Just curious who you guys think are the smartest doctors in the hospital by specialty. I'm a resident, and we were having a discussion on what specialty we thought tended to be the brightest overall or most impressive.

PS This is meant to be fun... not a pissing war.

Just kidding...probably nephrologist...IMHO! :D

I would have to say Critical Care (MICU), Trauma Surgery, CT surgery... all manage extremely sick patients, that can be very complicated. They handle what other services can't, or won't.

Don't forget to post whatever your "other" is... I'm interested in what subspecialties were overlooked when it comes to brilliance! The OP had a pretty inclusive list.

I'm actually impressed by the minutia that radiologists know.

Proctologists. :D

I'm actually impressed by the minutia that radiologists know.

Agree... They need to know tons of anatomy, pathology, and they know a surprising amount of pathophysiology also.

neurologists

Pathologists.

family doc w/ hospital privileges, of course.

IM docs

neurologists


I second that

I'll tell you who it isn't - the neurosurgeon. Once while I was doing my psych rotation (I was on the C/L service), I had pulled up a chair next to a patient to interview him (this was a competency case b/c pt was refusing brain biopsy for tumor). Now I am a white female, 24 y-o at that time, and the patient was a black male in his late 30s. The neurosurgeon happened to walk into teh room in the middle of my interview with the patient. As soon as he saw me he got all excited and asked me "So you're the patient's mother?" I just sat their waiting him to laugh because I thought it was a joke, but he was looking at me with anticipation and I realized he was serious, so I just replied "No," and he was like "Damn!" I would have thought that if our appearances weren't enough for him to figure this out, at least my short white coat with the school badge would have given it away. :confused:

I'm actually impressed by the minutia that radiologists know.

I second this. It's such a competitive field that they're ridiculously smart people, from what I've seen. I'm sure it varies from place to place though.

I'll tell you who it isn't - the neurosurgeon. Once while I was doing my psych rotation (I was on the C/L service), I had pulled up a chair next to a patient to interview him (this was a competency case b/c pt was refusing brain biopsy for tumor). Now I am a white female, 24 y-o at that time, and the patient was a black male in his late 30s. The neurosurgeon happened to walk into teh room in the middle of my interview with the patient. As soon as he saw me he got all excited and asked me "So you're the patient's mother?" I just sat their waiting him to laugh because I thought it was a joke, but he was looking at me with anticipation and I realized he was serious, so I just replied "No," and he was like "Damn!" I would have thought that if our appearances weren't enough for him to figure this out, at least my short white coat with the school badge would have given it away. :confused:

N=1

I second that

Neurologist of course :D

Another vote for neurologists, aka NERDologists! ;)

Neurologists :D
They aren't usually skilled socially though

A regular IM doc? To be a good internist, you have to be d**ned smart.

The answer is obvious... Internal Medicine! How can you even begin to practice good medicine as a IM subspecialist (cards, gi, heme-onc) if you aren't a great internist? Internists are the only doc who truly have to know something about nearly every area of aspect of medical care from pathophys to dx, to management! and much much more.

The answer is obvious... Internal Medicine! How can you even begin to practice good medicine as a IM subspecialist (cards, gi, heme-onc) if you aren't a great internist? Internists are the only doc who truly have to know something about nearly every area of aspect of medical care from pathophys to dx, to management! and much much more.

Wow you just defined emergency medicine physicians. The only difference is EM physicians can manage trauma patients in addition to medicine patients.

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

I think you might have just started a fight....

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

Yet internists and surgeons are always MORE than willing to call us in (to actually talk to the patient :rolleyes: ) when the patient is too "difficult" for them to manage.

Go figure.

How about general internists? They have nearly the same depth of knowledge as the specialists... ALL of the different specialists, that is.

How about general internists? They have nearly the same depth of knowledge as the specialists... ALL of the different specialists, that is.

They only treat medicine patients.

What about surgical/trauma patients?

































EM

All specialists are useless outside their niche. Generalists lack depth of knowledge in any field.

Therefore, all doctors in the hospital are equally dumb. :D

Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

Pbbbbbt! :p

The answer is obvious... Internal Medicine! How can you even begin to practice good medicine as a IM subspecialist (cards, gi, heme-onc) if you aren't a great internist? Internists are the only doc who truly have to know something about nearly every area of aspect of medical care from pathophys to dx, to management! and much much more.

By this regard, wouldn't a Med/Peds trained physician be even more intelligent? :idea:

All specialists are useless outside their niche. Generalists lack depth of knowledge in any field.

Therefore, all doctors in the hospital are equally dumb. :D



:laugh:

Obviously, this question is extremely subjective. However, I vote IM. Not only do they have to know (and mentally pleasure themselves in doing so) all of the medical differentials...they have to put up with all of the Psych issues. Yes, I'm on another medicine month again, and I would say 90% of my patients have at least 1 undiagnosed psych disorder. This is the reason I chose Radiology and not IM or Psych. You people have to be saints to do this stuff day after day. My hat is off to those of you who chose this path.

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

you've got it wrong...

Internests know everything and do nothing
Surgeons know nothing and do everything
Pathologyist know everything and do everything, but it's too late (the patient is already DEAD!!!)

you've got it wrong...

Internests know everything and do nothing
Surgeons know nothing and do everything
Pathologyist know everything and do everything, but it's too late (the patient is already DEAD!!!)

:laugh: :laugh: I like the last one!

dr house. he's brillant.

dr house. he's brillant.

He may have "book smarts", but his abhorrent behavior towards patients makes him the least intelligent doctor I've ever seen.

:barf:

dr house. he's brillant.

My exact thoughts. Even though he did get kicked out of johns hopkins for cheating of that guy (yeah I know i'm a dork and have been watching 'house').

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.


I've heard that too, but with the addition:
Pathologists know everything and solve everything. :laugh:
Note:I am going into pathology. :D




oops: I didn't scroll down see someone else already responded

My exact thoughts. Even though he did get kicked out of johns hopkins for cheating of that guy (yeah I know i'm a dork and have been watching 'house').

I like watching it sometimes because my friends/family think I am smart when I have figured out the diagnosis by the 2nd commercial break. :laugh:

Internists. That one wasn't listed, so I voted nephrologist - those guys have to know everything.

I vote med-peds.

I've heard that too, but with the addition:
Pathologists know everything and solve everything. :laugh:
Note:I am going into pathology. :D
I think it's "Pathologists know everything but they're too late."

Wow you just defined emergency medicine physicians. The only difference is EM physicians can manage trauma patients in addition to medicine patients.
Yeah if you call "management" paging the surgeons.

You should've included the anesthesiologists (I'm biased here) but many, esp the critical care anesthesiologists are hella smart.

I'm voting for the nerdy neurologists. That's one of the reasons why I love the field :)

I think a tossup between nephro and neuro: both ultra-nerdy specialties :meanie:
But someone told me of a study (I cannot confirm, but it's plausible) showing that psychiatrists actually have the highest IQ among all medical specialties :p

I think a tossup between nephro and neuro: both ultra-nerdy specialties :meanie:
But someone told me of a study (I cannot confirm, but it's plausible) showing that psychiatrists actually have the highest IQ among all medical specialties :p
Maybe.
Most posters have converted the question from who's the most intelligent to who is the most learned about medical information. Not the same thing!

neurologists

I agree with this, they are one of the last specialties who can figure out almost any lesion just by symptoms and if needed physical exam

The most intelligent people in the hospital are likely not the physicians (sorry everyone). Intelligence and hard work/discipline/motivation/learned knowledge are different beasts.
I am impressed by some nephrologists and critical care docs who care for very sick patients with multiple comorbidities, etc.
As far as raw, untamed intelligence and aptitude, maybe rad onc or CT surgeons.
sd

Got to go with amarula and kutastha... med/peds! Agree with all the posters about internists, however, internists can't deal with the under-21 set. Med/Peds have to know everything about everyone, and be prepared to handle all of it.

Yet internists and surgeons are always MORE than willing to call us in (to actually talk to the patient :rolleyes: ) when the patient is too "difficult" for them to manage.

Go figure.


The IRONY here is that 40% of our board exam is NEUROLOGY - and theres a ton of people saying neurologists are the smartest :laugh: DUH!

Oh, and you'd have to be pretty smart to work 40/wk and make more than the hospitalists working 80 right? :meanie:

Surgeons have to know the most to do their job well.

Med students and pre-meds posting here may not realize it yet, but surgeons actually do have to understand all the medical physiology behind the disease processes. Surgeons actually do make diagnoses, often when the EM and IM docs can't quite figure out what's going on, they call the surgeon - for abdominal things, vascular problems, endocrine issues that could be treated surgically, all sorts of things.

Spend a month on a surgical service with ICU patients... you will see just how much critical care management every surgeon can handle - surgery residents learn early on vent managment, how to manage fluid balance and hypo or hypertensive problems, run drips - plus they are easily the best at any critical care procedures - central lines, art lines, swans, chest tubes. Rarely will a surgeon call a consult for a critical care patient except maybe a nephrologist just b/c that's who actually gets to say a patient needs dialysis (and we already know the patient needs dialysis before we call them). Surgeons are also trained to do endoscopy, which means they can do all the GI docs do (except not usually ercp), and also operate on the patient's problems too.

Doing surgery is actually quite a fine craft to learn itself, so this takes some smarts too. Learning what to do when a case does not present like the textbook (which happens quite often), takes some quick thinking on your feet and knowlege from lots of background reading you've hopefully done about similar rare cases others may have described.

This is why we spend 80 hours a week all 5 years learning our craft...how can you say a neurologist who spends less than 40 hours a week is smarter - they sure do know more about Parkinson's disease and that sort of thing...but not much about any non-neurologic disease.

With few exception (like a clear-cut MI or CVA), if you ask me to pick one doctor to take care of me when I present to the hospital really really sick with multisystem problems, I would definitely say a surgeon.

the nurses, they're the most intelligent in the hospital.

Surgeons have to know the most to do their job well.

Med students and pre-meds posting here may not realize it yet, but surgeons actually do have to understand all the medical physiology behind the disease processes. Surgeons actually do make diagnoses, often when the EM and IM docs can't quite figure out what's going on, they call the surgeon - for abdominal things, vascular problems, endocrine issues that could be treated surgically, all sorts of things.

Spend a month on a surgical service with ICU patients... you will see just how much critical care management every surgeon can handle - surgery residents learn early on vent managment, how to manage fluid balance and hypo or hypertensive problems, run drips - plus they are easily the best at any critical care procedures - central lines, art lines, swans, chest tubes. Rarely will a surgeon call a consult for a critical care patient except maybe a nephrologist just b/c that's who actually gets to say a patient needs dialysis (and we already know the patient needs dialysis before we call them). Surgeons are also trained to do endoscopy, which means they can do all the GI docs do (except not usually ercp), and also operate on the patient's problems too.

Doing surgery is actually quite a fine craft to learn itself, so this takes some smarts too. Learning what to do when a case does not present like the textbook (which happens quite often), takes some quick thinking on your feet and knowlege from lots of background reading you've hopefully done about similar rare cases others may have described.

This is why we spend 80 hours a week all 5 years learning our craft...how can you say a neurologist who spends less than 40 hours a week is smarter - they sure do know more about Parkinson's disease and that sort of thing...but not much about any non-neurologic disease.

With few exception (like a clear-cut MI or CVA), if you ask me to pick one doctor to take care of me when I present to the hospital really really sick with multisystem problems, I would definitely say a surgeon.

Are you serious??? Have you ever seen a general surgical service where complicated patients are actually managed CORRECTLY! Why do you think general surgeons (just like orthopods) make every attempt to turf their patients to IM? Granted they aren't as bad as orthopods, but still, they don't care about the minutia of the patients medical problems. They can't manage a patient with multisystem disease nearly as well--that is a fact. Granted, IM docs can't manage post-op problems. People go into surgery b/c they like to operate. Yes, operating is a very fine skill, but it's like cooking. You do it the same exact way every single time. You could do it in your sleep 99% of the time (unless you're a trauma surgeon, where you actually do have to think on your feet a lot more). The other 1% are those rare cases where something goes wrong or the anatomy is extremely abnormal which was not anticipated prior to surgery (doesn't happen very often with all the CT's and MRI's that are ordered in advance.

I will agree that surgeons are excellent at critical care, and learn ICU management early and well. Personally, I think that all surgical patients should be admitted to a general medicine service and surgery should only manage their SURGERY. When you ask a surgeon to manage a patients diabetes, MI, CVA, CHF, or even HTN, you're asking for serious problems. They don't care about these issues, nor do they know how to manage them appropriately. (nor should they... it's not their specialty).

Also, if I were getting admitted to the hospital, I sure as hell wouldn't want to get admitted to a surgical service over a medical service. Surgery is not benign, and the fact of the matter is that the same problem will be managed totally different depending on who you seek for help. Example... If you have chronic low back pain, you can seek out a IM doc, Neuologist, or Neurosurg/Ortho. The IM doc is likely to perscribe narcotics/ibuprofen and search for rheumatic causes, etc... Neurologist are likely to perscribe neurontin and be conservative.... the surgeons are likely schedule you for the OR.

This is a riot. As if any of this all actually matters :laugh: There are smart people in every field, and there are dumbasses in every field. No specialty has a monopoly on it, and within every specialty there are people getting by with being morons.

Critical care, on the surface, sounds like you have to be really smart, but in truth a lot of it is algorithms and checklists of things to stay on top of. It's the same with most others as well. In path we get a chance to interact with almost all specialties, and in the course of biopsy interpretation and lab management we interact with them all. So while I am impressed with the knowledge synthesis, lab test knowledge, and differential diagnosis making of the rheumatologists, I am also impressed with the neurosurgeons and their ability to deal with medical problems more than I expected. The two fields I just can't stand dealing with are plastic surgery and orthopedics, because once the patient is out of the OR they seem to stop paying attention completely.

Med students and pre-meds posting here may not realize it yet, but surgeons actually do have to understand all the medical physiology behind the disease processes. Surgeons actually do make diagnoses, often when the EM and IM docs can't quite figure out what's going on, they call the surgeon - for abdominal things, vascular problems, endocrine issues that could be treated surgically, all sorts of things.

I agree, there are some surgeons that are brilliant and have ice water in their veins, making them perfect to handle very sick patients. Those docs have my utmost respect.

There are many surgeons, however, who are the equivalent of the "jocks" in high school and are not the brightest -- even in fields like neurosurgery or CT surgery. At several hospitals in different regions of the country, I have been witness to many examples of a surgeon's poor understanding of disease, sometimes with disturbing consequences for the patients (who typically have no idea they underwent unnecessary surgery or are being mismanaged).

Most recently, we had the pathology attending who took 15 minutes to carefully explain the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment options of a rare thoracic neoplasm to a CT surgeon. After being handed the diagnosis and entire management plan on a silver platter, the surgeon asked his only question: "So, is it a tumor?"

That sums up why I'm in pathology and not surgery!

...Personally, I think that all surgical patients should be admitted to a general medicine service and surgery should only manage their SURGERY...
Hell yeah....I'd be all for that. Let the fleas take care of the minutia.

I agree, there are some surgeons that are brilliant and have ice water in their veins, making them perfect to handle very sick patients. Those docs have my utmost respect.

There are many surgeons, however, who are the equivalent of the "jocks" in high school and are not the brightest -- even in fields like neurosurgery or CT surgery. At several hospitals in different regions of the country, I have been witness to many examples of a surgeon's poor understanding of disease, sometimes with disturbing consequences for the patients (who typically have no idea they underwent unnecessary surgery or are being mismanaged).

Most recently, we had the pathology attending who took 15 minutes to carefully explain the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment options of a rare thoracic neoplasm to a CT surgeon. After being handed the diagnosis and entire management plan on a silver platter, the surgeon asked his only question: "So, is it a tumor?"

That sums up why I'm in pathology and not surgery!

so, is it?

With few exception (like a clear-cut MI or CVA), if you ask me to pick one doctor to take care of me when I present to the hospital really really sick with multisystem problems, I would definitely say a surgeon.

WOW. This is seriously one of the most baffling things I've ever seen posted on this forum. No way. Virtually the last person I'd pick would be a surgeon. In my experience, the IM doctors and subspecialists--when the stubborn surg. service finally breaks down and asks for a consult on their SICU patient circling the drain--are invariably horrified at the kind of management the patient has been receiving for the past couple weeks (hell, even as a fourth year medical student I'm frequently horrified). Thank god for surgeons, and I respect them greatly for what they do in the OR and their ability to handle the majority of post-op patients, but they frequently get in way over their heads when patients have complex multisystem medical problems. It's all fine and good to be rah-rah about your field, but patients die when physicians have a poor understanding of their own limits. Surgery is notorious for brainwashing trainees into believing that they are "internists who completed their training" and need no help, no consults, no outside input... and this is completely ridiculous, not to mention dangerous as hell. Imagine a medical specialty that focused primarily on really sick ward patients, spending countless hours managing these people... but then, at the end of day, popped into the OR for a couple hours. And now imagine these people calling themselves "surgeons who completed their training."
If I ever need major surgery then I'll kiss my surgeon's feet, but I'll also absolutely demand to be co-managed with another service post-op.

There are smart people in every field, and there are dumbasses in every field. No specialty has a monopoly on it, and within every specialty there are people getting by with being morons.

So true :thumbup:

But if I had to pick the single "smartest doctor" I have ever worked with, it would have to be a neurointensivist. Our university hospital has a separate NSICU for the neurology and neurosurg critical cases, and the woman who runs it trained as a neurologist and did some additional training in critical care. (There is talk of creating a neurointensivist fellowship next year.) Anyway, her depth of knowledge and attention to detail is astounding. And she manages all of their complex medical problems along with their neuro and neurosurg issues.

You should've included the anesthesiologists (I'm biased here) but many, esp the critical care anesthesiologists are hella smart.
I 2nd that, Gas gets no love. Anesthesiology is critical care measured by seconds and minutes instead of days and weeks. They are hella smart, and hella cool. Tough combo to find in most specialties.

WOW. This is seriously one of the most baffling things I've ever seen posted on this forum. No way. Virtually the last person I'd pick would be a surgeon. In my experience, the IM doctors and subspecialists--when the stubborn surg. service finally breaks down and asks for a consult on their SICU patient circling the drain--are invariably horrified at the kind of management the patient has been receiving for the past couple weeks (hell, even as a fourth year medical student I'm frequently horrified). Thank god for surgeons, and I respect them greatly for what they do in the OR and their ability to handle the majority of post-op patients, but they frequently get in way over their heads when patients have complex multisystem medical problems. It's all fine and good to be rah-rah about your field, but patients die when physicians have a poor understanding of their own limits. Surgery is notorious for brainwashing trainees into believing that they are "internists who completed their training" and need no help, no consults, no outside input... and this is completely ridiculous, not to mention dangerous as hell. Imagine a medical specialty that focused primarily on really sick ward patients, spending countless hours managing these people... but then, at the end of day, popped into the OR for a couple hours. And now imagine these people calling themselves "surgeons who completed their training."
If I ever need major surgery then I'll kiss my surgeon's feet, but I'll also absolutely demand to be co-managed with another service post-op.

:thumbup:
Agree 100%... I've also watched too many surgeons ego's get in the way of good medical care (not consulting, and watching people die). Being a good surgeon mean's your a great operator... not a good internist.

anyone who is smart enough to choose a specialty that allows a life outside of the hospital and who doesn't take it out on everyone else when their life sucks because they chose a specialty where they never see the light of day.

anyone who is smart enough to choose a specialty that allows a life outside of the hospital and who doesn't take it out on everyone else when their life sucks because they chose a specialty where they never see the light of day.

in the above theme, i'll offer radiation oncologists. and the ridiculous salary doesn't hurt.

also, i'll see your internal medicine and raise you an infectious disease fellowship. maybe this isn't a global phenomenon, but those guys are always coming up with a ridiculously long and complicated differential at my hospital. their explanation usually starts with something like, "9 years ago their was a case report of a guy who presented just like this after his friend brought him a bottle of river water from the congo, which is a well-known breeding ground of one sub-species of tsetse fly that carries a rare form of trypanosomiasis."

[QUOTE=waterski232002]Are you serious??? Have you ever seen a general surgical service where complicated patients are actually managed CORRECTLY! Why do you think general surgeons (just like orthopods) make every attempt to turf their patients to IM? Granted they aren't as bad as orthopods, but still, they don't care about the minutia of the patients medical problems. They can't manage a patient with multisystem disease nearly as well--that is a fact. Granted, IM docs can't manage post-op problems. People go into surgery b/c they like to operate. Yes, operating is a very fine skill, but it's like cooking. You do it the same exact way every single time. You could do it in your sleep 99% of the time (unless you're a trauma surgeon, where you actually do have to think on your feet a lot more). The other 1% are those rare cases where something goes wrong or the anatomy is extremely abnormal which was not anticipated prior to surgery (doesn't happen very often with all the CT's and MRI's that are ordered in advance.[QUOTE]


I guess the interest in the medical care of a patient may vary based on surgeon and institution you are in. Sorry, but I think at my hospitals surgeons are just as good and at times better managing critical care patients well.

You are completely wrong about surgery being routine and cookbook. So often there are cases where things aren't simple and straightforward. Most patients have had previous surgery, adhesions, there are lots of important structures like blood vessels nearby you can easily injure if you are not 100% accurate in every single move you make - you can kill patients easily if you were to take surgery so lightly as you think you can. I don't know how to explain this to you b/c obviously you haven't spent much time in the OR, but if you had you'd know this, especially if you ever tried to do anything surgical yourself.

Something else no one realizes is there is a HUGE emphasis placed on the inservice exam for surgery residents - this is unofficially used in many programs to fire residents - how many other specialties really care this much if you are performing well on the inservice exam? This test is not easy, and has nothing much to do with any surgical techniques, but everything to do with basic science and clinical managment of medical/surgical problems. So, yes, today's surgeons-in-training are expected to have a huge amount of medical knowlege.

The title of this thread could have just as well have been "What field of medicine are you in?".

I would say that surgeons are the most SKILLED, whereas I would say the least amount of INTELLIGENCE is required to do their job.
Not to say lots of surgeons aren't super smart, but I think it is only slightly required. Obviously, to be a physician in the first place you are in the top percent of "smarts" in the country.... So it is all relative.
I didn't think surgeons cared about their patient's medical problems. Not trying to be a brat- I really didn't.

I am very surprised by the amount of people talking about nephrology. Once you grasp acid-base really well and understand renal physio (which is really fun)....

A final thought - almost all docs are really intelligent otherwise they probably wouldn't have made it thus far. It is when they lack social skills, compassion, common sense and a sense of responsibility that we have to worry about them. There are stupid ones and smart ones in every field.

My dos pesos: There are well designed studies showing that patients with even moderate cardiac problems do FAR better when being treated by a cardiologists, rather than general internists. Similarly, there are other studies showing that greater coordination of care with specialists improves care. Also, there are studies showing that doctors "extremely confident" rather than just "confident" in their decisions, actually are wrong more often. My point? Do it yourself all the time, be overconfident, and you are setting yourself up for failure. Most surgeons are excellent and know when to call for help. Same with internists. But far too many surgeons don't too. That is probably the biggest mistake--and it has nothing to do with intelligence.

As for who really is the smartest--uhh, I don't know, but the very exclusive surgical subspecialties I would assume have a pretty high baseline intelligence because they need such good test scores. However, nephrologists seem hella smart to me too. Not sure why, they just do.

My dos pesos: There are well designed studies showing that patients with even moderate cardiac problems do FAR better when being treated by a cardiologists, rather than general internists. Similarly, there are other studies showing that greater coordination of care with specialists improves care. Also, there are studies showing that doctors "extremely confident" rather than just "confident" in their decisions, actually are wrong more often. My point? Do it yourself all the time, be overconfident, and you are setting yourself up for failure. Most surgeons are excellent and know when to call for help. Same with internists. But far too many surgeons don't too. That is probably the biggest mistake--and it has nothing to do with intelligence.

As for who really is the smartest--uhh, I don't know, but the very exclusive surgical subspecialties I would assume have a pretty high baseline intelligence because they need such good test scores. However, nephrologists seem hella smart to me too. Not sure why, they just do.


And this is the key. I'm a rad onc, with training in a surgical specialty. There are a lot of bright rad-oncs, and med-oncs and surg-oncs and internists and etc. But there are some who are underwhelming, too, even in rad onc. The brightest docs (and the ones I want taking care of my family), know their limits, know when to consult the radiologist/surgeon/internist/nephrologist/whomever.

These guys care about doing the right thing for their patients. Also, the best docs think about areas outside their specialty, otherwise we might have just gone ahead and turned on the beam on a spinal lesion for a newly incontinent person with known metastatic cancer and prior spinal mets sent to us by the internists. But, the study didn't show the cord compression. So, when we got to the floor we asked a lot of questions about the urinary symptoms. "Doc, it hurts when I pee and I can't hold it when I go to the bathroom." UA/C&S: whopping UTI, Bactrim and no beam. All better. Wish they were all this easy.

Moral: We all have to pay attention to the patient, be on guard against complacency to medical complaints outside our specialty, talk to one another and learn from each other. That way we all get brighter and our patients get better care.

Just curious who you guys think are the smartest doctors in the hospital by specialty. I'm a resident, and we were having a discussion on what specialty we thought tended to be the brightest overall or most impressive.

PS This is meant to be fun... not a pissing war.


Neurology didn't make your list?

Perhaps derm seeing as they have to bust their humps just to get an interview for residencies?!

No plastics love?

I agree with the dissenters and the obliviously optimistic. Its so true that there are greats and doofs in each field. Surgeons can be excellent at managing pts. with medical problems, if it mattered....LOL.
Seriously i agree that medicine taking care of the medical issues/watching over while surgery worries about surgical problems would be the best combination..FOR THE PT, not anyones ego. Isnt this what they do at the Mayo Clinic?

Too often ppl get all egoistic and righteous, like a IM or Surgeons owning a pt and all their problems, and they should be able to handle anything that comes along. And that it is an affront to your character if you consult or ask for help. That is a retarded attitude, do what your good at and let others who are good at other things do it, and be glad your doing the best for your pt.

Completely agree! :thumbup:

Rads from my limited experience...they have to know physics too..ouch

Orthopods!!!!!! :D

Orthopods!!!!!! :D

are we forgetting psychiatry! Seriously.

Just curious who you guys think are the smartest doctors in the hospital by specialty. I'm a resident, and we were having a discussion on what specialty we thought tended to be the brightest overall or most impressive.

PS This is meant to be fun... not a pissing war.

I think it depends on what you mean by smartest. If you're talking about intellectual ability as manifest in medical school performance (USMLEs, NBME exams, in-house exams, clinical evaluations etc), it's no contest: derm, plastics, ent, rad onc guys are the smartest. I mean, in what other specialites do you hear: "I have 260, AOA, pubs--can I match?"

Now, if you mean by smartest that specialty which requires the largest breadth of knowledge (independent of the innate intellectual ability of those who practice it), then I would say an internist. An internist probably has to know more than a dermatologist, but the average dermatologist performed much better in medical school than the average internist. When I rotated through internal medicine, the prelim students were much stronger than the categoricals.

Orthopods!!!!!! :D
Wanna know how to keep a secret from an Orthopod?









Publish it.

no doctor really impresses me with their intelligence.

internists watch, consult, consider, monitor, and therapeutically wait their patients to the morgue. they are good at coming up with irrelevent differentials, ordering a bunch of studies that don't matter, and ignoring obvious interventional problems until it's too hard to ignore, at which point is it too late. neurologists are the most guilty of this.

surgeons really don't give a crap about things like diabetes and hypertension. i've seen people's sugars fluctuate hundreds of points per shift, pressures over 160. kidneys sucker punched constantly with lasix dose after dose. but at least they're alive.

the smartest resident i worked with was a surgeon. smartest attending was an internist. worst resident was a psychiatrist. worst attending was a neurologist. they are all kind of mediocre though (much better than me, but still mediocre in the grand scheme of things). makes sense, why waste brilliance on medicine.

no doctor really impresses me with their intelligence.

internists watch, consult, consider, monitor, and therapeutically wait their patients to the morgue. they are good at coming up with irrelevent differentials, ordering a bunch of studies that don't matter, and ignoring obvious interventional problems until it's too hard to ignore, at which point is it too late. neurologists are the most guilty of this.

surgeons really don't give a crap about things like diabetes and hypertension. i've seen people's sugars fluctuate hundreds of points per shift, pressures over 160. kidneys sucker punched constantly with lasix dose after dose. but at least they're alive.

the smartest resident i worked with was a surgeon. smartest attending was an internist. worst resident was a psychiatrist. worst attending was a neurologist. they are all kind of mediocre though (much better than me, but still mediocre in the grand scheme of things). makes sense, why waste brilliance on medicine.
:laugh: so true.....so positively true!

Ah dear!

You guys are all wrong, it's those doctors that enter into the hospital administration - now they can push the rest of us around and act like jerks and we grunts can't do a bloody damn thing.

And on top of that, they can't get sued!

If I had a choice, I'd prefer the brilliant people not be in the trenches with us doctors but in the labs researching things to advance medicine. Face it, while we all get off on our clinical research and outcomes research, things like MRI, new drugs, gene therapies, etc. come from PhD physicists, biomedical engineers, chemists, mathematicians.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to become a great doctor. Just a dedicated, motivated person willing to work really really hard.

If I had a choice, I'd prefer the brilliant people not be in the trenches with us doctors but in the labs researching things to advance medicine. Face it, while we all get off on our clinical research and outcomes research, things like MRI, new drugs, gene therapies, etc. come from PhD physicists, biomedical engineers, chemists, mathematicians.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to become a great doctor. Just a dedicated, motivated person willing to work really really hard.


:thumbup: :thumbup:

Derm takes the greatest amount of intellectual firepower to get into. Hands down.

Rad-onc is a bear to get into, as I know, but you can get in without scores/AOA if you have the papers to back it up.

Once all that is done, though, I think internal medicine subspecialists know the most. Probably critical care, but cardiologists and nephrologists are pretty sharp, too.

That's my opinion,
S

If I had a choice, I'd prefer the brilliant people not be in the trenches with us doctors but in the labs researching things to advance medicine. Face it, while we all get off on our clinical research and outcomes research, things like MRI, new drugs, gene therapies, etc. come from PhD physicists, biomedical engineers, chemists, mathematicians.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to become a great doctor. Just a dedicated, motivated person willing to work really really hard.

:thumbup:

Agree... For all you guys posting that think our life sucks and we suffer/sacrifice. Those PhD's sacrifice and yet they are not nearly as well respected as MD's, don't get the prestige (not that we get a lot), and work for virtually nothing... I'll take my hat off to thier work any day. They make us look smart (as if we developed MRI's, ventillator's, and vancomycin).

Anybody watch Scrubs?

Dr. Jan Itor gets my vote :)

The one that leaves the hospital the earliest and has a social life.

If I had a choice, I'd prefer the brilliant people not be in the trenches with us doctors but in the labs researching things to advance medicine. Face it, while we all get off on our clinical research and outcomes research, things like MRI, new drugs, gene therapies, etc. come from PhD physicists, biomedical engineers, chemists, mathematicians.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to become a great doctor. Just a dedicated, motivated person willing to work really really hard.

:thumbup: :thumbup:

ANESTHESIOLOGY- they get out pretty damn early :D

infectious disease? all they ever do is recommend Zosyn.

For my money, a GOOD pulmonary/critical care doc tops the list. (and you can tell the good ones from the average ones on how quick they are to start phoning the consults)

Nephrologists are the most nerdy, for sure.

The obvious answer has been mentioned twice, but not for the right reasons.

Dermatologists- They are the ones smart enough to have chosen a field with no acute call, no nighttime emergencies, very few pts die under their care, a humane residency, good pay, etc.

They are the smarts ones.:laugh:

nephro tops my list. They are always so cerebral.

Although pulm/critical care is probably a close second. Having gone through the IM residency and then done the pulm/cc route makes them very broadly educated.

I much prefer being a surgical subspecialist. If it's not in the head and neck you can bet I'm calling a consult. No reason to extend yourself beyond your area of expertise.

As someone stated previously this could be a thread entitled, "What specialty are you in/Do you want to get in?" and there are studs and duds in every field.

The smartest doc I ever worked with was a neurosurgeon who was actually almost done with his training as a general surgeon when he decided that it was not for him. He spent some time as an ER doc before landing his NS spot.

There is a tie for the dumbest doc I ever worked with. One was a general surgeon who could not find his a** with a map and assistance and I worked a number of cases with him where I thought it would be merciful if the patient just died, rather than be under his care.

The second was a neurologist who could not calculate a GCS score and who could not even correctly document when a patient was following commands or not. Whenever you talked to him there was just this blank stare and you would ask him a question and his answer was always the same. "I don't know about that, let's wait and she if he/she improves".

The docs I learned the most from while in school were probably the nephrologists.

However, if you want to talk about the smartest/most effective group in general, I would have to say anesthesia.

This group marries the minutuae of management of internists with the zeal for procedures of the surgeon. These folks have to be on point all the time, have to be able to sum up a patient by a very quick history, eyeball and gut instinct and are sure as hell the people that you want to be calm in the face of the storm.

-Mike

For the specialty that requires the most amount of knowledge, I'd actually have to vote for family practice. I mean, think about it. They have to know internal medicine, pediatrics, OB/Gyn, psych, and even some surgery. Their knowledge base has to be broad.
However, if your judging intelligence based on board scores, then I'd vote for dermatologists, since they need at least 260 to even think about getting an interview. Oh, and they're smart enough to pick a specialty with a good lifestyle.

However, if your judging intelligence based on board scores, then I'd vote for dermatologists, since they need at least 260 to even think about getting an interview. Oh, and they're smart enough to pick a specialty with a good lifestyle.

Let's not go overboard here...Derm is tough and all but I don't recall them having the highest average Step I score. Can't remember. Anyway a good field with a great lifestyle.

infectious disease? all they ever do is recommend Zosyn.

For my money, a GOOD pulmonary/critical care doc tops the list. (and you can tell the good ones from the average ones on how quick they are to start phoning the consults)

Nephrologists are the most nerdy, for sure.

I'll defend Infectious Disease here for a while, since they're my pick (may be biased by a very good ID program here).

I've never seen a bigger difference in the knowledge when it comes to general IM docs and other IM speciality vs. ID. I don't know if the training has changed recently where more ID is taught but I've seen some of the most baffling management of patients before an ID consult was called (and this is as a student). And while it may seem simple at time (Hey, what doesn't Zosyn treat that you'd need an ID consult for), the times when some rare fungus or unusual strain rears it's ugly head, I'm glad we have a good ID department.

However, if your judging intelligence based on board scores, then I'd vote for dermatologists, since they need at least 260 to even think about getting an interview. Oh, and they're smart enough to pick a specialty with a good lifestyle.

Yes DERMS are the smartest because they are smart enough to be in the hospital the least.

If I had a choice, I'd prefer the brilliant people not be in the trenches with us doctors but in the labs researching things to advance medicine. Face it, while we all get off on our clinical research and outcomes research, things like MRI, new drugs, gene therapies, etc. come from PhD physicists, biomedical engineers, chemists, mathematicians.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to become a great doctor. Just a dedicated, motivated person willing to work really really hard.

Ahem. Are you saying the smartest doctors in the hospital are not chained to any one specialty, but are in fact, MD-PhDs??? :D

neurologists

I've heard it all before. If neurologists are so smart, why do the majority of their patients do so poorly? ;)

The only doctors that know it all and do it all are in works of fiction, those that think otherwise are probably killing people :rolleyes:

As for who really is the smartest--uhh, I don't know, but the very exclusive surgical subspecialties I would assume have a pretty high baseline intelligence because they need such good test scores. However, nephrologists seem hella smart to me too. Not sure why, they just do.

One of the smartest nephrologists I knew use to analyze patients' urine by tasting it. How smart could he be?

its a stupid poll, because you can't judge an entire specialty from an experience you had with one doctor, since you could have a bad expereince or great experience at any given time, that could alter your mind to agreeing that specialty has the smartest docs,
but for me the smartest (well rounded) is any doc that is very good in their own field but also very knowledgeable outside of medicine

One of the smartest nephrologists I knew use to analyze patients' urine by tasting it. How smart could he be?

Dude, are you serious? I could see that sort of thing happening back in the days of ancient Greece or Rome, in fact probably earlier, when physicians didn't have the labs we do now. But in this day and age, come on!

neurosurgeons or neurologist perhaps.

neurosurgeons or neurologist perhaps.

Nah.. I think the Critical care guys. PICU MICU SICU

I am recalling an old joke in my hospital:

Internists know everything but do not solve anything.
Surgeons do not know anything, but solve everything.
Psychiatrist do not know anything and do not solve anything.

This is the joke.

An internist is someone who knows everything and does nothing.
A surgeon is someone who does everything and knows nothing.
A psychiatrist is someone who knows nothing and does nothing.
A pathologist is someone who knows everything and does everything too late.:)

obviously its anesthesia, damn those guys are soooooooo smart :cool:

Well, I don't know for sure which ones are the smartest, but I do know which ones are without a doubt the least intelligent.

Hands down the least intelligent has to be Internal Medicine.

Abdominal pain, any kind of pain for that matter consult, consult, consult, no work up, it's pain so it's an automatic consult.

Constipation, consult surgery.

Pimple consult surgery for abscess

We don't know what's wrong, let's get a full body CT scan and hope we can consult surgery.

That CT scan revealed gallstones, the patient has no symptoms of gall bladder disease, but consult surgery any way and maybe they can make the diagnosis.

Hypotension we will use pressors, no urine output and hypotension, the patient obviously needs more pressors and a nephrology consult.

GI bleeding with hypotension, place the patient on pressors and consult GI and Surgery (no fluids, no blood only pressors)

Hypotensive patient systolic in the 60's foot turns blue consult Vascular surgery for ischemic foot and ignore the hypotension.

Chest pain, follow the algorithm for chest pain then add Nicotine patch during active cardiac ischemia.

Peripheral vascular disease and diabetic, consult vascular for ischemia and continue the patient on their nicotine patch.

The life of IM is consult, consult, consult while running 5 million useless labs per day and starting everybody on statins waiting on their consultants to make the diagnosis and treat the patient.

Hell I was consulted once and I was the 5th, yes FIFTH consult on the chart and the patient had only been in house for 30 minutes, no note from the IM doc doing the consulting, only orders being admit, resume home meds and the 5 consults.

Most intelligent would probably be Derm or Rad-Onc. There is an unbelievable amount of pathophysiology derm can diagnose just from a skin exam. It's kinda spooky in a way if you are around a good one.

No if I were admitted to the hospital I definately would not want most IM docs to even see my chart let alone try and "treat" me.

I would much rather be admitted to the Family Practice or Surgery service.

While I don't agree 100%, I definitely agree with your sentiment.

I thought Internal Medicine was for the thinkers. Everything I've seen points otherwise. Half of their work is A) treating the stuff the consultants don't want to treat, like diabetes and hypertension (which is oh so thrilling. Oh my gosh, this guy's got Wegener's Granulomatosis? General internists get shoved aside as rheumatology/immunology, pulm, ENT, and nephrology all swarm on him.. B) Deal with stupid disposition work. Well, this guy is unsafe to go home alone, says he'll kill himself if he goes to a nursing home, and his kids hate him and refuse to take him...and he has to be out of here by 5:00 tonight because our team is going to be admitting all day tomorrow.

Are you serious??? Have you ever seen a general surgical service where complicated patients are actually managed CORRECTLY! Why do you think general surgeons (just like orthopods) make every attempt to turf their patients to IM?

Also, if I were getting admitted to the hospital, I sure as hell wouldn't want to get admitted to a surgical service over a medical service.

Are you in IM? If so, are you giving us a license to dump patients on you?

So when the patient has a headache or needs something to help get to sleep at 3 AM they'll call you instead of us? SWEET!!! :thumbup:



Seriously, though, I have friends in IM and I believe they get unfairly dumped upon. They seem to get all the BS cases from the entire hospital. I can't believe you are asking for it!

Well, I don't know for sure which ones are the smartest, but I do know which ones are without a doubt the least intelligent.

Hands down the least intelligent has to be Internal Medicine.

The life of IM is consult, consult, consult while running 5 million useless labs per day and starting everybody on statins waiting on their consultants to make the diagnosis and treat the patient.

Hell I was consulted once and I was the 5th, yes FIFTH consult on the chart and the patient had only been in house for 30 minutes, no note from the IM doc doing the consulting, only orders being admit, resume home meds and the 5 consults.

No if I were admitted to the hospital I definately would not want most IM docs to even see my chart let alone try and "treat" me.

I would much rather be admitted to the Family Practice or Surgery service.

Woah. :laugh: You have to be kidding.
This is atypical for IM...at least where I've trained.
I'm sorry that you have this conception of internal medicine based on the poor quality of practice at your hospital. Unless this post was satire.

Woah. :laugh: You have to be kidding.
This is atypical for IM...at least where I've trained.
I'm sorry that you have this conception of internal medicine based on the poor quality of practice at your hospital. Unless this post was satire.

No, I only wish I was kidding. That is NOT N=1 hospital either it was that way where I went to medical school too. We spent our IM rotation hoping to find something strange and testing for that but letting the consultants actually manage the patient while we tested for some rare parasite or disease that was 112th on the differential.

Where I am a resident it is standard for the IM physician to just be a consult jocky and not actually do anything for the patient, only arrange the consults with absolutely NO work up. Trouble urinating, urology or nephrology consult (sometimes both) without so much as urine lites, pain of any type is an automatic surgical consult without so much as a plain xray.

Those stories above were 100% true and even the routine consults for "abdominal pain" that turn out to only be constipation didn't piss me off as bad as the 5 consults without a note on the chart (BTW that patients ab pain was ALSO due to constipation).

I would only let about 20% of the IM docs I have been exposed to treat me or my family (those few though are very, very good and when they consult its something real with an actual work up before hand).

When I get a consult if it comes from IM it is BS until proven otherwise unless it is from one of the 20%.

Family medicine OTOH actually works thier patients up before they consult us, take care of small things themselves and actually treat the patient. Those guys can take care of me and my family any day. They are pretty damned good.

Surgery Residents are pretty stupid, in my humble opinion.

I dont know how many consults I have gotten from them mismanaging something as easy as fluids.

"we have this guy with a hx of chf, nows he's getting hypoxic"

of course, first chest film checked is when I order it.

Of course, i'm sure everyone has stories about every specialty doing stupid stuff, so it probably averages out in the end.

Surgery Residents are pretty stupid, in my humble opinion.

I dont know how many consults I have gotten from them mismanaging something as easy as fluids.

"we have this guy with a hx of chf, nows he's getting hypoxic"

of course, first chest film checked is when I order it.

Of course, i'm sure everyone has stories about every specialty doing stupid stuff, so it probably averages out in the end.

It all averages out in the end because I can tell you stories of medicine residents consulting surgery to the MICU for hypotensive patients with pancreatitis. And when we respond that the patient is underrescuscitated, they'll respond with "but we gave him 2 250 cc boluses!!." Surgery laughs at that management just as you do our fluid management in CHF.:laugh:

Nothing good can come from this thread. Anyone who's been in residency longer than 6 months will have a ton of stories about stupid calls from other services.

Nothing good can come from this thread. Anyone who's been in residency longer than 6 months will have a ton of stories about stupid calls from other services.

I agree, I hate threads like this. And like clockwork every few weeks/months they get bumped and then people start responding again. Amazing that people actually think you can rank fields based on intelligence. :rolleyes:

The problem with generalizations is that people use individual people/situations/anecdotes to support their opinions.

In encounters with virtually every branch of medicine during my residency training and med school, I have seen dumbasses and smart people in every field. And often times the same person who seems dumb one day is smart the next.

The problem with generalizations is that people use individual people/situations/anecdotes to support their opinions.


Exactly why we're all supposed to switch from "anecdotal" medicine to EBM, no? :)

its anesthesia.. don't you idiots know anything.. lol..

The smartest doc in the hospital is the one who is confident in his abilities but understands the limits of his knowledge and training. I know when its time to bring heme, gi, cardio, nephro, id, etc. on board. Unfortunately humility is something most people learn after buying some poor schmuck a week in the ICU or permanently injuring someone.

Now from my personal experience.. the trauma surgeons who ran the sicu where i trained.. some of the most brilliant docs i have ever met in my life. Its just that kinda job were they needed to really understand every organ system and disease process plus be able to repair a bad liver lac at 3am on no sleep. General surgeons.. especially at the senior resident level have a tremendous pool of knowledge and some of them are even good enough to know how to apply it.

On the IM side.. I've met some brilliant neurologists.. presumably because they've got nothing better to do than read.. and a handful of pulm/cc docs i have met just had a way of approaching and understanding disease that looked like magic to the eyes of an intern.

Oh yeah.. anesthesia also has the coolest cars and we are the most well endowed of all docs too... lol...

Oh yeah.. anesthesia also has the coolest cars and we are the most well endowed of all docs too... lol...

TTIUWP! :meanie:

Ortho for sure.

Brilliant group of guys. I think they actually continued to work on and ultimately finish a total hip after the patient died on the table after 30 minutes of chest compressions.

Ortho for sure.

Brilliant group of guys. I think they actually continued to work on and ultimately finish a total hip after the patient died on the table after 30 minutes of chest compressions.

....and this makes them intelligent. i like your sarcasm.

The smartest one is the guy who is only there to eat the free lunch at the CEU lecture and then go back to his private practice.

....and this makes them intelligent. i like your sarcasm.

They still wanted the patient to get ANCEF 2 GRAMS post mortem.

Nothing good can come from this thread. Anyone who's been in residency longer than 6 months will have a ton of stories about stupid calls from other services.

Agree 100% Nothing more true has even been said. It's amazing how much tunnel vision some of our co-SDNers can have....

They still wanted the patient to get ANCEF 2 GRAMS post mortem.

And up and ambulating POD #1!!:laugh:

And up and ambulating POD #1!!:laugh:


At least get a PT consult! Good lord.

-Mike

I think it's "Pathologists know everything but they're too late."

You guys need to get this joke straight, it goes like this:
Surgeons know nothing but can do everything.
Internists know everything but can do nothing.
Psychiatrists know nothing and do nothing.
Pathologists know everything, can do everything, but are always too late.

This is the joke.

An internist is someone who knows everything and does nothing.
A surgeon is someone who does everything and knows nothing.
A psychiatrist is someone who knows nothing and does nothing.
A pathologist is someone who knows everything and does everything too late.:)

You guys need to get this joke straight, it goes like this:
Surgeons know nothing but can do everything.
Internists know everything but can do nothing.
Psychiatrists know nothing and do nothing.
Pathologists know everything, can do everything, but are always too late.

Umm.....(look up)

This thread should be called "who THINKS they are the smartest docs in the hospital".

Anyway, my vote is internists. Despite the ranting in earlier threads, internists have a difficult job. It's easy to look like a star when you can focus all your attention on one body part and flaunt your knowledge to people who don't have that luxury (hear that, all you snotty cardiologists-to-be out there??), but to actually know enough to be competent in EVERYTHING that comes your way is a true challenge.

Also, notice how it's only the 1-issue patients who get admitted to other services? 65 y/o with broken hip ---> ortho. 71 y/o with MI ---> cards. But the 100 year old with an MI who fell and broke her hip and is now in renal failure? She comes to the medicine service, where, despite our piddling knowledge of arrhythmogenic RV dysplasia, she gets appropriate cardiological treatment along with her other issues (sans consult).

Every service deals with their unique blend of challenges, and I don't think any group is as a whole smarter or stupider than the rest (even ortho... they may not be thinking too much about medical issues but they do some pretty slick stuff in the OR.)

But the 100 year old with an MI who fell and broke her hip and is now in renal failure? She comes to the medicine service, where, despite our piddling knowledge of arrhythmogenic RV dysplasia, she gets appropriate cardiological treatment along with her other issues (sans consult).


Depends on the hospital. Where I trained she would have gone to Trauma with Cards, Ortho and Renal consults. :rolleyes:

Umm.....(look up)

He left out that the pathologist can do everything. I consider that VITAL to the joke.

Over the years, I've been lucky to work with some pretty brilliant docs. I'd have to say the nephrologists were the most impressive overall. Although our heme/oncs weren't slouches by any stretch.

Hard to generalize it though. I could name some in most any specialty who were scary-smart. Even ortho :p

Neurosurgery

Been most impressed by some Pulmonary/Critical Care Folks

Radiologists have an enormous wealth of knowledge. They must know pathology and diff dx for all specialties and be able to converse about them with the respected clinicians...I don't know if they are "the smartest" but they should not be overlooked.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c140/Javadran/die-thread.jpg

Radiologists have an enormous wealth of knowledge. They must know pathology and diff dx for all specialties and be able to converse about them with the respected clinicians...I don't know if they are "the smartest" but they should not be overlooked.

yeah, probably between radiology and pathology. both of these require the most studying from the residents. i also believe radiology has the most board exams: physics, written, and orals. these probably require the most extensive knowledge base... rads has to know how normal and abnormal anatomy presents under a number of different modalities (US, xray, mri, mra, CT, enema, and the list goes on)

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c140/Javadran/die-thread.jpg

I think intelligence is better measured between race than medical specialties. So which specialties are the most WASPy? :D

Radiologists have an enormous wealth of knowledge. They must know pathology and diff dx for all specialties and be able to converse about them with the respected clinicians...I don't know if they are "the smartest" but they should not be overlooked.

Well, to be fair, sometimes this "communication" consists of us simply reading their dictation. :)

They still wanted the patient to get ANCEF 2 GRAMS post mortem.Can't stop laughing :laugh:

One of the smartest nephrologists I knew use to analyze patients' urine by tasting it. How smart could he be?


really? that used to be the bedside test for differentiating DM from DI... but that was a loooong time ago...

Yes DERMS are the smartest because they are smart enough to be in the hospital the least.

the smartest are the ICU-ers, EM, and hospitalists because they dont have to deal with office staff. (and most ICUs are shift work, so it's not that bad)

Whats the story with Derm? Why is it so competitive, and why do Derm programs have among the highest board scores? Dont mind my ignorance, but all I know about dermatology is what I remember from Pathology in MS-2. I thought skin was one of the more straightforward topics. Supposedly theres a whole lot of diseases that can be suspected or diagnosed by examining the skin, but is that what really what dermatologists do? I cant imagine that the Primary care doc will notice acanthosis, call a derm consult, and have the dermatologist make the underlying diagnosis. Do dermatologists really need to be brainiacs?

Anyway, my vote is for Pulmonary/CC

One of the smartest nephrologists I knew use to analyze patients' urine by tasting it. How smart could he be?


Thats' gotta be smart.
"Hmm....sniff sniff...." sip. "The osmolality is a little high. Did I taste a bit of sweetness in the urine? Diabetic case possibly? Let me sip it again. No, that's not it. Not sweet enough. A little concentrated, slightly acidic with a hint of bitterness. An infection maybe? I'm not yet sure." sip "Whoa! Definitely blood that time. Darn it! Drank blood twice this week! But it may mean my patient has an infection..." Sip. "It's slightly cloudy and tastes bitter. Definitely an infection. "

*calls over resident doc. for teachable moment* "Hey, Dr. Camp. Come taste infected urine."

I'm a little hurt with the 1.11% for GI. I think my fiance is pretty smart!

Thats' gotta be smart.
"Hmm....sniff sniff...." sip. "The osmolality is a little high. Did I taste a bit of sweetness in the urine? Diabetic case possibly? Let me sip it again. No, that's not it. Not sweet enough. A little concentrated, slightly acidic with a hint of bitterness. An infection maybe? I'm not yet sure." sip "Whoa! Definitely blood that time. Darn it! Drank blood twice this week! But it may mean my patient has an infection..." Sip. "It's slightly cloudy and tastes bitter. Definitely an infection. "

*calls over resident doc. for teachable moment* "Hey, Dr. Camp. Come taste infected urine."

:barf:
at least now i dont have to wonder what i am eating for dinner.