Does your School Matter for residency [Archive] - Student Doctor Network Forums

Goofy

06-03-2002, 06:45 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bonecutter:
School reputation and prestige play a huge role. One important thing to note is that US news rankings do not always reflect a schools reputation with residency directors. Take a look some time at the lists of residents at top programs and you will notice some recurring themes in where they went to school. You can still get into a good program from anywhere but reputation really does help you

Bonecutter<hr /></blockquote>d

I have spent enough time in the ivy league to once again comment on this repetitive topic. This is absolute rubbish. We have been through this nonsense before, but that doesn't seem to stop anyone. Two students with identical numbers on paper, from two seperate US MD programs, regardless of the name, nine and half times out of ten have the exact same chance of obtaining a specific slot. The intangibles are what will make the difference.

Aside from a few quack PD's, the screening process has nothing at all to do with a school's name, provided it's a US MD program. Students from such programs are lumped and screened together based on their paper support. Again, intangibles will make the difference.

arthur v

06-03-2002, 09:29 AM

I can only speak for my experience in dermatology this past year, but the candidates from the top medical schools had the luxury of applying to less programs and were more likely to land the coveted interviews than those who went to less prestigious institutions, even if they had lower credentials. Is that enough of a motivation to choose a medical school by prestige factor? Absolutely not. I went to my state medical school, sparing myself from a pile of debt, and matched at a great (although not "Tiffany") residency program. Still, to answer the question originally asked, for some specialties, it does matter.

AV

2003doc

06-03-2002, 09:30 AM

I am from a small accredited allopathic school that doesn't exactly carry an ivy league name (hehe); however, every year, we have people match in ortho, opth, radiology, derm, as well as "prestigious" medicine, peds, and the like programs. Name may help a little or matter in certain places more than others, but from what I've seen here, if you are an otherwise strong applicant with good scores, (lack of) name isn't a problem.

bonecutter

06-03-2002, 09:41 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Klebsiella:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bonecutter:
School reputation and prestige play a huge role. One important thing to note is that US news rankings do not always reflect a schools reputation with residency directors. Take a look some time at the lists of residents at top programs and you will notice some recurring themes in where they went to school. You can still get into a good program from anywhere but reputation really does help you

Bonecutter<hr /></blockquote>d

I have spent enough time in the ivy league to once again comment on this repetitive topic. This is absolute rubbish. We have been through this nonsense before, but that doesn't seem to stop anyone. Two students with identical numbers on paper, from two seperate US MD programs, regardless of the name, nine and half times out of ten have the exact same chance of obtaining a specific slot. The intangibles are what will make the difference.

Aside from a few quack PD's, the screening process has nothing at all to do with a school's name, provided it's a US MD program. Students from such programs are lumped and screened together based on their paper support. Again, intangibles will make the difference.<hr /></blockquote>Nine and a half times out of ten? What study are you quoting? Where is the evidence? The only objective data I have encountered seems to indicate that students at top level schools match better (taken from match lists at top schools). While I certainly don't deny that you can go anywhere from anywhere, just playing the numbers game your chances are better (not to be read 100 percent, just better) at one of the big name schools

Bonecutter

Bonecutter

BlackPuma

06-03-2002, 09:42 AM

so drako which school did u end up picking? :)

Goofy

06-03-2002, 10:40 AM

Bonecutter said:

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Nine and a half times out of ten? What study are you quoting? Where is the evidence? The only objective data I have encountered seems to indicate that students at top level schools match better (taken from match lists at top schools). <hr /></blockquote>There aren't any 'studies' that prove my assertions, nor does there need to be. Certainly my conclusions are opinions based on evidence on match list sites, as well as a wealth of personal experience in the ivy league itself.

I have looked at the match lists and compared the lower tier schools with my program. All medical schools have students matching in all specialities including the most difficult ones. All schools have students matching in top programs. The discrepencies arise from differences in networking potential and cunning of the student entering. It aint the school that gets the residency, it's the student. Don't confuse the two.

As Kimberli astutely points out, name brand schools tend to attract more resourceful students. While I would debate the 'caliber' argument, as I largely regard most medical students as equally bright, the more resourceful students seem to be more persistent and cunning. As a result, the student population at a Penn or Harvard may be somewhat different.

Having said that, two students with identical numbers have equal chance at obtaining said residency. Intangibles will decide who gets the spot in a tie. A PD will reject a snooty know it all, for an equally stellar state school applicant any day of the week.

School name largely, almost completely, has little to no role other than what I have postulated. I know it may seem hard to believe, but having worked in this capacity, I know it to be true. The connections one student may have at any ivy league can easily be compensated with away rotations.

If you are a resourceful, cunning, bright and determined student, you will achieve the same level success from any US MD program.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> While I certainly don't deny that you can go anywhere from anywhere, just playing the numbers game your chances are better (not to be read 100 percent, just better) at one of the big name schools <hr /></blockquote>Again, I think you are making a gross generalization based on what less than 1/2% of PD's may do. The overwhelming majority of PD could care less where you come from (provided it is a US MD program). What does matter a whole heck of a lot is the score on your USMLE report, and what your clerkship evaluators had to say about your performance.

I should add that the reason I am so vocal on this issue is because I personally got burned badly from a strictly financial perspective. I too bought the 'name brand' baloney when I chose my school. I am confident that I would have achieved the same level of success at a state school, and my debt load would have been relatively small.

While I am proud of my education, I feel as if I could have had the same caliber education at one of the excellent state programs. I am left with truly burdensom debt that has, and will have a significant affect on my financial well being.

I remind those early in the process, that it is very easy to lose touch with debt load. When toiling through med school it almost seems as if you are playing with the house's money. At the end of the fourth year, like a prison cell slamming home, the debt becomes frighteningly real. To borrow a line from blood brothers, 'a debt is a debt, and must be paid!' For me, it is the equivalent of a mortgage on a rather expensive house.

Did I learn medicine any better? Unlikely. Would I have achieved the same success elsewhere. Very likely.

Don't get caught up in the name game, it'll cost ya.

Sevo

06-03-2002, 01:06 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by bonecutter:
School reputation and prestige play a huge role. One important thing to note is that US news rankings do not always reflect a schools reputation with residency directors. Take a look some time at the lists of residents at top programs and you will notice some recurring themes in where they went to school. You can still get into a good program from anywhere but reputation really does help you

Bonecutter<hr /></blockquote>I don't know about that. I recently compared the match list of my school (in the top 15) with the big state school in the area (ranked in the lower 1/3rd of the US News rankings). The match lists were virtually identical.

I think going to UCSF, Harvard, and Hopkins might get you interviews at places where it may be almost mandatory to do away-rotations at. However, when it comes down to it, where you, as an American medical school graduate, will eventually end up will depend almost strictly on your board scores, your recs, and your performance during your interviews.

Whisker Barrel Cortex

06-03-2002, 01:18 PM

I agree with those who point out that the more impressive match lists for some of the top schools are more likely due to the fact that these students are generally more competitive. They study harder for the boards, do more research, etc. and this will get them better interviews. Also, you'll notice that a lot of the "great" programs that people get into from these top schools are at their own hospital. At every school, a big chunk of the graduating class will stay (at our school 42 out of 190 stayed at MCW).

zpdoc

06-03-2002, 01:23 PM

Klebsiella,
Just out of curiosity, have you had the chance to talk to some residency directors, and have they confirmed what you have been saying? Has anyone else ever talked to residency directors (esp. for competitive residencies) about what factors affect their desicions?

Goofy

06-03-2002, 01:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Whisker Barrel Cortex:
I agree with those who point out that the more impressive match lists for some of the top schools are more likely due to the fact that these students are generally more competitive. They study harder for the boards, do more research, etc. and this will get them better interviews. Also, you'll notice that a lot of the "great" programs that people get into from these top schools are at their own hospital. At every school, a big chunk of the graduating class will stay (at our school 42 out of 190 stayed at MCW).<hr /></blockquote>WBC,

You make a very good point about students staying at their own school.

Goofy

06-03-2002, 01:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by zpdoc:
Klebsiella,
Just out of curiosity, have you had the chance to talk to some residency directors, and have they confirmed what you have been saying? Has anyone else ever talked to residency directors (esp. for competitive residencies) about what factors affect their desicions?<hr /></blockquote>Absolutely. Additionally, I have also spoken to a broad range of hierarchy that supports the PD. In most cases, this support crew has more say than the PD, as rank lists are very often first screened, and once supporting info is sent, rank is achieved by committee consensus.

US medical schools represent the best medical education to be had, and the difference in quality between the 'best' and 'worst' is superficial at best.

Work hard and do well wherever you go, you wont have any barriers whatsoever with a convincing file. What you will have if you choose the more expensive route, is an enormous amount of debt that few pre-meds have the forsight to avoid (myself included).

beezar

06-05-2002, 05:10 PM

So, my question is if you place a middle of the road student from a top 10 school into a lower tier school, will he/she be at the top of the class at that lower tier school? If so, that would be quite unfair for students in top 10 schools, especially if grades and class rank is so important in the residency matching process.

dcdo

06-05-2002, 06:58 PM

For what it's worth...

I applied internal medicine in California with a top 10 ranking in my class, a 240 on the USMLE, a 669(99th %)on COMLEX and an enthusiastic letter of rec from one of the vice chairs at UCSF. I was also a bone marrow donor at UCSF. What did this get? No interviews from UCSF, Stanford, UC Davis or Santa Clara Valley Medical Center. I also rotated at Harbor UCLA, got a good eval with a prestigious cardio attending telling me I did a great job and hoped I would be back next year. I did not get an interview, and the PD told me that "Of course every competitive program likes to have residents from well known and prestigious schools." I did get an interview from UCLA.

Also, a UCSF attending told me "UCSF graduates always get great residencies, even when they're not any good."

Maybe being a DO student clouds this argument a bit, but I'm just telling you what happened.

P.S.,

I did still get a pretty decent residency. <img border="0" alt="[Clappy]" title="" src="graemlins/clappy.gif" />

Sevo

06-06-2002, 02:38 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dcdo:
For what it's worth...

Maybe being a DO student clouds this argument a bit, but I'm just telling you what happened.

<hr /></blockquote>Being a DO student SIGNIFICANTLY affected your chances at these places.

I don't have any problems with DOs and I know and respect many DOs that I've worked with, but a lot of PDs still feel that DO students are still second tier medical students.

Goofy

06-06-2002, 04:34 AM

Winged Scapula

06-06-2002, 04:47 AM

Gotta say that I agree with Klebsiella and Sevo on this one. Even if a particular PD didn't have a problem with DOs, the fact is that having residents with the DO degree is often seen as a negative in the allopathic medical world.

I'd say that your degree was what hurt you the most at those schools- competitive programs for anyone.

A&W

06-06-2002, 08:45 AM

Hi all,

I'm a pre-med and new to the forum and looking for some answers (or something pretty close to it). I was wondering if it would be preferable to go to DO school or a Caribbean school like Ross. Any thoughts?

Winged Scapula

06-06-2002, 09:14 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by A&W:
Hi all,

I'm a pre-med and new to the forum and looking for some answers (or something pretty close to it). I was wondering if it would be preferable to go to DO school or a Caribbean school like Ross. Any thoughts?<hr /></blockquote>Since you are new, you are undoubtedly aware that this topic has been discussed ad nauseum, largely in the International Forum. I suggest you look there - but essentially the consensus is that while both may suffer some stigma in the US (largely) allopathic medical community, it is much preferable to go to a US DO school over a Caribbean one.

BTW, if you are assuming that DO schools are much less competitive than MD ones, those days are over.

drusso

06-06-2002, 05:16 PM

Now, wait a minute...I think some of you are over-stating the case. Many DO students don't bother applying to top programs because of some perceived "discrimination." As a recent residency interviewee, and someone who rotated at a variety of allopathic institutions, I think that this osteopathic "discrimination" business is vastly overstated. Do some DO students have more difficulty matching at some programs than others? Yes. But, on the whole, I think that residency program directors are a smart bunch of people. They know better than to judge an applicant solely based on where they went to medical school or type of medical degree earned. They want qualified, smart residents who will show up on time every day dressed to play---regardless of type of medical degree earned.

We all know that the residency match process is a *GAME* of the highest order. It's a big vetting process: The programs fawn over the candidates and promise them slots, the candidates send gushing thank you letters saying "I'm ranking you number one." The chief resident calls the candidate and says "we're highly interested in you." Lo' and behold you don't match...why? Because getting jerked around is how the game is played. Both MDs and DOs get jerked around every year this way.

I don't know the specifics of dcdo's situation, but I think the fact that dcdo, although he has excellent board scores and superb credentials, graduated from a brand-spanking new osteopathic school with little track record may have something to do with his "harrowing" match experience. Also, for all we know, dcdo might come across as a real jerk in interviews (JK) :)

In my class at TCOM, we had students match categorical internal medicine at Cleveland Clinic, Mass General (Harvard), and Hopkins. Now, this could be a fluke, but I think the fact that TCOM has a 35 years old track record of producing quality physicians and has an established faculty with national "connections" might give us an edge over a newer osteopathic school.

Also, I'm *NOT* convinced that US MD students view programs with DO residents in them as poorer quality programs. This flies in the face of every conversation I've ever had with MD interviewees and students. In fact, from a program director's perspective there is evidence that the contrary is true: Interest in dual AMA/AOA accreditation of residency programs has never been higher...

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9846049&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 1</a>
<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9597532&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 2</a>

There is a plethora of published research that suggest that AMGs (USMD and USDO students) and program directors view programs with FMGs in them as inferior.

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8645405&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 3</a>
<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9356575&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 4</a>
<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7859953&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 5</a>

So, it almost becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: Programs the depend on FMGs, tend attract more FMGs, which in turn, drives away qualified AMGs.

<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8769548&dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Ref 6</a>

Thus, I think that the real situation is complex. Some program directors might be biased against DO's, as some are biased against FMGs, women, black people, etc. But, I do not think that there exists some nefarious, widespread conspiracy driven by osteopathic "discrimination." Like most things in life, and in accordance with proven sociological research, attitudes change once individuals get an opportunity to challenge their biases. One kick-ass DO in a competitive residency program opens the door for more DO's in the future. This has been occurring rapidly over the last 15 years and is referred to in osteopathic circles as the "trailblazer" phenomenon. For example, Scott & White Medical Center in Texas (referred by some as the "Mayo of the South") used to be a "closed shop" for DOs---especially in competitive subspecialties such as interventional cardiology---don't even bother applying. Now, the cardiology program has four DO interventional cardiologists, including the chief of interventional cardiology!

<a href="http://www.sw.org/staff_dir/cardiology.htm" target="_blank">Ref 7</a>

dcdo

06-06-2002, 07:29 PM

Drusso,

Unfortunately, the programs I mentioned didn't even grant me an INTERVIEW, so I didn't get to dazzle them with my incredible personality. :cool: Maybe it's a California thing, since these same programs also don't take IMGs for residencies or even rotations for that matter. I went to TUCOM which is new, but we're gradually making inroads in Cal. As mentioned before, I did get interviewed at UCLA which doesn't interview many people and I did get into UCI.

By the way, if I interviewed with you I would make you believe the sun rose and set on your rear end! <img border="0" alt="[Laughy]" title="" src="graemlins/laughy.gif" />

Winged Scapula

06-06-2002, 08:03 PM

drusso...

Obviously DO candidates are looked upon favorably in many places and the stigma perceived/presumed is not evident at every program. In addition, we will never really know why drdo didn't even get interviews at the programs he listed.

I am glad that your experience has been different. However, each of us can only comment on our own experience and that which we find in the literature. The fact is that I KNOW there are programs in which DOs are not prized...mine is one of them (and this despite the fact that we didn't fill last year). While most will tell you that DOs are every bit as bright and hardworking as the next (allopathic) candidate, many do fear the stigma or the reputation of having less than the best and brightest. Its not fair, I agree...and perhaps I was overstating the case...but given my intimate knowledge of some of the California programs to which he applied, I think I may not have been.

dcdo

06-06-2002, 09:45 PM

I would guess that the scant representation of DO schools on the west coast until recently has a lot to do with it. DOs were eliminated in CA from 1961-1974, with COMP being founded around 1977 and TUCOM and AZCOM not coming until 1997.

Things are improving. I remember our dean around 3 years ago told us that there was no way we were going to get residencies in the Cal bay area. Now we have graduates from TUCOM at most of the programs here, although not UCSF, UCD or Valley Medical. By the way, Valley Medical doesn't even let DO students rotate there in medicine or GI for whatever reason, although other rotations are open.

Ligament

06-07-2002, 12:49 AM

man, I had a feeling this thread would turn to DO's as soon as I read it....I dont know if this is good or bad...

?

Goofy

06-07-2002, 05:31 AM

Hi Drusso,

You said:

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I think that this osteopathic "discrimination" business is vastly overstated. <hr /></blockquote>I think you are grossly understating the problem. There is a big problem. I have seen it first hand. Looking at match lists only confirms the suspicions.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Do some DO students have more difficulty matching at some programs than others? Yes. But, on the whole, I think that residency program directors are a smart bunch of people. <hr /></blockquote>Firstly, I would debate the nuances of your comments on this 'smart bunch of people'. Secondly, smarts has absolutely nothing to do with it. There is rampant prejudice against the osteopathic establishment in the allopathic world. When I say rampant, I mean glaring, offensive, and denigrating. It is everywhere. PD who accept large numbers of DO's are perceived as not being successful in the match. This is how they achieve their grades. Granted there are stellar DO applicants, but they don't walk around the hospital with board scores on their forehead. The perception, however sick it is, is how things are determined.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I don't know the specifics of dcdo's situation, but I think the fact that dcdo, although he has excellent board scores and superb credentials, graduated from a brand-spanking new osteopathic school with little track record may have something to do with his "harrowing" match experience. <hr /></blockquote>I do know because he made public his osteopathic upbringing. In my opinion, turning a blind eye to this rampant and pervasive problem only serves to exacerbate the problem for osteopathic candidates. The establishment needs to fully embrace the problem, and not bury it under the carpet, if meaningful change is to be realized.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />In my class at TCOM, we had students match categorical internal medicine at Cleveland Clinic, Mass General (Harvard), and Hopkins. <hr /></blockquote>This is comforting news, and perhaps the seeds of change are being placed. The problem is that the exception is not the rule. Osteopathic physicians have been gaining access to top programs for a long time now. But only in tiny tiny numbers. No one is saying it cant be done, but the opportunities for a osteopathic candidate are recognizably smaller.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Also, I'm *NOT* convinced that US MD students view programs with DO residents in them as poorer quality programs. <hr /></blockquote>As someone who just graduated an US MD program I can tell you that this is not correct. Conversations with my peers about this subject often elicits comments and rhetoric too demeaning to post here. On rounds, DO physicians are often the butt of jokes. I'm sorry to say that the ego of many of my peers is being nurtured and nourished to look down on osteopathic students. I'm not saying it's right.

Personally, I think of DO students as my peers. We have all been through an almost identical process. I would even venture to say that osteopathic students actually receive more training than MD students. But to conclude that things aren't that bad is somewhat purblind to me. Application stats, match lists, experience all suggest something wildly and disturbingly different.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />There is a plethora of published research that suggest that AMGs (USMD and USDO students) and program directors view programs with FMGs in them as inferior.
<hr /></blockquote>I have actually heard from more than one PD that sometimes IMG's are actually admitted before DO of equal qualification because the IMG can still wear the MD on the coat, and most people wont know the difference.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Thus, I think that the real situation is complex. Some program directors might be biased against DO's, as some are biased against FMGs, women, black people, etc.<hr /></blockquote>I think you are sugar coating a rampant and glaringly obvious problem that has severely handicapped the opportunities of DO candidates by making these comparisons.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> But, I do not think that there exists some nefarious, widespread conspiracy driven by osteopathic "discrimination." <hr /></blockquote>Actually, your comment however sensationalized it might seem, isn't too far off. Yes, the problem is that bad for osteopathic students.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Now, the cardiology program has four DO interventional cardiologists, including the chief of interventional cardiology! <hr /></blockquote>This is indeed comforting to hear. However, these examples are abundant. Sadly, they remain the exception to the rule, and opportunities for osteopathic candidates remain terribly limited. Perhaps things will change rapidly, and the allopathic establishment will embrace our osteopathic colleagues on equal terms. Sadly, all of my research and experience indicates otherwise.

drusso

06-07-2002, 08:19 AM

Klebsiella,

Where did you go to school? If you don't feel like being specific, just give me a general geographic area. I'm amazed that such "rampant" "denigrating", "demeaning", "insulting" attitudes exist toward DO's where you're from. Well, maybe if you're in Louisiana, Arkansas, or Mississippi I'm not that surprised...

If disgust with the "osteopathic establishment" really is so prevalent, I'm surprised no one has taken the time to study it. Medical educators seemed to have studied attitudes towards FMGs, minorities, disabled people, and women in academic medicine, why not DO's?

And, if the situation is really has bad as you paint it, which I have a hard time accepting based upon my own personal experiences, those of my peers, and published research, then what we face is truly a crisis of professionalism. Are DO's **REALLY** the last dog left to kick in medicine? "Shucks, can't bash women, minorities, and gays anymore---I got an idea, let's humiliate the DO!"

Maybe I'm the most competent DO to ever set foot in a hospital (I doubt it), so intimidating that no one would dare say anything to my face (I doubt it), or just so absolutely clueless that I don't recognize when upper-levels or attendings are making fun of me for being a DO (Again, unlikely). How can our experiences be so different?

Finally, I don't buy this "I'll take an FMG over a DO because they can where a MD behind their name and no one will know the difference" bit at all. That's pucky. There are real documented problems with the educational standards at foreign medical schools that anyone who has been around academic medicine for two seconds is keenly aware of. Besides, there is more paperwork and red-tape involved in accepting foreign graduates. These issues, coupled with post-911 jitters about anyone with a student visa coming to the USA, really suggest that your perceptions are skewed.

I've worked in hospitals as a DO student, with DO housestaff and attendings, and can attest that it is the rare, rare patient who ventures to ask, "What does DO mean?" I've never seen a patient not satisfied with a simple explanation, "An osteopathic doctor," and I've have never seen nor heard of a patient say, "I don't want to be treated by no osteopath!" And, if this did happen, I think they'd pretty much be SOL: They could just sit in their puddle of urine, emesis, or blood until one of my fellow MD colleagues could get around to see them. And, we all know how happy he or she would be to have *THAT* patient on their service. Everyone loves a doctor shopper!

So, again, how can it be that wherever you are attitudes toward DO's seem to be frozen circa 1962, and here in good 'ol Texas (not exactly the most progressive place in the world) things are so...different?

Goofy

06-07-2002, 09:39 AM

Hi Drusso,

I want to preface this next reply by saying my comments are mere observation. I by no means endorse this kind of pathetic and egotistical view of osteopathic medicine. I view osteopathic medicine as simply a different route to the same ends. I would even argue that the osteopathic route is even more comprehensive than allopathic. I certainly view my osteopathic colleagues as equals.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Where did you go to school? If you don't feel like being specific, just give me a general geographic area. I'm amazed that such "rampant" "denigrating", "demeaning", "insulting" attitudes exist toward DO's where you're from. Well, maybe if you're in Louisiana, Arkansas, or Mississippi I'm not that surprised... <hr /></blockquote>I went to school on the east coast. I would add that I have had similar experience in no fewer than four states and at least a dozen hospitals. It is pathetic I admit, but exists nonetheless.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> If disgust with the "osteopathic establishment" really is so prevalent, I'm surprised no one has taken the time to study it. Medical educators seemed to have studied attitudes towards FMGs, minorities, disabled people, and women in academic medicine, why not DO's? <hr /></blockquote>Simply because something hasn't been studied extensively doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are millions of studies that might be useful, but limited resources. I guess attitudes towards osteopathic physicians isn't high on the list. Perhaps you might undertake the endeavor. I will be keeping a close look out in NJM for it :) .

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> And, if the situation is really has bad as you paint it, which I have a hard time accepting based upon my own personal experiences, those of my peers, and published research, then what we face is truly a crisis of professionalism. <hr /></blockquote>I thing you need to consider two things. First, can we agree that DO's have bigger barriers to success and opportunity than equally qualified MD's? Secondly, I think you can understand why a DO might not be privy to the lockeroom antics of infantile MD's. To really appreciate the limitations, one only has to look toward match lists. If you can forward me a copy of your schools match list, I think I can show you what I mean. Again, I am dismayed that DO's are cast in this light, but as you put it, there really is a 'crisis in professionalism.'

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> How can our experiences be so different? <hr /></blockquote>I cant speak for your region of the country, but I have never seen a DO confronted in such a deragatory way either. I have seen rampant rhetoric behind closed doors.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Finally, I don't buy this "I'll take an FMG over a DO because they can where a MD behind their name and no one will know the difference" bit at all. That's pucky. There are real documented problems with the educational standards at foreign medical schools that anyone who has been around academic medicine for two seconds is keenly aware of. Besides, there is more paperwork and red-tape involved in accepting foreign graduates. <hr /></blockquote>I am simply sharing with you views I have been privy to, no matter how mundane they may seem.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> These issues, coupled with post-911 jitters about anyone with a student visa coming to the USA, really suggest that your perceptions are skewed. <hr /></blockquote>Again, you are distorting my comments. These are not my views. I think if you review my posts over the past year, you will find I have been one of the biggest proponents of DO's. These aren't my perceptions/views/opinions or otherwise.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I've worked in hospitals as a DO student, with DO housestaff and attendings, and can attest that it is the rare, rare patient who ventures to ask, "What does DO mean?" <hr /></blockquote>This is another argument entirely. I have worked with many excellent DO's, and if the confusion doesn't exist, why do 9/10 DO's choose to put 'doctor so and so' on their white quote in the place of 'DO'. I don't think there is rampant confusion in this regard, but enough for many DO's to give up the title entirely.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> So, again, how can it be that wherever you are attitudes toward DO's seem to be frozen circa 1962, and here in good 'ol Texas (not exactly the most progressive place in the world) things are so...different? <hr /></blockquote>I believe (and I stress 'I') that the problem is a lot more pervasive than you let on. If you look at match lists, residency and fellowship lists, research and attending appointments, you will find that the opportunities for equally qualified DO's are much much lower. It shouldn't be that way, and I'm glad that you will serve as a true 'trailblazer' to give your colleagues the well earned respect they deserve.

Sandpaper

06-07-2002, 09:09 PM

Hmmmm....same old arguments. Lemme settle it once and for all. :D As a former student at a school that has both an osteopathic and allopathic program, I can tell you that generally speaking the MD students do look at the DO students as being academically inferior. Some made light of the fact that though we took the same identical pre-clinical courses, the pass rate for the osteopathic student is 70% while it is 75% for the allopathic student. Individually, my osteopathic friends are cool, but collectively, many had chips on their shoulders. I can also tell you that friends of mine who had a choice between the MD and DO schools and chose the latter regretted it big time when they hit the interviewing trail this year. More bits and pieces of anecdotal gems are available but that serve nothing here. I think that our DO colleagues would be wise to realize that discrimination against the DO degree is more prevalent than one would think, and that ya'll would be better serve to fight the problem rather than minimalizing it.

Med4ever

07-21-2002, 02:43 PM

Hey does your school matter for residency or is more of a USMLE I and II thing.

Thanks

Spiderman [RNA Ladder 2003]

07-21-2002, 02:55 PM

Yes, it MAY. It will depend on your grades and boards scores. Top 10 school have a stong trend for the students t get better residency programs than people with similar grades from other non-top-10 schools. It also depends on how well you are "connected."

saman

07-21-2002, 05:09 PM

From what I heard USMLE, class rank, and any kind of research (for residency programs that need them i.e. surgery) are more important than school.

dr kevin40

07-21-2002, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by saman
From what I heard USMLE, class rank, and any kind of research (for residency programs that need them i.e. surgery) are more important than school.

being in the top 30% of a top ten should mean a lot more than being in the top 5% of a non-top 30 med school

school should matter for residency. as to whether it actually does, i don't know

CANES2006

07-21-2002, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by dr kevin40

being in the top 30% of a top ten should mean a lot more than being in the top 5% of a non-top 30 med school

school should matter for residency. as to whether it actually does, i don't know

kevin,
From what I heard, your scenario does not happen. If you are top 5% from a non-top 30 med school and have good boards, you will probably get a better residency than one who is top 30% from a top ten with equal boards. A top 5% class rank is way different than a top 30% class rank no matter what school you come from. I do not doubt, however that a top 10-15% in a top ten will get a better residency than one with a top 1-5% from a non-top 30 med school with all things being equal. From what I heard, top ten don't mean crap if you perform at a mediocre level. Bottom line: class rank and boards determine your residency placement for the most part.

LizardKing

07-21-2002, 06:05 PM

Just like in the med school admissions game, where you went to school has some effect on the residency game.

Now I don't have any statistics or studies to back up my statements. But after talking with lots of residents and looking at tons of matchlists, I find there is a pattern. If you look at the most sought after residencies (optho, derm, neurosurgery, etc.) in the top hospitals (Hopkins, UCSF, NY-Presby, MGH, etc.), the majority of residents come from top ten schools. This alone isn't strong evidence, but it can't be denied either.

Residents also tell me that many students from Harvard, etc. automatically get interviews for derm, surgery, etc. without doing that well in school (even those in the lower 50% of the class). To interview for the same residencies coming from USC-Keck, for example, would probably require you to be in the top 5% of the class--not an easy task for anyone. So before the interview process even begins, you can be at a disadvantage.

Also, the intangibles. You make connections at the school you go to. Sometimes residency directors favor applicants from their own med system. It also helps to get letters of rec from the exact department you're applying to.

Ultimately, though, if you pull outstanding board scores, clinical evals, grades, and letters of rec, you won't have a problem getting your top choice residency. To eliminate the school factor, though, you really gotta work your a** off.

I wish the school you came from weren't so important. But I think it's the reality.

LizardKing

07-21-2002, 06:09 PM

Also, this may be obvious, but it really depends on what residency you're talking about. What are you interested in?

Med4ever

07-21-2002, 07:54 PM

Orthopedic surgury or General Surgury

nylee

07-21-2002, 08:02 PM

I have to agree with LizardKing...just from experience. I followed around the Hopkins ENT-otolaryngology team on their rounds and got to meet the residents and house staff. When I asked them where they graduated from, it was basically Hopkins, UCSF, Duke, Harvard, Yale...and maybe Vanderbilt. Plus, ENT is really competitive at Hopkins because it's currently ranked number one...

After talking to a neurologist in my lab (graduated from Harvard med), I found out that Mass General also has a lot of bias towards their own Harvard students. It's almost cake to get into a residency there if you're from their med school.

however, like Lizardking said, it depends on which specialty you're interested in and which hospital...:)

Actually...my PI who's a neurologist at Hopkins graduated MD/PhD from UIC and he received his residency at Hopkins and now he's head of ALS research...i think he was at the top of his class, though. So I guess you don't necessarily have to be from a top 10 or even a top 50 school...but it may help you get the initial boost to an interview.

Katie

07-21-2002, 08:06 PM

just a thought.. a number of schools on the P/F or H/P/F system do not rank students for the first two years at all. Examples are Tufts and U Conn. Your class rank from these two schools will be based on your performance in the clinical years (the grading system changes during yrs 3 + 4 at TUSM). So, while a strong performance in the first two years at these types of schools may help you out a little bit, your USMLE scores, letter from the dean, and performance during the clinical years will be the big factors determining your residency placement. BTW, Tufts' match list was outstanding this year IMO, lots of specialty matches in radiology and dermatology and opthamology and many IM, Peds, and OB/GYN matches at places like Yale, Boston Children's, UCLA, Cedars Sinai, MGH, JHU, etc.. Cool considering how much our school gets bashed on this board:)

qweewq11

07-21-2002, 08:11 PM

Lots of people on here have bought into the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Take a look at the MCAT scores for Harvard/Cornell/UCSF students. They're around 35. The reason these kids got into these schools is b/c they were extremely intelligent to begin with, and they prolly would have in the top 5 students at a less well known school anyway, and had stellar USMLEs. The Harvard degree was just icing on the cake.

To put it another way, they got into top schools b/c they were good enough to get the residencies regardless of whether they got in.

Katie

07-21-2002, 08:17 PM

After talking to a neurologist in my lab (graduated from Harvard med), I found out that Mass General also has a lot of bias towards their own Harvard students. It's almost cake to get into a residency there if you're from their med school.

True, but interestingly enough, Tufts sends a decent # of grads to MGH as well. We have a professor who graduated from Tufts med who did his residency at MGH and is now a trauma surgeon there.

however, like Lizardking said, it depends on which specialty you're interested in and which hospital...:)

Very much true as well; and there tends to be a location bias among students rather than a bias toward the most prestigious hospitals at certain schools. NYMC, for example, tends to match a lot of people at NYMC-affiliated hospitals and in CA because that is where their students often prefer to go (being from NY or CA), and University of Maryland SOM, not surprisingly, matches a remarkable number of graduates to UMAB-affiliated hospitals cause 90% of the student body are Maryland residents and want to stay there. Just something to keep in mind when evaluating how "good" a match list is.

Actually...my PI who's a neurologist at Hopkins graduated MD/PhD from UIC and he received his residency at Hopkins and now he's head of ALS research...i think he was at the top of his class, though. So I guess you don't necessarily have to be from a top 10 or even a top 50 school...but it may help you get the initial boost to an interview.

Although neurology is a very challenging specialty, I read the other day that it is considered to be a non-competitive residency because there are relatively few applicants for all the available spaces. I'm sure your PI is a fantastic physician and scientist, but if he had been interested in radiology and tried to get a residency at Hopkins he MIGHT have had a harder time getting into Hopkins.

Chowdah

07-21-2002, 08:17 PM

Not only that, but someone in a top 10 school actually cares about how prestigous their residency is.

atsai3

07-21-2002, 08:57 PM

If you examine medical schools' match lists, you will find that most of them tend to place a high proportion of students in their own hospitals' training programs. CWRU students match to CWRU programs, NYU students match to NYU programs, etc. It may simply be "favoring one's own", or it may be a familiarity with the student and the training process at the home institution ("we trained her, so we know she's good").

More broadly speaking, residency committees employ a variety of data, and the extent to which they employ which pieces of data varies from program to program. For example, one study compared OB/Gyn and Family Medicine on six factors: dean's letter, personal statement, transcripts, application form, USMLE scores, and chairman's letter. Family Medicine residency directors emphasized the dean's letter but ranked USMLE scores as 5 out of 6 (in terms of importance). But Ob/Gyn residency directors ranked the transcript as 1/6 but USMLE only 3/6. [Taylor CA, Weinstein L, Mayhew HE. The process of resident selection: a view from the residency director?s desk. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85:299-303]

A more recent study of selection criteria reported similar results: more competitive specialties (i.e., those with >85% fill rates) relied more on "hard" data such as transcripts, AOA, and USMLE scores. [Wagoner NE, Suriano R. Program directors? responses to a survey on variables used to select residents in a time of change. Acad Med. 1999;74:51-58]

Cheers
-a.

Steinway

07-21-2002, 09:53 PM

qweegq,
couldn't have said it any better. everyone gets by on their own talents not their school's rep...at least that's how it is for undergrads applying to med school.........i

dr kevin40

07-21-2002, 11:59 PM

do u really think that someone w/ a 3.7 from UCberkely or Harvard (despite the rampant grade inflation there) is given the same weight as someone w/ a 3.95 or 4.0 from a no-name school? sorry to those who go/went to no-name schools but i think its just that way.

LizardKing

07-22-2002, 02:08 AM

Yes and no. I've heard from many credible sources that Harvard's average board scores, for instance, aren't in the top 10. Many schools (Vandy, etc.) you wouldn't normally think of as top 10 schools actually have the highest board scores. This inconsistency throws into question your theory that students from the "top" schools perform the best therefore they get the most competitive residencies. Sure, board scores aren't everything, but they are one of the most important factors in the match.

There are exceptionally gifted students at every med school. Yes, there might be a higher concentration of geniuses at Harvard, but there are plenty of people from lower tier schools who perform on par, if not better, than students there. Yet there seems to be a Harvard, Hopkins, etc. monopoly on some residencies. It's not fair at all, but that's the game.

In addition, I would think it's much harder to pull a 260 USMLE and be in the top 10 of your class at a no-name med school than get a 210 USMLE and be in the middle at Harvard. Yet many students from the latter category get the interviews over the former.

Originally posted by qweewq11
Lots of people on here have bought into the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Take a look at the MCAT scores for Harvard/Cornell/UCSF students. They're around 35. The reason these kids got into these schools is b/c they were extremely intelligent to begin with, and they prolly would have in the top 5 students at a less well known school anyway, and had stellar USMLEs. The Harvard degree was just icing on the cake.

To put it another way, they got into top schools b/c they were good enough to get the residencies regardless of whether they got in.

LizardKing

07-22-2002, 02:18 AM

I would put school name below these other criteria (in order of importance):

1. Board Scores
2. Clinical Evals
3. Letters of Rec/PS
4. 1st + 2nd year grades
5. Reputation of School

This would probably apply to getting any type of surgical residency. Of course, this is only my guess.

Ischemia

07-22-2002, 08:40 AM

Dr Kevin,

I think it depends on how much of a "no-name" school it really is. I think someone with a 4.0 from a small, private college that has absolutely no affiliation with research, is essentially a 4 year community school, or is a school that rich kids go to because they know they wouldn't make it at a tough school, would not be given the same weight as a 3.5/3.7 from Harvard, and it rightfully shouldn't. However, there are plenty of universities that could easily be considered 'no names' that have great things going on and are just as academically challenging. A prime example would be the New York state universities (SUNY). For undergrad, I was accepted into Columbia, Cornell, NYU, and the rest of the state schools (I only applied to NY schools). However, I didn't receive flattering financial aid packages and so I didn't go to one of these 'name' schools but instead a 'no-name' state university. Here, I work harder than many at 'name' schools and my GPA is quite high. In fact, that helps me to stand out quite a bit. I know many others just like myself. I highly doubt that a 4.0 from my school would be frowned upon in comparison to a 3.5/3.7 from Harvard, where, like many other 'name' schools, grade inflation is known to be a serious issue.

Although my school isn't stellar, it is certainly good enough. Unfortunately, New York doesn't pride themselves in education as does California. It's a sad fact, but one that has to be lived with. I'm sure most other states are like this. It does not, though, take away from the quality of your own education. No matter where you go, you learn only based on how much effort you put into it. I think, or at least certainly hope, that many adcoms recognize this.

I realize this post is about getting into residency. I think the situation is similar. Sometimes a big fish in a small sea stands out over a small fish in a big sea.

Jalby

07-22-2002, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by LizardKing
I would put school name below these other criteria (in order of importance):

1. Board Scores
2. Clinical Evals
3. Letters of Rec/PS
4. 1st + 2nd year grades
5. Reputation of School

This would probably apply to getting any type of surgical residency. Of course, this is only my guess.

One thing that REALLY helps to get a residency is doing on-site locations. My friend who is a residency director says that is one of the main things that put people over others, b/c he can just go talk to the res who the person worked under and ask him how he did and if they would want them there.

yaoming

07-22-2002, 11:12 AM

I dont want to be a part of this heated debate, but I just wanted to remind you guys of a point. The "top ten" schools you are referring to has nothing to do with "education." They are not the top ten schools of educating their students with excellent educational programs. They are top ten for research.

I went to ucla undergraduate, and learned crap there. They taught me all these ideal theories and unapplicable research-related topics. I wished I went to a community college instead because I would've learned more applicable concepts for the MCAT, and for sure would've done better. UCLA undergrad's education blows.

This comment related to someone wondering why vanderbilt has better average board scores than harvard.

hatcher

07-22-2002, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by dr kevin40

being in the top 30% of a top ten should mean a lot more than being in the top 5% of a non-top 30 med school

school should matter for residency. as to whether it actually does, i don't know

to ease my curiosity, why don't you explain why it should matter?

there are those of us out there who probably kicked your ass on the mcat but(most likely due to our superior intelligence) chose to go to a school where we actually felt more comfortable rather than being led by our insecurities to a school with a big name that we could use as a platform off of which to brag.

the competition between classmates at top ten schools is not so much greater than at non-top ten schools that one can look at the 98 i got in neuro (or the 99 in micro, or the 98th % i scored on the physiology shelf exam, etc...) and say i don't know as much as someone at some top ten school. plus, while many top schools emphasize research, mine emphasizes dr-patient interaction, which i guess means i will be better at interacting with my patient than someone at a top ten school (since we are making gross overgeneralizations here).

convince me why the upper third of a top ten school is better qualified to get a certain residency than the top 10 students in my class. tell me why 300 or so people from 10 schools are better qualified than the hundreds at other schools not looked upon as "stellar" by your sacred us news and world report.

Diogenes

07-22-2002, 11:43 AM

I've spoken to deans of admission, including some that previously ran residency programs, and they all said that how you perform at your school and specifically on your boards and during your rotations, matters much more than what school you go to. And this was coming from deans at top 10, top 20, top 30 schools.

CANES2006

07-22-2002, 11:59 AM

I sense a heated debate is about to start here. I agree with hatcher and yaoming. Many of those top ten schools (not all of them of course) are overrated. They are mostly up there because of their research emphasis and reputation, which is based on years of tradition in being up in the ranks (notice that the ranks are basically the same year after year). These schools aren't necessarily the best IMO. Many top ten graduates are incompetent when it comes to clinical (treating the patient and interacting with the patient). They probably rock in research, but that's not the only thing that makes someone a good doctor in my opinion. Of course, there are some brilliant people in the top ten schools. However, these schools aren't the only ones with brilliant people. Every school has its share of those. Just like every school has subpar individuals. That's right. Even the top ten schools have individuals who aren't so well qualified (those who got in because parents have connections or those who were filling a token position). Basically, every school in America has a standardized form of teaching medicine. This is why everyone takes the same board and why residency is based heavily on your board scores. To say that one individual is better than another solely because he/she goes to a top ten is absolutely crazy. There are alot of people out there in a non-top 30 school who could smoke a top ten student.

*Canes strikes the bell for the second round to begin*:D

MacGyver

07-22-2002, 01:17 PM

Some of you people amaze me. You go on about how med schools (regardless of rank) are largely alike and point out that an outstanding student from a nonranked school can do better in the residency match than a mediocre/poor student from a top school. All of which is absolutely true.

But then you go on to make massive generalizations and assumptions that put down the "top" schools, implying that research is the only thing they are good at, cant interact with patients, the only reason they are there is because they want the name of the school, etc etc etc

In one breath you dispel stereotypes about nonranked schools and in the next breath you spew your own uninformed stereotypes about "top" schools.

Now what the &*@# is that!! +pissed+

Trek

07-22-2002, 01:25 PM

Quit whining mac, doesn't go well with your brown nose. --Trek

hatcher

07-22-2002, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by MacGyver

But then you go on to make massive generalizations and assumptions that put down the "top" schools, implying that research is the only thing they are good at, cant interact with patients, the only reason they are there is because they want the name of the school, etc etc etc

wow, you're sure quick on the uptake. if you will, carefully reread my post, paying particular attention to the 3rd paragraph's last sentence. if you still can't see it, let me know and i will highlight it for you.

i know i was making a gross generalization. i was as upfront about doing it as i could be (seeing as how i said in the post that i was doing it). it is called irony. check it out. it is how we students at "lesser" medical schools deal with the reality of being subpar in comparision to all of the gods at the top ten schools. (and, to save you the time of replying to say that i am now contradicting myself by saying i think i am inferior to students at the top ten, i will let you know that the last sentence of this paragraph is sarcasm).

doepug

07-22-2002, 03:01 PM

Erk.

Here we go, no sugar coating:

Plain and simple, yes, the med school you attend will affect your chances for many residency positions.

Sure, you can come up with the "good student at a mediocre school" vs a "mediocre student at a good school" argument, but MUCH more often than not, the mediocre student at a good school wins.

Yes, there are exceptions, but they are EXCEPTIONS.

Everyone has anecdotes about "so-and-so" from Podunk U grabbing a hot-shot residency, but aside from the FEW people who manage to do this, these are largely fairy tales.

Jalby

07-22-2002, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by hatcher

those of us out there who probably kicked your ass on the mcat but(most likely due to our superior intelligence)

These type of quotes are never good. Don't assume thigns about people. Kevin kind of named his user name after his MCAT score.

hatcher

07-22-2002, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by Jalby

These type of quotes are never good. Don't assume thigns about people. Kevin kind of named his user name after his MCAT score.

your point?

Diogenes

07-22-2002, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by doepug
Erk.

Here we go, no sugar coating:

Plain and simple, yes, the med school you attend will affect your chances for many residency positions.

Sure, you can come up with the "good student at a mediocre school" vs a "mediocre student at a good school" argument, but MUCH more often than not, the mediocre student at a good school wins.

Yes, there are exceptions, but they are EXCEPTIONS.

Everyone has anecdotes about "so-and-so" from Podunk U grabbing a hot-shot residency, but aside from the FEW people who manage to do this, these are largely fairy tales.

I've talked to many residency directors and most of them say something like this:
"If you want to get a very competetive residency, you need to be near the top of your class, regardless of your school."

Now for residencies of medium competition level, then the whole mediocre student or mediocre school thing might apply. But if you want a very desirable residency, going to a top 20 school won't mean squat if you don't kick some ass when you are there -- according to the residency directors I've spoken with.

BTW I'd like to see the data that you are basing your assertions on. If you are going to make startements like "MUCH more often," you must have some actual data to back that up, not just anecdotal evidence or stuff you have heard other people say or your own speculation. Please share your data with us.

MacGyver

07-22-2002, 04:10 PM

Diogenes,

Unless you took a survey of hundreds of program directors, I'd say your evidence is anecdotal also.

doepug

07-22-2002, 05:58 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Diogenes

I've talked to many residency directors and most of them say something like this: "If you want to get a very competetive residency, you need to be near the top of your class, regardless of your school."

All I know is this. I'm an MS III at a well-known school. People who graduate at the bottom of the class here get excellent residencies, even in very competitive fields (e.g. neurosurg, ENT, ophth). For example, ~9-10 people from my school match in neurosurgery programs each year. They consistently match into awesome programs. Compare these 9 or 10 to a list of those students inducted into AOA, and it becomes clear that one does not need AOA status here to match into an awesome program.

My data are hardly anecdotal... just look at match lists. Top schools have rocked the match since the founding of the NRMP. Decades of match lists prove this point. At my school, we're consistently told that grades are only for show, because students at the bottom of the class can match just as well as those in AOA. I'd wager to say this is true at a handful of other well-known schools.

Cheers,
doepug

doepug

07-22-2002, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by LizardKing
I would put school name below these other criteria (in order of importance):

1. Board Scores
2. Clinical Evals
3. Letters of Rec/PS
4. 1st + 2nd year grades
5. Reputation of School

This would probably apply to getting any type of surgical residency. Of course, this is only my guess.

Hmmm.

Unfortunately, as much as everyone hates it, surgical fields tend to be very elitist in their selection of residents, at least at top programs.

For surgical programs, I'd rank your list as follows:

1. Reputation of school
2. Clinical evals (tie)
2. Board scores (tie)
4. Letters of rec (unless they're from a bigshot)
5. Preclinical grades

Diogenes

07-22-2002, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by MacGyver
Diogenes,

Unless you took a survey of hundreds of program directors, I'd say your evidence is anecdotal also.

Yes it is, but when comparing two pieces of anecdotal evidence, one cannot accurately say which is correct.

doepug

I don't doubt that Hopkins students match well into the specialties they want. That was not the point. You stated that a mediocre student at a good school will beat out a good student at a mediocre school. This is what you have no evidence of. Mediocre schools have match lists with many students matching to desirable residencies. So who beat who for what? There is no way to tell.

I guess my definition of "mediocre" schools is probably not quite right anyways, since I live in California and all of my state schools are ranked by US News. Perhaps using the "worst" UCs as "mediocre" on my personal rankings is an underestimate of their reputation/value.

CANES2006

07-22-2002, 06:24 PM

doepug,
So basically what you are saying is that you can totally slack off in medical school and be at the bottom of your class and STILL land a great residency program because you just went to a top ten? I find this hard to believe. Most probably you will be beaten for the job by one of your classmates that really worked hard in medical school. Most often these "top ten" students who landed prestigious residency positions WERE ALSO TOP of their class. Of course, they got the postion. They were brilliant. They probably would have landed the job anyway because they would have been at the top of the class at ANY medical school. But, for you to say that you can just slide through medical school and be at the bottom of your class and still land a good residency is just ridiculous. Hopkins or not, you need to work hard in medical school and try to be at the top of your class or else you will get stuck with a not so impressive residency. Case in point, I have a friend who went to Cornell for college. He performed at a mediocre level there and ended up NOT getting into ANY U.S. medical school. I on the other hand did not go to an IVY league. However, I busted my butt and was at the top of my class. I got into every school that I applied to (I didn't care to apply to a top ten so don't pull the argument "but you didn't get into a top ten"). I will be starting medical school at the University of Miami this fall (it was my first choice school for many years). And you know where he is now? IN THE CARRIBEAN!!!! Bottom line folks: work hard at medical school or in anything you do and forget about the rankings.

dr kevin40

07-22-2002, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by Ischemia
Dr Kevin,

I think it depends on how much of a "no-name" school it really is. I think someone with a 4.0 from a small, private college that has absolutely no affiliation with research, is essentially a 4 year community school, or is a school that rich kids go to because they know they wouldn't make it at a tough school, would not be given the same weight as a 3.5/3.7 from Harvard, and it rightfully shouldn't. However, there are plenty of universities that could easily be considered 'no names' that have great things going on and are just as academically challenging. A prime example would be the New York state universities (SUNY). For undergrad, I was accepted into Columbia, Cornell, NYU, and the rest of the state schools (I only applied to NY schools). However, I didn't receive flattering financial aid packages and so I didn't go to one of these 'name' schools but instead a 'no-name' state university. Here, I work harder than many at 'name' schools and my GPA is quite high. In fact, that helps me to stand out quite a bit. I know many others just like myself. I highly doubt that a 4.0 from my school would be frowned upon in comparison to a 3.5/3.7 from Harvard, where, like many other 'name' schools, grade inflation is known to be a serious issue.

Although my school isn't stellar, it is certainly good enough. Unfortunately, New York doesn't pride themselves in education as does California. It's a sad fact, but one that has to be lived with. I'm sure most other states are like this. It does not, though, take away from the quality of your own education. No matter where you go, you learn only based on how much effort you put into it. I think, or at least certainly hope, that many adcoms recognize this.

I realize this post is about getting into residency. I think the situation is similar. Sometimes a big fish in a small sea stands out over a small fish in a big sea.

I agree w/ u in many respects that someone working hard in a less than big-name university might still be afforded the same opportunities. thanks for keeping ur post civil.

dr kevin40

07-22-2002, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by hatcher

to ease my curiosity, why don't you explain why it should matter?

there are those of us out there who probably kicked your ass on the mcat but(most likely due to our superior intelligence) chose to go to a school where we actually felt more comfortable rather than being led by our insecurities to a school with a big name that we could use as a platform off of which to brag.

the competition between classmates at top ten schools is not so much greater than at non-top ten schools that one can look at the 98 i got in neuro (or the 99 in micro, or the 98th % i scored on the physiology shelf exam, etc...) and say i don't know as much as someone at some top ten school. plus, while many top schools emphasize research, mine emphasizes dr-patient interaction, which i guess means i will be better at interacting with my patient than someone at a top ten school (since we are making gross overgeneralizations here).

convince me why the upper third of a top ten school is better qualified to get a certain residency than the top 10 students in my class. tell me why 300 or so people from 10 schools are better qualified than the hundreds at other schools not looked upon as "stellar" by your sacred us news and world report.

geez hatcher. i don't know what u prob is. i was just giving my opinion alright! for ur info, i'm not at any med school right now so its not fair for u to assume that b/c of what i said, i am at a top med school...plus i don't know y u gotta hate and say dumb **** like "i got a better mcat score than u" when u don't even know my score. sorry if i offended u w/ what i posted but i was just sharing what i believed. residency is just like med school, and in med school, ur underg rep counts so med school rep will count just the same

hatcher

07-22-2002, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by dr kevin40

geez hatcher. i don't know what u prob is. i was just giving my opinion alright! for ur info, i'm not at any med school right now so its not fair for u to assume that b/c of what i said, i am at a top med school...plus i don't know y u gotta hate and say dumb **** like "i got a better mcat score than u" when u don't even know my score. sorry if i offended u w/ what i posted but i was just sharing what i believed. residency is just like med school, and in med school, ur underg rep counts so med school rep will count just the same

my prob is you said the top third of a top ten school should get in over the top ten at non top thirty schools. your elietism disgusts me, that is my prob. you basically said that the only doctors who are worth their weight as physicians are those who graduate from top ten schools.

i want to know why you have the opinion that you have. i want to know what makes the top third of a certain school so much better, in your mind, than the top grads at non-top tier schools. i want you to justify your opinion. i want you to explain to me how your mind works such that it allows you to rationalize that thought to the point that you would take it as your opinion. the fact that you are not even in med school makes it even worse. you have no appreciation for what anyone else goes through; the only people who you respect are those who go somewhere with a reputation. your statement, opinion or not, is one of the most disrespectful statements i have ever read on sdn. that is my prob with you.

MacGyver

07-22-2002, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by CANES2006
So basically what you are saying is that you can totally slack off in medical school and be at the bottom of your class and STILL land a great residency program because you just went to a top ten?

Being at the bottom of the class and slacking off is not necessarily the same thing. At most schools, the people at the bottom of the class did fine, they just dont have honors in every class. But its not as if they made straight Ds thru all their courses. Med students at every school are extremely driven, and even those at the bottom of a particular school are not necessarily slackers. Its a lot different from college.

I find this hard to believe.

Well, if you are talking about people making straight Ds thru their courses, poor clinical evals, poor board scores, then yes I would find that hard to believe too. But finishing at the bottom of the class does not necessarily mean that you meet the criteria above.

Most probably you will be beaten for the job by one of your classmates that really worked hard in medical school. Most often these "top ten" students who landed prestigious residency positions WERE ALSO TOP of their class.

doepug just stated that this was NOT true at his school. AOA is generally a good indicator of who finished at the top of their class (its the top 15-20%). He pointed out that for the neurosurgery match, one of the most competitive, there was no correlation between AOA status and the people who matched in neurosurg. Of course, the case could be that none of the AOA people tried to go into neurosurg; but clearly its too simplistic to state that you MUST finish near the top of your class to match into a competitive field.

Of course, they got the postion. They were brilliant. They probably would have landed the job anyway because they would have been at the top of the class at ANY medical school.

The people he refers to were NOT at the top of the class at his school, according to AOA status.

But, for you to say that you can just slide through medical school and be at the bottom of your class and still land a good residency is just ridiculous.

thats not what he said. He said that people at the bottom of the class still got competitive residencies. He never referred to them as inferior students, he just mentioned that according to AOA status they were not at the top of the class. There was never any mentioning of them "sliding through"; again its not like college, you HAVE to study to pass.

Hopkins or not, you need to work hard in medical school and try to be at the top of your class or else you will get stuck with a not so impressive residency.

Absolute statements like this cannot be trusted. The reality is that there is a blend of truth to this statement. Of course, its more likely that you will match into a more competitive specialty with better grades, AOA status, and in general finishing near the top of the class. I think doepug was trying to make the point that at "top" schools the rule you stated above is less likely to be absolute, and that students at the bottom of the class can match into good, competitive areas.

work hard at medical school or in anything you do and forget about the rankings.

I agree with this, but I think that the school you go to makes some difference. Look we all know that undergrad school makes a difference in med admissions. All things being equal, the Ivy grad will tend to be favored. Does that mean they have an advantage that cant be overcome by somebody from a non Ivy? Absolutely not, but by default the Ivy grad will get some slight favoritism. Why would it be any different for med school/residency? If you want to argue that these people are fickle for playing favorites like that, then I can agree with that. But it doesnt change the reality of what goes on.

Dr. Dodger Dog

07-22-2002, 07:18 PM

Hatcher,

I don't understand why you can't respect other people's opinions. Whether you disagree or agree, there is no need to make such disrespectful comments. I am appalled that someone like you was accepted into medical school.

Now that is my opinion.

hatcher

07-22-2002, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Dr. Dodger Dog
Hatcher,

I don't understand why you can't respect other people's opinions. Whether you disagree or agree, there is no need to make such disrespectful comments. I am appalled that someone like you was accepted into medical school.

Now that is my opinion.

i respect others opinions, provided they respect me. your boy kev obviously has no respect for me because, even though i was accepted at every school to which i applied, i chose to go to a non-top tier school. every medical student at the 95 us schools not in the top 30, not to mention the foreign medical school students, were all disrespected ten times worse by drkev than he should be by anything i said to him.

go give your boy a hug and tell him everything is ok. tell him that he is completely right to disrespect current medical students because, as long as they are not at top 10 schools, they are beneath him and his great wisdom. take your 40 mcats and live in your fantasy world where people who score that high or higher only go to the top ten schools.

god forbid you ever have an attending/resident who went to someplace like ut. we had a 100% match rate for ent, neurosurgery and derm last year. just because our school focuses on producing family doctors (and thus, attracts people who want to go into that specialty) doesn't mean we are idiots. the same holds true for every other school in the country.

dr kevin40

07-22-2002, 07:58 PM

hatcher,

that's great that u r happy w/ ur med school choice. i was merely representing my opinion. the reason i said waht i said was b/c i believe that ppl at the top medical schools r usually the top recruits and would be stars at lesser medical schools. u said u didn't choose a school based on ranking but a lot of ppl do. y do u think there's so much movement in medical school waitlists? when ppl get accepted into a better (more often than not higher ranked school) they ditch wherever they at now.

i think u have a lot of anger or sumthin. i never brought up my mcat score and still don't see how its valid to the discussion we having right here.

jot

07-22-2002, 07:59 PM

dr kevin40
hatcher
42-44s

is it normal for people to wear their mcat scores on their sleeves? cause i'd hate to not be in style:laugh:

chak_de_phatee

07-22-2002, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by jot
dr kevin40
hatcher
42-44s

is it normal for people to wear their mcat scores on their sleeves? cause i'd hate to not be in style:laugh:

Hahaha no offence to you guys with those awesome scores.........congratulations you guys rule............... but Jot didn't you know size of the MCAT scores is all that matters to premed chicks these days.........:D

P.S. I think jot you asked a while back and yes I got a little pj in me too. Orange is an awesome color........:cool:

hatcher

07-22-2002, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by jot
dr kevin40
hatcher
42-44s

is it normal for people to wear their mcat scores on their sleeves? cause i'd hate to not be in style:laugh:

i was under the impression that it was, based on my new friend dr kevin. i didn't want to be left out, either. ;)

kevin-
i have no anger. i have disgust. i have disgust for people who are so seemingly intelligent, but who have blinders on to the world. i have disgust for people who feel they have to prove something to the world by doing things simply for the prestige. i have disgust for people who do not think of the consequences of their statements. you overgeneralize about things you really have no idea. to make such a generalization slaps every medical student in the face and makes you look like a complete ass. one of the main reasons i am not at a top tier school is because i didn't want to be around *****holes who think like yourself.

the reason your mcat keeps coming up is because it keeps being brought up by others (including yourself). you're right, it is immaterial. i won't touch it again and i will take mine off my title. i have been here nearly two full years and had never disclosed my mcat score until today. i saw you did within a month of joining. if you post it, it is free game to come up again in discussion. the reason i mentioned it last time is because your bro' dodger dog felt left out of the conversation, so i figured i would tie him in while at the same time post how i actually read most of these threads without posting and that i knew your score when i originally made my first post. i thought anyone who included their score in their user name didn't mind it being referenced.

i am pretty much through here. all i really want you to do is start thinking about the consequences of your statements. if you insult your colleagues and think yourself above them, i can promise your that your life will be hell.

good luck with the application process. try not to base your decision on prestige and try to remember there are those of us out there at other schools who are just as smart, if not smarter, than you and your buddies.

LizardKing

07-22-2002, 11:28 PM

EVERYONE CHILL OUT. Keep the personal attacks to your goddamn self. There's no need to get all emotional about this issue.

I think we all agree that school name matters at least a little bit. No one here is really saying it's critical in the match. Of course it's nowhere near as important as your board scores, evals, and recs. Same thing with MCATs and undergrad schools.

Does anyone disagree that applicants from Harvard undergrad have a little bit of an edge over those from state schools? Almost everybody I met during my interviews were from the Ivies. Whether I was at Pitt or Hopkins, I was usually one of two or three people from lower caliber undergrad schools. It's the way things are.

Anyway, I don't like the generalizations that some people only go for the prestige. You don't know any of us, so quit judging.

Bikini Princess

07-22-2002, 11:34 PM

For more information, you may visit the AMCAS website and click on "NRMP". Basically, the above poster is correct. I think the clinical training you get at a particular school is more important than name recognition alone for matching. (ie one school might be good for surgery matching, whereas another might be good for opthamology matching, etc)

LizardKing

07-22-2002, 11:43 PM

kevin40, you already got over half as many posts as I do! I've been here for a year. I'm a regular too.

You gotta kick the habit, man. It's an addiction.

hatcher

07-23-2002, 04:03 AM

Originally posted by LizardKing
EVERYONE CHILL OUT. Keep the personal attacks to your goddamn self. There's no need to get all emotional about this issue.

I think we all agree that school name matters at least a little bit. No one here is really saying it's critical in the match. Of course it's nowhere near as important as your board scores, evals, and recs. Same thing with MCATs and undergrad schools.

Does anyone disagree that applicants from Harvard undergrad have a little bit of an edge over those from state schools? Almost everybody I met during my interviews were from the Ivies. Whether I was at Pitt or Hopkins, I was usually one of two or three people from lower caliber undergrad schools. It's the way things are.

Anyway, I don't like the generalizations that some people only go for the prestige. You don't know any of us, so quit judging.

i never said people only go to a school for prestige. i simply noted the fact that many people do. look at the posters on this forum who are hell bent on getting into a top ten school without ever knowing anything about the school other than its name and rank.

i do think students from top tier schools may have an advantage in certain situations. however, i do not think the top third of their class should be given preference over the top 5 % from other schools. that is the statement to which i took offense. everyone else on this forum should have been offended, too.

LizardKing

07-23-2002, 05:23 AM

Again, nobody is saying that the top third of their class "should" be given preference. We are merely arguing that they ARE given preference. It's the reality.

Sure, once you get past the interview stage, school name might not be that big a deal. It's all about side-by-side comparisons at that point. But a lot of people don't even get to the interview stage because of their school background.

Originally posted by hatcher

i never said people only go to a school for prestige. i simply noted the fact that many people do. look at the posters on this forum who are hell bent on getting into a top ten school without ever knowing anything about the school other than its name and rank.

i do think students from top tier schools may have an advantage in certain situations. however, i do not think the top third of their class should be given preference over the top 5 % from other schools. that is the statement to which i took offense. everyone else on this forum should have been offended, too.

hatcher

07-23-2002, 05:42 AM

Originally posted by LizardKing
Again, nobody is saying that the top third of their class "should" be given preference. We are merely arguing that they ARE given preference. It's the reality.

reread the post by dr kevin40 on the first page of this thread and tell me if you want to stick with the statement you just made.

Originally posted by dr kevin40:
being in the top 30% of a top ten should mean a lot more than being in the top 5% of a non-top 30 med school

school should matter for residency. as to whether it actually does, i don't know

11000

07-23-2002, 08:52 AM

hatcher: you made the decision to go to the school you're going to, and you're satisfied/happy with your decision, right? good for you. but why all of the insecurity? you don't need to justify your "merits"--you are no longer an applicant--your high mcat scores, undergrad performance, and high acceptance rate do not really matter now... from now on you are just another 1st year student at your medical school...

don't vent your frustrations about how rank/reputation is represented/misrepresented by society on kevin. i think he presented an opinion that is shared by many people (and one that is not entirely without merit).

remain well,
swaroop

dr kevin40

07-23-2002, 09:34 AM

hatcher,

I think my wording was not correct. instead of the top third "should" i shoulda written "is given pref by residency directors" above the top 5% of lower schools. u def have a lot of anger

lizardking,

LOL~~~ i think i'm on track to get to >1000 posts.
do u think that ifu had same stats, if u had gone to a different school say ivy, u'd have gotten more outright acceptances? i really was amazed at the # of bac/mds ur yr w/ excellent creds that r staying at our school.

Med4ever

07-23-2002, 09:35 AM

Its an honour to have started a thread that is so heated.

I just wanted to know if I wanted to do ortho surgury what would ensure me a good chance of getting a residency ANYWHERE. Yup Im willing to go to the styx to do it.

yaoming

07-23-2002, 11:59 AM

I just hope this is not the way our doctors of tomorrow will discuss issues such as abortion, embryonic stem cell research, etc.

LizardKing

07-23-2002, 08:20 PM

Hey kevin, it's tough to say if I would've gotten more outright acceptances. But looking at the acceptance lists to Hopkins, Michigan, UPenn, etc. it seems they take an AWFUL LOT of people from the Ivies. Take Yale Med for instance. 33% of their class is from Yale and Harvard alone. A little over 50% of their entering class is from the Ivies! I find it hard to believe that they can't find as many qualified applicants elsewhere.

My speculation: If I scaled my GPA down a little bit and had the same MCAT coming from Harvard, I might have gotten a couple more interviews. This is just from my observations during my interviews. Interviewers would always ask me, "So why did you pick USC?" in a rather condescending tone. I wonder if they ask that question to Harvard grads?

Originally posted by dr kevin40
hatcher,

I think my wording was not correct. instead of the top third "should" i shoulda written "is given pref by residency directors" above the top 5% of lower schools. u def have a lot of anger

lizardking,

LOL~~~ i think i'm on track to get to >1000 posts.
do u think that ifu had same stats, if u had gone to a different school say ivy, u'd have gotten more outright acceptances? i really was amazed at the # of bac/mds ur yr w/ excellent creds that r staying at our school.

yaoming

07-23-2002, 11:39 PM

What I dont get is, why cant someone pick UCDavis or UCBerkeley undergrads because of price and location over ivy leagues. If they got into all ivy leagues as well as UCs for undergrad and went to a UC, is that person dumber or less qualified than someone who did choose an ivy. i went to ucla and i know someone who went to columbia and i got better grades, mcat scores, interviews, and acceptance over him for med school. lizardking, i think you shoulda told ur interviewer something similar to this, that would've been cool.

joetxe

07-26-2002, 09:26 PM

when you talk about top 10%, top 30%, top 5%. what ranking system are you refering to?

Renovar

07-26-2002, 10:12 PM

Wow this has become a heated debate! In my opinion (from talking to several residents, the dean of students at my school, and the residency director of medicine and med/peds at my school) here is what I think:

School name has some effect on residency matching. THis is an UNDISPUTED truth. If you are an average student at Harvard and Hopkins, with all else being equal (ie. boards, letter of recc, research, etc etc), you will match FAR BETTER (ie. have more options in terms of specialty, more interviews) than an average student from, say, U of Nebraska medical school if they apply to the same residency programs.

Now, I think the argument some people are making on this board is: "if you are top 5% from a no name state school you can match better than the bottom 25% student than students from top schools." This argument is also true. But this argument has nothing to do with the question we started out with, ie. "does the rank of medical school matter for residency?" People who make this argument is comparing apples and oranges! There are many people who are outstanding who attend medical schools that are non-top-10 but can bring it with the best of them in clinical performance and boards (some may even be accepted by a top school but decided to go to their state school to save $). Conversely, there are students in top schools who might get into a "top 10" school with credentials that are impressive (ie. olympic gold medalist and go to Harvard med) but are below average in terms of raw performance data (like boards, etc) and be favored less by residency.

The bottom line is, residency directors look for QUALITY medical graduates, REGARDLESS of where you go to school. With this said, residency directors also know that on the whole, the average Hopkins Med grad is better qualified than the average Joe Schmoe State SOM grad. With all this said, the original question can be answered in 2 ways:

1. The average medical student from a top ranked school, with all things considered, is going to have advantage over an average medical student from a "no name" school

2. If we hold the absolute performance of a medical student equal. Say a very well qualified MS4 applying to a residency program - it doesn't matter which med school he/she is from - quality is quality, no matter where you put it. It's just happens that the top schools attract higher percentage of the top pre-med students, and in terms of raw performance data, tend to do better than no-name schools.

ie. if you are good, you are good - no matter where you go to school. But on average, people from top schools are better qualified than those from no name schools.

There... My 2 cents.

Mr.D

07-27-2002, 01:11 AM

Ditto.

joetxe

07-27-2002, 06:55 AM

I do think it matters what school you go to. When I was applying to med school I was accepted at one school with no name. I wanted to do Ortho so I went through their match lists from several years and realized no student from that school had matched in a known Ortho program (ie Harvard).

Luckily, I then received acceptance from an Ivy school. When I went through their match list there were 2 students that year and 1 student the previous year who had matched at the Harvard Ortho Program. Not to mention the incredible names (Harvard, Columbia, Yale...) for other specialties. My decision was pretty clear, Ivy baby!

I am now a 3rd year and I'm looking forward to matching in one of those top ortho programs. I know it would've been very hard!! to do it from the school I was accepted first.

So I think school matters.

atsai3

07-27-2002, 07:07 AM

Please refer to this thread (http://www.studentdoctor.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40872) for data on the factors considered by residency program directors.

Cheers
-a.

MacGyver

07-27-2002, 08:36 AM

OK let me get this straight.... Program directors discriminate against DOs rampantly, but when it comes to allopathic programs, they are completely fair and impartial?

You understand why I'm skeptical about that

md03

07-27-2002, 09:21 AM

MD/DO controversy aside, I'd like to add a comment about the original question. I think generally, no it doesn't matter where you go to medical school. One possible exception, however may be if you are applying to programs at a place where they tend to give preference to their own students.

I learned this from having faculty review my first list of programs that I may apply to. For a couple of them, I'm told that it will probably be difficult to get into because they tend to take their own students (one school is a big MD/PhD place, and they tend to take their own MD/PhD folks). I've heard this about 2-3 programs on my list (out of 40+ total I'm considering).

This aspect would only play into a very small proportion of programs on an applicant's intital list.

MacGyver

07-27-2002, 10:00 AM

I think there are 2 separate issues going on here, it boils basically down to causation vs correlation.

I think its pretty much undeniable that there is at least a slight correlation between the rank of the med school you attend and the competitiveness/desirability of the residency you match into. We can debate all day long about how strong the correlation is. The correlation coefficient is certainly not 1, but its certainly not 0 either (as Kleb implies)

If there was really no correlation at all, then there would be no distinct difference between match lists of the top schools and all other med schools. Do you REALLY think there is no difference (on average) between the match lists of low and high tier programs? Whatever it is you're smoking, I want some.

Why is it that the so called "lower ranked" schools are much less likely to publish their match lists and give out statistics for their match rate? If there was no difference between these schools and the top programs (which do generally publish their match lists and match stats) then they would have a lot to gain by making the data public showing that there was no real difference between their school and the top schools. But yet most programs dont do this. Why?

As kimberli pointed out, its near impossible to show that med school rank is related to residency placement in a causal way (i.e. the reason you did so well in the match is because of the med school you went to)

I believe there is clear evidence of correlation, but no evidence for causation. I wish the NRMP would publish more detailed statistics on this, but they dont currently.

treefrog

07-27-2002, 11:32 AM

My anecdotal evidence from residency directors mostly agrees with Diogenes, but you can take it or leave it. Just be a good doctor, please!

Though The RDs for competitive residencies are concerned with school (they?re not unaware of it, and there's a home school bias, especially if they know you personally from a rotation), most really look more for excellence.

They don?t care so much what the med school adcoms thought about you and your college record. They want to know how you?re going to be as a doctor in their program and beyond. If you kicked serious A? on the boards and got good clinical evals/recs, they know you?ve got the stuff, whether you went to Ivy League, State U, Podunk U, or Grenada. After that basic cut, they look for good personalities, or people who will mesh well with their program.

Something to keep in mind is that not all the smart geniuses go for the competitive residencies. Quite a few just do plain vanilla IM, or peds, or whatever makes them happy, not rich and famous. Which I guess is the smart thing to do, after all ?.

MacGyver

07-27-2002, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by treefrog
My anecdotal evidence from residency directors mostly agrees with Diogenes, but you can take it or leave it. Just be a good doctor, please!

Though The RDs for competitive residencies are concerned with school (they?re not unaware of it, and there's a home school bias, especially if they know you personally from a rotation), most really look more for excellence.

They don?t care so much what the med school adcoms thought about you and your college record. They want to know how you?re going to be as a doctor in their program and beyond. If you kicked serious A? on the boards and got good clinical evals/recs, they know you?ve got the stuff, whether you went to Ivy League, State U, Podunk U, or Grenada. After that basic cut, they look for good personalities, or people who will mesh well with their program.

Something to keep in mind is that not all the smart geniuses go for the competitive residencies. Quite a few just do plain vanilla IM, or peds, or whatever makes them happy, not rich and famous. Which I guess is the smart thing to do, after all ?.

If your theory that all schools are perfectly equal and that residency directors place zero weight on med school is true, then I would expect that (on average) the match lists for Grenada would be just as good as Harvard, once you take away the home residency slots (i.e. dont consider the Harvard grads who stay at a harvard hospital)