effect of increase in training spots

[tiffanychang]

Well, everyone seems to be so charmed by the new found interest in pathology. I did some research on the job market and came across this thread on the web:
http://members.tripod.com/~philgmh/CIPJM.html

then while reading the posts, I came across postings that this thread may be put up by some disgruntled fmg. Well, if you go to the MATCH website it says that the number of Pathology residency was increased by around 100 spots this year.

Would this mean?
1. the number of people finishing residency would increase over years.
2. the number of fellowship applicants would again exceed the few spots.
3. are we again going to enter the 'downslide' cycle of pathology job market.

I guess I am a little confused about my choice for residency, I thought Pathology was out of the red, but it seems that pathology may not be a secure job market after I finish residency.

please add any links you may find on this trend.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

You are right to be worried to an extent. I don't know what the exact job market situation is now or will be in the next let's say 10 years.

I do get the impression though that there are quite a few other fields with more fertile job markets than the pathology job market.

I'm sure LADoc00 can chime in on this

 

[LADoc00]

You are right to be worried to an extent. I don't know what the exact job market situation is now or will be in the next let's say 10 years.

I do get the impression though that there are quite a few other fields with more fertile job markets than the pathology job market.

I'm sure LADoc00 can chime in on this

EVERYONE SHOULD READ THAT STUFF ON THAT WEBPAGE. IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE WITH ALMOST NO HYPE.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

EVERYONE SHOULD READ THAT STUFF ON THAT WEBPAGE. IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE WITH ALMOST NO HYPE.

Word. I actually came across this site quite some time ago...I wanna say it was last summer when I was putting my application together.

 

[LADoc00]

This is all we are to academic pathologists:

Here are some estimates I have of the numbers involved:

Let's say that the US Population is about 270,000,000 (latest census estimate). If there are roughly 6,000 surgical specimens per 100,000 population per year then there are 16,200,000 surgical specimens examined in the US per year. A full-time Pathologist working very hard doing only Surgical Pathology would average about 4,000 specimens/yr. Therefore the entire Surgical Pathology load of the US could be done by 4050 Pathologists.

Let's guess that the US Cytopathology load could be done by 2,000 Pathologists, Autopsy by 1,000 and Clinical Pathology by 1,000.

There is a need for a minimum of 8,050 Pathologists (an educated guess). HOWEVER THERE ARE CURRENTLY ABOUT 14,000 PATHOLOGISTS IN THE USA, AN OVERSUPPLY OF 73%. If every Pathology training program was closed, this oversupply would last at least 10 years.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Dude, did you stick that thing up your ass? It looks very unhappy. Is his name Lemmiwinks?

 

[QuietSylph]

Well, everyone seems to be so charmed by the new found interest in pathology. I did some research on the job market and came across this thread on the web:
http://members.tripod.com/~philgmh/CIPJM.html

then while reading the posts, I came across postings that this thread may be put up by some disgruntled fmg. Well, if you go to the MATCH website it says that the number of Pathology residency was increased by around 100 spots this year.

....

please add any links you may find on this trend.

The website you cite is using some old facts and figures, which should be taken into account when weighing the validity of its claims. More recent data is available, such as that found here at ASCP (indicating that in 2004, the average applicant got 1.9 job offers):

http://www.ascp.org/member/resident/surveys/job-survey-04.asp

In my experience on the interview trail, there wasn't serious concern about unemployment among US-trained pathologists. However, if an individual restricted his search to a specific geographic area, he might encounter more difficulty in securing the ideal job.

I do agree that residency programs in general like to add slots because they want increased funding and a good source of cheap labor. Clearly (and annoyingly) their aims are not in line with those of the private market, which most of us will face upon finishing a residency. Because pathology is a specialty that continues to get more and more efficient and automated, it does seem that it would be logical to limit the number of pathologists trained every year.

However, some would argue that with the soon-retiring baby boomers, we will have a simultaneous drop in the number of working pathologists AND a surge in the number of pathology specimens. It's an interesting projection. Ultimately, if you have so much anxiety about employment that your enjoyment of the field would be overshadowed by worry, I would recommend looking at another specialty. Pathology, like some other fields in medicine, is cyclical. You have to accept that going in.

On another note -- there is an interesting flip side to the increase in slots added to pathology residency programs in recent years. Had the number of slots stayed static, I think pathology would now look *very* competitive and there would be few unfilled slots through the Match (I don't have the numbers at hand to crunch). Obviously, this increasing number of residency slots has been absorbing a lot of the new interest in pathology. Thoughts, anyone?

 

[b&ierstiefel]

The website you cite is using some old facts and figures, which should be taken into account when weighing the validity of its claims. More recent data is available, such as that found here at ASCP (indicating that in 2004, the average applicant got 1.9 job offers):

http://www.ascp.org/member/resident/surveys/job-survey-04.asp

In my experience on the interview trail, there wasn't serious concern about unemployment among US-trained pathologists. However, if an individual restricted his search to a specific geographic area, he might encounter more difficulty in securing the ideal job.

I do agree that residency programs in general like to add slots because they want increased funding and a good source of cheap labor. Clearly (and annoyingly) their aims are not in line with those of the private market, which most of us will face upon finishing a residency. Because pathology is a specialty that continues to get more and more efficient and automated, it does seem that it would be logical to limit the number of pathologists trained every year.

However, some would argue that with the soon-retiring baby boomers, we will have a simultaneous drop in the number of working pathologists AND a surge in the number of pathology specimens. It's an interesting projection. Ultimately, if you have so much anxiety about employment that your enjoyment of the field would be overshadowed by worry, I would recommend looking at another specialty. Pathology, like some other fields in medicine, is cyclical. You have to accept that going in.

On another note -- there is an interesting flip side to the increase in slots added to pathology residency programs in recent years. Had the number of slots stayed static, I think pathology would now look *very* competitive and there would be few unfilled slots through the Match (I don't have the numbers at hand to crunch). Obviously, this increasing number of residency slots has been absorbing a lot of the new interest in pathology. Thoughts, anyone?

The data in the link does suggest that the job market is not as bleak as before. I am wary of the small sample size of the survey study though. However, if the ASCP keeps conducting these surveys often enough, we should be able to extrapolate some sort of trend as to whether things truly are getting better and will continue to improve.

As for your final statement regarding the new interest in pathology, I can think of two explanations for this.

#1) There has always been a good number of med students interested in pathology. However, accounts of how bleak the job market served to discourage students to go into this field. Furthermore, attendings (not only in pathology but in other fields as well) who feel that the job market in pathology is in the gutter may further propagate this by discouraging med students from going into this field. Having started med school in 1998, I have heard my fair share of discouragement along these lines. Interestingly, I have encountered less negative talk about the job situation in pathology in the last two years as I was going through clinical rotations. Maybe this means something. Or maybe it just had to do with the attendings with whom I was in contact. So is it really new interest in pathology that is resulting in the increased numbers of pathology applications in light of the increased # of residency positions? Who knows.

#2) I may get flamed for this explanation but I have seen my peers apply to pathology as a backup choice. The last several years of medicine has seen an increased emphasis on "lifestyle." Perhaps this is why fields such as radiology, dermatology, and opthalmology have really skyrocketed in competitiveness. Gas is even becoming more competitive these days. There is a high level of interest at my school in these fields. And given the similarity in lifestyle and type of work in radiology and pathology, I have witnessed some radiology folks apply to pathology as a backup. They do this because they feel they are not competitive enough to match at a good rads program. Pathology is an easy backup given the increased numbers of residency spots and the lack of competitiveness in the application process (until recently). I think this is a tragic scenario but who am I to judge? To each his own.

Having experienced #1 and witnessed some folks think along the lines of #2, it makes sense that pathology is getting more attention these days.

Anybody got any other ideas?

 

[tsj]

But don't forget you gots all the academic pathologists who only sign out one organ 1-2 weeks a month. Plus you gots women who only want to work part time so they can spend time with the children.


There's still plenty of specimens to go around.


However, if the average medcare reimbursement is $50, that would mean 4000 specimens only gives a salary of 200,000. I need to do more like 10,000 per year.

 

[yaah]

People have been talking about the large # of potentially retiring pathologists for a few years, but they aren't retiring. I guess eventually they will have to though!

 

[LADoc00]

People have been talking about the large # of potentially retiring pathologists for a few years, but they aren't retiring. I guess eventually they will have to though!

THIS IS TRUE:

Single most common reason for a pathologist to stop practicing medicine?

Answer: Death

Note: NO OTHER SINGLE PROFESSION (INCLUDING MILITARY) CAN MAKE THIS CLAIM.

 

[beary]

Single most common reason for a pathologist to stop practicing medicine?

Answer: Death

Wow, pathology must be even more fun than I thought since people are doing it right up until they die!

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Wow, pathology must be even more fun than I thought since people are doing it right up until they die!

nah, they're still paying off debt from med school

just kidding.

 

[deschutes]

Single most common reason for a pathologist to stop practicing medicine?

Answer: Death

I thought the single most common reason for a pathologist to stop practicing medicine was the decision to D/C the internship year

 

[desmangt]

Well, everyone seems to be so charmed by the new found interest in pathology. I did some research on the job market and came across this thread on the web:
http://members.tripod.com/~philgmh/CIPJM.html

then while reading the posts, I came across postings that this thread may be put up by some disgruntled fmg. Well, if you go to the MATCH website it says that the number of Pathology residency was increased by around 100 spots this year.

Would this mean?
1. the number of people finishing residency would increase over years.
2. the number of fellowship applicants would again exceed the few spots.
3. are we again going to enter the 'downslide' cycle of pathology job market.

I guess I am a little confused about my choice for residency, I thought Pathology was out of the red, but it seems that pathology may not be a secure job market after I finish residency.

please add any links you may find on this trend.

That webpage hasn't been updated in over 4 years! So I guess whatever committee members that were so concerned about good job palcement went and got high paying jobs and lost interest.

 

[ernie]

One would hope that there would be some criteria/logic behind doing something like this. Of course there is - chairmans can get more money for their departments.

how about taking into account 1) future demand for pathologists and 2) the number of american graduates going into the field.

Until the job market loosens up a LOT and programs are filled with all american grads - there is no justification (aside from the above captioned) for increasing spots.