- Joined
- Sep 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,560
- Reaction score
- 212
I see. That was my logic too but in the osteopathic boards there's nothing but negativity about how difficult it is to match into a good specialty as a DO- which is why I investigated UQO
UQ-Ochsner MBBS 2013
- Thread starter 2BR02B
- Start date
I see. That was my logic too but in the osteopathic boards there's nothing but negativity about how difficult it is to match into a good specialty as a DO- which is why I investigated UQO
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
Someone matched into general surgery and there is another post here who talks about having matched into a top program in a low competitive specialty (psychiatry). That being said if you are hoping to get into something competitive don't go DO or UQ-O with high hopes
There is not going to be much difference in what you can match. In fact, since UQ is such a big research school you probably have a better shot at residencies that like publications/research because you'll have that opportunity to research at UQ but not at DO
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
From my research (I've gone through a number of residency websites for IM) there are still a lot of residencies that have DOs that don't have IMGs. Whereas the residencies that have IMGs and not DOs are limited, usually actually only the very best programs where the IMGs who get in are heavily published physicians and probably killed their boards.
I think on the osteopathic forums you'll see them complain they can't get into competitive specialties, i think on the img forums you'll see them trying just to get into a specialty. DOs are definitely feeling entitled to something more and so you'll see complaining, but I think they are quite about what they already have which is a pretty good shot at a residency.
I think though if you want to go international try UQ-O. I personally think its quite a good program. Although i do have a bit of a suspicion that the program really wanted to have a 100% match rate for their 1st class, so they arranged with Oschner to take some of the candidates who were likely weaker applicants. I think as the program expands you won't see such high match rates anymore, but I'm pretty confident they'll still be good as long as they keep class sizes to a manageable number.
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,651
- Reaction score
- 177
Ochsner (note the spelling!
) has a vested interest to always take a disproportionate number of their own as necessary, and will continue taking a large number for at least the next few years before relaxing their numbers as allowed (which they are confident will be able to happen as the program matures). This from a personal communication with a key representative of Ochsner a couple of years ago. I'd think though that some % less than 100 would be acceptable to them.I've been having some login issues that I finally managed to figure out and wanted to address a few points:
"From my research (I've gone through a number of residency websites for IM) there are still a lot of residencies that have DOs that don't have IMGs. Whereas the residencies that have IMGs and not DOs are limited, usually actually only the very best programs where the IMGs who get in are heavily published physicians and probably killed their boards."
Yes, there are programs that simply will not accept IMG's. Period. UC Davis comes to mind. However, there are also programs that won't accept DO's. And programs that won't accept from certain specific US programs. I do not know how many in each category there are and I do not think that there is any robust way to find out since, for the most part, the selection practices like these are not official nor made public. The best way to figure it out is to look at how many IMGs, DO's, etc are accepted and infer from that. But that is obviously fraught with bias.
My gut would be that there are probably more programs that categorically do not interview IMGs than DO's, but how many more and how that would affect your opportunities I do not think can be accurately quantified. Furthermore, it is quite conceivable and indeed likely that depending on exactly what you want to do and where, it may become much more preferable to be an IMG rather than a DO and vice versa. So a knowledge of the average can easily not apply on an individual level.
Personally, I would consider that to be low on my list of priorities in deciding on a program except for a distinct and very small minority of people.
"Although i do have a bit of a suspicion that the program really wanted to have a 100% match rate for their 1st class, so they arranged with Oschner to take some of the candidates who were likely weaker applicants. I think as the program expands you won't see such high match rates anymore, but I'm pretty confident they'll still be good as long as they keep class sizes to a manageable number."
As Pitman pointed out, Ochsner has a vested interest in building its work force and recruiting. This is not a secret and indeed one of the public statement regarding the forging of this partnership. They are also not stupid to realize that spending 2 years in clinical rotations at their facility gives them a much better idea of whether you are a candidate they would want or not - enough that it can help you overcome parts of your application that may be lacking. In other words, if you are gunning for ophthal but don't destroy your boards, you may not have a great shot at most other programs because they use the (generally accepted as poor but still used because of a lack of better metrics) board scores to weed people out. At Ochsner they will know much more about YOU and thus you could potentially mitigate a poorer showing on standard metrics.
And furthermore, their goal is indeed to recruit and retain a work force here in NoLa. Which means that indeed it would be in their interest to retain a higher proportion of candidates. None of this is to mean that they will retain people MERELY to make the program match numbers look better, nor that they would retain people that are definitely underqualified. The benefit of a "two year audition" is a double edged sword - you could have very good board scores but be someone that they would not want in the program and be excluded.
However, on the balance it is quite reasonable to say that there is indeed a vested interest in Ochsner retaining us and thus you would likely have a much higher chance of matching there and thus their numbers will be stacked to reflect that. It does not mean, however, that they are lowering standards to make the program match numbers look better.
"From my research (I've gone through a number of residency websites for IM) there are still a lot of residencies that have DOs that don't have IMGs. Whereas the residencies that have IMGs and not DOs are limited, usually actually only the very best programs where the IMGs who get in are heavily published physicians and probably killed their boards."
Yes, there are programs that simply will not accept IMG's. Period. UC Davis comes to mind. However, there are also programs that won't accept DO's. And programs that won't accept from certain specific US programs. I do not know how many in each category there are and I do not think that there is any robust way to find out since, for the most part, the selection practices like these are not official nor made public. The best way to figure it out is to look at how many IMGs, DO's, etc are accepted and infer from that. But that is obviously fraught with bias.
My gut would be that there are probably more programs that categorically do not interview IMGs than DO's, but how many more and how that would affect your opportunities I do not think can be accurately quantified. Furthermore, it is quite conceivable and indeed likely that depending on exactly what you want to do and where, it may become much more preferable to be an IMG rather than a DO and vice versa. So a knowledge of the average can easily not apply on an individual level.
Personally, I would consider that to be low on my list of priorities in deciding on a program except for a distinct and very small minority of people.
"Although i do have a bit of a suspicion that the program really wanted to have a 100% match rate for their 1st class, so they arranged with Oschner to take some of the candidates who were likely weaker applicants. I think as the program expands you won't see such high match rates anymore, but I'm pretty confident they'll still be good as long as they keep class sizes to a manageable number."
As Pitman pointed out, Ochsner has a vested interest in building its work force and recruiting. This is not a secret and indeed one of the public statement regarding the forging of this partnership. They are also not stupid to realize that spending 2 years in clinical rotations at their facility gives them a much better idea of whether you are a candidate they would want or not - enough that it can help you overcome parts of your application that may be lacking. In other words, if you are gunning for ophthal but don't destroy your boards, you may not have a great shot at most other programs because they use the (generally accepted as poor but still used because of a lack of better metrics) board scores to weed people out. At Ochsner they will know much more about YOU and thus you could potentially mitigate a poorer showing on standard metrics.
And furthermore, their goal is indeed to recruit and retain a work force here in NoLa. Which means that indeed it would be in their interest to retain a higher proportion of candidates. None of this is to mean that they will retain people MERELY to make the program match numbers look better, nor that they would retain people that are definitely underqualified. The benefit of a "two year audition" is a double edged sword - you could have very good board scores but be someone that they would not want in the program and be excluded.
However, on the balance it is quite reasonable to say that there is indeed a vested interest in Ochsner retaining us and thus you would likely have a much higher chance of matching there and thus their numbers will be stacked to reflect that. It does not mean, however, that they are lowering standards to make the program match numbers look better.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 994
- Reaction score
- 761
How much weight do you think will be put on the reputation of UQ and Ochsner when graduates apply to residency programs? Wouldn't programs rather have UQ-O graduates from a top ranked university/clinical school instead of students from SGU or Ross, for example?
I don't know that anyone can really answer that question to much satisfaction. It would all have to be speculative and relative, with absolute effect sizes unknown.
But yes, it is the opinion of most people involved and most people who get to know of the program that this would certainly be viewed much more favorably than most other offshore programs like the Carib schools. We like to say that we should be viewed more like Oxford than Ross.
As for whether that will register with PDs or not... who knows? If they sat and thought about it then sure, it would seem silly for them not to realize the distinct difference in quality of instututions and education. And in every encounter I have personally had, everything I have heard from Dr. Pinsky (who meets with AAMC officials and is on the ACGME board), and even the recent MBC video I linked to upthread all corroborate that when people understand what the program is they think it is great.
But that is the key part - when they understand. In a lot of cases people are aware of UQ and in many not aware of Ochsner (at least, certainly not as a place to come from as a med student - I often get asked "Oh, so you're from Tulane or LSU?" and that's around these parts). So at first blush many PD's would probably view us superficially similar to Carib programs and then let pattern recognition fill in the rest, without taking the time to delve a little more deeply. Which makes sense - they are very busy and don't need to be investigating every offshore school deeply.
Which is why name recognition and how the first few classes fare is important. And I know that Dr. Pinsky talks us up at every ACGME and AAMC meeting he goes to and we have lots of public media attention, articles, the Governor of LA speaks about and supports us, etc. OMSA is working on public outreach and community service projects and every student who interviews at programs gets a chance to let that PD and that program know we are different and why.
So ultimately I think that it will indeed be quite different. Just for now it may be a little hit or miss because we don't yet have that name recognition. But it is a beauty contest I am confident we will win and by the time new entrants for the incoming class of next year care about such things, I reckon it will be quite different indeed. After all, by then there will have been at least 260 students that have gone through the match (and if you figure each one will probably average at LEAST 5-8 interviews, that is a lot of direct program exposure). Plus a few more years for the program to publicize itself.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
UQ-O is well regarded but lets not get ahead of ourselves and say its closer to Oxford than Ross. Oxford accepts the vast majority of its students from the UK, its not an offshore program and last year it accepted a grand total of 1 international student from 202 interviews and an even higher number of applications.
I don't think it is at all unreasonable to say that UQ is closer to Oxford than Ross. I didn't say it is CLOSE to Oxford - do note the relative nature of the statement. And accepting international students is not even remotely a metric of how "good" a program is - or do you have some reason and evidence to support that statement? Because Harvard accepts over 4,000 international students a year.
The real difference is that Ross is a proprietary (for profit) entity that only offers two degrees - human doctor and animal doctor. No research, no labs, no other degrees of any kind. UQ is a full University, a leader in research at a local and international level, offers many degrees (my own fiance attended UQ because it was the world's leader in her particular field - scramjet technology - and earned a research thesis masters degree), and is ranked extremely highly internationally in all these regards. Oh yeah, and still accepts most of its students from Australia, though obviously it has a large international presence.
So, explain to me again how I was "getting ahead of myself" by trying to assert that UQ is closer to Oxford than Ross?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
Dude i support the program, its just you could've used USyd, Melbourne as an example, there are better examples for comparison if you know what i mean.
I didn't mention Oxford's other qualities which make it different including the fact that it is 900 years old, one of the 6 world superbrands, ranked 2nd in the UK for medicine. These qualities make it more different from UQ than a school like University of Sydney which is of similar age, similar ranking and same country.
I mentioned international not because it means its a good program, but because it means its very very difficult to get into. I agree that Ross doesn't have research labs or anything or the sort.
I didn't mention Oxford's other qualities which make it different including the fact that it is 900 years old, one of the 6 world superbrands, ranked 2nd in the UK for medicine. These qualities make it more different from UQ than a school like University of Sydney which is of similar age, similar ranking and same country.
I mentioned international not because it means its a good program, but because it means its very very difficult to get into. I agree that Ross doesn't have research labs or anything or the sort.
Last edited:
It just seems like you are picking some nits for no particular purpose - I didn't pick USyd as a random example because of exactly the reasons you mention; it is basically exactly the same unknown to the casual American reader. Does [random US SDN user] get a visceral understanding of my point by hearing me say "UQ is more like [other Australian university] than Ross"? I don't think so, though I suppose I could be wrong.
I guess what I am getting at is that if people are looking at UQ saying "it's like USyd" doesn't really help the point much. They probably know about the same about both and may as well just research UQ then. But as a comparator I think it is indeed to say that UQ is closer to Oxford than Ross. A proprietary school that churns out only two degrees is so vastly different than a legitimate university it seems eminently reasonable for me to make the comparison. Plus, people "get" that Oxford is a good and well regarded school. UQ is also a good and well regarded school, with many of the same attributes as Oxford. And the two share many, many more similarities than Ross does with either of them.
Could I have picked Harvard or Cambridge or Trinity College or something? Sure. But Harvard doesn't work because in my comparator I need an international school. And I went with the first one that popped into my head for recognition's sake.
And you totally lost me with the whole "doesn't accept internationals" part. That seems entirely irrelevant to what I was going for, but maybe I wasn't clear enough. Hopefully this clears up what I meant when I said what I did.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
Its alright it clears it up for sure.
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,882
- Reaction score
- 1,675
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 994
- Reaction score
- 761
Can you explain? I'm not saying you're incorrect or anything (I am pro-UQ). Just curious to hear your opinion on UQ vs. American-DO since you are a current UQ student.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
I am no fan of DO. Personally would choose UQ-O over US DO if given only those 2 options. However, isn't it true that the DOs have more access to the competitive specialties which are essentially off limits for IMGs? I've also noticed quite a few DOs in most IM programs bar the top university programs where very few IMGs are accepted. The only programs that will take a IMG and not a DO from what i've seen (i've looked at all the programs from California, Washington, and a number of NE states) are the elite university programs who will take FMGs that have superior research resumes and NYU IM. Also for most its probably easier logistically to study in the continental US and i know DO is in upheaval over the failure of the merger but generally they seem to be ones that are "pushing out the IMGs" with their ever expanding schools sometimes based in some of the most sketchy universities imaginable.
Honestly, I don't know that there is a clear cut answer to your question. If you have any data or links to back up some numbers I would be interested in seeing them. My understanding and feeling is that the "competitive" specialties and programs are going to (in general) disfavor both DO and IMG. The basis of the animus is different - xenophobia/American exceptionalism and a history of quackery - but the outcome is essentially the same. Probably the osteopaths are making a little more headway a little faster since they have ditched 99+% of the quackery and are home grown folk, but there is also definitely a shift away from the xenophobic animus and a tempering of the exceptionalism of the past. Programs are starting to realize that they want quality candidates and that this doesn't just mean US top tier programs.
Beyond that, I don't know that there is any data to describe averages let alone specifics. As I said in a post upthread, there are undoubtedly some programs and specialties where being an IMG will be distinctly more favorable than DO and vice versa.
But if you have data beyond speculation I really would love to see it.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
Why interview 202 internationals for one spot? It seems excessive, unnecessary and inefficient. Unless I'm misinterpreting something...
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
I think they interview them for more spots but they only accepted one because they deemed the others "unqualified" (although looking at Edinburgh which released its applicant lists, the IB students were extraordinarily qualified). Ok for this year there were 255 applicants, they shortlisted 32 (i don't know if shortlisted means interview or not) and they made 1 offer. I do know one international who is at Oxford for medicine, they are in the top 5 of their class so clearly these internationals are quite amazing.
Oxford also said they only accepted 1 graduate entry student that same year for their 6 year course, however keep in mind they also have a graduate stream which has 30 spots. By law internationals are limited to 7% of home/EU intake, Oxford just chooses not to fulfill its intake.
http://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/study/medicine/pre-clinical/statistics
Cambridge is more open, they accepted 14 internationals (not 7 as i previously thought).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,882
- Reaction score
- 1,675
In terms of competitiveness for US residencies:
US-MD > US-DO = UK/Aus/Singaporean/Japanese IMG > Caribbean/other IMG.
And let's say:
US-MD = A
US-DO / UK/Aus/Singaporean/Japanese IMG = B
Caribbean/other IMG = C
Based on having read through match statistics/experiences, etc., my guess is that in order for an applicant to match the competitiveness of another applicant in a higher bracket for the same residency spot (e.g. B-applicant looking to out-compete A-applicant, or C-applicant looking to out-compete B-applicant), with all other factors held constant (e.g. research, LORs), the applicant in the lower bracket needs a Step1 score of at least 1 SD > than that of the higher applicant for non-competitive residencies (e.g. B-applicant needs a 222 to be seen as equally competitive as A-applicant with 200 for general medicine position).
For mid-competitive specialties (e.g. general surgery, pathology, IM), at least 0.5 SD (~11 points) advantage is needed.
For competitive specialties (e.g. derm, radiology, plastics), any IMG scoring >260 has an equal shot at the residency spot relative to a US-MD if the program has a history of accepting IMGs and the IMG produces satisfactory research and US LORs.
The 2011 match data demonstrates that although IMGs are less frequently accepted into competitive specialties, their Step1 scores are also lower. However, of the IMGs having scored >260, the match rates are comparable to those of AMGs.
------
The bottom line is that an IMG or DO applicant shouldn't be overly concerned with his or her competitiveness for a residency position insofar as he or she produces a very favorable Step1 result. The distinction between DO and IMG is therefore insignificant.
US-MD > US-DO = UK/Aus/Singaporean/Japanese IMG > Caribbean/other IMG.
And let's say:
US-MD = A
US-DO / UK/Aus/Singaporean/Japanese IMG = B
Caribbean/other IMG = C
Based on having read through match statistics/experiences, etc., my guess is that in order for an applicant to match the competitiveness of another applicant in a higher bracket for the same residency spot (e.g. B-applicant looking to out-compete A-applicant, or C-applicant looking to out-compete B-applicant), with all other factors held constant (e.g. research, LORs), the applicant in the lower bracket needs a Step1 score of at least 1 SD > than that of the higher applicant for non-competitive residencies (e.g. B-applicant needs a 222 to be seen as equally competitive as A-applicant with 200 for general medicine position).
For mid-competitive specialties (e.g. general surgery, pathology, IM), at least 0.5 SD (~11 points) advantage is needed.
For competitive specialties (e.g. derm, radiology, plastics), any IMG scoring >260 has an equal shot at the residency spot relative to a US-MD if the program has a history of accepting IMGs and the IMG produces satisfactory research and US LORs.
The 2011 match data demonstrates that although IMGs are less frequently accepted into competitive specialties, their Step1 scores are also lower. However, of the IMGs having scored >260, the match rates are comparable to those of AMGs.
------
The bottom line is that an IMG or DO applicant shouldn't be overly concerned with his or her competitiveness for a residency position insofar as he or she produces a very favorable Step1 result. The distinction between DO and IMG is therefore insignificant.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 994
- Reaction score
- 761
Thanks for the insight. Sounds good to me.
This is actually reasonably concordant with what my understanding is. I think that Phloston tends to overemphasize the Step 1 a little bit, but its a quibble not a major disagreement.
That said, my frame of thinking about things in regards to the step is slightly different.
The Step will NOT make your application*. But it certainly will break it. The Step is a barrier to entry; a threshold you must cross. Once you cross that threshold the rest of your application becomes vastly more important. If you look at the PD survey data for the most competitive specialties, you'll note that just like the rest Step 1 is ranked highly in importance for consideration of an applicant. What you'll also notice is that it is ranked slightly lower than in less competitive specialities. That is because those programs tend to set a cutoff (usually 230) and if you don't meet that magic number you don't even get looked at. From there, they become more interested in the rest of your application a little ahead of the step score.
Additionally, once you get that interview Step score and whether you are IMG, DO or Ferengi goes out the window. It would be rather uncommon to have a Step score make you for the match. I've asked as many PDs and DIOs as I can and every one of them says that if they try really hard they can think of a couple of cases over the years where the Step score actually acted as a tie breaker for them.
The reality is once you have the interview they think you are smart and qualified, regardless of whatever the hell else is on your pedigree or CV. Now it becomes a question of whether they like you and are a good match for their program. The DIO at Ochsner (who is also PD for ENT) said it well, "I want to know if I will be OK with this guy calling me at 3am for the next 5 years or whether I'll want to strangle him."
So yes, the Step 1 score is very important for the interview. And no doubt a high score gives you a much, much better chance at one. >260 can almost guarantee you an interview at most places (though I can assure you that a 260 with ****ty LoR and no research at an academic program will still have trouble getting an interview). But once you go to that interview, if I have a 240 and Phloston has a 260 and we both have almost identical CV's the actual interview will matter way more than the 20 point difference between us. If Phloston come off as a jerk and I am a genuine heartfelt guy, those 20 points ain't saving ya buddy ;-P
And they make it a huge point that the secretaries are actually involved in the selection process. If the secretary says you were a jerk to her, regardless of how the rest of the interview went, you're toast. Seriously.
So remember the Step 1 is very important. Especially for competitive programs (whether that be specialty, location, or both). And Phloston's numbers are probably a pretty darned good yard stick. But that is for an interview not a match. Obviously you need the former to get the latter, but I still think it is a highly useful nuance to be aware of.
And since I'm rambling a bit and waiting for my next cuppa to brew... I'll point out that there are always exceptions and variations. I know a guy in Ochsner ophthal who scored close to a full SD lower than the mean for accepted opthal residents (he is an AMG). He killed the Step 2, however, and had a good application. So while important, Step 1 is certainly not the end-all-be-all of matching.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,560
- Reaction score
- 212
Just wondering, whats so special about Singapore and Japan? I'm also surprised you didn't list Israel, Germany, France
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,882
- Reaction score
- 1,675
My post is in no way supposed to be a definitive statement about applicant matching. It's just my personal perspective based on having spent the past 1.5 years analyzing Step1.
It's tough to say how US residencies view any particular country, since the decision-making process is usually very subjective (I've emailed with a few PDs here on SDN who have admitted that).
It's tough to say how US residencies view any particular country, since the decision-making process is usually very subjective (I've emailed with a few PDs here on SDN who have admitted that).
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
I think most European schools (France, Spain, Ireland, Poland, etc...) = UK
However Eastern European is a separate category in a lower tier.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
Isn't poland part of eastern europe?
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
Oops I thought it borders Germany?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
It does, but i looked it up and depending on who you ask its either Eastern Europe or part of Central Europe.
UN says its Eastern Europe, but the CIA World Factbook says its part of Western Europe.
Agreed. And my comment is in the same vein.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
Doubt it, it sounds like that 24 minimum is a pretty strict cutoff. They recently changed it that you can have one 7 but your total still has to be over 24. And they will take that on a case by case basis.
3.7 undergrad, 4.0 masters, 34R MCAT
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 994
- Reaction score
- 761
Why on earth would you choose to go to any international school with those amazing stats?
5
514901
Maybe the dude just wants to be in a better place?
America is a dying country and will only get worse, especially for medical professionals.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
Or maybe hes just trolling. If he wanted to move to australia he wouldn't have applied to UQ-O but would have applied to australia only based programs.
If he isn't trolling he just made a huge mistake, when friends who did worse than him went to US schools and match much better compared to him.
5
514901
Who knows man. Not everyone thinks conventionally. I'm sure there's a plethora of highly prestigious medical students in America who have matched into incredibly prestigious specialties but at the end of the day what matters is that you're enjoying your life.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
It doesn't matter. America is not a strong country anymore, we are not special and our medical education is not superior to Australia's top universities.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
Its not really about whose medical education is better its a licensing issue. Even the crappiest MD school is looked at better than UofM's medical school for US residency matching.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
What is UofM school of medicine?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 535
sorry i meant melbourne
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,882
- Reaction score
- 1,675
Do you guys really think good grades and a 34R are a reason not to go to UQ?
Every year, the MCAT ranges for UQ are 24 to 40s, and M-T, with means of ~30.
My cohort (med class of 2013, even though with my PhD I'm now in the class of 2015) had a mean of 30, with a range of 24-41 and M-T.
The year above me had a 43T. It was actually achieved by an Australian guy I know who took the exam because he didn't know if he wanted to stay in Australia for med school. Undoubtedly one of the smartest people I've ever met, and he chose UQ when he could have gone anywhere.
It's to my observation that the MCAT is a huge predictor of success in medical school.
Every year, the MCAT ranges for UQ are 24 to 40s, and M-T, with means of ~30.
My cohort (med class of 2013, even though with my PhD I'm now in the class of 2015) had a mean of 30, with a range of 24-41 and M-T.
The year above me had a 43T. It was actually achieved by an Australian guy I know who took the exam because he didn't know if he wanted to stay in Australia for med school. Undoubtedly one of the smartest people I've ever met, and he chose UQ when he could have gone anywhere.
It's to my observation that the MCAT is a huge predictor of success in medical school.
5
514901
Just to clarify though, the written section is scored by a computer
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,057
- Reaction score
- 208
And there is no more written section on the MCAT anymore.
5
514901
Damn. I read somewhere the BS section is basically all biology now because they wanted to justify taking more females in med school
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,560
- Reaction score
- 212
I think UQ-O is a specific exception to the international rule. I have a 35 and i'm still going to be applying here because the opportunity to study in Australia sounds amazing. Additionally, its not like UQ-O is anything remotely like the Caribbean in terms of academics. I met two of the resident's who matched in the first year UQ-O class at the NYC meeting this summer. They were both brilliant
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2012
- Messages
- 994
- Reaction score
- 761
I think UQ-O is a specific exception to the international rule. I have a 35 and i'm still going to be applying here because the opportunity to study in Australia sounds amazing. Additionally, its not like UQ-O is anything remotely like the Caribbean in terms of academics. I met two of the resident's who matched in the first year UQ-O class at the NYC meeting this summer. They were both brilliant
I respect that. The program looks fantastic and I'll be applying here too in about a year or so. The only thing that 'scares' me is being able to practice in all 50 states. However, from what I've gathered here is that situation is in the process of being taken care of. And congrats on the great MCAT score!
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 16
I think UQ-O is a specific exception to the international rule. I have a 35 and i'm still going to be applying here because the opportunity to study in Australia sounds amazing. Additionally, its not like UQ-O is anything remotely like the Caribbean in terms of academics. I met two of the resident's who matched in the first year UQ-O class at the NYC meeting this summer. They were both brilliant
Hey, I just finished my first year at UQ Ochsner, and I'd like to offer my 2 cents to this discussion as someone who has a fair share of criticism about UQ, but can confidently say that it'll turn you into a doctor if that's your goal. It feels like yesterday when I was in your position, scouring SDN to try and figure out whether or not UQ is legit, and to convince myself that everything is going to be great if I come to UQ. Let's be honest: in order to make the investment and take the risk to come halfway around the world to go to med school, you need a bit of "confirmation bias" that it's going to be OK, by which I mean, you need to weigh the evidence that it's good (good international rankings, affiliation with Ochsner, etc) more than the evidence that it's bad (they let you in with a 26 MCAT and a 2.8 GPA, it's in Australia, it's expensive, etc).
If you have already decided to come here next year, you can rest assured, UQ IS a legit medical school, and there are a ton of very well-qualified students in my class who love it. Before I came here, I was very curious about how everyone else "ended up" coming to UQ. I have been very pleasantly surprised that Americans in Ochsner are very good students, and usually interesting, well-traveled people. Some of my best friends here are from Ivy League schools. To be honest, I am here because I screwed around too much in undergrad, and there are consequences (3.2 GPA, 31Q MCAT, because I know you are curious). But some of my friends are here simply because they had intense family, interpersonal, or health issues during undergrad that caused them to have one bad semester, and in the med school game, that is unfortunately enough to ruin your application, as I imagine some of you have already discovered for yourselves. The current president of the Ochsner Medical Student Association (OMSA) had something like a 39 MCAT, and he was basically just over-confident in his original round of US applications and turned them in late, another big no-no in med school applications, and that's how he ended up here. But he hit the ground running in Australia as an exemplery student doing all sorts of projects and research and never looked back. He writes on this board a lot, so you have probably read his posts already, but I can vouch for him, to the extent that you think an anonymous stranger on the internet is a valid opinion
As for the Australian students (some of whom are called "twoosies" because they did a 2-year science degree starting at age 17 and then went right into med school at age 19), they are really the cream of the crop here in Australia. UQ is one of the top med schools in the country (depending on the reference... it usually ranks in the top 4 or 5). It can be a bit infantilizing going to classes with 19 year old Australian colleagues. No one prepared me for that before I came here. Sometimes I question just what the hell I DID learn during my 4 year undergrad degree, because a lot of these kids are SMART. It's humbling, and you just gotta get over it if you come here (easier said than done).
There are a few facilities that I found surprisingly good here. The anatomy lab is actually pretty sweet. It's open most days of the week, so you can come in and take a liver or a heart sample out of a bucket and drill down your anatomy. I've never had trouble dealing with that area. The actual anatomy practical labs are crowded and not entirely useful, but that is more than made up for by how good it is on off-hours (i'm going to get in trouble for telling you this, because it's a bit of a well-guarded secret). There are usually tutors or just well-informed colleges in the lab who are more than happy to help you out. Before I came here everyone made a huge fuss about whether or not there was a wet cadaver lab. First of all, there is. And about half-way through the year, you can start doing dissections. But more importantly, you will learn VERY quickly that the presence or absence of a wet lab really doesn't make much of a difference to your anatomy education. All you surgery hot shots will have plenty of time to get your hands on some organs at the appropriate time; it's not a very important part of year 1 (1).
However, there are a lot of things about UQ that drive me crazy. For starters, let's be real: no matter what anyone says, you will be less competitive in residency if you come here. That's just how the world works. Doctor's care about pedigree, and so do we. That's why we're asking all these questions about the pedigree of UQ, right? I'm sick of all this misleading "no one will see you differently" rhetoric, because it's not true. But that on its own is not a reason not to come to UQ. We all know that you are considering UQ because things didn't work out in the US (2). If you don't go to med school, you'll have ZERO chance at residency, so don't dwell on residency stats. Your chances at getting a placement after graduating from UQ are still better than if you went to the Caribbean, so as far as studying medicine abroad, the only international school that might be slightly better is the Columbia-Israel program, but I can't speak too intelligently about that, and I imagine you'd only want to go to it if you were Jewish. Be aware before you come here of the fact that you are going to get an MBBS degree if you come here before 2015. Everyone tells me it's exactly the same as an MD. I doubt it's the exact same for the same reasons as above, but from everything I've read and US doctors I've talked to thus far, it is seen by most people as exactly the same (3). Real US doctors are actually the least judgmental people about Australian med school. The most common response I usually get is, "damn, I wish I'd done that!"
In a more general sense, studying at UQ is probably not what you've always dreamed that "Medical School" would be like. UQ is a giant state university (something like 70,000 students in the whole system or so), and there are about 500 1st year medical students. The administration treats you like a statistic. The administration is a huge pain in the ass to deal with, and they are infamously disorganized. They lost a friend's midterm last semester... that level of disorganization (don't worry they found it eventually). I've heard UQ described as "Kafka-esque," and that is spot on from my experience. "Surgery theater of the absurd" is also a decent pun. There are all sorts of bureaucratic annoyances, It was a bit disarming to have to compete for seating in the lecture hall on my first day of classes. It is equally disarming that this leads to a culture of skipping lecture among Ochsner students, a suggestion you will receive from 2nd years when you first get here that I believe ought to be taken with a big grain of salt.
Perhaps the worst part of the medical education here is the practical labs. They are about as crappy as any undergrad lab you've ever had. Microbio is a joke, seriously. Again, I don't think that is a reason not to come here on its own, although it is quite annoying. The annoyance is two fold. After the obvious annoyance of having to waste our time in these over-stuffed labs, it is also annoying because it shifts the onus of learning microbio to Ochsner students. Because you need to know microbio for the USMLE.
Ah, the USMLE, aka, "The Boards." If you come here and want to score some friends quickly, read up on the USMLE before you come here, because Ochsner students LOVE to talk about it. Everyone freaks out about it because it is believed that UQ doesn't adequately prepare its students for the USMLE. To be honest, I can't speak intelligently about this subject. There are USMLE tutorials every week put on by second year med students, and they are as good as tutorials can be from 2nd year med students who haven't taken the test themselves who are busier than you are and just learned this stuff the year before... which is to say there is a range in the quality of the sessions. The issue is the universal uncertainty surrounding the USMLE. People who love to speak authoritatively will do so about the USMLE for as long as you're willing to listen, but that doesn't mean that anything they say is veracious. This leads to a bit of "paralysis by analysis" for some people, who spend half the year searching for the "best" way to study without actually doing any studying for the test. "Which review book is the best?" "Have you started Q bank yet?" "Oh, I use Kaplan, it's better." "Oh, I hate the Made Ridiculously Simple series." Everyone has an opinion. The people who are most successful are good at tuning all this banter out, and just picking a resource and sticking with it.
There are some non-medical aspects to the education that are also a huge pain in the ass. We have to take bioethics for the two australian pre-clinical years. But this isn't heady "bioethics" about categorical imperatives and all that (although there is a bit of that); it's Australian bioethics. So you need to learn a bunch of esoteric facts about Australian Law that will never matter to you once you leave Australia. Some of it is a bit interesting, but most of it is just busywork. Frankly, 100% of my friends just crammed last minute for bioethics exams. Everyone did fine (some of us actually got 7s, the UQ equivalent of an A), but it added what felt like an unnecessary amount of stress. The Aboriginal Health class was actually a bit more interesting if you're the type of person who likes anthropology or public health. If you're going to live in Australia for a few years, I think it's important to develop a bit of an understanding of the culture here, and it was interesting, albeit sad, to learn about the colonialism here and its lasting consequences on Aboriginal communities. That being said, some Ochsner students hated that class, and perhaps you will too, but it can be bearable if you see it as a culturally-enriching opportunity.
As for what it's like living in Brisbane, it's a small, but rapidly growing town. If you like sun, you'll love Brisbane. After the brutal (by my standards) summer ends around March, the weather becomes quite temperate for the rest of the year. I personally prefer cloudy days, but I realize I'm an outlier. I love riding the ferry to school. Perhaps because of the weather, people tend to show a lot of skin here. Guys wear short shorts, girls wear short skirts. Perhaps I've just forgotten what it's like to be around 19 year olds. Coffee (a "long black"= an Americano) costs about $3.50-$4.00 for a cup, and beer is about $17 for a six pack. Frankly, you get used to it. I mean, you're planning on dropping like a quarter of a million dollars or something like that on your medical education, nickel-and-diming a few bucks on commodities really shouldn't make or break your decision. It is a bit frustrating that the beach isn't as close as I'd like it to be. I don't have a car here, but I think investing in one, or maybe splitting one with some friends, is a pretty good idea if you want to get out of Brisbane. There are a lot of fun things to do in the surrounding area, and it can be life-affirming to get away from med school stress, if only for an afternoon.
I hope this has added to your appraisal of what UQ is like. I hope I didn't come off as pedantic about anything. Perhaps the biggest thing I learned after a year here is how important it is to be in med school because YOU want to be in med school. It was pretty crushing for me when I didn't get into US schools, and I think I went a bit crazy frantically trying to get to med school at any cost after that. Now that I'm here, I've realized that for me, med school isn't the end all and be all of my life or my ability to help other people. If you want to go to med school because you want to "help" others, I'd recommend doing a bit of soul-searching before you sign up to come all the way to UQ, because whatever factors that led you not to get into US med school in the first place might be telling you that med school isn't right for you. And I think it's important to be OK with that (4).
Good luck with your applications, and feel free to PM me if you have any questions.
footnotes:
1) I personally don't find anything too educational about dissections after you've got the basic understanding of the body. People make a big deal about anatomy and cutting open cadavers because it is the most aesthetically "med schooly" thing you do in year 1, but it's not THAT important. The reason med schools have reduced the amount of anatomy education we do is because the people who write the curriculum had to endure an unnecessary amount of anatomy during year 1 when they were in med school, and they decided to spare us and use the time to focus on physiology more. And to be clear, I'm not taking a side in the "medicine vs. surgery" debate here; I just don't think it's important for anyone to focus on surgical skills during year one.
2) As the saying goes, if it's too good to be true, it's too good to be true. If you are wondering why UQ let you in, you just need to follow the money to understand why they are willing to accept you when US schools might have rejected you. International student fees are a huge boom, and the cost to them of having a few of the unqualified international students drop out is much less than the amount they rake in from us. There is a notorious shortage of residency programs in Australia right now, so they are leveraging Ochsner's clinical resources. In turn, Ochsner is leveraging UQ's substantial research resources. This place is really a research powerhouse. You know how they love to brag how they are one of the top 50 med schools in the world according to QS rankings? A lot of that reputation comes from the component of the ranking calculation that comes from research. If they improved the actual teaching, they'd probably rank higher.
3) There is also a lot of talk about whether or not you will be able to practice in all 50 states if you graduate from UQ. The truth is that if you graduate from the normal 4-year uq medical degree, you can practice in all 50 states. The UQ ochsner program simply has not been evaluated yet, but I think there is strong evidence that it will eventually be OK. Trust me, the uncertainty freaks me out too. The only cup-half-full rationalization I can provide is that as doctors, we'll need to be able to feel comfortable with a bit of uncertainty, right?
4) If you went to Ghana every summer of undergrad to help out in an orphanage and used that experience as the linchpin of your medical school application, are you sure that you're favorite part of that experience was the medical aspect? Maybe you are better suited for international aide? I'm not trying to be antagonistic here; I just personally would have benefited from considering this type of thing before I came to UQ. I spent a lot of energy this year trying to understand why I'm in med school, and I that is energy I could have saved if I would have been more willing to consider another career before I comitted to med school. I understand the pressure that you or your friends and family might put on yourself because of the "prestige" of a medical degree, but that might not be enough to make you content with your time at UQ in the long run.
