Interview impressions

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
folks, if you want to use the impressions account for "privacy", at least return the courtesy by not thowing in cheap insults at individuals.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Chicago top tier threatening to fall slightly
Good: fun + afordable city
Bad: cold + windy, some say the program is resting on its laurels
Future?: good. may lose a little ground in the rankings to up and coming programs though. everyone marvels about Hellman (and rightly so), but he's already at 50% and will probably become progressively less involved.

Cleveland Clinic
Good: friendly program, strong clinical training
Bad: cleveland. not a place for bench science either
Future?: solid mid tier program.

U Colorado low-mid tier likely to shoot up soon
Good: extremely light work load (though this is likely to change), fun city
Bad: very young program with no track record as of yet (a bit of gamble)
Future?: good. will climb into the top 15 in short time

NYU mid tier, stable
Good: NYC
Bad: cost of living, kooky residents, bellevue
Future?: not stellar, but stable.

Mt. Sinai good mid tier program
Good: NYC, beautiful location (upper east side)
Bad: cost of living
Future?: stable

UPenn top tier with an upward trajectory
Good: super nice chair, Philly (for some)
Bad: killer manditory prelim program, Philly (for others). supposedly one really malignant attending they hide during interview day.
Future?: looks very bright, will possibly make quantum jump in rankings in several years and compete with MDA/MSK/HROP if/when the new center comes onlines w/protons (one of the few places i believe will actually get protons within the next few years)

Yale bottom of the top tier, possibly to go up slightly (though dependant on Wilson)
Good: great dynamic PD
Bad: New Haven. commuting 45 minutes each way to satelite campuses
Future?: good. they speak of a new cancer center which is several years from opening. i'm skeptical re: their claims of "thinking about getting protons" in that new facility though... rampant rumors that PD will leave for a chair position soon as he was passed over for the job at Yale

UCSF top tier likely to climb higher soon
Good: great city
Bad: low pay + cost of living, split between two campuses
Future?: bright. Roach plans on stacking the program with Holman pathways and possibly getting protons (way down the line). expect this program to become more hard-core science like MDA

Stanford top tier, stable (but may face challenges in rankings from other programs)
Good: awesome weather, beautiful cancer center.
Bad: mysteriously unhappy residents...(does anyone know why?!). cost of living. not in a city.
Future?: solid. some say the place is a bit stagnant, but it's still top-shelf.

Wisconsin top tier, stable
Good: friendliest bunch of people ever (attendings + residents). offers both categorical and advanced training spots.
Bad: cold climate. also, possibly a little too tomo-heavy
Future?: very good.

Duke low top tier, but climbing
Good: not at all malignant (though maybe a touch arrogant)
Bad: Durham.
Future?: very good. Willet will carry this program up the rankings.

UWashington (seattle) mid tier but on a threatening downward trajectory
Good: seattle
Bad: (precipitation), residents get totally scutted out and overworked. you don't actually work at the Hutch either. PD has garnered much criticism, though rumor has it the friendly new young faculty member might be taking over. oh, and only 3 months of research time?! (ok, negotiable up to 6mo, but still...how does this program expect to climb or even tread water when it discourages research relative to every other program out there?). the whole split between 3 institutions thing seems rather crazy (and hectic too); one wonders if it will be economicaly feasiable as the U gets much of its business siphoned off...
Future?: will probably sag in the rankings as the draw of the city will not be able to hold up the drawbacks of the program
 
Adding to my impressions from my post on 3/18/7 at 5pm-

Harvard: I would like to clarify the amount of arrogance to be largely localized to the MGH group (although there were some other non-MGH'ers that could be included, especially those with ridiculous martial arts training).

In addition, since they seem to take 50-90% of their own each year in the Match, I wonder why they even offer interviews to non-Crimsons...Oh and also, Boston is a lame city.



Boston is not lame, and you are clearly bitter. get over it. i wasn't accepted into the program, and i still think the MGH crowd was a friendly bunch. if they still take 3 non-Harvardites a year, isn't that still more than the number of spots most programs offer (let alone keep open for outside applicants)?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Regarding Yale and previous post...
PD (Wilson) was associate professor and attending for only about 7+ years when Glazer became chair 2001-2002. Haffty was still at Yale then so I doubt it was a "passed over" situation; I doubt he was even close to being in the running. Don't you think he would have left by now if that was the reason?? He certainly is waiting a long time if he is disgruntled because he was "passed over".
Yale's plan for protons has always been for a new building not part of the cancer center building which is being constructed currently.
 
UCSF top tier likely to climb higher soon
Good: great city
Bad: low pay + cost of living, split between two campuses
Future?: bright. Roach plans on stacking the program with Holman pathways and possibly getting protons (way down the line). expect this program to become more hard-core science like MDA

I am curious as to how you came to this conclusion. Other than the fact that UCSF matched 3 MD/Phds this year (though this could be an anomaly of the Match algorithm), did you hear something from Roach/residents/faculty about a shift in research focus?
 
I am curious as to how you came to this conclusion. Other than the fact that UCSF matched 3 MD/Phds this year (though this could be an anomaly of the Match algorithm), did you hear something from Roach/residents/faculty about a shift in research focus?

When I interviewed with him he told me about his philosophy of expanding the department's research from the ground up. He even compared himself to Billy Beane (Oakland A's GM for those non baseball fans, read Moneyball for more info) which I thought was pretty cool. He views the residents as the farm system of the department. I think the results of the match are a reflection of this.
 
Completely agree with this post. Roach was a huge mistake for UCSF, completely arrogant. I went to one of those post-interview dinners and Roach showed up wearing his silly beret and scarf, toting his wife (who strangely never spoke a word) and bottles of wine. And, funny enough, I don't even think he knows that much about wine. Huge disappointment for a department that sorely needed a lift, and I got the feeling that they were looking for every reason NOT to make him chair.
 
Who should it have been if Harari was out of running? Roach is a well known guy, successful clinical investigator, experienced, been there a long time so knows the politics, how to get things done, etc.
 
please lets keep this thread to impressions. i will peel off tangential posts into their own thread.
 
Background: I interviewed at 16 programs. I wanted to put in a plug for some of the less discussed programs that I really liked. With respect to objectivity, I did interview at 5 of the so called “top ten” schools, but seriously, if I have to read one more post debating the merits of Harvard vs Stanford vs Penn, I may vomit onto my keyboard (they’re all great, go if you get the chance). Also, most of these places I only saw on the interview day (except Miami and Seattle) so I’m definitely hoping to hear from anyone who agrees or disagrees…

Colorado
:
Positives: Believe the hype. Just walking around the department you get the feeling that this program is headed for greatness. A collection of talented young faculty, each from a different “top” program and the leadership of Laurie Gaspar. New peds faculty (and maybe PD?) is Arthur Liu from Harvard. I worked with him and he is a great guy and a fantastic teacher. Clinical research opportunities seemed plentiful to me, more projects that you could keep up with actually, with a large patient database and faculty who’ll support you through it. Residents were very personable (dare I say “fun”) and seemed extremely happy with their education and clinical experiences. Behemoth, spanking new cancer center in Aurora houses all the cancer specialties and the med school will be moving there shortly.
Negatives: The program is new so no one has passed their boards or gone through the job hunt. I didn’t get the feeling that there would be a problem with either. Also, I don’t think there’s a lot of basic research opportunities (correct me if I’m wrong). Also heard rumors that patient load was low but what was presented numbers-wise on interview day and purported by residents said otherwise. Other than that, a pretty fantastic program. As a city, Denver always disappoints me a bit, not a ton of culture and not very aesthetically pleasing (Do go to “Rockstar” bar on Colfax when you’re there though, a fantastic tribute to 80’s metal and cheap booze). Aurora is no better and it is a bit of a commute if you wanna live downtown (but most residents do it and say it’s fine).
Impressions: I came away very impressed from this program and along the interview trail, faculty, residents, and applicants all had great things to say. Definitely give this one a look.

UW Seattle:
Positives: I loved this program (ranked it #1), visited and interviewed there. Residents were smart, friendly and down to earth. Great new PD in Dr. Patel (Douglas is on sabbatical) who I have confidence will do great things for the education. Majority of attendings I worked with were personable and seemed interested in teaching and the conferences I went to were solid. If you’re interested in peds, UW Children’s is fantastic and the throughput is pretty high. I was concerned about research opportunities but came away from my time impressed with the number of projects proposed to me. Plus, Seattle is a fantastic city and 4 years is a long time to spend in a place you don’t like.
Negatives: Residents do get scutted out doing paperwork and covering clinic, hopefully this will change. And moving between the different hospitals is kind of annoying (but it has some clinical advantages). Agree that to compete with the bigger name programs they should put more emphasis on resident research but the opportunities are certainly there if you dig a bit.
Impression: All in all a strong program with everything you want and located in a great city.

U of Miami
:
Positives: Great clinical exposure. You split your week between the Sylvester Cancer Center (private, fancy), and Jackson Memorial (public, crazy). Great patient population with the mix of cultures and socioeconomic diversity (I got to speak French, Arabic, and Spanish all in one day and our first consult was a Haitian woman with “spinal mets” that turned out to be Potts dz…where else can you see that?). Residents were fun and seemed very happy with lifestyle and reasonably happy with their education. Definitely a program traditionally geared towards private practice but with addition of the irrepressible Dr. Hatoum, there is a new emphasis on resident teaching and research. Good clinical trials and outcomes opportunities. Plus it is in Miami
Negatives: No basic science opportunities that I could see. Residents said there was some variation in attending interest in teaching. Plus, it is in Miami
Impressions: This program isn’t for everybody. You definitely need to be a self starter and have a fairly high tolerance for the inefficiencies of charity hospitals. You also have to love big dirty cities, clashing cultures, community medicine, pina coladas, and getting caught in the rain. Don’t forget your white pants.


Einstein/Montefiore
:
Positives: This program definitely surprised me. Went on interview to have an excuse to hang in NYC, but came out with this one high on my list. PD is a young, charming woman from MSK who is working hard to build up the program. After reading a very flattering recc letter from my PI, she actually called him to see if he meant what he wrote. Anyone who does that much research into candidates gets a vote of confidence from me. Similarly, on match day she wrote an email to congratulate me (didn’t hear from program I matched at til 4 days later). I was also told by PD that they didn’t rank a lot of the people they interviewed and would rather scramble than take someone who didn’t fit in with the family (hope they got someone good). Chair is well respected and also very personable. High clinical throughput and residents get lots of responsibility.
Negatives: Limited basic science opportunities (one opportunity, really). Residents get worked pretty hard with high clinical burden. Being way up in the Bronx is a negative/positive depending on your interests. Not all attendings as resident friendly as PD.
Impression: Very good small program (and in my book # 3 in NYC) with trend toward improvement in the future. Nice place to work.

NCI/NIH:
Positives: Fantastic opportunity for basic science research. I have a close friend who is a resident there and already has large number of publications as a PGY 3. They are also required to write at least one protocol and get good guidance to become future academics. Peds clinical volume is in the top 3 of all rad/onc programs because of the children’s hospital there and senior resident will be taking a job at St. Judes next year. Also, one of the few programs with real international opportunities (because it is a government program they can get around ACGME limitations on what residents can do outside US). Residents were great too. CLINCHER: They have a loan forgiveness program that pays something like 1/3 of your student loans for you.
Negatives: Clinical volume is dangerously low. NCI sees a lot of zebras but bread and butter cases are at the Army and Navy hospitals. Rotating between the 3 hospitals can be a little isolating and security clearance issues make day to day life interesting. They are still looking for a new PD. Also, the fact that they take outside the match is frustrating and limits your ability to shop around (they give you an offer in January I think).
Impression: If you wanna be a lab rat or know you are going into academics I would definitely give this program a look. Also great for peds but general clinical training is hindered a bit.

Other programs: Other programs I liked and agree completely with previous postings are: Cleveland Clinic, UAB, and UC Davis
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Thank you bigeasy. that is most helpful for what really is the majority of med students applying.
 
Duke:
Location: The South. But arguably best part of south. OK but still low degree of diversity. Cheap real estate. Good recreation. Great college sports. No pro teams.

Residents: Nice bunch. From all over the country but mostly from south. Many married. Residents emphasized that although they did not initially intend to stay in south after residency, the quality of life is high and they now plan to do so.

PD: Actively involved in resident education & mentoring. Good guy. Maybe a little too much Harvard envy, which seemed a bit pervasive in dept.

Chairman: Super smart. Advocate for residents. A little tight in the collar. Will continue to direct program in positive way for many years.

Research: Plenty of opps for clinical research. Less emphasis on basic science.

Jobs: High % seek & obtain academic positions, mostly in south. Same for PP.

Overall: Top 15

Michigan:
Location: Ann Arbor is small but a lot of fun. Decent bars. Lots of recreation. Cold as hell. Nice people. Huge football school if that's your thing.

Residents: Multiple resident interviews. Maybe a bit of chip on shoulder, although this is top 5 program in terms of resources and faculty, maybe they residents feel they deserve more respect nationally.

PD: Seemed like a very good guy. Driven smart and cares about residents.

Chairman: most impressive guy I met on interview trail. Smart, driven, super-friendly and probably best guy to have in engine room of a department

Research: Amazing basic science research opps. Clinical good too. Physics guy here is leader in field. Chairman emphasized they are training academic leaders of tomorrow, and I think he is right.

Jobs: Many stay on as young faculty. They do very well in academics. Not sure about PP.

Overall: Top 5 program
 
I want to also mention how impressed I was with the University of Colorado. The faculty seem like an outstanding bunch. The residents are extremely happy. I was very surprised at how much I liked this program. I interviewed at several of the "top ten" but I ranked University of Colorado in my top three ahead of many highly ranked programs. I can't say enough good things about this program!
 
CPMC:
Being that it is well-located, I checked it out despite advice of various mentors. The interview day was very disorganized in that each interviewee had to drive (or take cabs/buses) between each of their 4 sites. One is completely outside of the city. The attendings were nice overall. There is really no research going on at this place. Some of the plans discussed in chart rounds just seemed weird...not that I know much about the spectrum of possibilities of how to do things, but I am not sure I would want to learn from them. The residents were all happy there. Most chose the program for personal ties to the bay area. This is not an academic program...
The facilities were fine, and the main campus is undergoing an expansion now.

Loyola:
The interview day involves a series of interviews each with a different purpose which is explicitly stated. One asks all the cheesy interview questions: what are your strengths?, how do you deal with difficult situations?, what is cancer???, what is a good day for you???, etc
Physicists assess your ability to learn their stuff---maybe even a few easy "pimp" questions. One asks about your research, one just chats to see if you are normal, one will ask for a case presentation so be ready. Despite this sort of annoying obstacle course of questioning, I found the day to be fun, friendly, and definitely gave me a good impression of the place. Overall the residents were happy, friendly. The location is a bit outside the city, but really not a bad commute to most neigborhoods in chicago (25-30 min). This place starts the day early at 7 am and chairman requires all the attendings to go to morning conf so that is a nice learning environment. Research not too strong...clinical if anything. Think it is the #2 program in Chicago

more later....
 
UCLA

Location: UCLA is in Westwood, which is close to Hollywood, the Beaches, the freeways and lots of cultural and recreational options. Westwood is clean, upscale and a bit crowded. Low crime. Los Angeles is expensive, but less so than New York or San Francisco. Great weather.

Faculty: Smallish group. At least one very famous faculty member (Withers), and other big names. Clinical faculty number 3 or 4 at UCLA. Residents rotate at other hospitals/ clinics in LA area, which increases teaching faculty to approximately 10. This will change quickly when new Chairman is hired. Expect them to bring in a big name. Dr. Selch is the leader in terms of education in the dept, according to residents, and he pours in lots of time and energy.

Residents: Super friendly. Seem to be enjoying themselves and not overworked or overscutted. High pedigree/ top schools. Good relationships with faculty. 6 total, but only 1 this yr and zero year before. Most go into private practice, which department supports, but this could change when new chairman arrives.

Department: Research opportunities seem hit or miss. If you are interested, you can find or develop projects. There is lots of basic science at UCLA, but most residents steer clear of this. However, the department supports research interest.

Big Picture: This is a program on the rise. Unfortunately, based on what happened in match, it is very hard to match here, even if academic reputation of dept doess not match medical center. Expect this program to be in solid in top 15 in 5 or 10 yrs.
 
I really disagree with the last post on UCLA.

IMO this program is in complete disarray and understaffed at every level (chair, faculty, nursing, physics, admin support). Most definitely not 'on the rise.' I admit the residents seemed friendly but educational and research opportunities appeared sorely lacking. Plus with only 2-3 faculty, there are really no clinical 'services' which means residents just pick whatever case is available on a daily basis. This is light-years away from being an academic place and the PD will acknowledge that. After interviewing at 23 programs, this was HANDS-DOWN the most disappointing program. The positive was that it was 80 degrees outside in winter. Still, I ended up not ranking them at all and honestly would not be surpised if this program soon meets the same fate as UC Irvine's. Just my opinion.
 
there is some truth to that but you paint a negative picture equal to the above positive. 5 yrs may not turn it around. but 10 probably will. the medical center is too strong to allow it to go the irvine pathway. i would expect after a chair arrives you will see multiple mid/junior level hires and normalize other problems. new hires will lead to better clinical programs. not on the rise now, but it will be
 
someone is honestly prognosticating the initiation of the ascent of a program in 10 short years?
 
They will have no chance of any rise without a new chair and tons of financial support for new faculty and program development. Do they have a new chair in line?
 
Here's some programs that have been reported to have good reputations in the Rankings thread, but have not had many reviews this year in the Impressions thread:

UT Southwestern
Emory
Cleveland Clinic
Maryland

Would anyone care to share their experiences?
 
UT-Southwestern- Positives- Enthusiastic chair and PD who seemed like genuine resident advocates and good people; top technology; excellent research opportunities with dedicated time off; lots of formal didactics; Interview date was well-organized; Negatives- not too sure about Dallas (personally) with the horrible traffic and sprawl; hard to gauge resident satisfaction as I believe this is a fairly new program; Overall- Pretty impressive program with a clear academic focus; obviously, not MD Anderson, but this program will be climbing the rankings.

U-Arizona- Positives- Seemed like a fairly laid back program with residents having lots of free time; PD was approachable; Tucson appeared to a pleasant place to live; Friendly work environment; Negatives- questions about faculty stability with lots of turnover in recent years with really no prominent professors; formal didactics seemed lacking; research time limited; technological resources seemed slightly dated; Overall- Decent training for private practice but honestly can't see anybody going to academics coming from here (although Harari did, as they frequently point out-- but many years ago).

California-Pacific- Positives- People were friendly. Patient volume seemed adequate. San Francisco is beautiful; Negatives- not too sure about the quality of training which is actually scattered throughout the city (some of the facilities don't even have IMRT); all of the attendings themselves trained at this program so it is pretty inbred, and they all appeared on the older side and didn't exactly come off as rad onc superstars; technology seemed very outdated; really no academic emphasis with no publishing opportunities; really strange concept of "rotations;" the residents all seemed smart, but i personally couldn't get the sense of how they learned anything at CPMC (outside of reading on their own) since there is no educational structure or organization at all. Overall- Somewhat of a joke of a program with questionable training. Probably better than not matching (but barely).

UC-Davis- Positives- Vibrant chair from U-Chicago who seemed intent on bringing that sense of academics to Davis; nice-looking cancer center in a huge medical center; good mix of young-older faculty all of whom seemed very energetic and approachable; excellent technology with solid physics; high patient volume; solid conferences; Negatives- reseach opportunities seem a little lacking; relatively new program without a real reputation yet; didn't really get to see Sacramento; Overall- I wasn't expecting a lot from this program but came away mightily impressed-- a lot like UT-Southwestern.

Colorado- Positives- Denver, well-respected chair but she seemed a bit on the cold side- got the sense she was having a bad day; new cancer center with sparkling facilities; residents all seemed very happy with minimal scut; good technology; Negatives- had the feel of a private practice; some residents expressed concern about numbers since the patient volume is very low; not too sure about research opportunities or academic focus; Overall- Solid program which will probably only get better; I ranked them a tad below UC-Davis.

UCLA- Positives- Southern california weather, proximity to beaches, the UCLA name; the depatment appeared to have all the standard technology and tools but nothing special; acting chair was pretty negative about the place; Selch seemed like he enjoyed training residents; Negatives- this has been covered by previous posts-- lots of instability; no chair (for 4-5 years?); massive faculty exodus; extreme private practice competition locally; essentially no research opportunities or infrastructure within the department; plus the department physically seemed a bit run-down and in need of remodeling; Overall- sliding downwards.
 
I'm posting these pretty late but I wanted to get settled a bit; I gained some pretty good insight by looking at these as a med student so I figured I would return the favor. Best of luck to next year's applicants.

University of Kansas
Location: While Kansas City is great if you're married and looking for affordable housing it might not be the right place if you're single or looking for a happening social life. Good BBQ though.
Faculty: Limited to say the least. When I interviewed there were only 2 full time and one half time attendings present and I didn't get the impression an expansion was iminent. hard to see that working well with 4 residents.
Residents: One of the nicest groups I had the pleasure of spending time with. Very local group and seem to be self starters.
Department: If you're looking for bells and whistles you didnt come to the right place. Basic equipment with nothing that really stands out.
Impression: Lower tier program without much improvement in sight.

Loyola
Location: Chicago, as good as it gets. Only problem is the campus is a bit far from downtown but still manageable. Residents lived all over from down the street to downtown.
Faculty: Diverse group. The Chairman is one of the most laid back you will meet. One faculty member will require you to present an H and P to them and the physicists will give you a few physics questions which I had no clue how to answer. Dr. Albequerque seems to be pretty reseach oriented.
Residents: I didn't get a fair sense of them on interview day to be honest.
Department: Basic equipment, vary good diversity of organ systems from what I remember.
Impression: Midtier program with great location.

Kaiser Permanente
Location: Los Angeles. Great city to spend time in. Cost of living is pretty high and the hospital is in a part of town where most of the residents don't live. Otherwise, it's sunny all year and beaches are only a few miles away.
Faculty: The faculty exposure was somewhat limited during the interview as you have one interview with 4 faculty members. The faculty is pretty extensive and diverse but solely clincial. Little to no research.
Residents: Nice group of people, addressed all questions and were pretty upfront that their program is a strong clinical program with little research.
Department: Standard equipment but what impressed me was the volume they see. Only downside is that residents switch attendings each half day so hard to get continuity of care or to buckle down and focus on one organ system.
Impression: Good clinical program in excellent location.

UTMB- Galveston
Location: For the most part, the residency is based in Galveston which reminds me of a beaten down tourist town. Houston is an hour or so away and one the residents commutes.
Faculty: one of the nicest groups to spend time with. The director is a wonderul physician who is really looking for someone to fit into the program not just someone whose CV is the best. The attending based in Houston was honest and pretty funny throughout.
Residents: Took us out to dinner the night before and were a blast to spend time with. Seemed to have a good balance of work and leisure.
Department: The department is built into a large hospital but has good technology. The newest technology seemed to be at the satellite in Houston which the residents spend time at and have to commute to.
Impression: A mid tier program enhance by the support from the faculty. Only thing that bothered me was the limited research and commute distances to Houston.

University of Miami
Location: Miami, which in my book was wonderful. Beautiful, warm environment and a booming city. Housing seemed fairly expensive but for the single resident a great place to be.
Faculty: Program Director was very nice but I left somewhat confused about whether she was staying around much longer. Dr. Hatoum is a new attending who was extremelty friendly.
Residents: Friendly bunch; seemed as if they had a good mix of residents who really enjoyed what they did. Did not seem as if scut was an issue at all.
Department: Deparment is based in a private setting but also at Jackson memorial. From what I was told Jackson provides a great oppurtunity to see some higher stage disease and the other locale provides some standard privatepractice radonc.
Impression: Program with limited research but a great location and strong clinical basis.

MCV/VCI
Location: Richmond is a city that works for the married couple and to some degree for the single bachelor/bachelorette. Laid back Southern town with fair night life.
Faculty: Unfortunately there appears to be a dichotomy from what I saw and what really is the case. They appeared to be attentive and focused on education while I was there but I was informed differently. Was also informed that since the previous chair passed away there as has been some disarray. Enjoyed my conversation with Dr. Chang who is extremely research oriented and their new Chair from Duke.
Residents: Very honest. The expressed their frustrations over being overworked, forced to cover 2 services, and frankly the fact that they were disrepected daily be their attendings. I was advised by them to not even rank the program and that I would be better served going elsewhere. This didnt appear to be sour grapes because the residents came off as extremely genuine people.
Department: Very modern up to date deparyment in beautiful new cancer center.
Impression: I reserve judgement because I only had one day at the institution. I was pretty cautious when it came to rank list time because I believed what the residents had told me.

More to come...
 
I'm posting these pretty late but I wanted to get settled a bit; I gained some pretty good insight by looking at these as a med student so I figured I would return the favor. Best of luck to next year's applicants.

University of Kansas
Location: While Kansas City is great if you're married and looking for affordable housing it might not be the right place if you're single or looking for a happening social life. Good BBQ though.
Faculty: Limited to say the least. When I interviewed there were only 2 full time and one half time attendings present and I didn't get the impression an expansion was iminent. hard to see that working well with 4 residents.
Residents: One of the nicest groups I had the pleasure of spending time with. Very local group and seem to be self starters.
Department: If you're looking for bells and whistles you didnt come to the right place. Basic equipment with nothing that really stands out.
Impression: Lower tier program without much improvement in sight.

Loyola
Location: Chicago, as good as it gets. Only problem is the campus is a bit far from downtown but still manageable. Residents lived all over from down the street to downtown.
Faculty: Diverse group. The Chairman is one of the most laid back you will meet. One faculty member will require you to present an H and P to them and the physicists will give you a few physics questions which I had no clue how to answer. Dr. Albequerque seems to be pretty reseach oriented.
Residents: I didn't get a fair sense of them on interview day to be honest.
Department: Basic equipment, vary good diversity of organ systems from what I remember.
Impression: Midtier program with great location.

Kaiser Permanente
Location: Los Angeles. Great city to spend time in. Cost of living is pretty high and the hospital is in a part of town where most of the residents don't live. Otherwise, it's sunny all year and beaches are only a few miles away.
Faculty: The faculty exposure was somewhat limited during the interview as you have one interview with 4 faculty members. The faculty is pretty extensive and diverse but solely clincial. Little to no research.
Residents: Nice group of people, addressed all questions and were pretty upfront that their program is a strong clinical program with little research.
Department: Standard equipment but what impressed me was the volume they see. Only downside is that residents switch attendings each half day so hard to get continuity of care or to buckle down and focus on one organ system.
Impression: Good clinical program in excellent location.

UTMB- Galveston
Location: For the most part, the residency is based in Galveston which reminds me of a beaten down tourist town. Houston is an hour or so away and one the residents commutes.
Faculty: one of the nicest groups to spend time with. The director is a wonderul physician who is really looking for someone to fit into the program not just someone whose CV is the best. The attending based in Houston was honest and pretty funny throughout.
Residents: Took us out to dinner the night before and were a blast to spend time with. Seemed to have a good balance of work and leisure.
Department: The department is built into a large hospital but has good technology. The newest technology seemed to be at the satellite in Houston which the residents spend time at and have to commute to.
Impression: A mid tier program enhance by the support from the faculty. Only thing that bothered me was the limited research and commute distances to Houston.

University of Miami
Location: Miami, which in my book was wonderful. Beautiful, warm environment and a booming city. Housing seemed fairly expensive but for the single resident a great place to be.
Faculty: Program Director was very nice but I left somewhat confused about whether she was staying around much longer. Dr. Hatoum is a new attending who was extremelty friendly.
Residents: Friendly bunch; seemed as if they had a good mix of residents who really enjoyed what they did. Did not seem as if scut was an issue at all.
Department: Deparment is based in a private setting but also at Jackson memorial. From what I was told Jackson provides a great oppurtunity to see some higher stage disease and the other locale provides some standard privatepractice radonc.
Impression: Program with limited research but a great location and strong clinical basis.

MCV/VCI
Location: Richmond is a city that works for the married couple and to some degree for the single bachelor/bachelorette. Laid back Southern town with fair night life.
Faculty: Unfortunately there appears to be a dichotomy from what I saw and what really is the case. They appeared to be attentive and focused on education while I was there but I was informed differently. Was also informed that since the previous chair passed away there as has been some disarray. Enjoyed my conversation with Dr. Chang who is extremely research oriented and their new Chair from Duke.
Residents: Very honest. The expressed their frustrations over being overworked, forced to cover 2 services, and frankly the fact that they were disrepected daily be their attendings. I was advised by them to not even rank the program and that I would be better served going elsewhere. This didnt appear to be sour grapes because the residents came off as extremely genuine people.
Department: Very modern up to date deparyment in beautiful new cancer center.
Impression: I reserve judgement because I only had one day at the institution. I was pretty cautious when it came to rank list time because I believed what the residents had told me.

More to come...
 
University Of Virginia
Location: Charlottesville seems like a fairly upscale college town. Lots of good restaurants and night life but also suburban in its own right.
Faculty: Dr Read is a very laid back but passionate director. They have an attending who is a neurosurgeon and radiation oncologist which is pretty impressive in my book.
Residents: Fairly standard bunch, seemed happy.
Department: The hospital is beautiful and the cancer center as well. They are equipped with a Tomo unit and seem pretty interested in tomo research.
Impression: Good mid-tier program with potential to rise up more with good faculty and tomo.

University of Minnesota
Location: Minneapolis which has to be the coldest location for a rad onc residency that I can think of. It's on the U-M campus which is nice but the winter is harsh.
Faculty: The PD was excellent; she is a HemeOnc/Rad Onc and someone who wanted to know the interviewees as people. I think she even asked me about what I had read recently and my spare time hobbies. There is an older faculty member whose name escapes me who was very well known and well published who seemed to be in the end of his career but someoen who provided a great perspective on the advancement of the field.
Residents: A great down to earth group, I can see myself with them at tumor board and then catchin a pint with them later in the evening.
Department: Standard department, I dont quite remember the technology they had.
Impression: Great group of faculty and residents with a few research opputunities.

Indiana
Location: Indianapolis, not much to do unless your a Colts/Pacers fan. Pretty typical midwestern city with a fair downtown.
Faculty: Interesting group...it seems as if there has been an exodus of more established faculty and that there has been an influx of younger attendings. Chair position was still vacant when I interviewed if I remember right.
Residents: Didnt spend a lot of time with them because you have an individual interview day where you spend most of your time with attendings. Were very pleasant at lunch.
Department: Seemed as if research was limited but strong clincal program. enjoyed their noon conference where a case was presented and reviewed from start to completion. Seemed as if there was not as much teaching from faculty as other departments but that maybe be changing.
Impression: Good clincal program with limited research

William Beaumont
Location: Suburban Detroit. Definately the nicer part of town. Detroit isn't the liveliest of cities but Beaumont is situated in the suburbs and near a town called Royal Oak which has a fair night life and restaurant selection.
Faculty: Some fairly well known faculty. Dr. Martinez is the Chair and can be intimidating during his interview and hammers home the point that research is expected. The rest of the faculty is strong and includes the PD Dr. Kestin as well Dr. Vicini and Dr. Chen. Got the impression that they were fairly site specific. In terms of teaching, pretty strong teaching from the faculty with morning conferences daily led by an attending and active tumor board involvement.
Residents: Great group of people. Fun to have dinner with and seemed like the enjoyed themselves. Didn't seem to overworked.
Impression: Private hospital with a very academic feel to it. Good clinical diversity and strong brachy experience. Very involved in HDR brachy for prostate and cervix. Full research year provided.

Henry Ford
Location: Located closer to Detroit than Beaumont.
Faculty: New PD from Cleveland clinic, Dr. el-shaikh. Has changed around the lecture schedule to increased academics. Dr. Ryu is pretty heavy into spine radiosurgery(I think he was part of the lecture at ASTRO). Dr. Ajlouni was the former director and is a great guy, made me feel at ease right away. Dr. Movsas previously from Fox Chase has brought over a gene therapy program. New PD is supposed to ramp up brachy experience.
Residents: Extremely friendly bunch with good divesity. Don't seem to be overworked at all and have time to read as they see fit. Services vary from extremely laid back to a little more active.
Impression: Midtier program, I expect it to rise up due to its a high volume and quality faculty bringing a more academic and research feel to the program.

Thomas Jefferson
Location: Center City Philadelphia. Great location right in the heart of downtown with great nightlife and culture.
Faculty: I had a less than appropriate interaction with a member of the faculty who basically questioned why I should have been selected for interview. I got the impression that the attendings did not read over the files and just glanced at things while I was interviewing and could care less about the process.
residents: While I wasn't frankly told this, it seemed that the residents had an underlying discontent. I also got the impression that the educatin was somewhat limited.
Impression: I was excited to get to this interview because of it's roots in the RTOG but left with the feeling that the program didn't live up to it. They have a Gamma Knife and good research but I didn't get the sense that the residents enjoyed coming to work everyday.

Drexel
Location: Philadelphia, as noted above.
Faculty: The PD is one of the strong advocates for their program I met on the trail. Extremely passionate and enthusiastic with a mind on the long term direction of her program. Other faculty seemed to be intune with this. association with CTCA and Tomo there.
residents: Seemed to really be happy and enjoyed the environement. Menetioned that the work at Hahnemahn was a little harder secondary to lack of ancillary staff but otherwise happy.
Impression: This was a program I knew little about prior to coming but one I left wanting to know more about. It seems like this program is headed in the right direction.


That's it for me. I write this hoping those that read this take it with a grain of salt and realize my impressions could be very different than another person. Also, I only saw these programs on 1 day for the most part so there might be underlying issues I didn't see. Best of luck in the match.
 
On this board quite a few programs are considered to be "on the rise", more than programs that are taking a negative turn; it is impossible to have programs increase in ranking without a commensurate number of programs dropping lower. With that in mind I will note my positive impressions on programs I interviewed at, but whether or not certain programs will move up/down (and what does that really mean in the long run anyway) I really couldn't say since that wasn't as important to me as finding a good "fit" (and hoping I just match somewhere!).

TUFTS/NEMC: be prepared for a long day crammed with interviews. I felt as if I met the entire department by the end of the day but had to catch my breath. Did not meet too many residents but the ones I did meet seemed happy to be there. What I did not realize until interview day was that residents spend a substantial amount of time in Rhode Island, about 1 hr+ away; the program rents out an apartment for residents to spend the night when they are at RI (which seemed to be about half the time). This may not be too convenient for residents who have family based in Boston.

GEORGETOWN: Interesting interview day in that they had two of us candidates there and basically threw us into their clinical schedule, interviewing us when the attendings had a couple of minutes between patients. Thus a lot of lag time between interviews. Two of the attendings at Georgetown were identical twins (!) so don't mix them up; one has an MD/PhD and seems more intense. Felt there was ample financial resources for research if necessary and the residents felt the higher faculty were supportive of their endeavors. No bias towards academics. Small amt of time spent at satellites. They are quite proud of their cyberknife, one of few facilities that have one.

THOMAS JEFFERSON: Had positive impression of chairman, except it was odd for a minute when he explained to me why TJ was superior to UPenn. Some time is spent off location, (st Jude for example). Can not comment on other attendings, some of whom were quite busy and could only interview for < 5 minutes (in an exam room or hallway). PD seemed kind in contrast. Residents friendly enough but evasive about their happiness. Also I think another resident left the program which raises ??

UCSF
: The chairman, Dr. Roach, made evident his desire to recruit a Holman pathway candidate, perhaps PhD is highly desirable in this program? See this year, 3 MD/PhDs have matched. PD made effort to know candidates. Several of the interviewees seemed to have done a rotation at UCSF. Beautiful location, residents seemed to have good camaraderie. Also interesting during interview w/resident, tradition is to ask three same questions every year to every applicant.

MAYO JACKSONVILLE: Very small program and department, informal interview day (no formal presentation, meet PD/acting chair only during your brief interview time; taken on tour by residency coordinator); despite lack of polish I really liked this program; attendings came across as laid back, genuine. You will spend time away from Mayo for gyn and peds cases. Hospital is still under construction; new labs are being constructed but program overall had more of a "private" feel, not academic. different from the other Mayo. Got impression Mayo Jax would be a good place for family, kids; beautiful beaches, nice hours and life; watch out for hurricanes.
 
Re: MCV-VCU

Have been reading this thread for a while and wanted update folks on some changes at MCV-VCU since last March.

The residents are now much happier. The chair and program director have really made a strong effort to improve things for the residents in terms of creating an appropriate work-load and enhancing education. Residents have protected time on Friday afternoons now to attend didactics and/or study. There is only one dual attending service now so the work load is much more manageable. New residents now go through a month long orientation period to get them upto speed on the basics of clinical radiation oncology, treatment planning, physics and radiobiology instead of just being "thrown in to sink or swim."

I think MCV has gotten alot better and the Chair and PD are determined to keep improving it. Definitely a different program now than 2 years ago and worth a look see.

Granted, I am biased because I went there a few years ago but I feel that I got a great education there.
 
Re: MCV-VCU

Have been reading this thread for a while and wanted update folks on some changes at MCV-VCU since last March.

The residents are now much happier. The chair and program director have really made a strong effort to improve things for the residents in terms of creating an appropriate work-load and enhancing education. Residents have protected time on Friday afternoons now to attend didactics and/or study. There is only one dual attending service now so the work load is much more manageable. New residents now go through a month long orientation period to get them upto speed on the basics of clinical radiation oncology, treatment planning, physics and radiobiology instead of just being "thrown in to sink or swim."

I think MCV has gotten alot better and the Chair and PD are determined to keep improving it. Definitely a different program now than 2 years ago and worth a look see.

Granted, I am biased because I went there a few years ago but I feel that I got a great education there.

Do you think you have a better chance of matching in the program if you are a MCV student?
 
I think anytime you are applying to the program at which you went to med school, it just amplifies whatever impression you make. For example, if you are a great candidate and you show up a lot in the department and interact with alot of folks there, the natural tendency is to want to take you because you are a known quantity and people are impressed with you... they probably feel comfortable with the idea of having you as a resident. If on the other hand, you make a bad impression and keep making a bad impression, you might be ranked even lower than someone with the same CV who gets an interview but they don't know personally very well.

My general impression is about 1-3 out of every 10 residents at most places has got a resident from the same med school.
 
Not interview impressions, just med student impressions.

Stanford
Location: Weather is awesome and stable in the 60s/70s and very dry in the summer. Neighborhood is suburban, affluent and safe. Lots of bikers and joggers. Living costs are atrocious. The Stanford mall, that is just north of the Cancer Center is... let's just say you better be earning a doctor's salary if you want to shop there.

Faculty: You'll barely ever see Dr. Hoppe, the chair. Dr. Donaldson, the program director, is very interested in teaching and is quite a nice lady. Very enthusiastic. Dr. Gibbs, the associate program director, is a fun, goofy woman. I really like her. Lots of younger faculty that don't do too much teaching, but there are some older folks like Dr. Kapp and Hancock that are like freaking encyclopedias and are constantly teaching.

Residents: I did sense an underlying tenseness mentioned before. I wouldn't say they're unhappy. When questioned, they would say they're happy, but I didn't sense a whole lot of enthusiasm. Very nice people, however, so I can't say much more than that.

Staff: Run of the mill people. I really liked Dr. Gibbs' nurses, though.

Department: Wow, that Cancer Center is decked out. They have lots of expensive machines (two cyberknifes, of course), and everything is integrated so well. Conferences and tumor boards run very smoothly, and there are some very good cases. Teaching is pretty regimented. There is a fair number of lectures. I'm not sure they do a lot of brachy.

Research: Seemed to me that there were always 4 or 5 residents who were doing research. Basic science and clinical research both seem plentiful. At least a third of the residents were PhD's as well.

Work: Lots of clinic scutwork for the 1st and 2nd years, depending on the attending you're with. Luckily, there's a fair number of med students per month, and they do a crapload of scut for the residents. This may be the reason for the tenseness. I worked until 8:30 a couple of days, and there were still 2-4 residents there. Most don't get out until at least 6:00 or 6:30. As a student, I ate lunch around 1:30 consistently. Many times, the residents didn't even get a chance to eat lunch (I don't count powerbars or 6 pieces of crappy sushi). Don't get me wrong, though. They do get to do a lot of other interesting things.

Overall Impression: I really liked the program. Everyone was nice, the faculty was pretty impressive. Technology is great. A couple of bumps, but nothing too bad.


Kansas University Medical Center
KU is not accepting for the 2009-2010 year, but they are looking for someone this coming year. EDIT: Whoops, I think they are closed this year too...

Location: Meh. It's Kansas City. Roads suck in the area but there are some really nice neighborhoods and schools close by. Kansas is kind of boring. Ideal place to raise a family due to low living costs. Weather: you get all four seasons. Summer can be muggy. Winters can be as cold as Chicago but have been rather mild lately.

Faculty: Only four faculty. Seems to be "inbred," with at least 3/4 faculty being gradutes from KU. I don't know about the last guy. They are a very laid-back and nice bunch. They are currently looking for a chair. Seem to have the salary for a big name. They always seem quite ready to teach but are rather soft-spoken.

Residents: Awesome bunch. Easy-going family type people. I think everyone's married with a kid or will be soon. They seem very happy at this program.

Staff: Similar to the faculty and residents. Nurses are some fun-loving people. One is very sweet, a couple are goofy. Therapists I don't know too much about. Course coordinator is a little stressed sometimes but she seems to enjoy the environment as well.

Department: Self-contained and rather small. Not a lot of machines and they have IMRT. Computers are a little dated, but the software is fine. Journal database is annoying; most are in dead-tree format with little access to online journals. They do have what seems to be a $3 million+ budget for a new machine, possibly a Trilogy. Tumor conferences are all over the place but not too far away. They are also a little disorganized but get the job done. Teaching and lectures are adequate. Morning chart rounds are outdated but reviewing films is supposed to be a thing of the past when they get some new machines in the next half-year.

Research: They support research, but don't count on a whole lot of help.

Work: Residents get about 150-250 patients per year because there's only four of them. This does not include any electives they may take at outside institutions. Pretty comparable to most other programs. The day starts at 7:30 and the residents are almost always gone by 5:30-6:00 unless there's late class/conference. Lunch-time is always around 12:00-1:00. Workload is very acceptable and there's enough experience as well.

Overall Impression: It's a nice comfy program. It is low-tier, and it doesn't seem to be moving up quickly; however, the residents are happy, the workload is just right, and experience is adequate.
 
I'm a 4th year student at MCV who is applying for Rad Onc in this year's match. I had some uncertainty about my rotation in the department after hearing some of the negative things posted on SDN last year, but I have to agree with the earlier poster...the negative image portrayed was not what I experienced in the least.

As expected, there are some attendings that ask questions about morning conference case presentations (staging, treatment options, etc) in a more direct manner...but none of this seemed malignant in any way. In my opinion, it's actually a dis-service to residents to omit this in training residents (esp for oral boards!).

The chair is incredibly approachable and amiable. He even participates in occasional 6am morning basketball with the residents, radiation techs, physicists, and clumsy rotating 4th year students (me). The program director is again an extremely nice and energetic person who seems very invested in the success of the residency program. I have many more good things to say about the program but I have to run and see a Pt.

Goodluck to everyone in the match and def give MCV a look.
 
I'm a 4th year student at MCV who is applying for Rad Onc in this year's match. I had some uncertainty about my rotation in the department after hearing some of the negative things posted on SDN last year, but I have to agree with the earlier poster...the negative image portrayed was not what I experienced in the least.

As expected, there are some attendings that ask questions about morning conference case presentations (staging, treatment options, etc) in a more direct manner...but none of this seemed malignant in any way. In my opinion, it's actually a dis-service to residents to omit this in training residents (esp for oral boards!).

The chair is incredibly approachable and amiable. He even participates in occasional 6am morning basketball with the residents, radiation techs, physicists, and clumsy rotating 4th year students (me). The program director is again an extremely nice and energetic person who seems very invested in the success of the residency program. I have many more good things to say about the program but I have to run and see a Pt.

Goodluck to everyone in the match and def give MCV a look.

I recently interviewed at VCU and came away thinking that the residents seem pretty happy now. There definitely was some hesitation on their part when discussing this whole issue with the program undergoing some serious change, but overall they made it sound like things are certainly on the upswing. The residents now have Friday off for lecture, which they love. There are also formal didactics now that they previously did not have. The program director was very approachable and we had a very pleasant conversation over lunch. I wasn't too impressed with Richmond, but I probably didn't see enough of the nicer areas to give it a fair assessment.
 
I am interviewing at Emory and am wondering if anyone has any comments about their program. Thanks.
 
I interviewed at UPenn this past monday, and I was VERY impressed.

Specifically two things:

The people - both residents and staff - seemed very happy, collegial and welcoming. I think that I speak for all the applicants that day when I say that we felt welcome, and that they had an honest interest in us as candidates.

The facilities - or I should say future facilities. The new operation (that our year group will experience) are going to be top notch. They have protons going in and an entire new physical plant that looks to be awesome. They are more than doubling their patient load, and the residency program will grow as well.

The interviews themselves were benign and felt like two way streets. The interviewers certainly asked tough questions, but they were never aggressive or intimidating. They all left time for me to ask them questions and seemed honestly proud of their program (for good reason).

Overall, GREAT impression, I can only hope that enough people who interviewed don't rank them higher than I do :).
 
Does anyone have impressions from the 11/16 Fox Chase interview they would like to share?
Thanks
 
Just wondering what impressions there are of the Moffitt program. I am from USF so I have a biased view and am hoping to get someone else's thoughts.
 
Does anyone have anything to say about Allegheny General??
 
Regarding earlier post, last year I interviewed at Emory and I wasn't all too thrilled with it. I was a little nervous about their board pass rate (which although I cannot specifically recall, I do remember thinking it was worse than quoted by other programs). I also was not a huge fan of all the locations, and the combined prelim, having to rotate at Grady.
 
any thoughts on uab? birmingham sucks, but other than that it seems like a strong program
 
-
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have any impressions to share from his/her Cornell interview this season?

I was pleasantly surprised... Even if they don't merge with Columbia (which it seems like they really want to do), it still seemed like the residents get good clinical training, although research is limited.

Any thoughts on the impact on training related to the fact that Cornell is apparently slow to adopt technology? (I think they only recently got a CT sim)
 
Assuming it is now "safe" to post '08 interview impressions? Not that I'm gonna say anything brutal, but is there any reason that it'd be prudent to wait until after match day that I'm missing?
 
Location: Lots of fun. Kind of sprawled, need to have a car. Know some people there who say it’s a great place to visit or be for school, but they’re all planning on leaving...say it’s just too much day-to-day. Kinda reminded me of Vegas in that way. Lots of traffic.

Faculty: Small group. Dr. Markoe is the outgoing chair, and although he is supposedly staying on staff he didn’t participate in the interview process. That was kind of weird. No big names here, but they are looking for a new chair and seem to be chasing some big names, not sure if that’ll happen. Very nice feel overall, but more of a community feel than hard-core academicians. Be prepared for the physics interview, a problem-solving exercise that really threw off some applicants. Guy just wants to see how you reason, and how you handle a little challenge (don’t get flustered or angry). Would agree with previous poster that they really seemed to want contact after the interview, declare your interest if you have it.

Residents: Small group of 5-6 residents. Very nice and friendly. When asked if they were happy, they uniformly gave a hesitant yes as their answer. Not a ringing endorsement. Said the clinical volume was heavy, though they get one protected academic day/week with it (though get the feeling they use it to catch up rather than get research accomplished). Said they have to seek out research opportunities, all seemed retrospective/case reports, no real forward-thinking projects ongoing.

Department/Program: Cover Jackson Memorial (indigent) and Sylvester Cancer Center (more typical pts with insurance). Crazy pathology here, see patients from throughout the Caribbean, making the clinical experience strong. The observed morning conference was a little scatter-brained, no one took charge, and the grasp of the material/literature wasn't that impressive. There was a mention by one faculty that “98% of residents have passed boards, but only 50% do so cleanly the first time.” Residents complained about Rad Bio didactics, seemed to have to self-teach it. Also little-to-no brachy here, another resident complaint. Have a Gamma-Knife at Jackson, but seem to have little volume on it as they’re losing patients to a competing, off-site CyberKnife facility.

My Two Cents: Decent program. Suffers from a lack of leadership. Were trying to sell new direction under new dean of med school, incoming new chair, etc, but at this point it seemed to all be uncertain. Wasn’t as big on the location as I expected…and I’m single. Not a place for those wanting academics.
 
Location: Jacksonville is the largest city in land area in the U.S., with 900 square miles. Ridiculous. Means that Mayo Jax Clinic is 12 miles from downtown, and it’s one constant strip mall between. Downtown was incredibly depressing for a city of 800,000. Was told by Starbucks barista that “This is really probably the only coffeeshop downtown.” An Italian restaurant downtown was touting “Jacksonville’s best wings” as its featured item. Hate to say it, but the lack of culture/non-chain restaurants/cool neighborhoods was astounding.

Faculty: 4 full-time. Extremely nice and genuine. Residents had nothing but nice things to say about them as teachers and people. No doubt they’d be a pleasure to work with.

Residents: 4 residents. Very nice, but fairly quiet. Seemed quite happy, no reservations. Think all married. Happy with Jax as town for family, but one guy from the NY/NJ area put it mildly—“Jax isn’t really a city, and there really isn’t much going on.” Only 1 guy seemed interested in doing any research, but he was getting a fair amount of abstracts accepted at national meetings.

Department/Program: Lots of money/support/technology. Basically all CT sims. Linac-based SRS. Image-guidance, brain lab, respiratory gating etc. Little-to-no Gyn brachy, residents must go to WashU in St. Louis for a month to get procedures (though great place to do so with Grigsby). Also no Peds here, they get some during a 2 month stint with private FLA Rad Onc Group (FROG), and are setting up 1 month rotation at Penn for peds as well. No dedicated academic days—all attendings see pts 5 days/week, a mild gripe from residents.

My Two Cents: A fine place to train for married, conservative types with kids. Not for those with heavy academic bent, single, or urban-types.
 
Location: Didn’t have time to feel it out, but Denver seems like a great place for either the married or single folks. Tons of outdoor activities, mountains. Downsides—Must have a car, hospital is in suburbia. No other cities within driving distance.

Faculty: 7 faculty, didn’t get to meet Dr. Raben (sabbatical) who is supposedly the liveliest of the bunch. Chairwoman Gaspar was nice, but not at all supportive of residents going into the lab, said they decided wasn’t in anyone’s best interests. Weird as almost of all applicants that day had either Ph.D or took time off for research. Very nice group overall. Dr. Kavanaugh is big name in SBRT, lots of research opportunity with him.

Residents: Great group, very fun to talk to. Stressed that they didn’t want “weird” people there. Lots of athletic types. Six there now, no PG-2s. 2-5’s, 2-4’s, 2-3’s, and 2 interns. Weird, why not 2,2, 1,1? Very happy. One started Holman, then cut down to one year of lab time—sounds like this is no longer available. All love Denver.

Department/Program: Solid training. Both PG-5s going private, they are first grads. Seemed to be productive group in terms of clinical abstracts/publications. Strong in Peds, Dr. Liu from Harvard is Peds-only attending & new PD. Great new children’s hospital. Dept. is relatively new, standard stuff. Good mix of patients/disease sites, no glaring weaknesses. Residents did say it’s a constant battle to keep 7 attendings happy with only 6 (5 if one on research/in lab) residents, they end up covering additional service on their attending’s academic day—not a fan of that.

My Two Cents: Upper mid-tier program in great location. Seems to have smarter/cooler residents than level of training might draw, due to location. No glaring weaknesses, nice people & dept., but distinct feeling that residents really interested in basic science aren’t really wanted.
 
Top