What the research profiles of this year's 6 incoming residents actually look like, by specialty relevance and notable activity, not just publication count.
Source: CaRMS program descriptions
Selection weights
Selection weights not published
What the program says it looks for
- Applicants are rated on a point scale covering the interview, personal and reference letters, medical school grades and standardized exams, previous radiology electives and scholarly activity, and research interests and experience
- Hard working, conscientious, self motivated and organized
- Respectful, collaborative, patient and compassionate
- Insightful and well rounded
- Good communication, leadership and time management skills
Where research appears
File review assesses research and publications as a summary of academic projects and experiences, and the interview links interest in radiology to electives and scholarly projects, with scholarly activity assessed through presentations and publications.
51 to 200
applicants per year
51 to 75%
interview invite rate
Inference, not the program's wording
Research has no separate weight. It is one of the point scale areas and appears in both file review and interview, so it can matter at both stages, but the program publishes no weights and no research share can be assigned.
Gaps: Only one stream is listed (Winnipeg CMG, quota 6), and the program does not state an interview count or rank list size.
All six residents in this cohort are Canadian medical graduates. Schools are shown as a set only and are not matched to the individual research profiles below, since with a cohort this small that pairing would make individuals identifiable.
One confirmed publication, a middle-authored protocol for a systematic review on sexually transmitted infections in military personnel, counted as other medical. No radiology research was found.
Notable: no notable activity found in public sources.
Additional items reported in the original research could not be independently confirmed and are excluded from the counts above.
* Includes 5 publications dated after match day.
Five confirmed publications, three of them first or second authored, all in supportive oncology and patient-reported outcomes. The mix is systematic reviews and meta-analyses plus secondary analyses of trial data, with no original protocol. All five are dated after match day and were most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking.
Notable: no additional notable activity found in public sources.
Additional items reported in the original research could not be independently confirmed and are excluded from the counts above.
* Includes 1 publication dated after match day.
Seven confirmed publications, the only record in the cohort with work in radiology. Two are first authored, a workforce diversity study across competitive specialties and an interventional radiology learning curve study that charts as radiology relevant, with the latter dated after match day and most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking. The other five are middle-authored papers in surgery, cardiology, cardiac anesthesia and dermatology meta-research, all counted as other medical.
Notable: no additional notable activity found in public sources.
Additional items reported in the original research could not be independently confirmed and are excluded from the counts above.
* Includes 1 publication dated after match day.
Two confirmed publications, both middle-authored preclinical vaccine studies from a virology group, counted as other medical. The more recent one is dated after match day and was most likely listed on the original application as in preparation or pending publication, which is worth keeping in mind when benchmarking.
Notable: no notable activity found in public sources.
One confirmed publication, first authored: a retrospective neuro-oncology epidemiology cohort study, counted as other medical. An earlier paper in environmental microbiology is non-medical work and is not counted.
Notable: no notable activity found in public sources.
One confirmed publication, a middle-authored national medical education consensus project in surgery, counted as other medical. A later conference abstract reporting the same project is not counted separately.
Notable: co-authored an oral presentation on this education work and sat on a medical student association committee.
Reading this data
Published research was light across this cohort, averaging under three confirmed papers per resident, and only 2 of 17 are directly radiology, including 1 in interventional radiology. Every other confirmed paper falls in another medical field, from supportive oncology to virology to surgical education, so research alignment with the specialty was not a visible differentiator in the public record for this class.
Output is uneven. One profile holds 7 of the 17 confirmed papers, and another holds five that are all dated after match day, so they may have been in progress when applications were submitted. Every resident has at least one confirmed paper. Program weightings may change from year to year.
All data on this page was gathered from publicly available sources and verified to a high but not absolute degree of confidence. This profile is intended to give prospective applicants a general sense of what previously matched residents looked like, not to serve as a definitive or exhaustive record.
