Having just read through 75 applications (resident reviewer), I can tell you guys the process of choosing applicants to interview is very hard. Our program screens out low board scores, so the average board score I looked at was about 240. There were 5 other reviewers, so by a rough estimate we have about 450 applicants with avg 240 board score. Also out of the 75 that I read, I didn't read 1 letter that said negative things about the applicant. Nearly everyone had very good clinical grades as well. Research varied a little more, but most people had some. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think some reviewers (like myself) have to end up using more subjective information, like our overall feel for the applicant. Do I think the applicant would really want to come here? Do you have any ties to the area? While someone from California may come to Michigan, I think it's much more likely that someone from Chicago will. Maybe that's not fair, but I think a lot of people feel that way. Do you sound genuine in your personal statement or are you giving me garbage about loving to play with tinker toys as a child (you would be surprised at how many people have personal statements like this)? Also, limiting descriptions of you activites to a few lines makes your application easier to read, making it more likely that the whole application will be read. Medicine recs are ok, but every one I read was so gushing about the applicant so I started to ignore them. Bottom line, many applications look very similiar, making peripherals more important and some impressive applications just don't read that well. I honestly thought that about 60 of the 75 apps I read were well qualified, but I was only allowed to pick 15 with 15 backups. I felt like I was randomly choosing some of them. Lastly, all of our rotators are automatic interview, so choose away's wisely. Hope this makes things slightly more clear and I'm not freaking people out more.
