Official 2012-2013 Help Me Rank thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

shan564

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,559
Reaction score
464
I've noticed that a lot of the "help me rank" posts are polluting the "interview reviews" thread (and my own "help me rank" thread is polluting the general forums)... and today, I noticed that IM has a "megathread" for this purpose, so I figured that we might as well have one too.


I'll start it off with a general question. Is it possible to have the "best" general residency training at a facility that doesn't get a widely diverse patient population? For instance, big hospitals serving a wide rural community... or big hospitals serving a narrow urban community... or private hospitals where 50% of the patients are rich (a la Mayo, McLean, Menninger)... or public hospitals where 50% of the patients are impoverished...

So far, the most "diverse" place I've interviewed at was WashU - a combination of rural Missouri/Illinois, urban/suburban St. Louis, rich, poor, etc. I'm wondering how many bonus points I should give them for this. Also probably Indiana, but I haven't been there yet.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thank you for starting this thread, I'm one of the people that posted in the interview review thread because I didn't want to start an individual thread.

I'm deciding between Stanford, UCLA, and UCSD. Does anyone have thoughts on the three programs? Stanford seems to not have as good of a reputation as the other two and I'm not sure why that is...it seemed like a wonderful program when I was there.

Thanks for any help!

Edited to add: I really loved the Stanford program and the Palo Alto area and the Stanford residents seemed the happiest out of the three (and there is more flexibility in their curriculum then anywhere else I have interviewed). I feel bad not choosing UCLA because it is such a strong program, but I'm not sure that I want to live in LA and several residents complained about call and about being deceived when they interviewed on the amount of call. As far as UCSD, I loved the San Diego area and the program and residents seemed great. I guess I'm having a difficult time because a part of me wants to be at the program with the best reputation out of the three, which is UCLA as far as I know. And I'm concerned because Stanford doesn't seem to have as good of a reputation.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for starting this thread, I'm one of the people that posted in the interview review thread because I didn't want to start an individual thread.

I'm deciding between Stanford, UCLA, and UCSD. Does anyone have thoughts on the three programs? Stanford seems to not have as good of a reputation as the other two and I'm not sure why that is...it seemed like a wonderful program when I was there.

Thanks for any help!

Edited to add: I really loved the Stanford program and the Palo Alto area and the Stanford residents seemed the happiest out of the three (and there is more flexibility in their curriculum then anywhere else I have interviewed). I feel bad not choosing UCLA because it is such a strong program, but I'm not sure that I want to live in LA and several residents complained about call and about being deceived when they interviewed on the amount of call. As far as UCSD, I loved the San Diego area and the program and residents seemed great. I guess I'm having a difficult time because a part of me wants to be at the program with the best reputation out of the three, which is UCLA as far as I know. And I'm concerned because Stanford doesn't seem to have as good of a reputation.

My take on ranking in general is that once you are talking about programs that are above average or better (not just "top 10" whatever that means), the programs are more similar than they are different. The geographic differences have much more impact on your overall happiness than the differences between programs.

I always advise med students that the quality of their personal lives while they're in training is the most important factor - all the good programs will get you where you want to go. You might as well have a smile on your face while you're getting there.

And just to confuse you even more, humans are terrible at predicting what will make us happy: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/science/study-in-science-shows-end-of-history-illusion.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Thank you for starting this thread, I'm one of the people that posted in the interview review thread because I didn't want to start an individual thread.

I'm deciding between Stanford, UCLA, and UCSD. Does anyone have thoughts on the three programs? Stanford seems to not have as good of a reputation as the other two and I'm not sure why that is...it seemed like a wonderful program when I was there.

Thanks for any help!

Edited to add: I really loved the Stanford program and the Palo Alto area and the Stanford residents seemed the happiest out of the three (and there is more flexibility in their curriculum then anywhere else I have interviewed). I feel bad not choosing UCLA because it is such a strong program, but I'm not sure that I want to live in LA and several residents complained about call and about being deceived when they interviewed on the amount of call. As far as UCSD, I loved the San Diego area and the program and residents seemed great. I guess I'm having a difficult time because a part of me wants to be at the program with the best reputation out of the three, which is UCLA as far as I know. And I'm concerned because Stanford doesn't seem to have as good of a reputation.

I think you should choose Stanford.

As somebody who isn't really looking at the western part of the country (I'm not interviewing any further west than San Antonio), I've never heard/read anything negative about Stanford's program, with the notable exception of Splik's "10 programs to avoid" thread (which, of course, was 80% joking and 10% BS). I think some people might not like it because it's relatively biological and very research-focused, but that would be considered an advantage to some people (myself included).

I think UCLA is popular among the crowd that are also considering MGH/McLean, NYPH, and UCSF. Stanford is more popular among the crowd that are considering Penn, Pitt, and WashU. I'm definitely in the latter group.

Also, I read somewhere that UCSD considers itself to be "the WashU of the West." The Assistant Department Chair at WashU told me "we are a research-oriented program, but if somebody is interested in pure research with minimal clinical involvement, we tell them to go to Stanford." So based on that, it sounds like UCSD and Stanford are in the same group.
 
I've noticed that a lot of the "help me rank" posts are polluting the "interview reviews" thread (and my own "help me rank" thread is polluting the general forums)... and today, I noticed that IM has a "megathread" for this purpose, so I figured that we might as well have one too.


I'll start it off with a general question. Is it possible to have the "best" general residency training at a facility that doesn't get a widely diverse patient population? For instance, big hospitals serving a wide rural community... or big hospitals serving a narrow urban community... or private hospitals where 50% of the patients are rich (a la Mayo, McLean, Menninger)... or public hospitals where 50% of the patients are impoverished...

So far, the most "diverse" place I've interviewed at was WashU - a combination of rural Missouri/Illinois, urban/suburban St. Louis, rich, poor, etc. I'm wondering how many bonus points I should give them for this. Also probably Indiana, but I haven't been there yet.

For my students who don't have compelling social factors to consider (e.g., "I need sun so I can only go to Los Angeles", "my parents live in Idaho") and who want the 'best' training they can get, I generally advise them to pick a program with a lot of diversity. In general that means diversity in training sites (e.g., the UCSF program has Moffitt, SFVAMC, and SFGH). If 99% of the patients coming through the ED are depression NOS + cocaine withdrawal induced mood disorder, then you are going to have a comparatively impoverished training experience. I would think that the diversity at WashU or Indiana (or Iowa, or UW, etc.) is a nice bonus.
 
Thank you for starting this thread, I'm one of the people that posted in the interview review thread because I didn't want to start an individual thread.

I'm deciding between Stanford, UCLA, and UCSD. Does anyone have thoughts on the three programs? Stanford seems to not have as good of a reputation as the other two and I'm not sure why that is...it seemed like a wonderful program when I was there.

Thanks for any help!

Edited to add: I really loved the Stanford program and the Palo Alto area and the Stanford residents seemed the happiest out of the three (and there is more flexibility in their curriculum then anywhere else I have interviewed). I feel bad not choosing UCLA because it is such a strong program, but I'm not sure that I want to live in LA and several residents complained about call and about being deceived when they interviewed on the amount of call. As far as UCSD, I loved the San Diego area and the program and residents seemed great. I guess I'm having a difficult time because a part of me wants to be at the program with the best reputation out of the three, which is UCLA as far as I know. And I'm concerned because Stanford doesn't seem to have as good of a reputation.

If reputation is the only thing keeping you from ranking Stanford first, and you like it for XYZ other reasons, then you should rank it first. Can't imagine you would have a problem finding a clinical or academic job coming from any one of the 3 places.

I wouldn't want to live in LA either.
 
For my students who don't have compelling social factors to consider (e.g., "I need sun so I can only go to Los Angeles", "my parents live in Idaho") and who want the 'best' training they can get, I generally advise them to pick a program with a lot of diversity. In general that means diversity in training sites (e.g., the UCSF program has Moffitt, SFVAMC, and SFGH). If 99% of the patients coming through the ED are depression NOS + cocaine withdrawal induced mood disorder, then you are going to have a comparatively impoverished training experience. I would think that the diversity at WashU or Indiana (or Iowa, or UW, etc.) is a nice bonus.

Cool, thanks. On a similar note, do you think that the lack thereof is a negative point against a place like Mayo (no ER, relatively restricted indigent population with the exception of the local prison) or Harvard South Shore (3rd year outpatient clinics are exclusively at the VA)?
 
My take on ranking in general is that once you are talking about programs that are above average or better (not just "top 10" whatever that means), the programs are more similar than they are different. The geographic differences have much more impact on your overall happiness than the differences between programs.

I always advise med students that the quality of their personal lives while they're in training is the most important factor - all the good programs will get you where you want to go. You might as well have a smile on your face while you're getting there.

And just to confuse you even more, humans are terrible at predicting what will make us happy: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/science/study-in-science-shows-end-of-history-illusion.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
Location is definitely very important to me. I interviewed at both East and West coast schools and decided that I really want to live in CA. I had a smile on my face the whole time I was in Palo Alto and the Stanford campus, but I also really liked San Diego.

I think you should choose Stanford.

As somebody who isn't really looking at the western part of the country (I'm not interviewing any further west than San Antonio), I've never heard/read anything negative about Stanford's program, with the notable exception of Splik's "10 programs to avoid" thread (which, of course, was 80% joking and 10% BS). I think some people might not like it because it's relatively biological and very research-focused, but that would be considered an advantage to some people (myself included).

I think UCLA is popular among the crowd that are also considering MGH/McLean, NYPH, and UCSF. Stanford is more popular among the crowd that are considering Penn, Pitt, and WashU. I'm definitely in the latter group.

Also, I read somewhere that UCSD considers itself to be "the WashU of the West." The Assistant Department Chair at WashU told me "we are a research-oriented program, but if somebody is interested in pure research with minimal clinical involvement, we tell them to go to Stanford." So based on that, it sounds like UCSD and Stanford are in the same group.
I feel like pretty much everywhere I interviewed has a rep of being biological and heavy on research, but at both Stanford and UCSD it wasn't really a big part of the interview day as it was at some other places (Columbia wouldn't stop talking about research for example).

For my students who don't have compelling social factors to consider (e.g., "I need sun so I can only go to Los Angeles", "my parents live in Idaho") and who want the 'best' training they can get, I generally advise them to pick a program with a lot of diversity. In general that means diversity in training sites (e.g., the UCSF program has Moffitt, SFVAMC, and SFGH). If 99% of the patients coming through the ED are depression NOS + cocaine withdrawal induced mood disorder, then you are going to have a comparatively impoverished training experience. I would think that the diversity at WashU or Indiana (or Iowa, or UW, etc.) is a nice bonus.
Diversity was my other concern with Stanford since they are known to have a relatively wealthy and white patient population. The residents seemed to think that there was still enough diversity, but I'm not sure...
 
NYU for gut feel and ideal place to study for current (however may drastically change during residency!) interests vs MGH/McLean for location/"reputation"--can't regret it long term...right?

At what point do you let your gut drag your s/o to a city he/she does not want to go to?
 
Last edited:
Cool, thanks. On a similar note, do you think that the lack thereof is a negative point against a place like Mayo (no ER, relatively restricted indigent population with the exception of the local prison) or Harvard South Shore (3rd year outpatient clinics are exclusively at the VA)?

I don't know much about Mayo.
For HSS, yes, I would count an exclusively VA 3rd year against it. That is not to say it might not have its own set of potential advantages. But I personally just don't see it. If, after you finish your training, you want to specialize in veterans care and become a VA faculty member, go for it. But residency training is a little too early for that, I think.
 
Ok so I'm struggling with , in alphabetical order.

A. CHA
B. MGH
C. Penn
D. Yale

I know these are all great programs and I will be happy wherever I end up. But a list must be made. I haven't settled on my long term goals of private vs. academics, but I wouldn't want to sacrifice the option of being an academic renowned psychiatry. I am a married male with 1 child on the way and possibly another one during residency. My wife will have a full time job/similar hours to me during residency. I have no geographic preference. My interests in psychiatry are neuroimaging, community psychiatry, and the concept of the medical home. My research interest are the effects of depression in the medically ill.

I would appreciate honest feedback.
 
Ok so I'm struggling with , in alphabetical order.

A. CHA
B. MGH
C. Penn
D. Yale

I know these are all great programs and I will be happy wherever I end up. But a list must be made. I haven't settled on my long term goals of private vs. academics, but I wouldn't want to sacrifice the option of being an academic renowned psychiatry. I am a married male with 1 child on the way and possibly another one during residency. My wife will have a full time job/similar hours to me during residency. I have no geographic preference. My interests in psychiatry are neuroimaging, community psychiatry, and the concept of the medical home. My research interest are the effects of depression in the medically ill.

I would appreciate honest feedback.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I perceive those programs as being very different from each other. Of course they're all strong research places, but I generally associate CHA with strong community psychiatry, MGH/McLean with the best classical/psychological psych and inpatient psych, Penn with very biological/medical-oriented psych, and Yale with just generally strong balanced training.

In terms of your preferences:
1. "The option of being an academic renowned psychiatrist" - I think any of those programs will do fine in that regard, but MGH/McLean certainly has some name recognition that might give you an infinitesimal head-start.

2. "Married/child" - I think that might be a point against Yale, since New Haven probably has fewer job options for your wife. Also, it doesn't have a reputation for being the best place to raise a family. Also - I'm sure things have changed in the last couple of decades, but after reading "Mount Misery", I'd be scared to do a residency at McLean (or anywhere in Harvard, for that matter) while having a family. I'm not a big fan of Boston (expensive, bad traffic, bad weather, etc.), but they do have good schools. Philly is one of my favorite cities in the US (traffic/weather/cost is better than Boston but all of the heritage is still there, more centrally-located, more easy-going people).

3. "Neuroimaging" - Penn is known for biological and imaging research. MGH is deeply involved in the Human Connectome Project, although the bulk of that work is happening at WashU.

4. "Community psychiatry" - CHA will probably give you the most exposure, McLean is probably just as good but will offer you less exposure, Penn is probably the weakest of the four (but still strong)

5. "Medical home" - that sounds like a Harvard sort of thing, but I don't know about specific research

6. "Effects of depression in medically ill" - I'd say Penn would be the best there, or maybe Yale. Again, I think Longwood would probably be the best of the Harvard programs in that regard, since McLean doesn't have medical patients and CHA is mostly outpatient.


Did you apply to Mayo? I know they're not as well-known in psych as MGH, but I think they're pretty good at those above 6 points.

If I were in your position, I'd probably rank MGH/McLean #1, since you're interests are so diverse and they're good at pretty much everything (even if they're not the best at certain things). Then it would probably be a toss-up between CHA and Penn, depending on whether you care more about community psych or neuroimaging and the effects of depression in the medically ill. Actually, I'd probably rank Penn higher because it'll still give you good community training, while CHA might not offer you the same diversity of experience. On the other hand, CHA might give you access to Harvard research resources. Yale would probably be #4 mostly because of location, but there's a Yale resident who occasionally posts on here, so he might be able to shed more light.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
NYU for gut feel and ideal place to study for current (however may drastically change during residency!) interests vs MGH/McLean for location/"reputation"--can't regret it long term...right?

At what point do you let your gut drag your s/o to a city he/she does not want to go to?


What are these "interests" where NYU is so much better than MGH/McLean?

I think NYC is a "love it or hate it" type of town. I love the liveliness of Manhattan, but I don't know if I can handle the general culture of the city.

As far as the s/o - I guess it depends on how much he/she hates it and how strong your gut feeling is...
 
Shan -

I want to thank you for your well thought out response. You aren't wrong in pointing out how different each of those programs are, but so are my interests. I have a very broad scope that I hope to narrow as the years of residency go by. I agree with most of your points except the -New Haven- comment. My wife will not need help finding a job, I just can't say what she does for the sake of privacy in this forum. My oldest son/daughter will be 4 when I finish training therefore the concept of raising a family won't apply since I likely won't be staying in New Haven after training. The latter point is more of an appropriate argument against -Yale- (but you couldn't have known that without me specifying) as ideally one would stay where one trains. I did also interview at -Longwood-, and I agree they are unbeatable for imaging (Stern and Silbersweig) although -Penn- is going to be doing a great project on imaging in the next few years. Longwood is not on my list because I didn't click with the residents.
In terms of "gut" feel, -Cambridge- was the fav. It's a special place in regards to the people it attracts, but I would be very happy there. I could sit around , have some beers and chat about liberal ideas for four years.
-Mgh/McLean - I know them very well. It's also a special place, but in the complete opposite regard. It's special in the sense of hard work and commitment to evidence based patient care by 98% of the residents/faculty. The new program director was a pleasant surprise and it actually placed Mgh back on the on the top 4.
-Penn - They courted me so hard that I felt they had something to hide, it felt like that Hot college girl with an std no one knows about until they are getting a gram of ceftriaxone IM and screaming bloody hell. I'm just being a douche, the interview day was perfect. Although I agree in regards to the community aspect. It seemed like the best work/life/academic rewards (when taking into account the amount of hours you work for your rewards) program of the bunch. Philly def. >>> Boston in terms of cost.

This is a grueling process, by far the hardest decision of my life . Thanks for reading.
 
What are these "interests" where NYU is so much better than MGH/McLean?

I think NYC is a "love it or hate it" type of town. I love the liveliness of Manhattan, but I don't know if I can handle the general culture of the city.

As far as the s/o - I guess it depends on how much he/she hates it and how strong your gut feeling is...

Not "so much better," but more emphasized. Acute treatment of psychosis, forensics
 
Sounds like your gut was telling you CHA. Go with that. The things I liked about cambridge were the nurturing environment, elective time starting in PGY-1 meaning you can start getting involved in research/prepare the groundwork from the get go, the integration between medical and psychiatric services, the restraints free units, exposure to the spectrum of patients from the overprivileged to the traditionally underserved, the well developed interpreter service and culturally-oriented services, opportunities to do what you want, and the best psychotherapy training you will find in any residency program (or at least most extensive). The great thing is that you can get involved with neuroimaging research at BWH or Mass Mental Health, or McLean etc without the nonsense of being a resident at longwood or MGH (which are obviously great programs). The best things are the call, the fact that if you are backup and have to come in you get paid, and the in-house moonlighting opportunities. Applicants do not think enough about things like vacation time, educational/professional leave, educational budget, and call - but these are extremely important to your wellbeing and really people should rank more on these things than a lot of other stuff. No one ever listens to me about this, but I can tell you once you're a resident you will realize I was right!

I don't know much first-hand re: Penn (as they rejected me! three times in fact!) but they have less elective time than the other places, and as someone who sounds like they would like to cultivate various niche interests having lots of elective time is important.

But really, go with that gut feeling, and also, do what your wife suggests, as residency will be a lot more miserable if she's not happy!
 
I agree with Splik - 1) Definitely pay great attention to your gut feeling, and 2) Look at the amount of elective time and moonlighting available.

I think Yale has a lot to offer in terms of the areas you highlight as being significant:

1) Married with child - Yale offers really excellent health insurance, and very good compensation. There are also significant internal moonlighting opportunities available form PGY-2.

2) Diverse research interests - I really like that Yale has faculty members engaging in research topics as diverse as the concept of citizenship in mental health, to hardcore neuro-imaging work, and lots of topics in between. There are residents who spend their second year electives in labs, and others who do qualitative research abroad. I can't really think of a research area that you would have difficulty becoming involved in.

I also think that having diverse clinical exposure is important, and Yale has the benefit of being affiliated with a community mental health center, a stand-alone psychiatric hospital, a large VA, a really nice, modern psych ER and the Yale Student/Staff Health center.

I didn't interview at any of the other programs you are considering and can't say whether they are better or worse, but I can tell you that Yale seems to check a lot of your boxes. Good luck with your decision!
 
Does anybody have any thoughts on Baylor? I liked the program, but they seem to be a bit controversial around the boards... so I'm wondering if I'm missing something. I know they have a history of being relatively heavy on the hours, but everybody's hours will be more relaxed next year, and even the senior residents seemed to be pretty happy with their workload.
 
Last edited:
Hey everyone!
I'm in a bit of a pickle and was hoping perhaps you could help me.
I have about 5 choices I just cannot choose between. Let me say a few things about myself, and my opinions of each program. Any feedback is so appreciated!
So I am very interested in neuropsychiatry and am applying to both combined neuropsych residency as well as straight psychiatry (with the thought that I will do neuropsych fellowship, or a neurology residency afterward). Ideally, in the future, I will have a career that encompasses both research and clinical medicine, in some sort of academic setting. Here are the places I am considering:

NYU - love the faculty. They have a combined neuropsych which isnt accepting this year (but said I could apply internally). Loved the residents. Lived in NYC previously and itching to go back. Confused about the PD, who seemed to discourage me from entering a career in both research and clinical medicine (saying in this economic climate it was impossible, while all other PDs said not only was it possible, but encouraged!). Got visceral "I can totally see myself here!" feeling.
Brown - Applying to combined program. Have a research mentor who already has a project picked out for me (who is fantastic). LOVED both neuro and psych PDs. Only 1 spot, with 10-15 people vying for it. Not crazy about Providence (spouse is not terribly excited about it either). Got happy visceral feeling. Only caveat - on the off-chance I fall in love with a different sub-specialty, I am locked in to being boarded in neurology, a whole medicine intern year, etc. I do not anticipate this happening, but it is a possibility.
Harvard Longwood - Applying to general psych (they have a sort of "underground" neuropsych combined program you apply to internally, as well as a recognized fellowship). Loved the residents and PDs. Love the chair. Like Boston.
Northwestern - Applying to general psych. Loved PD and residents. No real neuropsych (have a few praticing neuropsychiatrists in the children's hospital who said they would mentor me - is this enough?). Interested in several research projects. Got happy visceral feeling. Love Chicago (spouse's first choice city).
Duke - Applying to general psych. No real neuropsych faculty. Loved PD, chair, and excited about a number of research projects. Not excited about Durham. Most residents seemed married with kids (I am still young and like to go out!). Got happy visceral feeling.
Sinai - applying to general psych. A number of neuropsychiatrists willing to mentor me. No real neuropsych program. Really liked residents and PD. Seems like program with best quality of life.

Anyone have any thoughts? I feel so confused, trying to compare these disparate variables to one another.
Or, anyone have any thoughts about neuropsychiatry training in general?


Did you apply to the general psych program at Brown? Sounds like you're pretty set on neuro/psych... I think that seems like a good bet for your #1 choice. Also, if you decide not to pursue the combined track, I'm sure you could always switch to general psych (I'm not sure about neuro/psych, but I know this happens all the time in med/psych programs). I've heard nothing but wonderful things about Brown's neuropsych research.

I've heard a lot of horror stories about work hours and burnout at NYU. It's all hearsay, so take it with a grain of salt... but FWIW, FREIDA says that they average 75 hrs/week in PGY1.

Longwood is a great place for multidisciplinary training. I don't like Boston too much, but if you're interested in research, there's probably no better place than Longwood. I know of a lot of cool neuropsych research at BWH, and I'm sure that the other Longwood hospitals are just as good. And there's also the added benefit of top-notch didactics and various lectures/opportunities that you get just by virtue of being at Harvard.

Northwestern is probably alright for neuropsych, but I've heard a lot of concerns about the diversity of their general psych training, which is necessary for good psychiatrists. Most people around here seem to think that UIC is the best in Chicago.

Duke is great for psych, but if they don't have "real" neuropsych faculty, that's probably a concern. Still, they have a great reputation in biological psych.

Sinai - I've always thought of them as more of an East Coast-type program - i.e. focused more on the psychological side than the neurological side of things.
 
the idea of combined neurology/psychiatry residencies were popular once but they have largely fallen out of favor, which is why there are no so few of them. specialties are moving further and further towards specialization, it is not possible to really keep up with all of psychiatry let alone both neurology and psychiatry. if you are interested in neuropsychiatry you are much better off going for a fellowship in behavioral neurology/neuropsychiatry following general residency. Really, if you want to work in this area you would have to be working in academics as its so specialized so a research and clinical career is what you would be doing. it would be madness to do psych and THEN do a neurology residency (as you would have to a whole prelim year after residency) and you would not be doing neuropsychiatry during that time.

The other thing about combined neuro/psych residencies is obviously there is much less elective time meaning there is much less research time. You need to satisfy requirements for both neuro and psych, trying to fit research on top of that would be stressful even if possible.

The most important reason not to do a combined neuro/psych residency is that something has to give, and that something is psychotherapy. Given that a big sphere on neuropsychiatry is actually conversion symptoms and other dissociative phenomena (non-epileptic attacks, amnesias, fugue states) it is essential you get good grounding in psychotherapies which you will not get in a combined program. Even if you are interested in the more 'medical' aspects of neuropsychiatry e.g. behavioral/emotional symptoms of neurological disorders then experience with cognitive behavioral therapy is very important even if you will not be doing much of this yourself.

The other thing to bear in mind is whilst you should certainly cultivate your interest clinically and academically in neuropsychiatry during residency, the main focus of residency should be to get a good broad based exposure to wide variety of psychopathology in different settings, with familiar with as many different therapeutic modalities as you can especially if you do not plan to do that later. For example I have absolutely no interest in child psychiatry, but the developmental perspective, working systemically with families, and seeing the consequences of adult psychopathology on children is incredibly useful.

Go where you think you would like to live, and for sure where your current interests can be nourished, but also somewhere that will challenge you to think in a different way than you might otherwise and will take you out of your comfort zone. For instance I am more socially-oriented, but am at a program that is fairly biologically-oriented (not in the least because there aren't really any socially oriented psychiatry residencies) - but I am constantly opening my mind up to a different way of seeing/thinking and challenging others too.
 
Sinai - I've always thought of them as more of an East Coast-type program - i.e. focused more on the psychological side than the neurological side of things.

their research portfolio is almost entirely biological psychiatry - they are especially big on neuroimaging, genetics, OCD, autism etc. but yes clinically like anywhere else in new york there will be heavy lashings on psychodynamics with lots of analysts on the clinical faculty.
 
the idea of combined neurology/psychiatry residencies were popular once but they have largely fallen out of favor, which is why there are no so few of them. specialties are moving further and further towards specialization, it is not possible to really keep up with all of psychiatry let alone both neurology and psychiatry. if you are interested in neuropsychiatry you are much better off going for a fellowship in behavioral neurology/neuropsychiatry following general residency. Really, if you want to work in this area you would have to be working in academics as its so specialized so a research and clinical career is what you would be doing. it would be madness to do psych and THEN do a neurology residency (as you would have to a whole prelim year after residency) and you would not be doing neuropsychiatry during that time.

The other thing about combined neuro/psych residencies is obviously there is much less elective time meaning there is much less research time. You need to satisfy requirements for both neuro and psych, trying to fit research on top of that would be stressful even if possible.

The most important reason not to do a combined neuro/psych residency is that something has to give, and that something is psychotherapy. Given that a big sphere on neuropsychiatry is actually conversion symptoms and other dissociative phenomena (non-epileptic attacks, amnesias, fugue states) it is essential you get good grounding in psychotherapies which you will not get in a combined program. Even if you are interested in the more 'medical' aspects of neuropsychiatry e.g. behavioral/emotional symptoms of neurological disorders then experience with cognitive behavioral therapy is very important even if you will not be doing much of this yourself.

The other thing to bear in mind is whilst you should certainly cultivate your interest clinically and academically in neuropsychiatry during residency, the main focus of residency should be to get a good broad based exposure to wide variety of psychopathology in different settings, with familiar with as many different therapeutic modalities as you can especially if you do not plan to do that later. For example I have absolutely no interest in child psychiatry, but the developmental perspective, working systemically with families, and seeing the consequences of adult psychopathology on children is incredibly useful.

Go where you think you would like to live, and for sure where your current interests can be nourished, but also somewhere that will challenge you to think in a different way than you might otherwise and will take you out of your comfort zone. For instance I am more socially-oriented, but am at a program that is fairly biologically-oriented (not in the least because there aren't really any socially oriented psychiatry residencies) - but I am constantly opening my mind up to a different way of seeing/thinking and challenging others too.
I really appreciate your input, and agree with a lot of what you said.
The current neuropsych residents at Brown did say they had essentially zero research time during their residency, which surprised me. Doing research during residency is very important to me. I had forgotten about that conversation until you reminded me. At all of the other programs I am considering there is some form of protected research time (including Brown psychiatry).
I just can't stop thinking about how nice, and seemingly different, it would make me, to be dual-boarded. I like the idea of being facile with a neuro exam, and reading MRIs with confidence. I want to perhaps specialize in TBI, PDD or dementia, and think I could be a great doctor if I were dual boarded. That being said, I am really interested in psychotherapy and want to learn as much about it as I can.
Also:
My spouse keeps telling me "location isn't important, you will be spending 70% of your waking hours in the hospital. Go where you will be happiest" but I do think a pretty reasonable chunk of my happiness arises from location.
I feel like everytime I sit and really ruminate over my choice of programs, I wind up confusing myself even further.
 
I really appreciate your input, and agree with a lot of what you said.
The current neuropsych residents at Brown did say they had essentially zero research time during their residency, which surprised me. Doing research during residency is very important to me. I had forgotten about that conversation until you reminded me. At all of the other programs I am considering there is some form of protected research time (including Brown psychiatry).
I just can't stop thinking about how nice, and seemingly different, it would make me, to be dual-boarded. I like the idea of being facile with a neuro exam, and reading MRIs with confidence. I want to perhaps specialize in TBI, PDD or dementia, and think I could be a great doctor if I were dual boarded. That being said, I am really interested in psychotherapy and want to learn as much about it as I can.
Also:
My spouse keeps telling me "location isn't important, you will be spending 70% of your waking hours in the hospital. Go where you will be happiest" but I do think a pretty reasonable chunk of my happiness arises from location.
I feel like everytime I sit and really ruminate over my choice of programs, I wind up confusing myself even further.

Do you have any other choices? If those are your choices and research is absolutely critical to you, I'd probably rank Longwood #1. Brown has great neuropsych research, but you won't have time for it in a combined residency. Duke is also a research powerhouse.

Did you interview at WashU or Baylor? WashU is a great place for research (they actually require 4 months of research from each resident), and Baylor has a new $25 million neuroscience department.
 
Thank you for starting this thread, I'm one of the people that posted in the interview review thread because I didn't want to start an individual thread.

I'm deciding between Stanford, UCLA, and UCSD. Does anyone have thoughts on the three programs? Stanford seems to not have as good of a reputation as the other two and I'm not sure why that is...it seemed like a wonderful program when I was there.

Thanks for any help!

Edited to add: I really loved the Stanford program and the Palo Alto area and the Stanford residents seemed the happiest out of the three (and there is more flexibility in their curriculum then anywhere else I have interviewed). I feel bad not choosing UCLA because it is such a strong program, but I'm not sure that I want to live in LA and several residents complained about call and about being deceived when they interviewed on the amount of call. As far as UCSD, I loved the San Diego area and the program and residents seemed great. I guess I'm having a difficult time because a part of me wants to be at the program with the best reputation out of the three, which is UCLA as far as I know. And I'm concerned because Stanford doesn't seem to have as good of a reputation.

In terms of choosing the right residency, it really depends on what your interests are and the type of career you envision for yourself.

In terms of academics: UCLA psychiatry residency probably has the best track record of producing academic psychiatry leaders among those three, which is well-deserved based on the breadth of psychiatry and neuroscience and just the sheer number of faculty and residents. Stanford on the other hand is a much smaller private research university, though very much elite as its faculty is consistently in the top 2 in NIH funding per faculty. In other words, it has tremendous depth in specific areas (neuroimaging, optogenetics, ethics), but its breadth is lacking. As such, if you have have research interests that align well with some of the leaders in psychiatry at Stanford, given the amount of research time available in the categorical track you will probably have the highest chance of finding academic success. However, if you have lots of interests and am unsure as to which research direction you want to devote yourself to, UCLA probably has the largest amount of opportunities to explore. UCSD is strong in some research areas as well, but its breadth is smaller compared to UCLA and the strength of their top researchers are probably less than Stanford's in terms of innovation and probability of winning a Nobel prize.

In terms of clinical training: UCLA probably has the most well-rounded. Stanford is smaller, , and UCSD is big and busy with lots of VA and county service needs. Once again it depends on what you envision yourself. If you see yourself as becoming a psychotherapist, think Stanford (given the elective time, two local psychoanalytic institutes with many adjunct psychoanalyst supervisors if you seek them out, and proximity to more established psychoanalysts in SF). If you see yourself in psychopharm, UCSD probably gives you the volume.

In terms of happiness: Stanford gives you way more time and has less clinical service demands than the UCs. Palo Alto is beautiful, close to SF, with a relaxed atmosphere. UCSD is great for surfing. LA is great for partying and awesome food. Depends on what stage in life you're at and what makes you happy, I guess.

I think UCLA and Stanford both have great reputations to the general public,, Stanford more so internationally and UCLA more so within clinical psychiatry circles. UCSD is well-respected in California.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I really appreciate your input, and agree with a lot of what you said.
The current neuropsych residents at Brown did say they had essentially zero research time during their residency, which surprised me. Doing research during residency is very important to me. I had forgotten about that conversation until you reminded me. At all of the other programs I am considering there is some form of protected research time (including Brown psychiatry).
I just can't stop thinking about how nice, and seemingly different, it would make me, to be dual-boarded. I like the idea of being facile with a neuro exam, and reading MRIs with confidence. I want to perhaps specialize in TBI, PDD or dementia, and think I could be a great doctor if I were dual boarded. That being said, I am really interested in psychotherapy and want to learn as much about it as I can.
Also:
My spouse keeps telling me "location isn't important, you will be spending 70% of your waking hours in the hospital. Go where you will be happiest" but I do think a pretty reasonable chunk of my happiness arises from location.
I feel like everytime I sit and really ruminate over my choice of programs, I wind up confusing myself even further.

If you're committed to trying to advance your research career during residency (e.g., get some pubs and pilot data so that you are in good shape to apply for a K by the time you his 2nd or 3rd year of fellowship) then what you are looking for in a residency is a program that offers you a lot of discretionary/elective time so that you can pursue your own interests. At Duke, your PGY2 year is going to be really intense, but your PGY4 year is basically your own. Should give you plenty of time to get something going.

That said, I would listen to your spouse. Go where she (and therefore you) would be happiest. If you think your happiness is going to be largely contingent on the program, then you are probably overestimating the extent to which your happiness is going to be contingent on the program.
 
Once again it depends on what you envision yourself. If you see yourself as becoming a psychotherapist, think Stanford (given the elective time, two local psychoanalytic institutes with many adjunct psychoanalyst supervisors if you seek them out, and proximity to more established psychoanalysts in SF).
I think your summary of differences between these three programs is pretty much spot on and well said, with the exception of the quoted point above. Stanford has traditionally been a weaker program for psychotherapy. The change in leadership has made steps to address this change, but it's going to be a process. I don't think I'd recommend it as a good program for a budding psychotherapist based on the fact that it's about an hour away from psychoanalytic institutes and has elective time. It's not that it can't be done, but it's not playing to one of Stanford's strengths.
 
I think your summary of differences between these three programs is pretty much spot on and well said, with the exception of the quoted point above. Stanford has traditionally been a weaker program for psychotherapy. The change in leadership has made steps to address this change, but it's going to be a process. I don't think I'd recommend it as a good program for a budding psychotherapist based on the fact that it's about an hour away from psychoanalytic institutes and has elective time. It's not that it can't be done, but it's not playing to one of Stanford's strengths.

You may be right.

But I heard that they had 80+ adjunct affiliated psych faculty in the community who are eager for supervision, many whom I assume are psychotherapists given the private practice culture and rich population ethos of the Peninsula. The chief on tour said she had had over 20 psychotherapy patients in her 1.5 years.

I just think that psychotherapy is not built into the curriculum as required, which makes sense given that they have a few all-star psych residents who want to do lots of research and end up full-time research faculty. I think it is a consensus that in California, UCSF is still the place of psychotherapy, but I admit that I am just not sure how Stanford compares to UCLA.
 
Yeah, member, I'll leave it up to folks who interviewed more recently. When I was looking at programs in 2010, Stanford was not strong in psychotherapy but a change in leadership was trying to turn that around. They may very well have better opportunities now. Your understanding that the consensus that the big psychotherapy program on the West coast is UCSF is right. UC Davis is probably another one that's stronger than most on the Left Side. For the rest, the strength of psychotherapy training will probably depend more on the initiative of the individual.
 
I just think that psychotherapy is not built into the curriculum as required, which makes sense given that they have a few all-star psych residents who want to do lots of research and end up full-time research faculty.

That's exactly the case. At Stanford, the graduates tend to go either into (a) high powered academic/research, or (b) private practice. For people who want to do research, you're not hampered by service requirements and you can get quite a lot of research done. For people who want to do private practice, you're not hampered by service requirements and you can find clinical supervisors throughout the entire Bay Area who are willing to take you on as a trainee.
 
I will just throw four names in. I have a difficult time deciding as I would be very happy at either program:

Duke
Pittsburgh
UPenn
Yale

Thank so much for your input!
 
I will just throw four names in. I have a difficult time deciding as I would be very happy at either program:

Duke
Pittsburgh
UPenn
Yale

Thank so much for your input!

What are your interests, career goals, and life priorities at this stage?
 
What are your interests, career goals, and life priorities at this stage?

I see myself becoming an academic psychiatrist and working in a university setting after residency. I am also looking for a program that allows me to follow my own interest and find my place in the field. I am not going into a residency with a specific area of interests in mind, but I would like to be able to make a good decision after residency. My main factor is to have a great time :D There is a life outside of medicine and I feel like I would be really happy at each program.
 
I will just throw four names in. I have a difficult time deciding as I would be very happy at either program:

Duke
Pittsburgh
UPenn
Yale

Thank so much for your input!

Tough call... I think those programs are all in the same league, but I'd probably choose Penn because I like Philly.
 
I see myself becoming an academic psychiatrist and working in a university setting after residency. I am also looking for a program that allows me to follow my own interest and find my place in the field. I am not going into a residency with a specific area of interests in mind, but I would like to be able to make a good decision after residency. My main factor is to have a great time :D There is a life outside of medicine and I feel like I would be really happy at each program.

Upenn is probably the best fit of having fun outside medicine (Philly is great) balanced with a strong psychiatry program with good research.

I would also consider ranking Yale because it has the strongest research opportunities, even in nontraditional areas such as psychosocial arenas, great intellectual capital and mentorship, and a tremendous reputation for churning out academic psychiatry leaders (see Mount Sinai's chairman, department chair, neuroscience chair). For research reputation, some may argue Pitt, though I think it has less breadth, especially outside of clinical psychiatry.
 
If you threw Stanford into that mix, how would it compare? I'm oscillating between Penn and Stanford. I want a good balance of biological research and psychotherapy (specifically psychodynamics). I value a program with a lot of flexibility/elective time. I'm also interested in forensic psychiatry.
 
Hello team,

I'm a newbie when it comes to posting, but I have enjoyed reading up on these psych forums for some time now. Obviously, I am posting because I am deliberating on how to rank a couple of programs at the top of my list of considerations for rank. They are (west to east):

UW-Madison
Michigan
Brown

My ultimate priorities are diversity of thought and perspective in a program (both with my future colleagues and faculty), well-roundedness in training as I seek maximum opportunities/resources to develop a personalized career path in residency (I am undecided, but pretty open and facultative when it comes to opportunities in general), fun atmosphere with fellow residents and outside of work (I'm a single 25 yo male) and a proximity to close friends and family. I have been doing research since my college years but I don't think I want a tenured/academic clinician path (don't want to be primarily concerned with grants and the whole 'publish or perish' lifestyle) but perhaps a more physician educator type role in academia early on in my career with some research on the side. I've realized lately that the primary reason for my involvement with research has been in large part due to meeting academic and personal mentors versus the research itself.

My considerations with each program are as follows:

UW: I interviewed for both general and research tracks (PD suggested I check out research track) early in the interview season. Really chill and laid-back residents and faculty, new to Madison: great city/culture/food, opportunity to bridge research with a close colleague of my current mentor, one of my cousins/best friends lives in Chicago. Got some extended family in MN as well.

Brown: Interviewed later in the season. Seems like a lot of research opportunities, plenty of great faculty, program appears highly academic. Lots of hospitals/sites to rotate through and strong focus on therapy training. My older sister lives in Providence and my younger sister lives in NY, which are both a major plus for me. Residents felt more "bookish," formal, and less nuanced/outgoing/conversational (not sure how to describe it, also appeared to be a lot more females both with the residents I met and also in my interview group (just 1 other guy), everyone seemed highly intelligent and accomplished, but I just didn't quite get the vibe that I was hoping for, not sure if I just had a skewed experience or what.

Michigan: Interviewed here at tail end of my trail. Been to Ann Arbor several times bc my best friend from college (practically a brother of mine) is a grad student at UM. Cool college town, nice undergrad and medical campus. Impressed with facilities. Residents I met seemed cool, I'd say quality of experience somewhere between UW and Brown. Chair seems like a really great guy. PD is also cool, told me I seemed like a good fit for their clinical scholars program, which appears to be really interesting to me (more so than the research tracks).

Other pertinent information: I go to school in the south, and have been raised and educated in various regions within that part of the country my whole life. My parents are in KY.

Obviously, I like a lot about all of these programs, I am just not sure what the best overall fit for me is (or perhaps I have gotten so muddled up in the interview process that I've lost clarity on that perspective and what factors should be weighted more than others) in terms of getting the best overall clinical training while maximizing my opportunities to find high quality mentors/advisors and carve out my own personal career.

Any input or personal perspectives would be great. Thanks.
 
Madison/Michigan/Brown are all great programs, but my biggest concern with those three choices would be patient diversity. One thing I've gleaned from the attendings on this forum is that ethnic and socioeconomic diversity among patients is practically a prerequisite to a "top-tier" psych program.

I also found myself losing perspective after several interviews, but experienced people keep telling me that diversity is critical.

Now, I don't now much about those three places, but my impression is that Ann Arbor is mostly a college town, Madison is a college + government town, and Providence is a small metropolis. In other words, Brown is the winner.

On the other hand, Ann Arbor is close to Detroit... but I don't know if it's close enough to get some of their serious psychopathology.

Also, if you're coming from the South, it'd be hard to get used to the Wisconsin winters.
 
Madison/Michigan/Brown are all great programs, but my biggest concern with those three choices would be patient diversity. One thing I've gleaned from the attendings on this forum is that ethnic and socioeconomic diversity among patients is practically a prerequisite to a "top-tier" psych program.

I also found myself losing perspective after several interviews, but experienced people keep telling me that diversity is critical.

Now, I don't now much about those three places, but my impression is that Ann Arbor is mostly a college town, Madison is a college + government town, and Providence is a small metropolis. In other words, Brown is the winner.

On the other hand, Ann Arbor is close to Detroit... but I don't know if it's close enough to get some of their serious psychopathology.

Also, if you're coming from the South, it'd be hard to get used to the Wisconsin winters.

It's one of the two things that kept me from Michigan and to a lesser extent Wisconsin. Ann Arbor is primarily a college town, and you do get a disproportionate number of the "worried well". Detroit is technically close, but it's still almost an hour drive away and is pretty much a non-factor in terms of patient draw. Ypsilanti right next to Ann Arbor has "rougher" parts, but from what I heard from people is that you get a lot of the affective/adjustment/anxiety crowd and not a lot of the severe mental illness. The facilities were nice, and the residents were fairly down to earth, but if you're looking for pathology this isn't the place. But I think UMich can be a good launchpad for an academic career, if that's your goal (see OPD) Madison is a bigger version of Ann Arbor plus the seat of government, etc., and seems to be more "socioeconomically" diverse. (Didn't interview there, but visited there a few times during college) I know nothing about Brown, but people seem to love it on here. All of these are very good programs, where you would want to live might be the deciding factor.
 
Last edited:
It's one of the two things that kept me from Michigan and to a lesser extent Wisconsin. Ann Arbor is primarily a college town, and you do get a disproportionate number of the "worried well". Detroit is technically close, but it's still almost an hour drive away and is pretty much a non-factor in terms of patient draw. Ypsilanti right next to Ann Arbor has "rougher" parts, but from what I heard from people is that you get a lot of the affective/adjustment/anxiety crowd and not a lot of the severe mental illness. The facilities were nice, and the residents were fairly down to earth, but if you're looking for pathology this isn't the place. Madison is a bigger version of Ann Arbor plus the seat of government, etc., and seems to be more "socioeconomically" diverse. (Didn't interview there, but visited there a few times during college) I know nothing about Brown, but people seem to love it on here.

Valid points on concerns Madison and Ann Arbor, but I have already taken them into consideration. At first, it is easy to assume just from the general inclination or assumptions that these places would be a little more scarce in ethnic or socioeconomic diversity. In fact, I actually went through on the demographics to see how they compared with each location to the national average; they are not that different.

http://www.areavibes.com/madison-wi/demographics/
http://www.areavibes.com/ann+arbor-mi/demographics/

Likewise, the general makeup of the city or whether or not it is a college town doesn't necessarily dictate the draw of patients that a hospital may have from the population. I would expect that it has more to do with insurance coverage and services provided by the institution.

I actually thought, ethnically, Ann Arbor is incredibly diverse. There is a large Asian population (as is the case in most academic locations), but also a good mix of other backgrounds. I heard people speaking several different languages just walking around on campus with my friend.

Here's what UM psych says on its FAQ: A recent review of our patient population showed a remarkable diversity of ethnicity, socioeconomic and education level, age, and diagnosis. In fact, the demographics of our patients correspond closely to the population of southeast Michigan in particular, and the nation in general. The many levels of clinical service we provide, including to community mental health, managed care, private and group insurance plans, and others, brings a broad spectrum of patients into our care. We are a public hospital and the designated provider of emergency and inpatient care for community mental health. About 50% of our patients are sponsored by public programs such as MediCare, Medicaid, or the Washtenaw Health Plan, a local program providing healthcare coverage to indigent and underinsured patients.

Of course, ethnically and socioeconomically, Providence looks to have the most "diversity" but according to national comparisons it's even more "diverse" than the national average. Plus, Providence is actually smaller than Madison in terms of population.
http://www.areavibes.com/providence-ri/demographics/

So basically what I'm saying is that I find the populations in each of these areas diverse enough to meet my training needs. Any other thoughts on the programs?
 
Where you would want to live might be the deciding factor. I don't think there are too many things that set these programs apart. Michigan and Wisconsin are a lot closer to Kentucky than Providence, if staying reasonably close to your family plays in to your decision. You can't make a wrong decision with any of these.
 
Last edited:
I actually thought, ethnically, Ann Arbor is incredibly diverse. There is a large Asian population (as is the case in most academic locations), but also a good mix of other backgrounds. I heard people speaking several different languages just walking around on campus with my friend.
Ethnic diversity, sure. But when we say "diversity", that generally means socioeconomic and urban/rural diversity. I'm not sure about this, but I'd be surprised if Ann Arbor had a lot of inner-city crime and drug-related problems.

Of course, ethnically and socioeconomically, Providence looks to have the most "diversity" but according to national comparisons it's even more "diverse" than the national average. Plus, Providence is actually smaller than Madison in terms of population.
http://www.areavibes.com/providence-ri/demographics/
Providence isn't smaller than Madison. There may be fewer people in the city proper, but the metro area is way bigger.

So basically what I'm saying is that I find the populations in each of these areas diverse enough to meet my training needs. Any other thoughts on the programs?
Again, "ethnic diversity" is different from what we mean when we say "patient diversity." We're talking about diversity of psychopathology. That means inner-city crime, crack users from the inner city, meth users from the country, well-off girls with eating disorders, people who can afford to pay for long-term psychotherapy or TMS, geriatric populations for ECT and other geriatric stuff, a strong general hospital for C/L, a big population of homeless people who will malinger in the ER, several ethnic minorities who may have communication gaps, etc etc etc.

I've interviewed at a lot of different kinds of programs, but the ones that seemed to have the best patient diversity were Indiana (big hospital system in a major city surrounded by rural areas), WashU (big hospital system in a major city surrounded by rural areas), and Baylor (super-huge hospital system in a major city surrounded by Texas).
 
Ethnic diversity, sure. But when we say "diversity", that generally means socioeconomic and urban/rural diversity. I'm not sure about this, but I'd be surprised if Ann Arbor had a lot of inner-city crime and drug-related problems.


Providence isn't smaller than Madison. There may be fewer people in the city proper, but the metro area is way bigger.


Again, "ethnic diversity" is different from what we mean when we say "patient diversity." We're talking about diversity of psychopathology. That means inner-city crime, crack users from the inner city, meth users from the country, well-off girls with eating disorders, people who can afford to pay for long-term psychotherapy or TMS, geriatric populations for ECT and other geriatric stuff, a strong general hospital for C/L, a big population of homeless people who will malinger in the ER, several ethnic minorities who may have communication gaps, etc etc etc.

I've interviewed at a lot of different kinds of programs, but the ones that seemed to have the best patient diversity were Indiana (big hospital system in a major city surrounded by rural areas), WashU (big hospital system in a major city surrounded by rural areas), and Baylor (super-huge hospital system in a major city surrounded by Texas).

So I'm assuming you've talked yourself out of Mayo?
 
So I'm assuming you've talked yourself out of Mayo?

No, I'm pretty sure my decision will be based entirely on what the weather is like on February 20. I always knew that WashU wins the patient diversity debate, but I'm considering several other factors that put me back in limbo.
 
My number is locked thanks to a you're my #1 email, but the 4 following have each been in the number 2 spot. They pretty much cycle daily. I am losing my mind.
 
If you threw Stanford into that mix, how would it compare? I'm oscillating between Penn and Stanford. I want a good balance of biological research and psychotherapy (specifically psychodynamics). I value a program with a lot of flexibility/elective time. I'm also interested in forensic psychiatry.

Penn and Stanford both have biological research, with different strength areas although Penn likely has more breadth while Stanford has a handful of superstars in their respective field. Psychotherapy is better at Penn. Stanford has no forensics, but much more flexibility.
 
Top