Is there a web page that has a list of good IM programs?

Why is no one answering? I am also interested in how people rank IM programs...is it just general knowledge...I know university hospitals will always be above the rest, but how do we rank these university places? ABIM pass rate? ABIM scores? NIH funding? Weather? Scutwork? Research output? Quality of fellowships? Is percent AMGs really an indicator, as some would claim?

Just would like to know if there is any august body that says...this place is number 1, number 2...We all know the top US hospitals rankings per (sub)/specialty, but I think that ranking is more for services and reputation, not training.

Scutwork.com rating is too subjective.

I don't think there is any such ranking, formal or informal. I think there are probably 15 top programs in the country, and within those, it's personal preference as to which is best.

The "top" training programs are also sometimes the most harsh, so they may not be considered "top" by some. Reputation is important, but so are other factors.

I gotta brag about my home program (University of Nebraska) a little bit...

**100% board pass rate for the past 6 years. :D

**Small-to-mid sized program with WONDERFUL faculty.

**Plenty of time and opportunity for research.

**q8 call as an intern on the wards, q5 on the unit.

**Residents are all very happy, well-adjusted folks who are getting a great education.

**All residents get to spend a month in South Africa at no cost to them. About 1/2 the time is in a clinic, the other 1/2 on a safari.

The only downside as far as I'm concerned is that it's in Omaha. Don't get me wrong, it's a great town. I'm just ready to see someplace new for a while, I think. :confused: It's an excellent program, though. I seriously think it's hard to do better in terms of happy programs that also offer a great education and relatively good work hours.

here's my opinion as to the top 15, just for fun. Everyone will have their own.

In their own class: MGH, Hopkins

Next tier: UCSF, Duke, Wash U

Next tier: UPenn, Columbia, Brigham

Next: Stanford, UW, Cornell, Yale, UCLA, U Mich, Mayo, and maybe a couple more

This is just rank of them academically....not how I would rank them as to personal preference.

Don't forget Univ of Chicago

Ahem,
not that I have anything against what the previous "nylee" posted, I just wanted to make it known that the last "nylee" was not me. This is the real nylee. :-)

The real nylee doesn't know about internal medicine or any specialties because nylee is still a first year in med schooL!

But I do think that Hopkins is in a league of its own. :laugh:
And I won't ever forget university of chicago--half of my heart is still there. :-)

Any input on how Case Western - University Hospitals IM program fares? Top 20?

Do you feel that this program would be conducive to gaining a well regarded fellowship?

Thanks.

I have to disagree with Nylee's (or whoever) ranks above. There's no list, it's all word of mouth, and it's partially based on what you look for in a program and what region you are from as to which are the best programs. Here's my list (based on her categories):

In their own class: MGH/Harvard, UCSF, Johns Hopkins

Next tier: Duke, Wash U, U of Washington, Mayo

Next tier: UAB, Cornell, UCLA, U of Chicago

Next: Vanderbilt, UT-Southwestern, Northwestern, Stanford, Columbia, NYU, CWRU, Penn, UCSD

If I missed any places, sorry (by the way, Yale was purposely left off, it is overrated). This is completely unscientific by the way.

does that mean stanford is technically less competitive and easier to get in? i'm from the area so i would like to know.

well, how good they actually are is different from how good they think they are....for example, when I was interviewing at Northwestern, they bluntly said they believe they are the best program in Chicago, although most people I've talked to both inside the city and out say U. of Chicago is the best program. That having been said, no, Stanford is not any easier to get into, they consider themselves top tier.

Duke... Second tier? C'mon guys, give me a break.

Duke is definitely a top IM residency. I've heard it's malignant, but they train some of the best clinicians. For those concerned with the rankings, the hospital is ranked higher than MGH.

Northwestern has great facilities, but I don't think that it's even the 2nd best medicine program in Chicago. It's a bit over-rated.

we're talking purely Internal Medicine, Duke is not on the same level as Mass General, Hopkins, or UCSF. Any of those names inspire awe no matter where you are in the country, and Duke just doesn't have that. Actually, within the Southeast, UAB is considered by most to have equalled if not slightly surpassed Duke in IM (unless you ask a Duke person of course), although Duke is a more nationally recognizable program.

my 2cents on the rankings:

Agree on the top-tier programs:

2nd tier: Duke, WU, UW, (Mayo????), Penn,

3rd tier: Columbia, UCLA, Chicago, UT-SW, Michigan

rest of the tops: Stanford (definitely more competitive than reputation), Cornell, Vandy, etc.

Any opinions on Colorado's place on this?

IMO, UCSF is way over-rated as an IM program. If we're talking tiers, I would definitely not put it in the 1st tier (maybe 3rd or possibly 2nd in my book ...). Don't forget about Brigham and Women's -- many people, including myself, consider it a better program than MGH. UCLA is also a very over-rated program, especially with their malignant program director. In fact, I think that UCLA-Harbor, a county hospital (*gasp!*), should rank higher than UCLA itself. My last bit of 0.02, Stanford tends to be under-rated in the internal medicine area. IMHO, it ranks somewhere along the lines of UW or WU.

Okay, here's really my last 0.02. Every region has their top IM programs, and what I learned last year going through the Match is that it's easiest to figure out which region you want to live, and then there will be several "top tier" programs in which to choose from in that region. In reality, people in IM don't break down the academic programs into such precise groupings. Instead, the top 20 or so academic IM programs are generally considered more or less equivalent in quality. Some programs will be stronger in, say, pulmonary, while others will be strong in oncology, and so on. Personal rankings tend to depend on your own preferences, such as where you want to live, what subspecialties you're interested in, how residents do in fellowship matching in the specialty of your choice, the patient population you want to work with, and how you like the residents.

Originally posted by Geek Medic
Duke... Second tier? C'mon guys, give me a break.

Duke is definitely a top IM residency. I've heard it's malignant, but they train some of the best clinicians. For those concerned with the rankings, the hospital is ranked higher than MGH.

Careful using USNews Rankings to distinguish small differences. Hospitals where all the services fall under one name will do better (i.e. Duke, JHU, etc.) Whereas areas where their are multiple hospitals will look poorer. If you were to consider the HMS entities as one, you would include MGH, Brigham with the Women's portion, Boston Childrens, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, and Dana Farber.

Does your residency certificate say MGH or HMS?

If it says HMS, then I could see the recognition. Fact of the matter is that MGH doesn't carry the prestige that the Harvard name does when you get outside the New England area. Come to the Southeast, Southwest, or the Pacific Northwest, and I can guarantee you that MGH won't be as recognized as you think.

The person who mentioned getting a program for where you want to practice was right on target. If you want to practice in New England, then yea, MGH is the place to do your residency. In the South, then MGH is pretty much another hospital.

I think no matter where you go Johns Hopkins seems to be well recognized.

Originally posted by Geek Medic

If it says HMS, then I could see the recognition. Fact of the matter is that MGH doesn't carry the prestige that the Harvard name does when you get outside the New England area. Come to the Southeast, Southwest, or the Pacific Northwest, and I can guarantee you that MGH won't be as recognized as you think.


Wow, that's surprising. I'm from Texas with no ties to New England, and I know very much about the MGH name. Many of our higher ups trained there. At any rate, my point is that when you are speaking of programs such as Hopkins and MGH, USNews rankings probably won't be that helpful.

I would consider Southwestern a top 10 program for IM.

While a great program, there is no way UAB is in a tier above Parkland/UTSW. Nor would I put any of the California programs except UCSF and Stanford on par with the training and quality of people at Southwestern.

Southwestern suffers from the "not on the coast" problem that plagues other programs like Chicago and Wash U. Northwestern, while with amazing facilities and physical plant, is not yet in the same league as the above programs. In my opinion, too private, and too sheltered a place to get good training. Amazing hospital though.

I agree with UT-SW being among the top 10. UCLA - Harbor is only average.

This is a ridiculous conversation. Whoever said MGH is not highly regarded in the South is delusional. I wish they'd given me an interview. I hope that anyone organizing programs in tiers has at least visited the ones they are talking about. IM is such a broad "specialty" anyway, what are you looking at when you make your calls? Do you really think US News and World Report knows what they are talking about either? You probably are the same person who bought First Aid for the Wards.

Oh yeah, and Summertime, UAB higher than Duke. OK, sure. In what, adolescent tropical rheumatology?

Originally posted by chis
You probably are the same person who bought First Aid for the Wards.

Nope, didn't buy it dude, but I have been in the 90+ percentiles for my shelf tests though.

Impressive. :clap:

chis, as far as Duke v. UAB, I'm not sure where you're from, so that may affect your view of it. Duke is a better national name UAB is still only a regional name. I would say, based on what I've seen and heard Duke has a better surgery program, but UAB has a better medicine program. Duke is also supposed to be much more heavily research oriented (I think their med students still do only 1 year of basic science and 1 year of lab research), which is why I didn't apply there, so I admit, I don't have an insider's view. UAB has a better balance of research and clinical training and is an all-around better residency program. Everything I know is based on talking to faculty, program directors, residents, and other med students/applicants, as well as the little bit I've seen firsthand. I've been to UAB, Wake Forest, Tulane, and Florida so far and still have Vanderbilt, Emory, and Baylor left to go, and I've heard a lot of talk about the Carolina programs (UNC, CMC, MUSC, etc.), Virginia and MCV, UT-Memphis, and UTSW, but I haven't heard many people on the interview trail so far talking about Duke. Just doesn't seem to be a trendy program this year (based completely on word of mouth and the people I've come across, of course). And like you said before, this is all totally subjective anyway, if you're happy at East Tennessee State then you've still found the best program for you.

Attendings/chairmen will tell you a lot about how a program is viewed in the profession. I have several personal friends who sit on boards having to do with residency reviews/accreditation. I also know quite a few fellowship chairs. In a nutshell Yale Internal Medicine is rated as "top tier" by the physicians I have dealt with. These particular directors have been known to preferentially interview Yale residents for residency positions. I don't go to Yale, and would rather put a plug in for my institution, but I'm just telling you what I heard. Yale is extremely competitive to get into ao it's not suprising that some may try to downplay it since they didn't get an interview (one of my friends wrote that Yale is not good...well, he was actually trying to go there, and was not offered an interview...sorry Phil, but we should post honest info on these boards). Many subspecialists prefer Yale for the unparalleled research and facilities. Four out of five Yale residents I know personally have been offered heafty postions at the end of their 1st year. One was actually offered to join the faculty of U Wash-Seattle upon completion of his residency. NO one that I know of at any of the Boston hospitals were given such offers. I'm at one of the "big" Boston hospitals, and I have yet to be offered something like this. I am second guessing my choice of residency and if I were to do it again, would have spent the time at Yale. Most faculty there are pioneers in their respective fields and therefore their recs hold suprising weight. Yale all the way for residency.

From bob3's reply, it sounds like these so called rankings are biased toward academic medicine. Am I correct to say if you are not all that interested in academia that reputation of a program does not matter much? I would rather go to an "underrated" program if it's a better fit than an "overrated" one.

well it all depends on if you want to do fellowships sunflower... if ya do then better go to a big name university program -- because that will open doors for you over small community programs (esp if you are interested in cards, gi)

What about the Cook County Hospital program. Their hospital is the biggest in the world sleeping 2000 patients a night, plus where else are you going to get such great pathology than a community like Chicago. I mean SF is a tiny little city compared to Chicago and is just more or less a white collar playground, so how could UCSF be even as close to as good as Cook County for medicine?

Cook County is not a 2000 bed hospital. It has approximately 400 beds. Yes, you see a lot of pathology there, but that alone does not equal unparalleled education. There are a lot of problems with county and these affect education there in many ways.

San Francisco is NOT a "white collar playground"-have you ever been there? There are many many reasons why UCSF is one of the premier medical institutions in the united states.


What about the Cook County Hospital program. Their hospital is the biggest in the world sleeping 2000 patients a night, plus where else are you going to get such great pathology than a community like Chicago. I mean SF is a tiny little city compared to Chicago and is just more or less a white collar playground, so how could UCSF be even as close to as good as Cook County for medicine? [/QUOTE]

Hmm, I thought I read somewhere that Cook slept 2000 a night. I didn't realize it was such a small hospital and only had 400 beds.

So maybe I don't know anything about Cook, but I lived in SF in the 70s and 80s (the first 18 years of my life) until I went to college. We lived in North Beach, and my neighbors back then were immigrants, a delivery man,a HS teacher, and other working class people. Now my parents neighbors are millionaires. Give me a break! To buy a house in the dumpy Richmond district costs 700,000-1,000,000 now. Docs can barely afford that. SF is nothing more than a white collar playground now. It has lost all its old charm and character.

So, I seriously question if you know what you are talking about.

Originally posted by pathstudent
Hmm, I thought I read somewhere that Cook slept 2000 a night. I didn't realize it was such a small hospital and only had 400 beds.

So maybe I don't know anything about Cook, but I lived in SF in the 70s and 80s (the first 18 years of my life) until I went to college. We lived in North Beach, and my neighbors back then were immigrants, a delivery man,a HS teacher, and other working class people. Now my parents neighbors are millionaires. Give me a break! To buy a house in the dumpy Richmond district costs 700,000-1,000,000 now. Docs can barely afford that. SF is nothing more than a white collar playground now. It has lost all its old charm and character.

So, I seriously question if you know what you are talking about.

I suggest you take a tour of San Francisco General Hospital so that you may see that your idea of San Francisco being a 'white collar playground' can be tested. You should not equate North Beach (and its real estate) with the rest of San Francisco. UCSF's hospitals serve more than just their immediate surroundings. Moffit-Long sees a lot of complicated pathology from all over central and northern California. San Francisco General is an amazing hospital, and much of its patient population suffers from the difficulties of drug use and poverty. The last thing that I think of when I spend time at the General is that it is a hospital for white collars. I think you need to come back to the city and spend some time in the Mission District, the Tenderloin, Bay View/Hunters, etc. The VA might be cush (as far as hospitals are concerned), but I don't think the majority of the patients seen by UCSF are white collar.

And as far as charm and character are concerned, I still witness plenty of both, everyday.

1. I think pretty much everyone in medicine knows what Mass General Hospital is.

2. pathstudent has no idea who he is because evidently lived in SF in the 70s and 80s and went to college but is now back in high school as a junior if you read the surgery board here.

http://www.studentdoctor.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66677

odd.

So, I guess you didn't get my joke pretending to be a HS student wanting to go into ENT.

But I do know SF. born and raised. Graduated for Galileo in 92. Moved there after college from 96-2000 and I have had an operation at SFGH in 97. Applied to medical school in 2000, and for sure SF is a giant white collar playground. And although I have only seen Cook once. SFGH has nothing on Cook. Chicago is a monster compared to little SF.

The average house in SF costs over a half million. That tells you about who lives there now.

You seem pretty lost neo. The board that you linked us to was obviously a spoof, and you are the first person to bring up Mass Gen in this thread.

For the record, cook county was a 2000 bed hospital, which was shut down because it was a mess of a hospital. I remember reading on their web site that it was described back in the 50's as having third-world standards, so I can imagine that it is pretty darn run down by now. It does have a long history of serving the large indigent communities of chicago, and continues to do so in a spiffy, albeit smaller, new hospital building. I think they're gonna turn the old one into a museum or something.

It's remarkable that a lot of people on the board cannot even tolerate someone questioning the traditional heirarchy of residency programs. It's as if they're being paid by these programs. Or maybe it's a source of their self-esteem... Suggesting cook county for residency has become apostasy. How dare you suggest that cook county even remotely challenges UCSF, when cook county isn't even ranked by USNEWS & World Reports!?! You will be immediately shamed as an academic doctor. All this passionate debating of who's "better", who has the bigger "name", the more presitgious reputation leads a lot of people away from the purpose of training -- to become a competent doc, which can easily be found at cook county, SFGH, almost wherever.

TY for the above post. So it was a 2000 bed hospital at one time. That is huge.

Ironically how I first heard about cook was from an a UCSF attending who said it was "one of the very most famous hospitals in the world". That inspired me to go look it up. I doubt SFGH falls into that category. Although SFGH probably has residents with a higher step 1,2 score and from more prestigous programs.

What is even better about Cook is that it is free of charge. SFGH is on a sliding scale. (i.e. Cook is full of idealists. Can you imagine a 2000 bed hosptial that costs patients nothing!)

abu,

1. mass general or MGH has been mentioned about 10 times in this thread.

2. of course that other post was a lie and im sure everyone realizes that high school students are unlikely to be here, just makes me take everything else he says with a grain of salt.

neo, the immediate debate was between SFGH and cook county. If you meant SFGH, that's fine, just say so, but don't make things up.

Neo,

You need an MRI. There might be some frontal lobe malfunction if you can't differentiate between a "lie" and a "parody". The post was meant to mock us pre-meds, medical students, residents who are forever worrying about what to do next to go where we want.

Didn't you meet some premeds in junior who already "knew" they want neuroradiology when they probably had never seen an x-ray, and they would be in a constant state of panic about the 89% they got an exam. Well I was just taking it one step further pretending to be a HS student who is freaking about his 1560 on his SAT.

abu,

perhaps you dont realize that this thread has two pages. on the first page, MGH was mentioned by nylee, summertime, geek medic, rigomortis and was alluded to in other posts. my original post was in reference to geek medic's post that MGH is not very well known outside of new england and that in the south, it is just another hospital.

even if you didnt know this thread was two pages, the second post on this page is from chris who also states that MGH is well known in the south.

read and know what you're talking before you post.

pathstudent

you should worry less about my brain function and worry more about your startling ignorance evidenced by your suggestion that cook county would provide a better education in internal medicine than UCSF.

true, that was in page 1, that was yesteryear's discussion, more than 20 posts back. The immediate discussion was about SFGH and cook county. If you can't be relevant, then be quiet.

Good bye.

abu foolishly interjects

"you are the first person to bring up Mass Gen in this thread."

obviously not the case and since i'd never been to this board before, the first post was a result of me reading the whole thread. you want to debate the relevance of what i write, then do it. don't say things that are patently wrong and make you look like an idiot.

Pathstudent,

Whatever your beef is with San Francisco, that's totally OK. Too many people are clamoring to get to UCSF anyway. Let's all get off Pathstudent's case and leave SF to those who appreciate it.
It's not for everyone.


Love,
Another native

My beef with SF is that it is too small of a city once you have been to NY, Chicago or London. It is incredibly provincial, there are no univeristies of any significance in the city's confines (other than UCSF but a medical instution doesn't have much to offer in the way of intellectual culture and say Harvard, Columbia or the University of CHicago do), there are no museums of significance, there isn't a decent nightlife. It is just a small urban area packed with people that have way too much money to go out and spend at dinner.

The once great counter culture there is dead.

It is a boring white collar town.

But I guess doctors don't care about that kind of stuff anyway, for the most part.

Originally posted by Rigomortis
Careful using USNews Rankings to distinguish small differences. Hospitals where all the services fall under one name will do better (i.e. Duke, JHU, etc.) Whereas areas where their are multiple hospitals will look poorer. If you were to consider the HMS entities as one, you would include MGH, Brigham with the Women's portion, Boston Childrens, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, and Dana Farber.

with all honesty what the hell are you talking about? MGH and Brigham are SEPARATE hospitals, across town from each other and have their own clinical units. JHU and Duke hospitals on the other hand, are a single entity in a single set of connected buildings. Big difference. The reason those services "fall under one name" as you put it is because they are 1 hospital; they are not spread across multiple hospitals. the US news ranking is a list of HOSPITALS, not hospital aggregates for each med school affiliation.

You cant compare Hopkins Hospital as a unit vs MGH + Brigham; MGH and Brigham share the harvard name but function as separate hospitals. The US News rankings are lists of the best HOSPITALS, not a ranking of hte aggregate hospitals in a whole city.

If the US News rankings were by city, instead of by hospital, then of course Boston would trump both Durham and Baltimore, because Boston is about 5 times larger than those cities and has more total hospitals.

by the way, both baltimore and durham have more hospitals than just the JHU/Duke hospitals. So your comment about multiple hospitals looking poorer doesnt make any sense. Every medium to large city in america has multiple hospitals besides the ones affiliated with the med schools.

Originally posted by Rigomortis
Wow, that's surprising. I'm from Texas with no ties to New England, and I know very much about the MGH name. Many of our higher ups trained there. At any rate, my point is that when you are speaking of programs such as Hopkins and MGH, USNews rankings probably won't be that helpful.

again your logic is strange.

You can say that the rankings are bogus, and dont apply to ANY hospitals in the whole country, but to put a different spin on the rankings for just JHU and MGH is wrong.

MGH is one hospital; JHU is one hospital. You seem to be suggesting either that MGH plus all the other affiliated harvard hospitals are one cohesive unit which shares resources; not true at all, they are not even in the same neighborhood.

I would agree that the Texas Medical Center in Houston is shortchanged by the rankings though, since all their hospitals are within walking distance and interconnected. But MGH is unaffected by this because they occupy their own unit on the east side of boston.

But then again, SF does have a quaintness to it.

And it is my hometown.

Originally posted by pathstudent
My beef with SF is that it is too small of a city once you have been to NY, Chicago or London. It is incredibly provincial, there are no univeristies of any significance in the city's confines (other than UCSF but a medical instution doesn't have much to offer in the way of intellectual culture and say Harvard, Columbia or the University of CHicago do), there are no museums of significance, there isn't a decent nightlife. It is just a small urban area packed with people that have way too much money to go out and spend at dinner.

The once great counter culture there is dead.

It is a boring white collar town.

But I guess doctors don't care about that kind of stuff anyway, for the most part.

You thrash your hometown, everyone IN it, and then bash on your future profession as well. You have issues that this forum can't help you with.

Why is there so much animocity among you guys?

Are IM program rankings really that important?

I think most of us can think of physicians who DIDN'T go to the big name, top-ten, IM Programs, and still became major authorities in their respective field.

If you want to be a good doc, an excellent researcher, go to any number of the top 50 medical schools / hospitals in this country and work hard. Individualized effort will be more important than the location in which that effort takes place.

um...so Cook County has a big cities? I never knew that. And you're right, cook county has a significant university in its county's vicinity (UCBerkeley is across the bay bridge and Stanford is a 15min drive, but Cook County has University of Minn a few hours drive away so it is better). Also, Cook County at least have great museums that show how they set up their libraries and railroads. How do Palace of Fine Arts, Exploratorium, California Academy of Sciences, National Maritime, Yerba Bueno Center, Lawrence Exploratorium (UCBerk) compare to that?? I think you're right, cook county residents' ownership of vast lands and farms must make them much poorer than the many immigrants residing in the city of sf.

i just realized how correct pathstudent is. my future vision is corrected and i am going to send my children to cook county to get the best education and learn the most humbled way of life. thank you pathstudent for opening my eyes.



Originally posted by pathstudent
My beef with SF is that it is too small of a city once you have been to NY, Chicago or London. It is incredibly provincial, there are no univeristies of any significance in the city's confines (other than UCSF but a medical instution doesn't have much to offer in the way of intellectual culture and say Harvard, Columbia or the University of CHicago do), there are no museums of significance, there isn't a decent nightlife. It is just a small urban area packed with people that have way too much money to go out and spend at dinner.

The once great counter culture there is dead.

It is a boring white collar town.

But I guess doctors don't care about that kind of stuff anyway, for the most part.

Originally posted by pathstudent
What about the Cook County Hospital program. Their hospital is the biggest in the world sleeping 2000 patients a night, plus where else are you going to get such great pathology than a community like Chicago. I mean SF is a tiny little city compared to Chicago and is just more or less a white collar playground, so how could UCSF be even as close to as good as Cook County for medicine?

That's just ignorant!

UCSF is one of the top IM program in the nation, Cook Co. is a community program with 90% IMGs.

Get your facts straight. The old Cook had about 750 beds. The new Cook has only about 400 beds.

SF Bay vs. Chicagoland...I've lived in both. In my opinion these two metros are the best in the nation. However, I would give the edge to SF Bay for its mild winters.

To clarify things.

Cook County used to be an amazing place to train - 1940-1970s. One attending told me that back then, anyone who was anyone in surgery did at least some training there. Over time, things changed. Medicine there is probably average now.

However, the trauma surgeons there are quite renowned for their skill. It's been said that if you ever find yourself in a situation where you need the services of a trauma surgeon in chicago, hope that you land at Cook County. However, once stabilized, transfer your care to Northwestern.

You have not a clue. Stanford and Berkeley are a world away from SF (although both within a 30 minute drive). They offer nothing to intellectual/artistic/cultural environment of the city. Let's see what is actually in SF. USF and SFSU (both marginal at best).

Chicago has University of Chicago (home to over 70 Nobel winners), Northwestern, Depaul, UIC, Loyola, School of the Art Institute (considered the finest in the US), Chicago College, and others.

Chicago has the Field Musesum, The Art Institute, Adler Planetarium, Shedd Aquarium, Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago Academy of Science, CSO (regarded as one of the world's best), Chicago Ballet, Joffrey, etc..

The DeYoung, Legion of Honor and California Academy of Science are a joke compared to the above. SFMOMA is nice, but does not outclass the MCA.

And for what it is worth Cook did house 2000 a night in its hey day plus had a Woman's and Childrens that slept over a 1000 more.

Yeah UCSF is hands down more prestigous, but that is about it.

SF has a tiny little downtown (only 250 skyscrapers) Chicago has 1500. The Transamerica has 48 stories. There are over 30 buildings in Chicago with over 50.

Yeah SF has about a million times better winter, but you don't see people walking around Chicago in July an noon with parkas (like you do in the Sunset District of SF).

If you want to judge a city by weather, than San Diego rules!

I have lived 23 of my 30 years there and know that the things that made SF notable (artists and radicals) are all gone.

DePaul, UIC, Loyola, Chicago College...??? You forgot DeVry University.

If SF such a horrible city compared to Chicago, why is it the top tourist destination in the US and why are the rents so high? You neglect to see the attraction of THE REGION and is just fixated on the comparison of the "little" city of SF vs. Chicago. SF is like the manhattan of NYC; it is the center piece of a region that includes 3 major cities (SF, San Jose and Oakland), world class universities like UCSF, Stanford Univ. & UC Berkeley, Silicon Valley, Santa Cruz and Napa/Sonoma wine country.

Chicago may have a better skyline, but SF has better weather and more diverse array of recreational activities. The most attractive and unique feature of the SF Bay Area is its proximity to over 100 miles of beach, moutains, redwood forests, valleys, and skiing.

As an academic medical center, UCSF beats cook county hands down. My point was that a program doesn't have to be ranked to offer you the best education, and I"m sure cook county has a lot to offer in terms of teaching (as well as IV draws, ptt transport, and other misc scut). A person has to make the best of where he or she's training and not be too anal about who's number 2 and who's number 5.

In terms of location, I would take bay area any day of the week (or the year, rather). The bay area has some of the most vibrant and diverse communities in the US. West, East, South, and North bay each offer their own distinct flavors. Major academic centers are all within less than an hour drive from each other (UC Berkeley, Stanford, and UCSF). And if you like the outdoors, there are few places with more activities than the bay area. And I think SF has more than enough to do in terms of cultural activities.

Originally posted by MacGyver
with all honesty what the hell are you talking about? MGH and Brigham are SEPARATE hospitals, across town from each other and have their own clinical units. JHU and Duke hospitals on the other hand, are a single entity in a single set of connected buildings. Big difference. The reason those services "fall under one name" as you put it is because they are 1 hospital; they are not spread across multiple hospitals. the US news ranking is a list of HOSPITALS, not hospital aggregates for each med school affiliation.

You cant compare Hopkins Hospital as a unit vs MGH + Brigham; MGH and Brigham share the harvard name but function as separate hospitals. The US News rankings are lists of the best HOSPITALS, not a ranking of hte aggregate hospitals in a whole city.

If the US News rankings were by city, instead of by hospital, then of course Boston would trump both Durham and Baltimore, because Boston is about 5 times larger than those cities and has more total hospitals.

by the way, both baltimore and durham have more hospitals than just the JHU/Duke hospitals. So your comment about multiple hospitals looking poorer doesnt make any sense. Every medium to large city in america has multiple hospitals besides the ones affiliated with the med schools.

again your logic is strange.

You can say that the rankings are bogus, and dont apply to ANY hospitals in the whole country, but to put a different spin on the rankings for just JHU and MGH is wrong.

MGH is one hospital; JHU is one hospital. You seem to be suggesting either that MGH plus all the other affiliated harvard hospitals are one cohesive unit which shares resources; not true at all, they are not even in the same neighborhood.

I would agree that the Texas Medical Center in Houston is shortchanged by the rankings though, since all their hospitals are within walking distance and interconnected. But MGH is unaffected by this because they occupy their own unit on the east side of boston.

Not to drag this on, because this is pointless but:

OK, I'll give you the fact that BI, Brigham, and MGH are independently functioning hospitals, but the same can't be said of the specialty hospitals such as Dana Farber, Mass Eye and Ear, etc. When you get a Optho consult at Brigham, you don't get the Optho staff there, you call up Mass Eye and Ear, or someone else in the system. There is no children's unit there, there aren't ENT's there either. Dana Farber is considered a seperate entity, but it is in-house. But really I'm not the best to explain it because I only visited there.

The point of all this is that you shouldn't be using the fact that some hospitals get more points in deciding which is better at doing things. Is Brigham a worse place to do training or anything else it does because the children go across the street or that it has to call in ENT and Optho consults? For crying out loud, Dana Farber is a floor in the Brigham. On the other hand are Duke and JHU that much better because they happen to have these services in-house? I would argue no. Do more points correlate with a better hospital, better reputation, or more importantly for us a better place to train? Maybe, if you are talking about tiers. But not in differentiating between programs considered in the same league. You're REALLY splitting hairs here.

I say SF is a neater place to live than Boston, but who cares what I think. If you really want to know you should visit them or spend time there yourself. Then you can make definitive judgement.

after further research...

Chicago has about 100 building greater than 50 stories.

It also has the most bridges of any city in the world.

It is where the subject of Sociology was invented (univ Chicago)

It produced the policies that defeated the Soviet Uniont (university of Chicago school of Economics. See The Washington Post Dec 8 1991 "The Cold War is Over and the University of Chicago won it")

It is where "house" music was invented. - now pumping in every city on the globe.

The "skyscraper" was invented there. - changed the face of cities worldwide.

Has the third most skyscrapers (Hong Kong and NY are #1 #2 respectively)

The first atomic reactor was built there.

It was the world center of anarchism in the 1870s.

The labor movement developed there.

It is the home of the Nation of Islam, Jesse Jackson and a multitude of other prominent black activists.

Also after further research. Cook County was once a great hospital, one of the greatest in the world, but has since become a victim of politics. Although they still don't turn anyone away, you are awfully lucky to get good care there. It seems even the new hospital isn't really concerned with the patients and more is just a tool for the county commisioner to dole out contracts to ensure his election.

Yes, it seems anywhere is better to go to than Cook for Internal Medicine.

I read that Cook though is a kick ass place to do Trauma surgery.

Also after further research. Cook County was once a great hospital, one of the greatest in the world, but has since become a victim of politics. Although they still don't turn anyone away, you are awfully lucky to get good care there. It seems even the new hospital isn't really concerned with the patients and more is just a tool for the county commisioner to dole out contracts to ensure his election.

What was the methodology of your research?

Cook County was never the greatest in the world, by any stretch. However, it is one of only a handful "free" hospital left in the US.

The quality of medicine practiced here is very good. In the new facility, they have a lot of resources and everything is state of the art. It's much more efficient. They have a large short-stay so only truely sick patients are admitted. The residents, though mostly IMGs, are very competent. A lot of new toys for radiology dept., but most rad attendings at Cook are useless and you are left with more questions than answers.

I just wanted to say I believe this is the dumbest discussion I have ever encountered. I might continue to read additional posts just because I find the stupidity (mostly what pathstudent says) of this discussion very facetious.

I just would like to say that a lot of you are acting like little kids. Pathstudent has an appreciation for cook county hospital, one of the greatest hospitals in US history, without a doubt (see http://www.cchil.org/Cch/history.htm ). In 1928, it housed 3 thousand 4 hundred total beds, and served the poorest people in chicago. It was the site of the nations first blood bank, one of america's busiest ER's and trauma centers (have you ever seen "ER"?), chicago's first AIDS clinic, and a lot of another services that are seen as innovations in the development of healthcare in the US. BUT THEN AGAIN, it wasn't ranked by USNews and World Reports, so how can it possibly be a good hospital? :rolleyes: <sigh> Simply children at play, it seems...

Pathstudent would like to publicly appreciate cook county hospital and the city of chicago. I certainly hope he reviews his options if he's building a rank list, but otherwise, what the heck is the problem? Or is it that he dares not to giggle in adoration over MGH or the brigham! Let the guy be, I hope he's not damaging any egos here.

From what I can see, what got him in trouble is not his appraisal of Cook or Chicago, but when he started bashing on a major city and a hospital that houses one of the highest numbers of nobel prize winners, medical innovations, and service to the community. I honestly dont care what he thinks, but others on this post seem to think he's an idiot for proclaiming such criticisms.


Originally posted by abu barney
I just would like to say that a lot of you are acting like little kids. Pathstudent has an appreciation for cook county hospital, one of the greatest hospitals in US history, without a doubt (see http://www.cchil.org/Cch/history.htm ). In 1928, it housed 3 thousand 4 hundred total beds, and served the poorest people in chicago. It was the site of the nations first blood bank, one of america's busiest ER's and trauma centers (have you ever seen "ER"?), chicago's first AIDS clinic, and a lot of another services that are seen as innovations in the development of healthcare in the US. BUT THEN AGAIN, it wasn't ranked by USNews and World Reports, so how can it possibly be a good hospital? :rolleyes: <sigh> Simply children at play, it seems...

Pathstudent would like to publicly appreciate cook county hospital and the city of chicago. I certainly hope he reviews his options if he's building a rank list, but otherwise, what the heck is the problem? Or is it that he dares not to giggle in adoration over MGH or the brigham! Let the guy be, I hope he's not damaging any egos here.

Abu Barney is a pretty cool guy.

And unfortunately I won't be ranking cook for residency. Just like everybody else I will be shooting for Columbia, UCSF, MGH, Univ f Chicago etc etc etc...

But I would have liked to have seen the day when Cook was a giant.

And who said there are tons of Nobel Prize Winners at SFGH, whoever heard of clinical practioners winning Nobel Prizes? If there are any, it has to be rare. Only real scientists win Nobels in Physiology and Medicine.

Not since Banting and Best.

pathstudent, thanks for the props :)

however...
And who said there are tons of Nobel Prize Winners at SFGH, whoever heard of clinical practioners winning Nobel Prizes? If there are any, it has to be rare. Only real scientists win Nobels in Physiology and Medicine.

I can't agree with you here. Varmus and Bishop from UCSF won the nobel in 1989... For the record, there have been no nobel laureates from cook county :)

So did that Prion guy Prussner, but were they all doing Internal Medicine at SFGH?

If you know anything about int med residency, you would know you rotate around different specialities--oncology, ob/gyn, derm, etc. The fact that you will be teamed up with experts on these specialties at ucsf doesnt mean you will become the best doctor, but it might help in your medical education.

Originally posted by pathstudent
So did that Prion guy Prussner, but were they all doing Internal Medicine at SFGH?

Originally posted by profunda
If you know anything about int med residency, you would know you rotate around different specialities--oncology, ob/gyn, derm, etc. The fact that you will be teamed up with experts on these specialties at ucsf doesnt mean you will become the best doctor, but it might help in your medical education.

ob, derm rotations??? that's news to me. tell me you're confusing IM with FP. i would quit medicine if i had to do ob/gyn. maybe if you're doing an primary IM, but still i've never heard of any IM doing an ob rotation.

Top 5: MGH, Stanford, Hopkins, UCSF, Wash U
2nd 5: Penn, Brigham, Mayo, Duke, UW
3rd 5: UCSD, Columbia, Cornell, UCLA, Yale

Ranking based on reputation, competitiveness and NIH funding.

yale? ucsd? stanford in top 5?

urrr the "rankings" you talk about is crack...

where is chicago? vandy? mayo? UTSW?

oh oh i wanna put in my 2 cents!!

take stanford out of your top 5...that's ridiculous man, they're not even top 15 any more. bump Penn up into your top 5 in its place. slide UTSW into Penn's place in the middle 5 (i'd put them at #10). then you've definitely gotta dump UCSD - that's all based on location, it's not as good a program as it is just competitive to get into in order to live in San Diego (not a bad program, mind you, but not top 15). also dump Yale, they live on name reputation...program isn't as strong as it used to be. also dump cornell....columbia and cornell roughly a tossup, Columbia likely would slide in at #15. add Vanderbilt, UAB, Northwestern (as much as it pains me to say it, with recent slips at U. of Chicago, Northwestern is likely the best IM program in Chicago). Chicago and Cornell, as well as Michigan, UNC, and possibly Emory or Iowa (a definite darkhorse - I know very little about this program, but I've heard some very good things) could round out the top 20. and of course, this is all completely, 100% scientific on my part

After interviewing at several of the above mentioned "top 15-20" programs, I must say that UVA has to be mentioned in the same breath as UNC and Northwestern, and perhaps before them.

CK:
IM residents may rotate in derm and gynecology,of course as electives. And yes, I've never heard of any IM resident do an OB rotation.

some of the women's health tracks in IM have ob/gyn rotations. derm can be done as part of an ambulatory elective at some places too, i've seen that in my program

Originally posted by pathstudent

...Not since Banting and Best.

From the University of Toronto, Canada... WooHoo :D

Okay, back to the battle...

when you go on your interviews, the "rankings" will become obvious as you talk to people on the interview trail. you'll see that the rankings in US news or by research dollars don't have much to do with which programs are really thought to be great.

by "group": programs within the group are all at about the same level:

1) Brigham and Women's, MGH, Hopkins, UCSF

2) Beth Isreal Deaconess, Hospital of the Univ of Penn, Duke, UT Southwestern, U. Washington-Seattle, Wash U St. Louis

3) Stanford, Columbia-Presbyterian, U. CHicago, Yale, Cornell, Mt. Sinai, UVa

4) UNC-Chapel Hill, NYU, Vanderbilt, Emory, UCLA

jay c, you're obviously from the east coast, from looking at your list. and i'm obviously from the south, for anybody looking at my list. that's part of the fallacy of these rankings, depends on what places you have the most knowledge about and experience with. but what the hell, it's still fun anyway to try to make up arbitrary lists....

actually, these lists are pretty standard. just look at the authors for the major medicine textbooks. braunwald, of harrison's, was chair of medicine at brigham for about 25 years. TIMI trials take place there. braunwald's "Heart" is the cardiology bible. also, many chairs of medicine around the country have trained in boston. for example, former chair of medicine at hopkins, Dr Edward Benz is a brigham alum. Lee Goldberg MD of UCSF as well. Chair at univ of arizona also from brigham. of course, New England Journal of Medicine Editor in Chief Dr. Jeff Drazen is Brigham alum. i'd be happy to provide any more if you'd like.

i'm not biased, actually, i'd like to move out west. but if you check out the interview trail for medicine, it's pretty much the same each year. there are many outstanding institutions in the south, west, midwest, etc. the difference is purely based on "name and snob factor" and you'd probably get the best clinical training at a place like bellevue in NYC or UT southwestern's Parkland.

one can also debate whether or not the theoretical law training at Yale Law is really important to practical law practice. but the bottom line is that Yale law is #1.

I think the "rankings" are best determined by the relative perception of programs around the country. Amalgamation of the perceptions of program directors for fellowships from the east and west coasts reveal the following general "rankings" (with the asterisked ones having the best track record matching residents to preferred fellowships):

1) Brigham*, MGH*, Hopkins*, Yale*, Stanford*
2) Washington-Seattle, Duke*, Cornell, Wash U-St Louis, Columbia
3) U Chicago, UCLA, Penn State, Mayo-Rochester

Note the places shown to have the best placements are all #1, with the exception of Duke. Note also that the #1's are prestigious undergrad programs (Harvard, Hopkins, Yale, Stanford) and are world recognized names. Take Washington U-Seattle for instance and mention it in Europe, and you may get a blank stare. Take Harvard or Yale and mention either, and there is instant name recognition. As a residency graduate, being from such a "recognized" name place gives you the most bang for your buck.

What's the word on Emory, GW, and Georgetown's IM programs? I'm interested in ending up in DC or Atlanta for my residency training.

jay c - i believe you about brigham...no need to get defensive...they still live in the shadow of mass general in that city, which is why i'd say they're maybe #6, but still undisputedly an excellent program

bob3 - Penn State? how did that end up in your list?

wakemed - Emory is really good. i interviewed there, solid program, lots of money which the med school is spending to make itself better. large program, multiple hospitals, and Grady is legendary as a training site. not too much personal experience with GW or Georgetown, but i've always heard they are crappy programs. i know 1 person that interviewed at georgetown, said it was OK, but she matched to UNC. and i know 1 person who interviewed at GW, thought it was a total joke and felt like he wasted his time even applying there after the interview...matched at Northwestern. of course, that's a really small survey sample, so definitely ask other people who have experience with the 2 programs. my advice, for what it's worth - out of those 3 programs go for Emory.

it's not my list...the article from the Academic Physician provided that list with the data on each program's success rates at matching graduates to prestigious fellowships/positions. The top three were Yale, Harvard (MGH, Brigham) and Stanford (in that order).

actually, for the match list on the program's side, the Brigham does better each year. this is internal data from the partners system. as i'm sure you're well aware, the MGH and Brigham merged to become Partners Health Care. Systemwide, they publish match data for all departments and divisions. for the medicine match, for their 30 spots, the MGH goes down to about 80-90 on their list. the Brigham for 42 spots, goes down to 60-70. that's about a 2.5-3 x ratio for the MGH, and < 2x ratio for the brigham.

i'm not saying that the training is better. it's really related to the quality of life. for example, between the few perceived top places, where would you rather live? san fran, boston or baltimore? i think, for those free to move anywhere (family or geographical preferences excluded), it's safe to say that baltimore would be below boston and san fran. then we can ask, where between boston and san fran? based purely on location, most would pick san fran. but the kicker is that the cost of living in san fran is higher in boston, and the pay is less (interns my year at the partners hospitals made about 40k, and ucsf 33k). so for cost of living reasons, most people pick boston. then, one asks, should i go to the mgh and get my butt whooped? or brigham and have a nice 3 years? the answer for most is the brigham. and this is how it plays out. most program directors will state that brigham is the most competitive, mgh and ucsf next. hopkins last of the big 4. there are many that get interviews elsewhere and not at brigham.

having trained at one of the boston programs, and also knowing about hopkins through people i've met, i strongly feel that the hopkins residents are perhaps the BEST trained residents, bar none. they work their butts off, learn a ton, and are extremely bright to begin with. but for me personally, there would be no way that i would live in baltimore and work to 10pm every night.

also, let's be serious. medicine is not like surgery. surgery is truly an apprentice-ship, where the surgeon you learn your craft from is very important. for medicine it's different. you can take a bright, motivated person, put them in some community hospital in idaho, and he or she will be a great doctor because that person will read a ton, see patients, and learn. the advantage of a tertiary or quaternery care center is to see the rare cases that get referred there.

Whoever included Yale as a "top-tier" program is insane. It's a good place, but I would hessitate to place it even in the top 25 programs.

Also, in another post, someone placed Beth Israel deaconess in a top tier. That is absurd. It would be a stretch to say BI was a top 30 program. It might fall under the Harvard umbrella, but it certainly is the ugly step-sister of the Harvard hospitals. The saddest thing is that the residents I know at BI deaconess always tell people they're doing residency at Harvard. When people in the know ask which hospital, they sheepishly have to admit that it isn't Mass General or the Brigham.

Yale is not only a top tier program according to the Academic Physician Article but is the top one after an analysis was done on programs receiving highest research dollars, percentage of residents entering academics, selectivity, and most importantly, success rates of residents achieving preferred fellowships/jobs. Everyone can make up "lists: according to their perceptions, but these are only perceptions. Hard core data is the scientific way of analyzing the programs and that's what was done in the article.

I do agree with you that Beth Israel is a joke.

and, no, I do not go to Yale, but wish I did.

Originally posted by bob3
Yale is not only a top tier program according to the Academic Physician Article but is the top one after an analysis was done on programs receiving highest research dollars, percentage of residents entering academics, selectivity, and most importantly, success rates of residents achieving preferred fellowships/jobs. Everyone can make up "lists: according to their perceptions, but these are only perceptions. Hard core data is the scientific way of analyzing the programs and that's what was done in the article.

bob3:
You are right on the money about the Yale University medicine program. The article was very informative and the data it presented clearly placed Yale at the top for matching their residents with fellowships.
I spoke to my Chair of medicine who advised that I should rank Yale Traditional first and Primary second. According to him, you skin the cat graduating from either program and he would prefer to take a Yale resident into his fellowship b/c he says the program is known for very solid teaching and grads do very well in general. Thanks for the invaluable info, bob3.

Originally posted by bob3
Yale is not only a top tier program according to the Academic Physician Article but is the top one after an analysis was done on programs receiving highest research dollars, percentage of residents entering academics, selectivity, and most importantly, success rates of residents achieving preferred fellowships/jobs. Everyone can make up "lists: according to their perceptions, but these are only perceptions. Hard core data is the scientific way of analyzing the programs and that's what was done in the article.

bob or anyone,

I looked into the Yale program...do you know abything about its abroad program for residents?

I know this is an old thread, but I stumbled across this and thought this might be a good addition.

It ranks IM programs by funding:

http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/award/rank/MedSchool_Departments.cfm?Department=INTERNAL%20ME DICINE/MEDICINE


Rank Organization Number Awarded Amount Awarded Grant Type
1 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 296 $150,288,287 Research
2 UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRAN SCH OF MED 279 $133,265,355 Research
3 DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE 178 $121,740,320 Research
4 UNIV OF PENNSYLVANIA SCH OF MEDICINE 219 $111,697,188 Research
5 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCH OF MEDICINE 184 $107,727,004 Research
6 VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 173 $97,198,947 Research
7 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 194 $95,600,444 Research
8 UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO SCH OF MED 158 $88,117,072 Research
9 DAVID GEFFEN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT UCLA 172 $84,541,536 Research
10 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL 155 $80,501,181 Research
11 YALE UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 156 $72,433,270 Research
12 COLUMBIA U COL OF PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS 129 $67,284,727 Research
13 UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA SCH OF MEDICINE 124 $66,388,905 Research
14 UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCH OF MED 116 $65,327,098 Research
15 UNIV OF CHICAGO PRITZKER SCH OF MEDICINE 120 $64,698,114 Research
16 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIV SCH OF MED 130 $63,297,559 Research
17 UNIV OF COLORADO HLTH SCI CTR SCH OF MED 126 $60,338,731 Research
18 MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU 142 $59,404,739 Research
19 UNIV OF PITTSBURGH SCH OF MEDICINE 153 $57,697,925 Research
20 STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 120 $55,639,566 Research
21 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL SCHOOL 89 $45,599,462 Research
22 KECK SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF USC 55 $45,178,733 Research
23 UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE 80 $42,356,101 Research
24 BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE 105 $41,801,610 Research
25 UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCH OF MEDICINE 73 $41,565,568 Research

with all honesty what the hell are you talking about? MGH and Brigham are SEPARATE hospitals, across town from each other and have their own clinical units. JHU and Duke hospitals on the other hand, are a single entity in a single set of connected buildings. Big difference. The reason those services "fall under one name" as you put it is because they are 1 hospital; they are not spread across multiple hospitals. the US news ranking is a list of HOSPITALS, not hospital aggregates for each med school affiliation.

You cant compare Hopkins Hospital as a unit vs MGH + Brigham; MGH and Brigham share the harvard name but function as separate hospitals. The US News rankings are lists of the best HOSPITALS, not a ranking of hte aggregate hospitals in a whole city...

Macgyver,

your reasoning is idiosyncratic, and not based on logic at all...

explain to me your precious US News & World Report's honor roll ranking of New York-Presbyterian Hospital of Columbia and Cornell. two hospitals, two medical schools, separated by more distance than Brigham and MGH. in addition, Brigham and MGH have far more combined/merged subspecialty training programs under Partners Healthcare than NYPH/Columbia/Cornell.

so, with all honesty, what the hell are YOU taking about?

I know this is an old thread, but I stumbled across this and thought this might be a good addition.

It ranks IM programs by funding:

http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/award/rank/MedSchool_Departments.cfm?Department=INTERNAL%20ME DICINE/MEDICINE


Rank Organization Number Awarded Amount Awarded Grant Type
1 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 296 $150,288,287 Research
2 UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRAN SCH OF MED 279 $133,265,355 Research
3 DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE 178 $121,740,320 Research
4 UNIV OF PENNSYLVANIA SCH OF MEDICINE 219 $111,697,188 Research
5 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCH OF MEDICINE 184 $107,727,004 Research
6 VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 173 $97,198,947 Research
7 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 194 $95,600,444 Research
8 UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO SCH OF MED 158 $88,117,072 Research
9 DAVID GEFFEN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT UCLA 172 $84,541,536 Research
10 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL 155 $80,501,181 Research
11 YALE UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 156 $72,433,270 Research
12 COLUMBIA U COL OF PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS 129 $67,284,727 Research
13 UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA SCH OF MEDICINE 124 $66,388,905 Research
14 UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCH OF MED 116 $65,327,098 Research
15 UNIV OF CHICAGO PRITZKER SCH OF MEDICINE 120 $64,698,114 Research
16 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIV SCH OF MED 130 $63,297,559 Research
17 UNIV OF COLORADO HLTH SCI CTR SCH OF MED 126 $60,338,731 Research
18 MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU 142 $59,404,739 Research
19 UNIV OF PITTSBURGH SCH OF MEDICINE 153 $57,697,925 Research
20 STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCH OF MEDICINE 120 $55,639,566 Research
21 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL SCHOOL 89 $45,599,462 Research
22 KECK SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF USC 55 $45,178,733 Research
23 UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE 80 $42,356,101 Research
24 BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE 105 $41,801,610 Research
25 UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCH OF MEDICINE 73 $41,565,568 Research



This is interesting.... we should start a new thread discussing IM programs. I think that would helpful, eh? Moderators? Bueller? :rolleyes:

This is interesting.... we should start a new thread discussing IM programs. I think that would helpful, eh? Moderators? Bueller? :rolleyes:

something to note about the rankings of NIH awards and institution names. the amount and number of awards can be a little misleading. for example, the conspicuous absence of Harvard from this list is due to the separation of MGH, Brigham, and BID from the umbrella of Harvard (unlike Johns Hopkins).

for NIH awards to all insitutions by rank for 2005:

Rank* Organization Amount
1 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY $607,222,589
2 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA $471,350,481
3 UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON $462,021,658
4 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO $452,165,301
5 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY $394,788,334
6 DUKE UNIVERSITY $391,196,272
7 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN $386,027,410
8 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES $385,788,286
9 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH $385,680,084
10 YALE UNIVERSITY $336,742,948
etc.

if we re-tally the NIH funds according to the general umbrella academic environment instead of strict insitution names, the list looks a bit different:

Harvard+MGH+Brigham+BID+DanaFarber+Childrens = $1,204,541,930
UnivWashington+FredHutch = $670,786,718
JohnsHopkins = $607,222,589
UPenn+CHOP = $550,942,433
UCSF+Gladstone = $477,088,062

yeah, i know... :sleep:

Ahh - this is also interesting.

Though I know it is tough to pick a program/rate a program solely on their amount of NIH funding.

I wish there was a website that put everything into table format for you and just listed simples things about each program, so you could compare... like which one's have private attendings? night float? computerized orders? amount of intern call? amount vacation? VA affiliation? amount outpatient? etc, you know... wouldn't that be great?

I've tried using scutwork, but I muust admit that I just don't have the patience to read through some of those long ass paragraphs.

When you are an intern on your tenth admit of the night in the ICU, that thick wad of NIH funding will NOT make the one-inch-thick callroom pillow any softer. And when you are on your first call night as an R2 with no supervision and a crashing patient, the US News rankings will not compensate for inexperience due to a too-cush intern year.

Just some thoughts...

When you are an intern on your tenth admit of the night in the ICU, that thick wad of NIH funding will NOT make the one-inch-thick callroom pillow any softer. And when you are on your first call night as an R2 with no supervision and a crashing patient, the US News rankings will not compensate for inexperience due to a too-cush intern year.

Just some thoughts...

good thoughts Mumpu. :thumbup:

just don't forget in the middle of all your frenetic activity to keep your eye on the prize. housestaff training will teach you the mechanics of being a good doctor, but your long term success will be determined by what you do in your "spare time". most residencies are front-loaded intentionally to give you more liberty to explore career options towards the second half of training--if the goal is private practice, then to do financial planning and schmoozing. if the goal is academics, then to do basic or clinical research. in academically oriented programs, the latter option is more common, especially if your intentions are for a competitive subspecialty fellowship.

NIH grant ranking is not helpful in this process, but it is small indicator of the general research productivity of a given campus. in the end, i would advise choosing programs and research mentors based upon whether they are a good fit for you personally.

Hi all! I am wondering how everyone ranks the two programs that are associated with Johns Hopkins- the Sinai and Bayview programs? Are they as good as JHU for fellowships, etc? Thanks for your thoughts!

Trepp

Hi all! I am wondering how everyone ranks the two programs that are associated with Johns Hopkins- the Sinai and Bayview programs? Are they as good as JHU for fellowships, etc? Thanks for your thoughts!

Trepp

no, they are not as good as the main program

no, they are not as good as the main program

How much worse are they? Second or third tear...or lower?

Thanks!

why does all this rankings business matter? I understand most are for ego purposes and some will say it's for fellowship placement, but if it's for fellowship matching, isn't it just easy to contact the individual program and see which graduates have matched into what fellowships? who cares if a program is top 5 in another person's eyes, it's just all personal opinions. i feel that this thread is pretty dumb, just browsing through makes me feel like im reading a thread with a bunch of teenagers talking about which sport team is the best

why does all this rankings business matter? I understand most are for ego purposes and some will say it's for fellowship placement, but if it's for fellowship matching, isn't it just easy to contact the individual program and see which graduates have matched into what fellowships? who cares if a program is top 5 in another person's eyes, it's just all personal opinions. i feel that this thread is pretty dumb, just browsing through makes me feel like im reading a thread with a bunch of teenagers talking about which sport team is the best


the ranking business garners all this hoopla because of the idea that a higher rank leads to more or better career options. a Harvard grad may not be any smarter than a UMiss grad, but the Harvard grad has better options in general. as you note astutely, a much better approach is to find out whether a program's graduates get to do the sort of things or go to the sort of places that you would want. unfortunately, it's often difficult to find this information. beware of programs that are coy in this regard.

p diddy

i think this is a rather silly conversation for several reasons:

1) the quality of your education and experience is most closely reflected by the effort of the individual. there are people from many less-prestigious programs that get outstanding fellowships and do great things in their careers. you should think first about where you want to live, what your goals are and if they can practically be obtained at a given institution.

2) i can't speak for other programs, but i have done rotations at iowa and mayo and i can say i was very happy with both. iowa was really a surprise to me and i feel it is very well rounded wtih a broad variety of pathology (only Univ. hospital in a rather rural state of 3 million) and the focus on teaching and EBM at Mayo is very unique - it's well-worked into the curriculum for residents.

i can't speak directly to other programs, but i've had a positive impression of both. i think there are many strong IM programs in the nation where you can be effectively prepared for fellowships or private practice. i'm likley to stay in the midwest, hence my away rotation picks, but i am applying to a couple big name eastern programs to see what they're like and if i'd want to live there.

i guess my main point is to remember that you'll be most successful at a high quality program where you are happy - both work-wise and personally.

oh oh i wanna put in my 2 cents!!

take stanford out of your top 5...that's ridiculous man, they're not even top 15 any more. bump Penn up into your top 5 in its place. slide UTSW into Penn's place in the middle 5 (i'd put them at #10). then you've definitely gotta dump UCSD - that's all based on location, it's not as good a program as it is just competitive to get into in order to live in San Diego (not a bad program, mind you, but not top 15). also dump Yale, they live on name reputation...program isn't as strong as it used to be. also dump cornell....columbia and cornell roughly a tossup, Columbia likely would slide in at #15. add Vanderbilt, UAB, Northwestern (as much as it pains me to say it, with recent slips at U. of Chicago, Northwestern is likely the best IM program in Chicago). Chicago and Cornell, as well as Michigan, UNC, and possibly Emory or Iowa (a definite darkhorse - I know very little about this program, but I've heard some very good things) could round out the top 20. and of course, this is all completely, 100% scientific on my part

:thumbdown

There are NO RANKINGS of INTERNAL MEDICINE RESIDENCY PROGRAMS!!- this information does not exist, so why do people insist on arbitrarily creating there own "ranking" system in 1st, 2nd, 3d tiers?? There are rankings of hospitals and rankings of departments- this may give you information on funding, nurse to patient ratios, etc, but it tells you ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the quality of a training program.

In applying for residency training programs, just do some research:
1. Apply to programs in cities where you think you will be happy living (near SO, family; near things you like to do, etc.)
2. Agree with P Diddy above- find out what their grads do after residency
(?matching in competive fellowships, % who go into fellowship vs. general practice- this will be important depending on which route you are interested in).
3. Look at ABIM pass rate data
4. Talk with people actually doing residency at that program/ read scutwork.com reviews/ etc. to get the real story.
5. Quit making up "rankings"

When you are an intern on your tenth admit of the night in the ICU, that thick wad of NIH funding will NOT make the one-inch-thick callroom pillow any softer. And when you are on your first call night as an R2 with no supervision and a crashing patient, the US News rankings will not compensate for inexperience due to a too-cush intern year.

Just some thoughts...

True. But consider this . . . when you are an R-2 with an elective month or two and are interested in applying for a GI or Cards fellowship, where would you rather be?

(a) a communiy hospital that has excellent "hands on" clinical training
(b) a world-class academic medical center w/ tons of research dollars invested in cards/gi departments w/ many clinical or basic science projects for you to jump on and publish

When you are finishing up your R3 and realize that your cards program recieved 700 applications for maybe 9 spots, think where you would rather be.

Rankings are not the be all end all. But if you want a highly competitive fellowship or to stay in academics, they should factor into your ranking equation.

There are NO RANKINGS of INTERNAL MEDICINE RESIDENCY PROGRAMS!!- this information does not exist, so why do people insist on arbitrarily creating there own "ranking" system in 1st, 2nd, 3d tiers?? There are rankings of hospitals and rankings of departments- this may give you information on funding, nurse to patient ratios, etc, but it tells you ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the quality of a training program.
"

There are no official rankings and US News is cr@p, but people can make their own ranking system based on reputation/prestige. I think that's what people are getting at. And eventually, applicants will have to create their own rankings in their own ROL. Obviously, that's a personal choice taking into account many other factors.

i think this is a rather silly conversation for several reasons:

1) the quality of your education and experience is most closely reflected by the effort of the individual. there are people from many less-prestigious programs that get outstanding fellowships and do great things in their careers. you should think first about where you want to live, what your goals are and if they can practically be obtained at a given institution.

2) i can't speak for other programs, but i have done rotations at iowa and mayo and i can say i was very happy with both. iowa was really a surprise to me and i feel it is very well rounded wtih a broad variety of pathology (only Univ. hospital in a rather rural state of 3 million) and the focus on teaching and EBM at Mayo is very unique - it's well-worked into the curriculum for residents.

i can't speak directly to other programs, but i've had a positive impression of both. i think there are many strong IM programs in the nation where you can be effectively prepared for fellowships or private practice. i'm likley to stay in the midwest, hence my away rotation picks, but i am applying to a couple big name eastern programs to see what they're like and if i'd want to live there.

i guess my main point is to remember that you'll be most successful at a high quality program where you are happy - both work-wise and personally.

I agree that what Behcet has said angers me as well... I mean, what are these supposed "slips at U Chicago" ...what is he/she even talking about? But, unfortunately, half of this thread is 3 years old. So, we probably shouldn't let what posters argued about 3 years ago bother us too much even if they are very, very wrong. :cool:

I think you are right on. "Rankings" or "reputations" or how ever you want to put it matter somewhat, because the basic point here is that whether or not we want it to, it matters what outsiders think of your program. It matters, because it will help you secure fellowship where you want to go, etc.

Also, I think it is fair to say that some programs have secured such a reputation for a reason. There is generally some truth to all of this beyond NIH funding. But, yea, in my opinion, I think you should always worry about finding a location where you will be happy first, and then going from there....

Hopefully, once people start going on interviews, their experiences and impressions at/of certain programs will be more helpful....

Which California programs (other than UCSF) are most successful in sending their grads to cardiology fellowships?

other than ucsf? you have to include stanford.

almost 1/2 of the residents there go into cards. most to top-notch cardiology fellowships.

Here is my ranking, I go with the US NEWS
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/best-hospitals/honorroll.htm

I will chose mayo over hopkins since mayo has a nicer lifestyle and community to live in. PLus I havent revieved a interview yet from hopkins so screw them if they dont want me !!!! lol