Are Short LORs Always Bad? What the Evidence Actually Suggests

Short letters of recommendation are not automatically bad. The panic about “one‑paragraph death letters” is wildly overstated and often wrong.

If you’re deep in ERAS season, you’ve probably heard some version of this horror story: “Program directors just throw out short LORs. If your letter isn’t a full page of glowing prose, you’re toast.”

I’m going to be blunt: that’s not what the data say, and it’s not how most actual program directors read letters.

Do weak letters exist? Yes. Can they hurt you? Absolutely.
But “short” is a lazy proxy for “weak,” and like most lazy proxies in this process, it fails once you look closely.

Let’s separate myth from reality.

---

What Program Directors Actually Care About (Not Page Count)

Most applicants imagine PDs reading every line of every letter like a sacred text. They don’t. They triage.

Surveys from NRMP and specialty PD associations say roughly the same thing every year:

• They care about who wrote the letter
• They care about what that person actually says (specifics, comparison, red flags)
• They care about context (clinical vs research vs “character” letter)

Length? Essentially never listed as a decision factor.

Here’s the rough hierarchy I see in real conversations with PDs and associate PDs at places like mid‑tier IM programs and competitive surgical ones:

1. Author identity and relationship

   • Core faculty vs random community doc
   • Chair or PD vs “friend of family”
   • Clerkship director vs “saw the student once in clinic”

2. Strength of endorsement

   • Clear, unambiguous support (“top 10%,” “I will rank this student highly”)
   • Presence or absence of hedging (“adequate,” “satisfactory,” “met expectations”)

3. Concrete behaviors

   • Can they function on the wards?
   • How did they handle responsibility?
   • Any professionalism issues?

4. Comparisons and differentiation

   • “Among the best I have worked with in the last 5 years” vs “worked well with the team”

Notice what’s missing. “Minimum 500 words or we bin this application.” No one serious about selecting residents uses word count as a primary filter.

---

What the Evidence and Surveys Actually Show

Let’s put numbers on this.

The NRMP Program Director Survey (multiple cycles) consistently ranks “Letters of recommendation in specialty” in the top 3–5 factors for offering interviews. But they’re talking about content and perceived strength, not length.

When PDs are interviewed more candidly at conferences or specialty meetings, you hear exactly the same thing:

• “I skim letters for red flags and for superlative praise; I don’t care if it’s half a page.”
• “Some of the best letters I’ve seen are five sentences from someone I trust completely.”
• “I stop reading once I know how strongly they’re endorsing the student.”

And you see the flip side: long, beautifully formatted, utterly useless letters that say nothing.

To crystalize this, here’s what tends to matter more than length:

Factor	Impact on Interpretation
Writer’s role/title	Very high
How well writer knows you	Very high
Explicit strength language	Very high
Concrete examples	High
Specialty alignment	High
Letter length	Low (unless extremely short)

Length is a loose signal only at the extremes: a two‑line form letter from a clerkship director? Bad. A concise, half‑page, specific endorsement from someone known to the PD? Often excellent.

---

The Real Red Flags: Not “Short” but “Empty” or “Hedged”

Here’s where applicants get burned: they conflate “short” with “negative.” Different problem.

Program directors are not counting sentences. They’re scanning for signals like:

• Vague, nonspecific language
  “Hard‑working, punctual, got along well with others.” That could describe half the class. If a writer stops there, it’s not a time issue; it’s a valuation issue. They don’t want to stick their neck out for you.

• Faint praise
  “Performed at the expected level of a medical student on their rotation.” Translation in PD‑speak: they’re fine, but I wouldn’t fight for them.

• Comparisons that damn with context “In the top half of students I’ve worked with.” That’s almost worse than saying nothing.

• Subtle hedges and qualifiers “With supervision, they were able to…”
  “Given clear instructions, they can…”
  These are not fatal by themselves, but repeated hedging sets off alarm bells.

A 300‑word letter full of this kind of language is worse than a 150‑word letter that says:

“I worked closely with Dr. X for 6 weeks on our inpatient service. I would place them in the top 10–15% of students I have supervised in the past 5 years. They handled high patient volumes, took ownership of follow‑up, and communicated clearly with nursing staff and families. I will be ranking them highly and believe they will excel in an academically rigorous residency program.”

That paragraph is short. It is also deadly effective. Any PD can read that in 10 seconds and understand exactly where you stand.

---

Why So Many Students Fear Short Letters (And Why That’s Misguided)

The fear comes from three places:

1. Misinformation from older students
   You hear, “My advisor said any letter under a page is a kiss of death.” Often this is anecdote plus misunderstanding. What actually killed that applicant might’ve been weak content, not the page count.

2. Confusing template issues with quality
   Some faculty use a standard institutional template that spits out letters with lots of space or boilerplate, ending up at 0.5 pages. Others write on letterhead with tight spacing and hit 1.5 pages. You’re judging Word formatting, not endorsement strength.

3. Overvaluing “effort signal”
   Students assume, “If they cared, they’d write a long letter.” That might be true for a few faculty. But many attendings are drowning in clinical work, have to crank out 30+ letters each fall, and have learned to write short, strong, efficient letters.

Let me be more direct: some of the best, most trustworthy letter writers are also the busiest and least flowery. They write punchy, high‑signal letters with zero fluff.

You’d rather have that than two pages of “Jane is a joy to work with.”

---

Where Length Does Start To Matter

Now, the contrarian take doesn’t mean length is irrelevant in all scenarios. There are boundary conditions.

Short letters become suspicious when combined with any of these:

• The writer is a core faculty member who supposedly worked with you for a full month
• It’s your department chair or program director and the letter is four lines
• The letter lacks any concrete example of your performance
• The letter doesn’t contain any comparative statement or language of strength

In those settings, a short letter can be interpreted as: “I don’t have much to say” or “I’m not willing to stake my reputation here.”

But again: content, relationship, and tone are the real variables. Length just amplifies or muffles them.

To make this concrete, picture two internal medicine applicants:

Scenario	Length	Content Quality	Likely Impact
A	0.4 pg	Specific, top 10%, examples	Positive/neutral+
B	1.5 pg	Rambling, generic praise	Mildly positive at best
C	0.2 pg	Vague, no comparison	Negative / concerning
D	1.0 pg	Specific, top 5%, strong closer	Strong positive

A is not “doomed” because it’s shorter than D. C is the real problem, regardless of font size.

---

What Faculty Are Actually Doing When They Write “Short”

Here’s the other side nobody tells you as a student: many faculty are deliberately moving toward shorter, higher‑signal letters because they know PDs are overwhelmed.

I’ve heard versions of this line directly from attendings:

• “I don’t need two pages to say they’re great.”
• “I give one paragraph of context, one of specific strengths, one line of comparison. Done.”
• “Chairs don’t have time to write novels; we write more like executive summaries.”

From a time/attention economy perspective, this is rational:

• PDs might read hundreds of letters in a season.
• They spend seconds, not minutes, on each.
• A clear, bold statement of support near the top is ideal.

Some institutions also push standardized language or structured templates, which cut down length by design. You’ll see things like:

• “Overall rating: Outstanding / Excellent / Very Good / Satisfactory”
• “Compared with peers: Top 5% / 10% / 25% / 50%”

Then a short narrative paragraph. These tend to be short on word count but rich in information.

---

How You Should Actually Judge (and Manage) Your Letters

You cannot and should not obsess about exact word count. But you are allowed to manage who writes your letters and how you set them up.

Here’s how to think like a grown‑up about this:

1. Prioritize relationship and observation, not reputation alone
   A shorter letter from someone who truly worked with you and likes you is usually better than a long, lukewarm letter from a brand‑name but distant attending.

2. Ask the critical question up front
   The adult way to request a letter:
   “Do you feel you can write me a strong letter of recommendation for [specialty] residency?”
   That word strong matters. If they hesitate, back away politely.

3. Arm them with specifics
   Send a short “brag sheet” or bullet list: specific patients you followed, tough cases, projects, feedback you received. That gives them material so a short letter can still be specific and strong.

4. Look for strength language when you get a peek
   Some systems let you see the letter if you haven’t waived rights; many students choose to waive. If you do see it, ignore the word count and scan for:

   • Concrete descriptions of your performance
   • Comparative statements (top X%)
   • Explicit, strong closing support (“I recommend without reservation”)

If the letter is very short and weak, and you have time, consider asking another writer who knows you better. But do not throw out a tight, specific letter just because it doesn’t hit a mythical “one-page minimum.”

---

The One Place Length Can Be a Proxy: Pattern Recognition

PDs don’t read your letters in isolation. They notice patterns.

If:

• All your letters are short
• None of them contain top‑tier comparative language
• None have clear, specific examples of going above and beyond

Then yes, that composite picture is worrisome. But the problem isn’t “length.” It’s that nobody has gone to bat for you in a clear way.

On the other hand:

• One letter is short and punchy
• One is long and detailed
• One is structured and template‑like with high ratings

That’s fine. That’s normal variation between attendings and institutions.

---

A Quick Reality Check on PD Reading Behavior

To really drive this home, picture how a busy PD processes a stack of applications.

How Program Directors Skim Letters of Recommendation

Step	Description
Step 1	Open LOR
Step 2	Check writer name/title
Step 3	Scan first 3-4 sentences
Step 4	Mentally categorize as strong
Step 5	Categorize as average/weak
Step 6	Potential problem
Step 7	Maybe reread carefully
Step 8	Clear strength or concern?

Now ask yourself: where exactly in that flow does “Is this at least one full page?” matter? It doesn’t. Length affects how long they bother skimming, not the core judgment.

---

When You Absolutely Should Worry

So, when should your antennae go up?

• You know a faculty member barely remembers you, but they still agree to write a letter. High chance of short and weak.
• Your department mandates a “chair’s letter” and everyone knows these are form letters with mostly boilerplate. The differentiation has to come from other letters.
• You hear from a mentor that a particular attending is “stingy” with praise and writes bland letters for everyone. That’s not about length; that’s about style. Choose accordingly.

If you’re already locked in and cannot change a letter, stop doom‑scrolling forums about short LORs. Focus on the pieces you can still control: personal statement, experiences, Step scores, and the strength of your other letters.

---

What the Evidence Actually Suggests: The Bottom Line

Strip away the folklore and here’s what reality looks like:

1. Program directors care about who wrote the letter and how strongly they endorse you, not how many words they used.

2. Short letters can be excellent if they’re specific, comparative, and clearly supportive; long letters can be useless (or quietly negative) if they say nothing.

3. Your real job is not chasing page count, but choosing writers who know you well and will go on record that you’re in their top tier of students and ready to function as an intern.

Length is cosmetic. Signal is substance. Focus on the latter.