranked the frequency with which programs interview and rank This report presents results by specialty on selected itemsfrom the survey. The NRMP hopes that program directors,specific applicant groups use of test scores in considering which applicants to medical school officials, and applicants find these datauseful as they prepare for and participate in the Maininterview, andResidency Match. the factors used for both interview selection and for rankingapplicants.The NRMP's data reporting and research activities are guided byThe overall response rate for all specialties in this report was its Data Release and Research Committee. NRMP data and reports18.0 percent. Transitional Year programs and programs in 22 can be found at: s with 10 or more responses are included in this report.Response rates are listed in the table below.SpecialtyAnesthesiologyChild NeurologyDermatologyEmergency MedicineFamily MedicineInternal MedicineInternal Medicine/PediatricsInterventional Radiology (Integrated)Neurological SurgeryNeurologyObstetrics and GynecologyOrthopaedic SurgeryOtolaryngologyPathology‐Anatomic and ClinicalPediatricsPhysical Medicine and RehabilitationPlastic Surgery (Integrated)PsychiatryRadiation nsitional YearVascular SurgeryAll OthersTotalNRMP Program Director Survey Results, 2020Surveys Sent Num ber Responding Response 0%
All Specialties Combined(N 924)
Figure 1All SpecialtiesPercentage of Programs Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating¹ for EachFactor in Selecting Applicants to Interview(N 650)Percent Citing FactorUSMLE Step 1 score90%Letters of recommendation in the specialty84%USMLE Step 2 CK score78%Personal Statement78%Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter)76%Perceived commitment to specialty70%Grades in required clerkships69%Audition elective/rotation within your department66%Any failed attempt in USMLE66%Class ranking/quartile65%Personal prior knowledge of the applicant65%Leadership qualities63%Grades in clerkship in desired specialty62%Evidence of professionalism and ethics62%Perceived interest in program61%Passing USMLE Step 2 CS60%Other life experience57%COMLEX‐USA Level 1 score*56%Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership52%Any failed attempt in COMLEX‐USA*51%Volunteer/extracurricular experiences51%COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Clinical Evaluation (CE) score*50%Consistency of grades48%Awards or special honors in clinical clerkships47%Graduate of highly‐regarded medical (MD/DO) school46%Evidence of continuous medical education without gaps45%Gold Humanism Honor Society (GHHS) membership44%Awards or special honors in clerkship in desired specialty41%Passing COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Performance Evaluation*40%Demonstrated involvement and interest in research36%Applicant was flagged with Match violation by the NRMP31%Visa status**28%25%Away rotation in your specialty at another institutionFluency in language spoken by your patient population21%20%Interest in academic career20%Awards or special honors in basic sciencesUSMLE Step 3 score15%COMLEX‐USA Level 3 score*10%100%50%0% 1¹ Ratings on a scale from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important).* DO seniors/graduates only.** International Medical Graduates only.NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 20203Average .13.93.63.83.23.33.55234
Figure 2All SpecialtiesPercentage of Programs Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating¹ for EachFactor in Ranking Applicants(N 641)Percent Citing FactorInterpersonal skills 95%Interactions with faculty during interview and visit 95%Interactions with housestaff during interview and visit89%Feedback from current residents88%Letters of recommendation in the specialty70%USMLE Step 1 score67%USMLE Step 2 score64%Perceived interest in program64%Evidence of professionalism and ethics63%Perceived commitment to specialty61%Leadership qualities60%Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter)58%Audition elective/rotation within your department57%Personal prior knowledge of the applicant56%Personal Statement54%Class ranking/quartile50%Passing USMLE Step 2 CS49%Other life experience47%Any failed attempt in USMLE46%COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Clinical Evaluation (CE) score*43%Grades in required clerkships42%COMLEX‐USA Level 1 score*42%Grades in clerkship in desired specialty37%Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership36%Any Failed COMLEX attempt*36%Volunteer/extracurricular experiences35%Passing COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Performance Evaluation*34%Consistency of grades34%Evidence of continuous medical education without gaps31%Graduate of highly regarded medical (MD/DO) school30%Gold Humanism Honor Society (GHHS) membership29%Demonstrated involvement and interest in research28%Awards or special honors in clerkship in desired specialty23%Awards or special honors in clinical clerkships23%Applicant was flagged with Match violation by the NRMP21%20%Interest in academic career18%Away rotation in your specialty at another institutionOther post‐interview contact18%Fluency in language spoken by your patient population17%16%Visa status**Second interview/visit11%USMLE Step 3 score11%Awards or special honors in basic sciences10%COMLEX Level 3 score*8%0% 1100%50%¹ Ratings on a scale from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important).* DO seniors/graduates only.** International Medical Graduates only.NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 20204Average 3.83.93.74.73.94.03.83.94.03.93.43.43.7345
All SpecialtiesProgram Usage of USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) Scores WhenConsidering Which Applicants to InterviewFigure 3USMLE Step 1 ScoresTest Required?100%Does your program consider applicants who fail theirLicensure test on the first attempt?N 655100%N 65180%80%60%55%57%60%43%40%40%28%20%20%15%3%0%Yes, pass onlyYes, target score0%NoNeverSeldomOftenUSMLE Step 2 (CK) ScoresTest Required?Does your program consider applicants who fail theirLicensure test on the first attempt?100%N 651N s, pass onlyYes, target score0%No10%NeverSeldomoftenUSMLE Step 1 and Step 2 CK ScoresPrograms Consider When Granting InterviewsScores Below Which ProgramsGenerally Do Not Grant InterviewsScores Above Which ProgramsAlmost Always Grant 00190190180180170USMLE Step 1N 337170USMLE Step 2 CKN 190USMLE Step 1N 281USMLE Step 2 CKN 171The boxes in the boxplots above represent the interquartile range (IQR), which is the range between the 25th and 75thpercentiles, and the line in the box is the median. The x-shaped symbol in the box represents the mean.NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 20205
All SpecialtiesPrograms Usage of USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skill (CS), Step 3, and COMLEX-USAScores* When Considering Which Applicants to InterviewFigure 4USMLE Step 2 CS and Step 3 ScoresUSMLE Step 3USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS)Test Required?Test Required?N 644100%80%60%93%80%60%51%49%40%40%20%20%0%N 542100%5%N 24Yes0%NoN 192%Yes, pass onlyYes, target scoreNoCOMLEX-USA Level 1 and Level 2-CE ScoresCOMLEX-USA Level 1*COMLEX-USA Level 2-CE*Test Required?Test Required?N 542100%80%80%60%60%40%N 540100%45%41%40%35%39%25%20%0%20%14%Yes, pass onlyYes, target score0%NoYes, pass onlyYes, target scoreNoCOMLEX-USA Level 2-PE and Level 3 ScoresCOMLEX-USA Level 2-PE*COMLEX-USA Level 3*Test Required?Test Required?N 531100%100%80%N 44690%80%60%60%49%40%39%20%0%40%20%12%Yes, pass onlyYes, target score0%No* DO seniors/graduates onlyNRMP Program Director Survey Results, 202066%4%Yes, pass onlyYes, target scoreNo
All SpecialtiesProgram's Interview ActivitiesFigure 5Average Percentage of Applications Rejected and ReviewedAverage Number of Positions, Applications Received, InterviewInvitations Sent, and Applicants Interviewed and 0%40030%30020%20010010%1078674Number ofinterviewinvitations sentNumber ofapplicantsinterviewedNumber ofapplicants ranked0%60Number ofpositions in theMatchN 924*Number ofapplicationsreceivedN 663N 668N 669Percentage of applications rejectedbased on a standardized screeningprocessN 668*Percentage of applicationsreceiving an in-depth reviewN 626N 647* Data from the NRMP database. All responding programs includedReason for offering more interview invitations toapplicants than interview slots to fillProgram offered more interview invitations toapplicants than interview slots to fillN 245N 685I wanted to ensure we had anadequate number of alternatecandidates in the event otherapplicants cancelled at the last minuteYes, 36%68%I wanted to ensure all interview spotsfilled in a timely manner39%No, 64%I worried I would not fill all my interviewslots31%Other24%0%Time given applicants to respond to interview invitationsbefore extending invitations to other applicants20%N 676In the order in which applicantsresponded to interview offers60%50%Applicants submitted a rank order ofinterview date preferences by aspecified deadline (e.g., within 72hours), with no preference given to theorder of responses40%30%20%15%1%0%1%Less than1 hour1 -3 hours3 - 12hoursOther12 - 24hours24 - 48hours19%21%more than48 hoursPercentage of Program's Interviews Extended During EachTime Period100%30%20%10%0%66%4%0%20%40%60%80%Percentage of Program's Interviews Conducted During EachTime Period100%N 64990%80%70%60%50%40%100N 66270%0%80%80%80%10%60%How interviews were scheduled100%90%40%N 63290%80%70%60%47%50%40%18%20%10%4%Prior to Oct. 12019October 2019November201932%33%30%22%December2019NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 2020January 2020or later10%0%1%Prior to Oct. 12019719%15%October 2019November2019December2019January 2020 orlater100
All SpecialtiesOther TopicsFigure 6Frequency of Programs Interviewing and Ranking Candidates in the Main Residency MatchInterviewRankingn 661n 10%5%1%4%MDSeniorMD GradDOSeniorDO GradOftenUS %23%80%50%100%5%1%7%11%MDSeniorMD GradDOSeniorNeverDO GradOften32%20%US IMGSeldomNon-USIMGPathwayCanadianNeverPreferred Type of Communication About Applicants During SOAPN 638100%90%80%70%60%50%40%35%35%30%23%20%12%10%0%No communication otherthan receipt of the ERASapplicationNo communication andinstead will initiate contactwith references and/or themedical school if neededTo be contacted bythe applicant’smedical school afterprogram hasinitiated contact withthe applicantOtherImportance of Factors in Assessing Residents' Success in Residency ProgramAverage rating on a scale of 5 (5 very important)n 621Professionalism4.9Quality of patient care4.9Clinical competency4.9Ethics4.9Communication skills4.8Passing board certification examination4.5Personality4.3Academic performance during residency4.2Ability to teach medical students3.8Performance on in-training examination3.7Patient Satisfaction Scores3.5Research and publications3.10NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 2020128345
Anesthesiology(N 33)NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 20209
Figure AN-1AnesthesiologyPercentage of Programs Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating¹ for EachFactor in Selecting Applicants to Interview(N 25)Percent Citing FactorAverage RatingUSMLE Step 1 score 100%Letters of recommendation in the specialty68%USMLE Step 2 CK score88%Personal Statement60%Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter)92%Perceived commitment to specialty68%Grades in required clerkships76%Audition elective/rotation within your department72%Any failed attempt in USMLE76%Class ranking/quartile80%Personal prior knowledge of the applicant64%Leadership qualities80%Grades in clerkship in desired specialty52%Evidence of professionalism and ethics68%Perceived interest in program60%Passing USMLE Step 2 CS48%Other life experience52%COMLEX‐USA Level 1 score*56%Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership52%Any failed attempt in COMLEX‐USA*56%Volunteer/extracurricular experiences56%COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Clinical Evaluation (CE) score*48%Consistency of grades56%Awards or special honors in clinical clerkships52%Graduate of highly‐regarded medical (MD/DO) school44%Evidence of continuous medical education without gaps40%Gold Humanism Honor Society (GHHS) membership40%Awards or special honors in clerkship in desired specialty36%Passing COMLEX‐USA Level 2 Performance Evaluation*28%Demonstrated involvement and interest in research36%12%Applicant was flagged with Match violation by the NRMPVisa status**24%Away rotation in your specialty at another institution12%Fluency in language spoken by your patient population16%8%Interest in academic career20%Awards or special honors in basic sciencesUSMLE Step 3 score8%COMLEX‐USA Level 3 score*4%100%50%0% 1¹ Ratings on a scale from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important).* DO seniors/graduates only.** International Medical Graduates only.NRMP Program Director Survey Results, .34.34.04.03.83.03.05234
Figure AN-2AnesthesiologyPercentage of Programs Citing Each Factor And Mean Importance Rating¹ for EachFactor in Ranking Applicants(N 25)Percent Citing FactorInterpersonal skills 100%Interactions with faculty during interview and visit 100%Interactions with housestaff during interview and visit88%Feedback from current residents88%Letters of recommendation in the specialty56%USMLE Step 1 score88%USMLE Step 2 score80%Perceived interest in program68%Evidence of professionalism and ethics72%Perceived commitment to specialty48%Leadership qualities68%Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter)92%Audition electiv
Pathology‐Anatomic and Clinical 136 29 21.3% Pediatrics 228 52 22.8% Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 105 21 20.0% Plastic Surgery (Integrated) 82 16 19.5% Psychiatry 250 57 22.8% Radiation Oncology 85 17 20.0% Radiology‐Diagnostic 195 36 18.5% Surgery‐General 540 70 13.0% Transitional Year 144 22 15.3% Vascular Surgery 59 10 16.9%
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
In March 2016, the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) conducted its biennial survey of the directors of all programs participating in the Main Residency Match . The . USMLE Step 1 USMLE Step 2 CK USMLE Step 1 USMLE Step 2 CK NRMP Program Director Survey Results, 2016 5. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
All programs must participate in the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) or other matching platform when available. All programs designated in the NRMP main match are required to post all positions through the match, as to follow the NRMP All-in Policy as of 7/1/2012. UFCOM-J supports the All-in Policy for its programs and fellowships that
