XX a Disadvantage??

Couldn't agree more with "Staff". There is clearly selection bias since there are plenty of people who don't want to train in NYC just like there are people who don't want to train in St. Louis (for example).

I've received emails from qualified female and male applicants with similar stories who did not match - unfortunately, there are definitely qualified people who do not match and for that group reapplying the next year can be and often is successful.

Honest assessment of why you didn't match is critical, however, so please reach out to your advisors and get critical, constructive feedback. If there is something negative in your interviews or demonstrated on your acting internship that is superceding your "walk on water paper status", then you're better off knowing that now rather than going through the whole process all over again and not matching a 2nd time.

wnl

the RRC views diversity as a positive.

as dr. levine said, the isa politically charged issue. i can tell you, from a smaller midwest program point of view, that it is hard to attract good applicants to a midwest 6 year program unless they have ties. it is easy for a large northeast or west coast program to attract diverse applicants due to location and therefore many of these bigger well known programs in popular areas are interviewing many of the same strong female applicants. i agree you must look at the history of the program; i remember when i was interviewing, i ran into the same 5 women everywhere i went and they all wanted to go to Vandy.

XX chromosomes should not be a negative. typically when people don't match, there was something that turned people off by an application or interview or you fell into the middle of the pack and had an unfortunate draw in the match.

there are a lot of good to excellent applicants out there. it is not an easy selection process and occasionally good people get lost in the shuffle.

Based on Dr. Levine's numbers from his own program I think some things are pretty clear. If you were a girl you had three times the chance of interviewing. 19/67=28%. vs. men 40/433=9%.

Whether this can be extrapolated to the rest of the programs who knows, but what is it like for a male applying to say OB/Gyne now? Is there a same double standard?

Are women matching more at certain programs because they have larger class sizes? I'm just brainstorming here, but might program directors be more concerned about losing one of three residents to maternity leave than losing one of eight or more? Of course that would be stereotypical, but I reckon they could think it.

This is a politically charged discussion for all of the obvious reasons. As has been pointed out many times on this site, however, there are many programs that have a "history" of matching women, minority, etc... applicants and there are others which simply don't.

There is not a lot of mystery to this since you all have access to programs' websites, previous students' perspectives, and current residents in those particular programs. If you are a woman applicant at a program that has no women residents and hasn't had one graduate in many years, it's very likely that you're in the wrong place.

On the other hand, there are plenty of programs (community, academic, small, and large) that believe diversity is a positive characteristic and with the applicant pool being so incredibly qualified and competitive it's very easy to match a "diverse" group.

For the record, as mentioned in the above post, we matched 3 women out of 5 for our 5-year program and 1 woman for our 6-year program. The statistics this year: 500 applications (67 women). We interviewed 58 people this year (19 women).

I know from speaking to the PD at HJD they also matched 4 women (out of their 12 residents).

Bottom line: Do your homework and identify programs that you feel will be a good fit for you - not just because of your gender or race (although that's clearly important) but also for all the other criteria that "Staff", other attendings and I have tried to assist you with in this challenging process.

As always, feel free to email me if you have any questions which you'd like to discuss "off-line" - [url=mailto]wnl1@columbia.edu[/url].

wnl

I think it ends up being a wash. There are some programs out there (specifically in the Southeast) that have never had a female resident and seem plenty proud to share that with all candidates, male and female. There are other programs that probably give women as well as minorities an advantage over the traditional white male applicant. It sounds like everything is great on your application. It may be worth contacting the program directors at some of the places you applied and ask what suggestions they have to improve your chances of matching there next year. Is it your application, letters, research, interview, etc. You have nothing to lose by asking, and it shows that you are determined to do orthopedics at their institution. Keep working hard, and it will pay off. Bottom line, if there are programs that black ball because of race or gender, screw 'em. That's not an environment you would want to be in for five years anyway.

It is an advantage however since there are so few females applying and most are usually very qualified, many programs will assume that you will end up chosing to "better" program. The truth of the matter is most females do. Thus other programs are less apt to believe u when u say u ranked them number one because there is so much bs going on during the post-interview period. This is truly a double-edged sword. I will tell you that many programs have matched high numbers of females this year. From HEARSAY, Columbia and NYU matched something like 4 females each this year alone. You will notice that the "top" programs have consistently matched females almost every year and I don't think that this is a coincidence. Obviously, these programs are not going to take everyone of them but the other programs are thinking YOU will go there and not rank u. These programs fill their ranks and rather than u matching at a place u ranked lower (which is what happens with most male candidates), u dont match at all. This is where some of the problem arises.

By the way, females are not alone in this regard. You see this with minority candidates as well.

I keep on hearing how programs are looking for women for "political reasons", and how being a woman can be an advantage. However, I didn't see that this year. On most of my interviews I was the only woman, or one of two that day. I find it especially interesting that one particular small program was very vocal about wanting to get a woman this year (they had none previously). Other people that interviewed there heard it from attendings affiliated with the program, and I was made to feel highly recruited (the secretary told me how glad she was I had accepted their invite, one of my interviewing attendings that I had met previously at a conference told me that they really wanted me there because of my background and because they really wanted to take a woman). Funny thing was, they only interviewed 2 women out of something like 40 total (2 spots a year). Surprise, surprise I didn't match there despite ranking it #1, telling them I was ranking it number one, and several calls made on my behalf by attendings from my home program.

The cynic in me believes that programs want to look good by interviewing lots of women and that may lead to the perception that women have an advantage. However, I believe that many of these interviews are just for show and they have no intention of ranking a woman very high. Maybe that was why they picked me as one of their token interviews (so they could use my low step 1 as an excuse to rank me low or leave off the ROL entirely), otherwise they could have interviewed one of the females with great scores, research, etc.

I think a female with a stellar application has a good chance (two females from my school matched at great programs, not sure how many there were this year). Those who are average or who have a red flag I think are more screwed than their male counterparts. Just my perspective of course, and colored by rejection times 2.

I had a similar experience as you, Ortho4Eva; similar board scores, plenty of honors, AOA, small research, good letters, aways in the west and midwest, lots of extracurriculars, and two X chromosomes. Offered 21 interviews, went on 14, ranked them all, and didn't match.

I probably did myself a disservice by applying to mainly smaller programs in the midwest and south where some programs still have a good old boy attitude but certainly not all. I think being a girl helped in getting interviews, but there were two programs where I interviewed where I could tell no girl was going to be on the rank list. The rest, the best I can assume is I screwed up that many interviews. I don't know. Best of luck to you next year. I'll be seeing you around.

i believe there has been ortho research showing that women have the same chance of matching. the same article states that women get more interviews than men.

my guess is that being a women is a polarizing attribute... it either gives people a reason to hate you or to like you more for the reasons bonebuilder listed. my take on women in surgery, is that they always seem to have a chip on their shoulder. not all but some. others, especially in ortho, try to hard to fit the ortho stereotype... regurgitating what you heard on sportscenter at any given opportunity is one example ive seen. that gets pretty annoying. however, these are just the exceptions... most ive met are not this way.

my guess is being a women didnt have any direct impact on not matching--is there anything else in your CV or personal statement that is different? lack of outside interests, unusual long-term goals, member of a unpopular political group, etc. anything bad in your LOR's? did you see your dean's letter?

Just my two cents.

I think qualified females have an advantage in most settings. If you have good grades and a good CV, then you're going to get a ton of interviews. If you perform well there, you'll get a spot. There are so many more male applicants than female appliants, and the fact that schools desperately want females to improve there diversity (and image, not to be controversial), XX is an in if you don't screw something up.

On all my interviews, the big name programs, especially on either coast, have a ton of gender equity. Harvard, Washu, UW, Wake, etc. (just a few I remember) all had a good number of females. The smaller schools, which seem to be more close nit is the only place where are I think you may have a disadvantage. That's where the good-old-boy mentality may hurt.

I have no explanation why you did not match. Good luck next year.