best pathology programs

[fldhkybnva]

hi! i love this forum. i have loved pathology since 2nd year, however over the course of 3rd year basic clerkship rotations i think i have decided that pathology is definitely the best field for me. as you all know, pathology isn't a favorite choice among medical students so it's been a lonely world out there especially when i am so excited to enter the field. as such, this forum has been very helpful. as the end of 3rd year nears, i decided that i'd spend some useless hours during spring break to research programs and set up a preliminary list. i just wondered if anyone knew the best resources to research good programs. i'm not too picky but i want to be at an academic, high-volume center with plenty of fellowship opportunities, preferably on the east coast or at the furthest the midwest.

thanks so much.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Entgegen]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=115367

 

[2121115]

hi! i love this forum. i have loved pathology since 2nd year, however over the course of 3rd year basic clerkship rotations i think i have decided that pathology is definitely the best field for me. as you all know, pathology isn't a favorite choice among medical students so it's been a lonely world out there especially when i am so excited to enter the field. as such, this forum has been very helpful. as the end of 3rd year nears, i decided that i'd spend some useless hours during spring break to research programs and set up a preliminary list. i just wondered if anyone knew the best resources to research good programs. i'm not too picky but i want to be at an academic, high-volume center with plenty of fellowship opportunities, preferably on the east coast or at the furthest the midwest.

thanks so much.

Go pick up a surgical pathology text book, preferably Rosai or Sternberg. Open to the contributing author page and see what institutions these authors are from. That will be a good start to find out what programs are strong. As you might expect, if it has a brand name that often correlates with a strong training program. You will also find non-brand name programs that provide excellent training. Overall though, the best thing to do is just ask around in your local area and see what people say.

 

[pathstudent]

hi! i love this forum. i have loved pathology since 2nd year, however over the course of 3rd year basic clerkship rotations i think i have decided that pathology is definitely the best field for me. as you all know, pathology isn't a favorite choice among medical students so it's been a lonely world out there especially when i am so excited to enter the field. as such, this forum has been very helpful. as the end of 3rd year nears, i decided that i'd spend some useless hours during spring break to research programs and set up a preliminary list. i just wondered if anyone knew the best resources to research good programs. i'm not too picky but i want to be at an academic, high-volume center with plenty of fellowship opportunities, preferably on the east coast or at the furthest the midwest.

thanks so much.

Hopkins and bwh are the great programs in the east. Those are the straws that stir the drink. There aren't any great programs in the Midwest but there are some very very good ones. Ucsf and Stanford are also great but it sounds like you aren't willing to go that car

 

[NurseGollam]

Hopkins and bwh are the great programs in the east. Those are the straws that stir the drink. There aren't any great programs in the Midwest but there are some very very good ones. Ucsf and Stanford are also great but it sounds like you aren't willing to go that car

First piece of advice: Don't listen to pathstudent.

 

[pathstudent]

hi! i love this forum. i have loved pathology since 2nd year, however over the course of 3rd year basic clerkship rotations i think i have decided that pathology is definitely the best field for me. as you all know, pathology isn't a favorite choice among medical students so it's been a lonely world out there especially when i am so excited to enter the field. as such, this forum has been very helpful. as the end of 3rd year nears, i decided that i'd spend some useless hours during spring break to research programs and set up a preliminary list. i just wondered if anyone knew the best resources to research good programs. i'm not too picky but i want to be at an academic, high-volume center with plenty of fellowship opportunities, preferably on the east coast or at the furthest the midwest.

thanks so much.

all the Robbins authors got roots at bwh. Or at least almost.

Go pick up a surgical pathology text book, preferably Rosai or Sternberg. Open to the contributing author page and see what institutions these authors are from. That will be a good start to find out what programs are strong. As you might expect, if it has a brand name that often correlates with a strong training program. You will also find non-brand name programs that provide excellent training. Overall though, the best thing to do is just ask around in your local area and see what people say.

 

[GG1853]

This is obviously a powder-keg of a question to ask on this board. I approach it kind of differently. I ask the question, "Where would I go for college, medical school, or graduate school?" Generally, I think those programs have reasonable residency training too.

Look at the ROL or rank order lists that people posted and programs that they are hoping to match into. All together, maybe 15 different programs are mentioned. These are obviously good programs to start looking at.

It seems like people on here want to try to convince people to go to the University of Southwest Oklahoma -- maybe because its the only place they could get into? I don't know, I can't figure it out.

 

[pathstudent]

First piece of advice: Don't listen to pathstudent.

Like I said bwh and Hopkins are the straws thAt stir the pathology cocktail. Sorry to those who cAn't deal with that and have to think their programs are the schIznit.

When I interviewed at residency I interviewed at 14
places and at almost all of the the pd or chair was from bwh. And think about the seminal text in our field it is basically a bwh gift to medicine.

 

[Euchromatin]

My search was somewhat different than yours. As I've mentioned in other threads, I really wanted to stay in the Midwest and avoid metropolises. I certainly looked into better known programs based on their reputation, but I also spent a lot of time browsing the websites of programs I was unfamiliar with. This would usually at least give me a rough idea of some factors (including whether they felt making a decent, informative website was important, hehe). I also hunted down the students from my med school that went into path from the previous year or two and asked for their advice and impressions of various programs. They referred me to several programs that I hadn't really thought about and ended up really liking in interviews. The residents, fellows, and attendings at whatever program you do your elective rotations at may or may not be a good source depending upon how similar those residents are to you in terms of their goals, competitiveness, etc.

 

[medicomel]

Like I said bwh and Hopkins are the straws thAt stir the pathology cocktail. Sorry to those who cAn't deal with that and have to think their programs are the schIznit.

When I interviewed at residency I interviewed at 14
places and at almost all of the the pd or chair was from bwh. And think about the seminal text in our field it is basically a bwh gift to medicine.

wait, what's happening here? don't you usually sing the praises of UCSF?

OP, check out http://www.pathologytraining.org/ for a definitive resource. They'll even send you a book for free. I used it to cram prior to each interview.

 

[PathMD2010]

Look at the ROL or rank order lists that people posted and programs that they are hoping to match into. All together, maybe 15 different programs are mentioned. These are obviously good programs to start looking at.

.

Though the schools posted on the ROL are very good (otherwise people would not have posted them) note that they vary geographically. I don't know how common this is - but mine was VERY concentrated geographically and I was concerned that would be a source of identification. I did not post my list -which contained a few schools that were not on the 15 that circulated in the ROL thread - because of this concern. Point is not my lack of sharing but that there are more than 15 schools that people here ranked.

I would def. use the above resources. Also, FRIEDA is good for basic list making. The school's websites often have surgical volumes.

What I did was use FRIEDA to get a big list, then looked at the path training site, and I made folders for programs I was interested in which contained their "official" info - off their website, FREIDA/ pathtraining info, and then reviews from SDN interview feedback and Scutwork.com. Narrowed based on volume, geographic region, job availability for spouse, ect. Probably should have narrowed more as I applied to too many; had to turn down, cancel interviews and still went on more interviews than avg.

But to answer the OPs question directly re best programs: The best program IMHO is where you are going to get the most out of your training. ie where you will enjoy your life and being at work; you can't get out more than you put in and if you enjoy being there you will put more into it. That said....

Best name brand programs in the East Coast are prob JHU, MGH (and BGW, BID), also the NYC programs like Columbia, Cornell, MSSM (which aren't mentioned much here), and Yale. Mid West - Norh Western. U Michigan, U Washington. But there are a LOT of high volume university programs in the Northeast esp that are IMHO great.

 

[GG1853]

The best program IMHO is where you are going to get the most out of your training. ie where you will enjoy your life and being at work; you can't get out more than you put in and if you enjoy being there you will put more into it.

I hate advice like that. It's guidance counselor sissy talk. Go to the place with the most hugs and cuddles. Some places also give you a puppy as part of the residency agreement. You should only consider those programs.

 

[HbyHA]

I hate advice like that. It's guidance counselor sissy talk. Go to the place with the most hugs and cuddles. Some places also give you a puppy as part of the residency agreement. You should only consider those programs.

go to a place where you'll get good training and be happy. no one wants to work with a miserable colleague who hates their life (in residency and beyond). if that's at one of the subjective "best programs in the country," then good for you. if it's at a less well known program with solid training where you think you'll be happy, that's fine too.

 

[pathstudent]

go to a place where you'll get good training and be happy. no one wants to work with a miserable colleague who hates their life (in residency and beyond). if that's at one of the subjective "best programs in the country," then good for you. if it's at a less well known program with solid training where you think you'll be happy, that's fine too.

Trust me. You will be happy living in camridge or the back bay and going ot BWH.

 

[Sulfinator]

Trust me. You will be happy living in camridge or the back bay and going ot BWH.

Well, for what it's worth, while interviewing at BWH, I met a couple of residents who I wouldn't categorize as "happy." That's not to say they were totally unhappy either. The point is, no one can or should expect their happiness to stem solely from name/national reputation of their residency program. It's just silly to think otherwise.

Having said that, I did really like BWH's program (ranked it #2); and I will be quite "happy" if I find I match there on Thursday.

 

[malchik]

Um, not necessarily true, not everyone there is happy.
But I think you will find things to be unhappy about anywhere. And it's very temporary. So you might as well benefit from a reasonably big name (not necessarily limited to pathstudent's top 5) that will train you well and help you get the fellowship you want.

 

[lifehouse51]

When I interviewed at residency I interviewed at 14
places and at almost all of the the pd or chair was from bwh. And think about the seminal text in our field it is basically a bwh gift to medicine.

Ironically, the PD at BWH (if i remember correctly) did NOT do her training at BWH but Instead subsequently became faculty there

 

[medicomel]

Ironically, the PD at BWH (if i remember correctly) did NOT do her training at BWH but Instead subsequently became faculty there

She trained at Loyola. And BWH is in the Longwood Medical Area with Beth Israel. MGH is in Beacon Hill, closer to Back Bay. There's a major difference in how far your money goes, rent-wise.

 

[GG1853]

I think there is an indirect relationship between happiness and quality of training. (Go ahead, post all your nasty replies now.) Think about it: What makes you happy? Probably spending time with family, friends, going out, sleeping in on a Saturday. If you are in a good program with a reasonably high volume, you don't a whole lot of time for these happy things because you are working.

Yes, yes, there are exceptions. You could be in a bad program that still requires 80+ hours per week. But "residency" is just that. You live in the hospital.

 

[HbyHA]

Trust me. You will be happy living in camridge or the back bay and going ot BWH.

um, no thanks.

but if other people are/will be happy training there, more power to them.

 

[TinyFish]

Reading these threads is priceless.
We're young (most of us) and think that the decision we make now is of huge, monumental significance. And yes, it is, to an extent. You want to go somewhere where you'll receive good training and have the resources to shape your career. But choosing MGH vs. Michigan vs. Emory vs. UVA vs. whatever the heck else is probably not the thing that's going to make you eternally happy or eternally unhappy. The only thing that might make you eternally unhappy is being an uptight tool who bases his/her entire sense of self-esteem on a few superficial factors.

Being happy and being at a "good" or "reputable" institution are both important. I think it's silly to go to one extreme or another. Strike a balance between the two. Don't go to a place with a name where you will be totally miserable (and yes, there will be places that will make you more miserable than other programs that are just as "good"), but don't go to a place where you won't be able to push yourself. Talk to lots of people, and don't take any one person's response as gospel. Research different programs. Contact people at different programs. Ultimately, you'll be intelligent enough to make a decision that you're happy with.

 

[JPmamd09]

Reading these threads is priceless.
We're young (most of us) and think that the decision we make now is of huge, monumental significance. And yes, it is, to an extent. You want to go somewhere where you'll receive good training and have the resources to shape your career. But choosing MGH vs. Michigan vs. Emory vs. UVA vs. whatever the heck else is probably not the thing that's going to make you eternally happy or eternally unhappy. The only thing that might make you eternally unhappy is being an uptight tool who bases his/her entire sense of self-esteem on a few superficial factors.

Being happy and being at a "good" or "reputable" institution are both important. I think it's silly to go to one extreme or another. Strike a balance between the two. Don't go to a place with a name where you will be totally miserable (and yes, there will be places that will make you more miserable than other programs that are just as "good"), but don't go to a place where you won't be able to push yourself. Talk to lots of people, and don't take any one person's response as gospel. Research different programs. Contact people at different programs. Ultimately, you'll be intelligent enough to make a decision that you're happy with.

 

[GG1853]

You are also the girl who was, from what I can gather from older posts, heavily recruited by top programs. So, while I think this is good advice it's kind of like the pretty girl saying that "beauty is on the inside" or the valedictorian acting suprised when she gets 100% an exam.

And I think there is a big difference between UCSF and say, Michigan. If there wasn't, you'd be ranking Emory or UVA to match. (The obvious response to this is . . . well, I like the city better . . . that's convenient.)

Being an uptight tool takes a lot of work. Don't knock it.

Reading these threads is priceless.
We're young (most of us) and think that the decision we make now is of huge, monumental significance. And yes, it is, to an extent. You want to go somewhere where you'll receive good training and have the resources to shape your career. But choosing MGH vs. Michigan vs. Emory vs. UVA vs. whatever the heck else is probably not the thing that's going to make you eternally happy or eternally unhappy. The only thing that might make you eternally unhappy is being an uptight tool who bases his/her entire sense of self-esteem on a few superficial factors.

Being happy and being at a "good" or "reputable" institution are both important. I think it's silly to go to one extreme or another. Strike a balance between the two. Don't go to a place with a name where you will be totally miserable (and yes, there will be places that will make you more miserable than other programs that are just as "good"), but don't go to a place where you won't be able to push yourself. Talk to lots of people, and don't take any one person's response as gospel. Research different programs. Contact people at different programs. Ultimately, you'll be intelligent enough to make a decision that you're happy with.

 

[lifehouse51]

Being happy and being at a "good" or "reputable" institution are both important. I think it's silly to go to one extreme or another. Strike a balance between the two. Don't go to a place with a name where you will be totally miserable (and yes, there will be places that will make you more miserable than other programs that are just as "good"), but don't go to a place where you won't be able to push yourself. Talk to lots of people, and don't take any one person's response as gospel. Research different programs. Contact people at different programs. Ultimately, you'll be intelligent enough to make a decision that you're happy with.

I think she does have a very valid point, and this is NOT coming someone who was at the top of his class (nor the bottom either). If you're interested in learning, you certainly wanna go to a place where you feel intellectually stimulated/challenged. And to some people, a balance of work and life outside work's more important. And to others, geographical location's the most important issue. Yet others, availability/ease to obtain fellowships at an institution can sway the decision. Just make sure you make some informed decisions (Although the reality is, you never know for 100% sure if a program's what you expect no matter how much research you do).

 

[TinyFish]

You are also the girl who was, from what I can gather from older posts, heavily recruited by top programs. So, while I think this is good advice it's kind of like the pretty girl saying that "beauty is on the inside" or the valedictorian acting suprised when she gets 100% an exam.

And I think there is a big difference between UCSF and say, Michigan. If there wasn't, you'd be ranking Emory or UVA to match. (The obvious response to this is . . . well, I like the city better . . . that's convenient.)

Being an uptight tool takes a lot of work. Don't knock it.

I never said I wasn't privileged. And I never said going for big-name programs is stupid. It's not. And for the record, I actually don't think there's a huge difference between UCSF and Michigan, save for location. This is why it's fourth on my list, because I am from a large city in the NE and would probably not consider living in the midwest otherwise.

What I *did* say was wrong is pushing other people to go for big name programs only and telling them that their education is worthless if they didn't.

I'm sure being an uptight tool takes a lot of work. I just doubt it makes for a very fulfilling and happy life. But, whatever.

 

[BrainPathology]

I think there is an indirect relationship between happiness and quality of training. (Go ahead, post all your nasty replies now.) Think about it: What makes you happy? Probably spending time with family, friends, going out, sleeping in on a Saturday. If you are in a good program with a reasonably high volume, you don't a whole lot of time for these happy things because you are working.

Yes, yes, there are exceptions. You could be in a bad program that still requires 80+ hours per week. But "residency" is just that. You live in the hospital.

Did you mean inverse?

The rest of your post assumes you hate working no matter where it is. I think this means you're in the wrong career anyway.

 

[yaah]

Reading these threads is priceless.
We're young (most of us) and think that the decision we make now is of huge, monumental significance. And yes, it is, to an extent. You want to go somewhere where you'll receive good training and have the resources to shape your career. But choosing MGH vs. Michigan vs. Emory vs. UVA vs. whatever the heck else is probably not the thing that's going to make you eternally happy or eternally unhappy. The only thing that might make you eternally unhappy is being an uptight tool who bases his/her entire sense of self-esteem on a few superficial factors.

Being happy and being at a "good" or "reputable" institution are both important. I think it's silly to go to one extreme or another. Strike a balance between the two. Don't go to a place with a name where you will be totally miserable (and yes, there will be places that will make you more miserable than other programs that are just as "good"), but don't go to a place where you won't be able to push yourself. Talk to lots of people, and don't take any one person's response as gospel. Research different programs. Contact people at different programs. Ultimately, you'll be intelligent enough to make a decision that you're happy with.

I agree for the most part -the best programs for some are not the best for others. To suggest as pathstudent said that there are no top programs in the midwest is so silly it doesn't deserve further comment.

There are many people who ascribe far too much importance to pedigree and program name. Some are people who trained there, others are those who did not but wish they did because they feel like it would have given them something extra that they think they are missing. No one really ever gets far by having their training program's reputation as the cornerstone of their application - that can play a minor role but it is essentially of trivial importance. The true importance of a training program is how it meshes with your learning style, your career goals, and your desired lifestyle. One that fits best with you will provide you the best training experience. One that does not will not, no matter how prestigious it is, and will most certainly not make up for major deficiencies.

Personally, I would never have trained at UCSF, for example. This is primarily because I dislike the Bay Area and have no desire to live out west, but also because the program did not mesh with my goals and style. This does not make it a bad program, obviously. But similarly, just because someone from the west coast says that the only acceptable programs for top students are a handful of programs on either coast doesn't mean it's true. That's hogwash.

 

[lipomas]

Are you guys all serious? You honestly think there are 4 or 5 programs which are "better" than every other program? There are probably at least 20-30 really good programs out there which will train a qualified and intelligent resident as well as they need to be trained. But even these programs end up with quite a few dud graduates over the years. There are other programs which are good in some areas and not so good in others, which may be the best option for certain career goals.

There are a bunch of ****hole programs which will not train people well, but yet some residents will still manage to rise above it. Then there are some programs in the middle where good residents will get solid training and bad residents will just float by and end up competent but nothing special.

My advice: Don't go to a ****hole program. Try not to go to a weaker program unless there is a compelling reason, and if you do, work very hard and stand out. Go to a good program if you can, but don't pick which one of the good ones to go to because of some arbitrary reason that has nothing to do with your career goals (like internet-derived prestige or rankings). If you don't have career goals then go wherever the hell you want to live because it probably won't matter anyway.

 

[pathstudent]

Did anyone see this article from this month's AJSP http://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-2.3/ov...LCEJJPEEHAA00&Link+Set=S.sh.17.18.23|18|sl_10

The dogma for decades was that there were three "origins" of ovarian tumors.... epithelial, stromal/sex-cord and germ cell.

Well it looks like everything we were taught was wrong and that there is no such thing as an ovarian epithelial tumor. All of them originate from somewhere else.

Oh and who is this article by....some guy named Kurman from JHU which borrows from work by some guy named Crum from BWH.

This article is a complete over turning of everything we have been taught for decades.

So all you can talk about how there are all kinds of great programs but there are only a handful that create leaders, revolutionary figures in pathology and JHU and BWH are two of those. And they just don't have a couple guys like that, they have dozens.

 

[Sulfinator]

So all you can talk about how there are all kinds of great programs but there are only a handful that create leaders, revolutionary figures in pathology and JHU and BWH are two of those. And they just don't have a couple guys like that, they have dozens.

Undoubtedly those programs have faculty who are leaders in the field. But, it does not follow that doing residency training at one of those programs will necessarily make you an all-around better practicing pathologist. As has already been pointed out, it depends on a variety of other factors, career goals being one of them. Don't get me wrong, I still think those programs are great.

Very nice and interesting article, by the way. Thanks for posting it!

 

[malchik]

BWH did not produce Crum, UVA did. He trained at UVA and was faculty there for awhile before moving to BWH. So why isn't UVA on your radar? Ah yes, it isn't in what you think is a desirable "urban city."

 

[nepath12]

People seem to be assuming that everyone going into pathology wants to be a big deal academic. I am pretty sure there are some brilliant pathologists in private practice too that probably don't give a crap about all the politics that go on in academics. Don't base your residency choices completely on what people say in the forums- it's the same East or West coast schools that pop up. Talk to the pathologists at your school about strong programs that may be a good fit for you. And eventually it all comes down to what is important to you at the end of the day and if that residency program helps you accomplish it.

 

[2121115]

Talk to the pathologists at your school about strong programs that may be a good fit for you.

Unfortunately, for a good candidate it may not be easy to get straight forward answers on this. I did a rotation at my medical school and 1 away rotation. Attendings at both places were very wary of speaking well of other programs and had obvious agendas when I asked them career questions. Just FYI.

 

[BierstiefelAndy]

BWH did not produce Crum, UVA did. He trained at UVA and was faculty there for awhile before moving to BWH. So why isn't UVA on your radar? Ah yes, it isn't in what you think is a desirable "urban city."

Don't forget Columbia...Crum has roots there too. So Columbia should be on everyone's radar...AND it's in New York City!

I think there are a much higher number of good programs that help you train to become a good pathologist, first and foremost (rather than some designated, but non-arbitrary top 5 list). If you aspire to be a researcher and powerhouse academic pathologist, then it will help to get training at a place like BWH, UCSF, Stanford, etc. There are a lot of successful academics at these institutions who are at the forefront of their respective fields; they can serve as great examples and in some cases, great mentors. Those following in their footsteps can glean a lot of knowledge by training and doing projects under the tutelage of these folks, no doubt. Nonetheless, after leaving, it is still up to the individual to pave one's own academic destiny. To be monetarily successful in private practice, one has to be an entrepreneur. To be successful in academics, one has to be aggressive, carpetbomb the literature, and get his/her name out there. Academics is largely politics and pushing ideas forward...if you're not creating rancor, nobody is going to give a hoot who you are.

If you aspire to get a good private practice job, the training program one attends after med school is only one of many variables that factor into success. Other factors such as serendipity, one's ability to geographically flexible, the local job market, having CP training (which most of you have covered), having one of these "coveted" fellowships under one's belt, having an influential faculty member at the institution be willing to pick up the phone for you, etc. matter just as much. Training at one of the "top 5" programs can influence these variables somewhat; however, I would argue that training at one of the "top 20" (whatever they may be) would be just as sufficient. It would be good for individuals to ask if the department has a charismatic individual who picks up the phone for his/her trainees and helps them find jobs. This is easily asked to the senior residents when you interview. Fletcher at BWH is a great example of this...there are countless stories of how he facilitates the BWH residents' job searches and coaches them throughout the job hunt. He even looks at negotiation packages and contracts and gives input on that. Going to a place with that kind of person will make your life a lot easier...it does come at a price because BWH is not an easy program. But other than that, one should go to a program where he/she will be happy and will learn pathology effectively.

 

[lipomas]

So all you can talk about how there are all kinds of great programs but there are only a handful that create leaders, revolutionary figures in pathology and JHU and BWH are two of those. And they just don't have a couple guys like that, they have dozens.

LOL, you are a piece of work. Amazing that you didn't list a California program there though. Who gets credit for someone like Mahul Amin who has had jobs at numerous places but trained at relatively no-name places? How about Rosai? Many prestigious programs tend to have big names, but not all of them spent their formative years there. A lot of big names at big name institutions only started working there after their careers were well established. And most of these big names would be successful no matter where they are.

As an aside, you shouldn't always equate big names with good education. Someone like Kurman is a big name and a good educator, but there are other big names who don't want anything to do with trainees unless they are helping them finish their work faster.

 

[LADoc00]

There are no good programs, only good residents. Even the term good resident though is quite suspect in that faculty will define it as someone that is willling to be walked over, kinda like the gimp from Pulp Fiction. Bring out the gimp!

So theoretically someone could have horrible evaluations and actually be a stellar job applicant.

I would put my "thin slice" (see Gladwell's Blink) eval FAR FAR above anything on paper in chatting with prospective hires. I have talked to a few people on the phone looking for jobs and actually told them I simply didnt care what their credentials were as in dont even tell me. Board certified in AP/CP? Okay, good to go, now lets get to the meat....

 

[2121115]

So theoretically someone could have horrible evaluations and actually be a stellar job applicant.

Academics is all politics and a particular kind at that. It is a different frame of mind where examples of the Peter Principle are everywhere. Newsflash- the best medical student doesn't make the best resident and (particularly in pathology) the best residents don't make the best attendings.

 

[malchik]

Unfortunately, for a good candidate it may not be easy to get straight forward answers on this. I did a rotation at my medical school and 1 away rotation. Attendings at both places were very wary of speaking well of other programs and had obvious agendas when I asked them career questions. Just FYI.

This is an excellent point that I unfortunately found to be true. You have to find someone very knowledgeable whom you can trust.

 

[pathstudent]

And bwh jhu and ucsf get to skim the best residents.

There are no good programs, only good residents. Even the term good resident though is quite suspect in that faculty will define it as someone that is willling to be walked over, kinda like the gimp from Pulp Fiction. Bring out the gimp!

So theoretically someone could have horrible evaluations and actually be a stellar job applicant.

I would put my "thin slice" (see Gladwell's Blink) eval FAR FAR above anything on paper in chatting with prospective hires. I have talked to a few people on the phone looking for jobs and actually told them I simply didnt care what their credentials were as in dont even tell me. Board certified in AP/CP? Okay, good to go, now lets get to the meat....

 

[lipomas]

And bwh jhu and ucsf get to skim the best residents.

I turned down two of those three for residency training, one of them also for a fellowship. Was told I would have matched.

 

[Rodak]

Programs with first-hand reports of residents having pathologist-level responsibility in many to all rotations: MGH, Yale, Hopkins, WashU, Iowa, Vanderbilt, Mayo, Columbia.

 

[pathstudent]

Programs with first-hand reports of residents having pathologist-level responsibility in many to all rotations: MGH, Yale, Hopkins, WashU, Iowa, Vanderbilt, Mayo, Columbia.

Remind me not to go to any of those places if residents are doing pathologist level responsibilities.

 

[LoaLoa]

After having been in practice for six years, landing a tenure-track faculty position at a "name" East coast program, then leaving for a partnership-track private position, here is my perspective: Go to one of the 25 or so "good" programs, preferably one with some name recognition. Doesn't have to be Harvard, doesn't have to be Hopkins--just has to be somewhere people have heard of and think is respectable. For example, Emory, Baylor, Cleveland Clinic, Mayo, Vanderbilt, UT Southwestern, etc. These almost never get mentioned as "top programs" but they will all turn you into a strong pathologist if you have the raw materials and do your work. Don't go to a "community program" unless you have reason to believe the contacts you make there will lead directly to a job.

If you want to get an academic job: Try your best to land a fellowship in your subspecialty with someone who has a "name", and publish as much as you possibly can.

If you want a good private job, be a nice person, show some hustle, network (yes, really), don't embarrass yourself in training, and do your residency or fellowship somewhere geographically near where you'd like to practice (again, for networking purposes). Do a fellowship in a boarded subspecialty that is not neuropathology or forensic pathology. Most desirable private jobs are never listed and they are handed out based on personal references and contacts you make during residency and fellowship.

Ranking residency programs by the number of chairmen they have produced is a waste of time. Most chairmen get their position because of personal qualities they have that would have allowed them to succeed and excel in any of a number of training programs.

 

[Rodak]

Remind me not to go to any of those places if residents are doing pathologist level responsibilities.

I don't mean to imply that these programs foist trainees into medicolegal attendings with residents billing Medicare or attendings that are at the golf course. I define "pathologist level responsibilities" as direct involvement in real-life clinical responsibilities (e.g. write final reports, workup cases, get called first by clinicians/techs, etc) with faculty supervision. That is, an apprenticeship--just like how all the residents are trained in every other specialty. I contrast "pathologist level responsibilities" with the "go read / watch me do my job at signout / gross-but-don't-dictate-final-reports / get crumbs from the table" style that is typical of most ACGME-accredited pathology residency programs.

In my original post, I reported that those programs in that list stand out among the rest because employers know that graduates have actually done hundreds of reps of what pathologists do (with, of course, faculty supervision that goes from more intensive at the beginning to minimal by the end). If you intentionally seek out a "go read" program for your training, it will be more comfortable in the short term but your post-residency job search, job satisfaction, and overall learning process will be more challenging in the long term.

 

[oldfatman]

Go to the place that will kick the living **** out of you the most and push you to your limits. You'll get the most of this. This is the last chance you have to take it to the max in school.