- Joined
- Oct 15, 2017
- Messages
- 700
- Reaction score
- 842
What do you guys think? What about DR?
Match rate for MDs is almost 90% for anesthesiology. DOs had a 66% match rate . Avg Step scores were almost identical for Step 1 and 2. This is a new phenomenon , where DOs were welcomed equally up until recently. I'd have to say it is less DO friendly than before.I personally would not call it "DO friendly" but rather "DO accessible" (DOable hehe). With the right board scores and programs you apply to, you still have a shot at matching, but it is not "meet X requirements and you're in."
Yes, average MD step I was 237 and step II was 248 while average DO step I was 234 and step II was 245. Overall anesthesiology is just becoming more competitive and based on these numbers the field isn't DO friendly, but that doesn't mean its not DOable if you have strong scores.Match rate for MDs is almost 90% for anesthesiology. DOs had a 66% match rate . Avg Step scores were almost identical for Step 1 and 2. This is a new phenomenon , where DOs were welcomed equally up until recently. I'd have to say it is less DO friendly than before.
More underqualified DO's applied this cycle? People who jumped ship from say EM who didn't have the scores for anesthesia? the pandemic reducing away rotation opportunities and it just getting more competitive overall... way too many variables... highly doubt programs that previously took DO's in say anesthesia or rads would just say no to them now...Match rate for MDs is almost 90% for anesthesiology. DOs had a 66% match rate . Avg Step scores were almost identical for Step 1 and 2. This is a new phenomenon , where DOs were welcomed equally up until recently. I'd have to say it is less DO friendly than before.
MDs had average step I of 237 and step II of 248 while DOs had a step I of 234 and step II of 245. So it seems the overall DO applicant pool wasn't as qualified especially when you consider there was 1500 MD applicants and 450 DO applicants. But there could be other variables at play as well.More underqualified DO's applied this cycle? People who jumped ship from say EM who didn't have the scores for anesthesia? the pandemic reducing away rotation opportunities and it just getting more competitive overall... way too many variables... highly doubt programs that previously took DO's in say anesthesia or rads would just say no to them now...
Technically accurate, but I would consider the difference in scores to be minimal. 2 or 3 points.MDs had average step I of 237 and step II of 248 while DOs had a step I of 234 and step II of 245. So it seems the overall DO applicant pool wasn't as qualified especially when you consider there was 1500 MD applicants and 450 DO applicants. But there could be other variables at play as well.
are those averages for people applying? or people matched to anesthesia? if so the bottom of that average could heavily skew the % for DO'sMDs had average step I of 237 and step II of 248 while DOs had a step I of 234 and step II of 245. So it seems the overall DO applicant pool wasn't as qualified especially when you consider there was 1500 MD applicants and 450 DO applicants. But there could be other variables at play as well.
It was just for those who matched. After looking again, I think the unmatched numbers are more significant. Unmatched numbers for DOs were step I 226 and step II 236 while MDs were step I 221 and step II 231. So just shows there is still more bias and it's not a DO friendly field.are those averages for people applying? or people matched to anesthesia? if so the bottom of that average could heavily skew the % for DO's
But by that logic, the DO averages for matched were lower? So they took more low scoring DO’s on average then lower scoring MD’s? All I am saying is the data is whack.. and objectively looking at match lists, most of the matches into gas from DO schools the past 2 years are at brand name academic places.. so while the data somewhat supports what your saying, the match lists don’tIt was just for those who matched. After looking again, I think the unmatched numbers are more significant. Unmatched numbers for DOs were step I 226 and step II 236 while MDs were step I 221 and step II 231. So just shows there is still more bias and it's not a DO friendly field.
Yeah it’s strange. From how I was approaching it is that the average DO applicant had lower stat’s so although some were accepted it would not make sense to accept a higher amount of students with lower scores. So this may explain why DO had 66% match and MD was 90%. But there are probably many more factors too like bias.But by that logic, the DO averages for matched were lower? So they took more low scoring DO’s on average then lower scoring MD’s? All I am saying is the data is whack.. and objectively looking at match lists, most of the matches into gas from DO schools the past 2 years are at brand name academic places.. so while the data somewhat supports what your saying, the match lists don’t
Highly doubt a field that had no/little bias just a few years ago is suddenly very biased … same for like PMR.. again it’s much more than what the data shows. Covid is real thing tooYeah it’s strange. From how I was approaching it is that the average DO applicant had lower stat’s so although some were accepted it would not make sense to accept a higher amount of students with lower scores. So this may explain why DO had 66% match and MD was 90%. But there are probably many more factors too like bias.
Very few DO ApplicantsHow did 4 US IMG matched plastic?
Zero plastic for DO
The unfortunate reality is that all fields still have some bias towards DOs. US MDs are the currency of the realm. But as the competitiveness of the applicant pool waxes and wanes so does the “DO friendliness” of the field. In times of famine (like a few years ago for gas), DOs match well and the specialty appears to have less bias. As interest of USMDs in a specialty increases the “DO friendless” goes down.Highly doubt a field that had no/little bias just a few years ago is suddenly very biased … same for like PMR.. again it’s much more than what the data shows. Covid is real thing too