Match List

[Guest]

Bumping this up in hopes of seeing the raw data @socrates

[bump]

bumping as well

[Guest]

Raw data would actually be really helpful. Without it, this doesn't really do it for me.

For example, what's a low score have in publication numbers. How much did some high scores rely on just numbers? And so on.

[Guest]

Agree with above. SOS

[Guest]

@socrates

[socrates]

I'll try to get to it in the next bit here, I've had wall to wall cases and a number of other things come up recently.

That being said, be patient. Individual, anecdotal data is not particularly useful given the limited amount of information collected here and intangibles that inevitably play a role.

[Guest]

(04-25-2017, 04:30 AM)socrates Wrote: I'll try to get to it in the next bit here, I've had wall to wall cases and a number of other things come up recently.  

That being said, be patient.  Individual, anecdotal data is not particularly useful given the limited amount of information collected here and intangibles that inevitably play a role.

I get being curious about the stats, but it's a little unclear to me how *any* of this data really helps *anyone.* Are any of you guys planning to go to a crappier med school, do worse on the wards, get a lower boards score, write fewer papers, or be more of a jerk during interviews because of this data? I mean, the direction to push all those things is clear.

And if anyone is thinking about this, the idea that you'll come up with a magical weighting system that reveals you should actually spend 2 hours per day on step 1 studying and 1 hour on research and not the other way around is a statistical fantasy. (And also just a really horribly sad way to live your life.) Your strategy should be to educate yourself and learn to contribute to the field. That's all you need to know.

FWIW, my takeaways from seeing the match in person this cycle were: (1) personal factors matter, (2) the match is unpredictable and surprises happen, (3) it's an impressive group out there, and mostly way cooler than you'd expect from reading online. Everything else is noise.

-Mud

[socrates]

The list can be viewed here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing 

Google Document:

[Guest]

(04-27-2017, 02:10 PM)socrates Wrote: The list can be viewed here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...sp=sharing 

Google Document:

[Ventricles]

Interesting. The data that we have is only 48 people, and seems skewed towards people who matched high on their list. The majority of people matched in their top 5, and its logical that those are the one's who'd be most willing to share their data and seek out this forum to do so. Still, its something to go on, but I'd caution everyone to look at this list with a grain of salt.