Coming home from a long day on wards to an hour of Sheriff content is just what I needed. Thank you for your perennially sage advice, and for parsing the confusing data on geo signaling!
My advice for future applicants: Do NOT signal programs that gets enormous numbers of applicants who do audition rotations, unless you’ve also done an audition rotation there. There are many programs that simply refuse to interview people who haven’t done rotations through there. If your goal is to match, focus heavily on showing new programs as much love as possible (especially if you’re a D.O.).
Very great comprehensive guide on signailng. Thanks for all the time and effort that went into this. Provides a lot of insight, especially as an applicant going into the match next month.
I’m so glad your page exists!! Dr. Gray was amazing help for me during my premed journey. So, I wanted another RUclips channel run by an experienced attending, who genuinely enjoyed guiding students, for medical school. I’m so happy I found your channel at the time I did. This was extremely helpful in understanding signaling, because I learned about it for the first time near the end of my third year. None of our admins or advisors ever mentioned it, so this was brand new to me.
Been an APD for an IM urban, community program in the midwest for 10 years. Overall, the program signaling is helpful to us to ensure we are interviewing people who honestly are interested in coming to our program. I appreciate laying out the optimal game theory based on data, but I would say as this is VERY new program utilization of this data will likely evolve over the next few years. I would encourage applicants to be honest when signaling programs or regions. It's more often than not going to prove the winning plan in the long run...and by that, I mean not just matching, but matching into a program that is a good fit for you. By doing that you will be much happier and more fulfilled. I would caution against applying to multiple specialties as a means of "winning" the game by matching. I have known many colleagues who matched into specialties that were poor fits for them as a result of this and typically this leads to a very unhappy professional life.
The magnitude of these changes can potentially change the match forever. I see these tokens are essentially soft-mimicking ERAS putting a hard restriction cap on how many applications you can send out (which I don't think is going to happen). For example, another video of his said that putting a cap of ~30 applications per student may lead to a win for everyone. Though this will never happen, these tokens are a reflection of that, depending on how the programs react to them. It's a soft-lock on applications, because you can still apply to as many programs as you want but applying over that 15 token mark may not be worthwhile. However, this entire video all lies on the assumption that programs will filter by these tokens and geographic signals. If the programs actively interview outside these tokens, because students have higher stats or a better application post filter, then this really has no place for interview invites. It will all depend on programs and how they view these tokens. My guess is smaller programs will take them wholeheartedly while bigger programs, not so much. Thoughts?
@@malcolmcollins4732 Big programs are going to use them too. The challenge is it’s a Herculean task to interview all the candidates…everyone’s going to be looking for opportunities to pare down the number of total interviews without running the risk of not filling.
I think we agree, actually. Like I said, you can’t win by getting something you don’t want - and many applicants can’t win by applying to multiple specialties. But others are less set on a specific specialty and will benefit from taking advantage of multiple preference signaling systems. And I agree, too, that the way programs interpret signals is going to evolve. IMHO there’s value in preference signaling - but it does create one more cat-and-mouse game between applicants and programs. Thanks for watching!
I expect that programs that receive a LOT of signals - either because they’re an extremely popular program in a specialty in which applicants receive a limited number of signals, or because they’re a typical program in a specialty in which applicants receive a large number of signals - WILL screen out applicants who do not signal. As I mentioned in the video, we already saw this happen last year: the probability of an interview offer was 1% in orthopedics (30 signals) and 5% in OBGYN (18 signals). I’m much less convinced that programs filter by geographic preference. In reality, many applicants who prefer a certain region have tie-ins to that region anyhow - I think it’s much less clear that programs are responding to the signal versus the other things (hometown, undergraduate or medical school location, etc.).
@@sheriffofsodium Good point, statistically solid. But just thinking logically (and anecdotally), a student with a 260+ CK score who signals has the best chance. When they filter by tokens first, I don't see them filtering away a 260+ CK score that didn't signal for a much lower score like 200+ that did signal (we can replace numbers with better overall application if you want, scores are just here for shorthand). Doesn't sound right on paper, so I don't think they will filter by tokens first for interview invites. Which brings me back to the original point that the effect of tokens is limited for higher-tier programs because they can interview (and take) the cream of scores regardless if they signal or not. They will actively interview outside of the signals because not everyone who sends them a signal will be worthy of their interview. Possible counter-argument: The volume of applicants will be so high that they can just filter by tokens, and then filter by scores and they will still have more than enough students to fill those seats. Seller's market. So I agree that it will probably be a combination of filtering by scores, signals, pubs, etc and then softer things later on. We can agree on this. Agree with the geographic preference, its just icing really. Though, much easier way to strike a connection than writing another flowery secondary essay about family or other ties. Could be wrong, please let me know your thoughts.
An interesting thing I heard from applicants was that they were listing as many hometowns as they could, every place they spent time in from high school to college to research years etc. Had you heard about any advice given to students to do this and complement the regional preference signaling?
This is absolutely true. I haven’t analyzed this officially, but from my own observations this year, I’d estimate that the median number of ‘hometowns’ that the typical applicant lists is at least 2-3. But I think you’re right - it probably does help.
Question: how do you suggest approaching signaling programs when you are dual applying but your top specialty does not participate in signals? For example, I am applying to peds/adult psych/child psych and general psych as a backup. The peds/adult psych/child psych programs don't do signals, but general psych does. Should I signal each peds/adult psych/child psych programs' analogous general psych program? Or is that the wrong approach?
Hello Dr. Carmody, I have an specific scenario about signaling. I had an interview last year from a program in PM&R, without signaling them. Should I signal them this year in my reapplication?
This is a tough one. So you interviewed at this program… but didn’t match? Is that right? If so, did you hear anything from the program post-interview or post-Match? If you went unmatched previously, and this program ranked you but just not highly enough to match, then it’s probably worth signaling. You don’t want to miss an opportunity with a program that may be likely to give you a look. But if you weren’t ranked - you don’t want to waste a scarce resource on a program that just isn’t that into you. One possibility is to email the program now. Thank them for giving you a look last year, and tell them that you’re re-applying this year. If they respond favorably, then you definitely signal.
It all comes down to the question I posed in the video: do you think you’ll get an interview there *without* using a signal? If your connection is strong enough that you’re gonna get an interview without sending a signal - then the dominant strategy is to save it and use it somewhere else where it can give you an interview you wouldn’t have received without it.
Coming home from a long day on wards to an hour of Sheriff content is just what I needed. Thank you for your perennially sage advice, and for parsing the confusing data on geo signaling!
Thanks for listening - and good luck!
My advice for future applicants: Do NOT signal programs that gets enormous numbers of applicants who do audition rotations, unless you’ve also done an audition rotation there. There are many programs that simply refuse to interview people who haven’t done rotations through there. If your goal is to match, focus heavily on showing new programs as much love as possible (especially if you’re a D.O.).
How do we know which programs do?
Hour long Sheriff of Sodium video, thank you.
You know, I thought about breaking this up into 2-3 shorter videos. But then I thought, nah, I’m saving this advice for my real ride-or-dies.
We appreciate it, you're the goat
This is a really helpful guide to preference Signaling! Really appreciate the time and work that went into this.
You probably know, I love to think about and follow this stuff - so no thanks necessary. But thank you for your kind words!
Tell your friends: the Sheriff is in town
Thank you for watching!
This video is pure gold! Thanks Sheriff!
Thank you for watching! I’ll probably update this one in the summer with some new data.
@@sheriffofsodium can’t wait!
Excellent content! The advice you provide on forming match strategy is source of calm in the storm.
Thank you for taking the time to watch.
Very great comprehensive guide on signailng. Thanks for all the time and effort that went into this. Provides a lot of insight, especially as an applicant going into the match next month.
Thank you for the kind words - and for taking the time to watch.
This really helped! Thank you so much doc.
#blessed
I’m so glad your page exists!! Dr. Gray was amazing help for me during my premed journey. So, I wanted another RUclips channel run by an experienced attending, who genuinely enjoyed guiding students, for medical school. I’m so happy I found your channel at the time I did. This was extremely helpful in understanding signaling, because I learned about it for the first time near the end of my third year. None of our admins or advisors ever mentioned it, so this was brand new to me.
Thank you for such a kind message. (And if something resonates with you, please consider sharing it with others!)
If this continued, I guess match process will be significantly less expensive than it is now. Probably a good thing
Been an APD for an IM urban, community program in the midwest for 10 years. Overall, the program signaling is helpful to us to ensure we are interviewing people who honestly are interested in coming to our program.
I appreciate laying out the optimal game theory based on data, but I would say as this is VERY new program utilization of this data will likely evolve over the next few years.
I would encourage applicants to be honest when signaling programs or regions. It's more often than not going to prove the winning plan in the long run...and by that, I mean not just matching, but matching into a program that is a good fit for you. By doing that you will be much happier and more fulfilled.
I would caution against applying to multiple specialties as a means of "winning" the game by matching. I have known many colleagues who matched into specialties that were poor fits for them as a result of this and typically this leads to a very unhappy professional life.
The magnitude of these changes can potentially change the match forever. I see these tokens are essentially soft-mimicking ERAS putting a hard restriction cap on how many applications you can send out (which I don't think is going to happen). For example, another video of his said that putting a cap of ~30 applications per student may lead to a win for everyone. Though this will never happen, these tokens are a reflection of that, depending on how the programs react to them. It's a soft-lock on applications, because you can still apply to as many programs as you want but applying over that 15 token mark may not be worthwhile.
However, this entire video all lies on the assumption that programs will filter by these tokens and geographic signals. If the programs actively interview outside these tokens, because students have higher stats or a better application post filter, then this really has no place for interview invites. It will all depend on programs and how they view these tokens. My guess is smaller programs will take them wholeheartedly while bigger programs, not so much.
Thoughts?
@@malcolmcollins4732 Big programs are going to use them too. The challenge is it’s a Herculean task to interview all the candidates…everyone’s going to be looking for opportunities to pare down the number of total interviews without running the risk of not filling.
I think we agree, actually.
Like I said, you can’t win by getting something you don’t want - and many applicants can’t win by applying to multiple specialties. But others are less set on a specific specialty and will benefit from taking advantage of multiple preference signaling systems.
And I agree, too, that the way programs interpret signals is going to evolve. IMHO there’s value in preference signaling - but it does create one more cat-and-mouse game between applicants and programs.
Thanks for watching!
I expect that programs that receive a LOT of signals - either because they’re an extremely popular program in a specialty in which applicants receive a limited number of signals, or because they’re a typical program in a specialty in which applicants receive a large number of signals - WILL screen out applicants who do not signal. As I mentioned in the video, we already saw this happen last year: the probability of an interview offer was 1% in orthopedics (30 signals) and 5% in OBGYN (18 signals).
I’m much less convinced that programs filter by geographic preference. In reality, many applicants who prefer a certain region have tie-ins to that region anyhow - I think it’s much less clear that programs are responding to the signal versus the other things (hometown, undergraduate or medical school location, etc.).
@@sheriffofsodium Good point, statistically solid. But just thinking logically (and anecdotally), a student with a 260+ CK score who signals has the best chance. When they filter by tokens first, I don't see them filtering away a 260+ CK score that didn't signal for a much lower score like 200+ that did signal (we can replace numbers with better overall application if you want, scores are just here for shorthand). Doesn't sound right on paper, so I don't think they will filter by tokens first for interview invites. Which brings me back to the original point that the effect of tokens is limited for higher-tier programs because they can interview (and take) the cream of scores regardless if they signal or not. They will actively interview outside of the signals because not everyone who sends them a signal will be worthy of their interview.
Possible counter-argument: The volume of applicants will be so high that they can just filter by tokens, and then filter by scores and they will still have more than enough students to fill those seats. Seller's market. So I agree that it will probably be a combination of filtering by scores, signals, pubs, etc and then softer things later on. We can agree on this.
Agree with the geographic preference, its just icing really. Though, much easier way to strike a connection than writing another flowery secondary essay about family or other ties.
Could be wrong, please let me know your thoughts.
An interesting thing I heard from applicants was that they were listing as many hometowns as they could, every place they spent time in from high school to college to research years etc. Had you heard about any advice given to students to do this and complement the regional preference signaling?
This is absolutely true. I haven’t analyzed this officially, but from my own observations this year, I’d estimate that the median number of ‘hometowns’ that the typical applicant lists is at least 2-3. But I think you’re right - it probably does help.
You're doing god's work
Thank you for watching.
Do you think we need to signal states where we are from/born and the state we are going to school in?
Question: how do you suggest approaching signaling programs when you are dual applying but your top specialty does not participate in signals? For example, I am applying to peds/adult psych/child psych and general psych as a backup. The peds/adult psych/child psych programs don't do signals, but general psych does. Should I signal each peds/adult psych/child psych programs' analogous general psych program? Or is that the wrong approach?
Hello Dr. Carmody,
I have an specific scenario about signaling. I had an interview last year from a program in PM&R, without signaling them. Should I signal them this year in my reapplication?
This is a tough one. So you interviewed at this program… but didn’t match? Is that right?
If so, did you hear anything from the program post-interview or post-Match?
If you went unmatched previously, and this program ranked you but just not highly enough to match, then it’s probably worth signaling. You don’t want to miss an opportunity with a program that may be likely to give you a look.
But if you weren’t ranked - you don’t want to waste a scarce resource on a program that just isn’t that into you.
One possibility is to email the program now. Thank them for giving you a look last year, and tell them that you’re re-applying this year. If they respond favorably, then you definitely signal.
I wonder if this applies to visa requiring IMGs?
It doesn't. Just pick no preference.
How about signaling programs that you have connections with but are not in your geographical area
It all comes down to the question I posed in the video: do you think you’ll get an interview there *without* using a signal?
If your connection is strong enough that you’re gonna get an interview without sending a signal - then the dominant strategy is to save it and use it somewhere else where it can give you an interview you wouldn’t have received without it.
Me eating my chipotle while watching this 😳😳😳
*Promosm*