- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 115
- Reaction score
- 2
Which are the programs that many try to get into and for what reasons? Anyone knows? I would appreciate your inputs.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Best top 5 Neurology residencies?
- Thread starter Vacant
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2004
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 2
Generating a list of the top programs in neurology can be quite arbitrary. Here's my 2 cents on the matter based on published rankings, my experience on the interview circuit thus far, and discussions with faculty at different programs.
Here's my list of the "top" programs for whatever it's worth
TOP TIER:
Powerhouses of Neurology: Partners, Columbia, UCSF (the largest clinical services + powerhouse research)
Smaller programs but heavyweights: Hopkins, WashU, PENN, Mayo (large volume, great research)
NEXT TIER:
UCLA, Beth Israel Deaconess, Cornell, Yale, Emory, Cleveland Clinic
Rank according to neurology research funding (NIH 2003):
1. UCSF
2. UCLA
3. WashU
4. Hopkins
5. Rochester
6. Columbia
7. Penn
8. Boston U
9. Emory
10. Mount Sinai
This particular ranking, I believe, inadequately reflects the quality of neurology training programs. Also, this ranking does not take into account the particular organizational structure of the department and whether it is primarily part of the medical school or hospital. For example, according to this ranking Harvard neurology is ranked 46! In fact, the Partners program consists of MGH and BWH which are affiliates of Harvard medical school. The research dollars are thus reported primarily with MGH or BWH and not Harvard.
Also, the USNews ranking groups neurology and neurosurgery departments so
you can't rely on this one too much.
Here's my list of the "top" programs for whatever it's worth
TOP TIER:
Powerhouses of Neurology: Partners, Columbia, UCSF (the largest clinical services + powerhouse research)
Smaller programs but heavyweights: Hopkins, WashU, PENN, Mayo (large volume, great research)
NEXT TIER:
UCLA, Beth Israel Deaconess, Cornell, Yale, Emory, Cleveland Clinic
Rank according to neurology research funding (NIH 2003):
1. UCSF
2. UCLA
3. WashU
4. Hopkins
5. Rochester
6. Columbia
7. Penn
8. Boston U
9. Emory
10. Mount Sinai
This particular ranking, I believe, inadequately reflects the quality of neurology training programs. Also, this ranking does not take into account the particular organizational structure of the department and whether it is primarily part of the medical school or hospital. For example, according to this ranking Harvard neurology is ranked 46! In fact, the Partners program consists of MGH and BWH which are affiliates of Harvard medical school. The research dollars are thus reported primarily with MGH or BWH and not Harvard.
Also, the USNews ranking groups neurology and neurosurgery departments so
you can't rely on this one too much.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- 21
Let me give my spin on things. Remember, these are all just opinions.
The Big Three:
Partners, UCSF, Hopkins
Right Behind: (formerly awesome, but fading)
UPenn, Columbia (except the best neurointensive program)
High 2nd Tier:
WashU, Mayo, UCLA, BIDMC, UMich, UCLA, Emory, UWashington, URochester
Then:
A bunch of places
The Big Three:
Partners, UCSF, Hopkins
Right Behind: (formerly awesome, but fading)
UPenn, Columbia (except the best neurointensive program)
High 2nd Tier:
WashU, Mayo, UCLA, BIDMC, UMich, UCLA, Emory, UWashington, URochester
Then:
A bunch of places
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2004
- Messages
- 31
- Reaction score
- 0
I believe that many of the aforementioned programs by my colleagues are what you always hear about, according to the rankings, etc. In my humble opinion, I believe that the best programs are the following, many of which are hidden gems:
(in no particular order):
Hopkins, Emory, Duke, WashU, UVA, Utah, Rochester, Miami, Penn, Mayo
(in no particular order):
Hopkins, Emory, Duke, WashU, UVA, Utah, Rochester, Miami, Penn, Mayo
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
I believe that syrinx/GopherBrain/most of this board are just about "right on the money" with their rankings.
Here's my "subjective/in-my-eyes" tiering (on places to go for neurology residency - based on strength of program, success of residents, location, and happiness of residents):
TOP TIER (seven - in order. These are the elite programs, and everyone knows it - with Hopkins-Penn-Mayo being very closely matched together.):
1. MGH/Partners
2. UCSF
3. Columbia
4. Hopkins
5. Penn
6. Mayo Clinic
7. Cleveland Clinic
NEXT TIER (ten - in order. All of these programs are outstanding in their own right and many are interchangeable; putting aside rivalry and insecurity of some colleagues in our field, you will be very highly regarded as a graduate from any of these programs and be competitive with the top tier.):
8. WashU
9. UCLA
10. BI
11. Cornell
12. Stanford
13. Yale
14. U of Washington
15. Emory
16. Baylor
17. Duke
ANOTHER TIER (sixty-five - in order. Yes - I am going overboard here, and I have probably forgotten a number of decent programs. In my opinion, the first few programs of 18. Mt. Sinai through 23. Virginia are the cream of this crop and have the potential of being intermixed with the above group.):
18. Mount Sinai
19. Michigan
20. U of Rochester
21. UCSD
22. U of Chicago
23. Virginia
24. Rush
25. Oregon
26. Miami
27. USC
28. Albert Einstein
29. Case Western
30. Tufts
31. Colorado
32. Brown
33. UIC
34. North Carolina
35. UAB
36. Thomas Jefferson
37. Northwestern
38. NYU
39. Arizona
40. Utah
41. Pittsburgh
42. George Washington
43. Cincinnati
44. UT Southwestern
45. U of Florida
46. Drexel
47. Vanderbilt
48. Iowa
49. UMass
50. Barrows Institute/Arizona
51. Georgetown
52. Boston U
53. Tulane
54. UMDNJ
55. Mayo/Scottdale
56. UTexas/Houston
57. Maryland
58. Minnesota
59. Wake Forest
60. Saint Louis
61. UC Irvine
62. Wisconsin/Madison
63. UC Davis
64. Henry Ford
65. Mayo/Jacksonville
66. Loyola
67. LSU
68. Cleveland Clinic/Weston
69. Michigan State
70. Indiana
71. Long Island Jewish
72. Dartmouth
73. St. Vincents/NY
74. Kentucky
75. Loma Linda
76. Temple
77. Medical College of Georgia
78. SUNY/Syracuse
79. UConn
80. Ohio State
81. New Mexico
82. SUNY/Buffalo
When I was applying for neurology residency in 2000/01, it seemed only natural to get a feel for the rank lists of other people - especially residents and fellows. I know that a 82-program list is far too lengthy, but I feel that it helps have a certain "perspective" of the grander "playing field" rather than a snap-shot of the top 5 programs.
Having known people graduating/currently at a number of programs and having personally interviewed in all four main sections of the states (15 programs - way too many ... but great for seeing new cities with the help of a moderate-sized loan) ... take it or leave it, this is my list; I tried to be as unbiased as possible, and I tried to make my list appropriate for 2005 (ie. Miami is losing Dr. Bradley as chairman and, thus, bumps them down a number of spots, and USC appears to be getting Damasio from Iowa, albeit having had Leslie Weiner recently step down as chair). IMO, when graduating and obtaining jobs, even if you're going into private practice, most recruiters/practices will prefer the resident from MGH (more 'academic') over the resident from Tufts (clinically strong) - excluding connections/etc. Also, in order to create more formality to the list, I didn't make "notes/comments" next to any of the programs. Nonetheless, it's evident that everyone has their own particular favorites (one should realize that I am in a larger program on the East Coast and may - inadvertently - have some bias), dislikes, and specific interests and family/relational obligations. The key is making the flight and deciding for yourself. Best of luck in the 2005 match!
*ADDENDUM: (I hope that this also helps some of you ...)
There's obviously no sure-fire way to make/weight/create your match list, and every individual is different. For me: when I was deciding on a neurology residency program, I found it helpful to look at a long list and make sure that I was "not missing out" on a program. Thereafter, I placed things into a pre-interview and post-interview rank list based on (not in particular order):
[1] strength of program (It's evident that there are a multitude of great programs to chose from. Don't let someone quickly defame another program for you. As in many academic fields, physicians have a lot of pride, and they usually believe that what they have is the best. Not to 'call anyone out,' but - for examle - the New York programs are quite notorious for unnecessarily putting down other programs; considering that there is a high degree of competition and close proximity of the NYC programs, this should not come as a surprise; it simply comes with the territory.)
[2] ability for residents to match a strong fellowship/go academic/go private (I've noticed that it's important for programs to not only do well at placement in strong fellowships such as EMG/neurophysiology and support residents staying on at 'home' fellowships and as attendings, but to also advocate for residents going private and residents who would prefer to go to another city/program for fellowship rather than stay on; in my opinion, flexibility and chairman/program director advocacy for 'what the residents want' are the keys.)
[3] location (As you know, you will be there for 3-4 years.)
[4] stability of program (ie. Are the program director and chairman staying and how long have they been there?)
[5] happiness and satisfaction of the residents (It is true that each residency has its own culture, which may or may not be apparent on an interview. While interviews and meeting the residents is helpful, we all know that these impressions can be made by good/bad chance and timing; things are very subjective and - on the interview trail - one should stay wary - considering that both false defamation and misplaced praise are rampant.)
[6] one's impression of the program director and chairman (They are the 'faces' of the program and, as in most semi-vertical structures, personalities/attitudes/daily activities tend to come from those in leadership positions such as the program director. They are also the ones writing your letters of recommendations for future jobs/changing positions and will - hopefully - be spending some time with you at future meetings.)
Everyone has their own criterion and likes/dislikes, and these are simply mine. From what I have seen, it's evident that these are the primary factors that go into most people's decisions. Call-backs from programs and other factors are a program's ploy to have you rank them higher. Rather than biting for their 'carrot,' perhaps you can try to move yourself up their list by simply doing a second look and/or writing them a message telling them how much you appreciate their program (if you truly do feel this way). Also, I wouldn't waste time in writing every program, and ranking a program that you do not like (however low that you may rank them) is a mistake that you may pay for. In whichever manner that you chose your match lists ... take care, and best of luck. I sincerely hope that you all get what you are wishing for.
*FOOTNOTE: I originally had a "42-program list"; thanks to PhineasGage for calling me out on forgetting about Stanford - an outstanding program in a beautiful location. As a matter of fact, with input from others on this board, I have realized that I missed a number of other programs and created this "82-program list." (Considering that I have encroached on the age of 30, my neurons have become more prone to misfiring! I want to take this moment to not only ask for forgiveness of my OCD qualities, but also to extend my sincerest apologies to the Stanford Cardinal.) Thanks to all for suggestions in potential ammendments to this list; your input is very valuable.
-274
Here's my "subjective/in-my-eyes" tiering (on places to go for neurology residency - based on strength of program, success of residents, location, and happiness of residents):
TOP TIER (seven - in order. These are the elite programs, and everyone knows it - with Hopkins-Penn-Mayo being very closely matched together.):
1. MGH/Partners
2. UCSF
3. Columbia
4. Hopkins
5. Penn
6. Mayo Clinic
7. Cleveland Clinic
NEXT TIER (ten - in order. All of these programs are outstanding in their own right and many are interchangeable; putting aside rivalry and insecurity of some colleagues in our field, you will be very highly regarded as a graduate from any of these programs and be competitive with the top tier.):
8. WashU
9. UCLA
10. BI
11. Cornell
12. Stanford
13. Yale
14. U of Washington
15. Emory
16. Baylor
17. Duke
ANOTHER TIER (sixty-five - in order. Yes - I am going overboard here, and I have probably forgotten a number of decent programs. In my opinion, the first few programs of 18. Mt. Sinai through 23. Virginia are the cream of this crop and have the potential of being intermixed with the above group.):
18. Mount Sinai
19. Michigan
20. U of Rochester
21. UCSD
22. U of Chicago
23. Virginia
24. Rush
25. Oregon
26. Miami
27. USC
28. Albert Einstein
29. Case Western
30. Tufts
31. Colorado
32. Brown
33. UIC
34. North Carolina
35. UAB
36. Thomas Jefferson
37. Northwestern
38. NYU
39. Arizona
40. Utah
41. Pittsburgh
42. George Washington
43. Cincinnati
44. UT Southwestern
45. U of Florida
46. Drexel
47. Vanderbilt
48. Iowa
49. UMass
50. Barrows Institute/Arizona
51. Georgetown
52. Boston U
53. Tulane
54. UMDNJ
55. Mayo/Scottdale
56. UTexas/Houston
57. Maryland
58. Minnesota
59. Wake Forest
60. Saint Louis
61. UC Irvine
62. Wisconsin/Madison
63. UC Davis
64. Henry Ford
65. Mayo/Jacksonville
66. Loyola
67. LSU
68. Cleveland Clinic/Weston
69. Michigan State
70. Indiana
71. Long Island Jewish
72. Dartmouth
73. St. Vincents/NY
74. Kentucky
75. Loma Linda
76. Temple
77. Medical College of Georgia
78. SUNY/Syracuse
79. UConn
80. Ohio State
81. New Mexico
82. SUNY/Buffalo
When I was applying for neurology residency in 2000/01, it seemed only natural to get a feel for the rank lists of other people - especially residents and fellows. I know that a 82-program list is far too lengthy, but I feel that it helps have a certain "perspective" of the grander "playing field" rather than a snap-shot of the top 5 programs.
Having known people graduating/currently at a number of programs and having personally interviewed in all four main sections of the states (15 programs - way too many ... but great for seeing new cities with the help of a moderate-sized loan) ... take it or leave it, this is my list; I tried to be as unbiased as possible, and I tried to make my list appropriate for 2005 (ie. Miami is losing Dr. Bradley as chairman and, thus, bumps them down a number of spots, and USC appears to be getting Damasio from Iowa, albeit having had Leslie Weiner recently step down as chair). IMO, when graduating and obtaining jobs, even if you're going into private practice, most recruiters/practices will prefer the resident from MGH (more 'academic') over the resident from Tufts (clinically strong) - excluding connections/etc. Also, in order to create more formality to the list, I didn't make "notes/comments" next to any of the programs. Nonetheless, it's evident that everyone has their own particular favorites (one should realize that I am in a larger program on the East Coast and may - inadvertently - have some bias), dislikes, and specific interests and family/relational obligations. The key is making the flight and deciding for yourself. Best of luck in the 2005 match!
*ADDENDUM: (I hope that this also helps some of you ...)
There's obviously no sure-fire way to make/weight/create your match list, and every individual is different. For me: when I was deciding on a neurology residency program, I found it helpful to look at a long list and make sure that I was "not missing out" on a program. Thereafter, I placed things into a pre-interview and post-interview rank list based on (not in particular order):
[1] strength of program (It's evident that there are a multitude of great programs to chose from. Don't let someone quickly defame another program for you. As in many academic fields, physicians have a lot of pride, and they usually believe that what they have is the best. Not to 'call anyone out,' but - for examle - the New York programs are quite notorious for unnecessarily putting down other programs; considering that there is a high degree of competition and close proximity of the NYC programs, this should not come as a surprise; it simply comes with the territory.)
[2] ability for residents to match a strong fellowship/go academic/go private (I've noticed that it's important for programs to not only do well at placement in strong fellowships such as EMG/neurophysiology and support residents staying on at 'home' fellowships and as attendings, but to also advocate for residents going private and residents who would prefer to go to another city/program for fellowship rather than stay on; in my opinion, flexibility and chairman/program director advocacy for 'what the residents want' are the keys.)
[3] location (As you know, you will be there for 3-4 years.)
[4] stability of program (ie. Are the program director and chairman staying and how long have they been there?)
[5] happiness and satisfaction of the residents (It is true that each residency has its own culture, which may or may not be apparent on an interview. While interviews and meeting the residents is helpful, we all know that these impressions can be made by good/bad chance and timing; things are very subjective and - on the interview trail - one should stay wary - considering that both false defamation and misplaced praise are rampant.)
[6] one's impression of the program director and chairman (They are the 'faces' of the program and, as in most semi-vertical structures, personalities/attitudes/daily activities tend to come from those in leadership positions such as the program director. They are also the ones writing your letters of recommendations for future jobs/changing positions and will - hopefully - be spending some time with you at future meetings.)
Everyone has their own criterion and likes/dislikes, and these are simply mine. From what I have seen, it's evident that these are the primary factors that go into most people's decisions. Call-backs from programs and other factors are a program's ploy to have you rank them higher. Rather than biting for their 'carrot,' perhaps you can try to move yourself up their list by simply doing a second look and/or writing them a message telling them how much you appreciate their program (if you truly do feel this way). Also, I wouldn't waste time in writing every program, and ranking a program that you do not like (however low that you may rank them) is a mistake that you may pay for. In whichever manner that you chose your match lists ... take care, and best of luck. I sincerely hope that you all get what you are wishing for.
*FOOTNOTE: I originally had a "42-program list"; thanks to PhineasGage for calling me out on forgetting about Stanford - an outstanding program in a beautiful location. As a matter of fact, with input from others on this board, I have realized that I missed a number of other programs and created this "82-program list." (Considering that I have encroached on the age of 30, my neurons have become more prone to misfiring! I want to take this moment to not only ask for forgiveness of my OCD qualities, but also to extend my sincerest apologies to the Stanford Cardinal.) Thanks to all for suggestions in potential ammendments to this list; your input is very valuable.
-274
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2005
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 0
play274,
I'm sure I speak for everyone when I thank you for your contributions to the discussion... we could all use some fresh perspectives right now.
Was Stanford's omission from your "top 42 list" an oversight, or by design?
-PhineasGage
I'm sure I speak for everyone when I thank you for your contributions to the discussion... we could all use some fresh perspectives right now.
Was Stanford's omission from your "top 42 list" an oversight, or by design?
-PhineasGage
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 40
- Reaction score
- 0
first of all, thank you for this list... it is really exhaustive! thanks very much. there are no good rankings out there, with us news world report being hospitals, + nsgy. anyway. my question is this-- you ranked gw, a program with only 6 faculty members, rather highly... can you explain why?
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
crackerjack:
You're very welcome. Honestly, the U.S. News and World Report rankings are nice for bragging rights, but they tend to straight-out miss some VERY good neurology residency programs (ie. UWashington, Yale, etc.); as you have implied, rankings for neurology residencies are unique and require their own ranking (apart from what is frequently published - ie. U.S. News, research dollars).
As for ranking GWU highly, I weighed in the reputation of the department and the assumption that John Kelly Jr. is still their chairman; from what I have heard (and I did not interview at either of the DC schools), it believe that it has a strong reputation for its graduating residents. In our field, 'names' do matter, and strong support from Dr. Kelly would likely go a long way in helping one achieve his/her career goals (especially in neurophysiology).
Please keep in mind that I am only one neurology resident who is trying to rank more than fifty programs based on a perspective derived from a limited experience (4 years in the field as a neurology resident). It is evident that I cannot possibly know the "ins and outs" of each program, and I won't be as bold as to profess such omnipotency in knowledge. I am sure that there are tons of "holes" in my list; moreover, after programs 25 or 26 on the list, it can be a toss-up for the programs, in that each program is respectable and will have specific strengths and/or weaknesses for individual applicants. Arguments can also be made with all the tiers. Nonetheless, (for me) it has been fun trying to place all these programs on a list; I believe that it can be helpful to have a view of the programs from the vantage point of a large list (probably one of a thousand perspectives that you have and will go through this week).
Take care, and good luck with the match!
-274
You're very welcome. Honestly, the U.S. News and World Report rankings are nice for bragging rights, but they tend to straight-out miss some VERY good neurology residency programs (ie. UWashington, Yale, etc.); as you have implied, rankings for neurology residencies are unique and require their own ranking (apart from what is frequently published - ie. U.S. News, research dollars).
As for ranking GWU highly, I weighed in the reputation of the department and the assumption that John Kelly Jr. is still their chairman; from what I have heard (and I did not interview at either of the DC schools), it believe that it has a strong reputation for its graduating residents. In our field, 'names' do matter, and strong support from Dr. Kelly would likely go a long way in helping one achieve his/her career goals (especially in neurophysiology).
Please keep in mind that I am only one neurology resident who is trying to rank more than fifty programs based on a perspective derived from a limited experience (4 years in the field as a neurology resident). It is evident that I cannot possibly know the "ins and outs" of each program, and I won't be as bold as to profess such omnipotency in knowledge. I am sure that there are tons of "holes" in my list; moreover, after programs 25 or 26 on the list, it can be a toss-up for the programs, in that each program is respectable and will have specific strengths and/or weaknesses for individual applicants. Arguments can also be made with all the tiers. Nonetheless, (for me) it has been fun trying to place all these programs on a list; I believe that it can be helpful to have a view of the programs from the vantage point of a large list (probably one of a thousand perspectives that you have and will go through this week).
Take care, and good luck with the match!
-274
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2002
- Messages
- 102
- Reaction score
- 0
Did you intentionally leave off Mayo-Scottsdale and Mayo-Jacksonville? I'd probably rank them per quality above many on this list unless you consider them to be a part of the "Mayo system".
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
swedcrip:
I believe that I placed Mayo/Scottdale at #55, and I felt that the Jacksonville program was not within my top 65 - but it's very close. My sources are, at best, simply "gestalt" from my interview at Mayo (Rochester) and from general conversations I've had with two residents whom I know at Mayo. As I have mentioned, this is only my list - and there are many other good versions that can be made by others; it's imperfect, but it's what I've offered to conjure up. Different people have different criterion for "which programs they like." In retrospect, I probably could have added about 20 other programs to the second half of my rank list. Well, with that in consideration, I'll extend my list to 72 (see original post below). Take care, swedcrip.
To all:
I hope that no one feels that I am giving excessive/unnecessary advice. Personally, I found my neurology interviewing/match process to be quite entertaining; everything said and done, I am very happy with where I matched - but I believe that I would have been just as happy at a number of other places on my list. I'd like to restate that my perspective is simply one of many. Best of luck to all, and have a great weekend!
-274
I believe that I placed Mayo/Scottdale at #55, and I felt that the Jacksonville program was not within my top 65 - but it's very close. My sources are, at best, simply "gestalt" from my interview at Mayo (Rochester) and from general conversations I've had with two residents whom I know at Mayo. As I have mentioned, this is only my list - and there are many other good versions that can be made by others; it's imperfect, but it's what I've offered to conjure up. Different people have different criterion for "which programs they like." In retrospect, I probably could have added about 20 other programs to the second half of my rank list. Well, with that in consideration, I'll extend my list to 72 (see original post below). Take care, swedcrip.
To all:
I hope that no one feels that I am giving excessive/unnecessary advice. Personally, I found my neurology interviewing/match process to be quite entertaining; everything said and done, I am very happy with where I matched - but I believe that I would have been just as happy at a number of other places on my list. I'd like to restate that my perspective is simply one of many. Best of luck to all, and have a great weekend!
-274
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2003
- Messages
- 576
- Reaction score
- 7
I think Play's list probably more accurately portrays how things really are compared to all the med students' perpetuate-the-myth lists (Utah in the 2nd tier, Rochester being top program, etc). Of course, future applicants must keep in mind that things can change very quickly for better or worse at one place or another with 1) chairman changes 2) large number faculty hires, either clinical or research (this often comes with 1), and 3) quality of supporting programs (internal medicine, neurosurgery, radiology, biostatistics/epidemiology). You can only find out about these things through UP-TO-DATE word of mouth or at interviews. Good luck with the match!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 1
tofurious said:
tofurious -- I respect what you are trying to say, but again Play's list how he/she mentioned it is one person's opinions and impressions.... just as yours are of one individual, as are mine of one individual.
However, let me say that the two programs you decided to note were probably not the best to support your argument.
I think most academicians and people who have actually visited the Utah program believe that it is an outstanding place to train. Of the West Coast program, it is commonly cited by academicians as the best program outside of UCSF and UCLA from the West Coast to Wash U in St. Louis. It is tops in neuro-onc, neuromuscular, and has the only NIH-funded neuro-genetics fellowship in the country.
With respect to Rochester, it is indeed a top program. Their chairman Griggs is editor of the Green Journal -- ever heard of it? Residents get the fellowship of their choice. Jacefowicz is world reknowned for neurology education. They have by far the best neurology program curriculum in the country. They are consistently #1-3 in NIH departmental funding every year, and have 100+ (!) faculty -- I don't think even 4 other programs in this country can claim that statistic.
I believe that you are basing your judgements based on your bias that these two programs are not in major metropolitan areas, such as SF, NYC, Chicago. Salt Lake City is a vibrant metropolitan area, and granted Rochester is cold a lot, it is a very clean and nice place to live.
Good luck with the Match!!!
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- 21
I wasn't going to weigh in on this again, because the point is more to submit your own opinions than to comment on other people submissions, but I can't resist any longer.
I really don't think that URochester being very high second tier is a myth. A year and a half ago, when I didn't know UWash from WashU, I asked a LOT of faculty about what they thought the strongest programs in the country were (without biasing them by asking for opinions on specific programs) and Rochester came up almost every time. On top of that, I have had several PDs along the interview trail tell me that Rochester is a great program when I told them where else I was interviewing. (It was typically the PDs of the prestige programs, because I guess they can say nice things about the competition without worrying that you won't rank their program highly.)
So this is my $.02 anyhow. And I would like to be clear that I don't have any personal or professional reasons to talk up Rochester. I'm just passing on what I (think I) know.
I really don't think that URochester being very high second tier is a myth. A year and a half ago, when I didn't know UWash from WashU, I asked a LOT of faculty about what they thought the strongest programs in the country were (without biasing them by asking for opinions on specific programs) and Rochester came up almost every time. On top of that, I have had several PDs along the interview trail tell me that Rochester is a great program when I told them where else I was interviewing. (It was typically the PDs of the prestige programs, because I guess they can say nice things about the competition without worrying that you won't rank their program highly.)
So this is my $.02 anyhow. And I would like to be clear that I don't have any personal or professional reasons to talk up Rochester. I'm just passing on what I (think I) know.
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2004
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 2
It is clear that Rochester is on the up and up. It has always been a good place to train but I wouldn't be surprised to see it considered with the likes of WashU in the near future. Their interest and infrastructure set up for resident education is pretty unique. The PD, Ralph Jozefowicz, is a leader in neurology education and 100% of his time is for neurology resident and student education.
Rochester's recent recruitment of Jon Mink from WashU and Steve Goldman from Cornell is very impressive. I thought the program was great when I visited but did not rank it due to location.
Rochester's recent recruitment of Jon Mink from WashU and Steve Goldman from Cornell is very impressive. I thought the program was great when I visited but did not rank it due to location.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
I have to agree with all the posts - from tofurious, jacksonianmarch, GopherBrain, and syrinx ... with a couple 'ammendments.' My list are simply one person's opinions - nothing more. In a way, I hope that my list will challenge others to take a broad look at a large number of programs on their initial look and then pare down the programs as they read more about them and interview. I can imagine that all applicants regret not applying to a couple programs that they hear raves about on the interview trail. I remember applying to U of Washington and BI at the last minute, and I thoroughly enjoyed my January interviews at those programs.
tofurious - I do not believe that Utah (43) and Rochester (20) being strong programs are a myth. I did not interview at either program, but I believe that I ranked them both pretty highly. I do agree that - as you mentioned - places can change very quickly - with chairman instability, faculty change, and other factors.
jacksonianmarch - Perhaps I underrated Utah. I do know that Utah (and Colorado) has a very strong neuromuscular program, Utah also is well-known (even on the East Coast) for it's neurogenetics, and Anne Osborn is well known from her neuroradiology-fame. With respect to Rochester, the location leaves much to be desired, and they do not have the commercial reputation of Mayo Clinic (in the 'other Rochester' ... ha - and that reminds me of the story of a resident that I met at my UCSF interview - whose travel agent mixed up his plane tickets for Rochester-MN and Rochester-NY!). Nonetheless, for many years, Rochester has been very well known for being a program that has a sound base and tradition; it has the ability to churn out academicians. Also, as you stated, it's only a 'judgement' on my part; there truly is no single correct "way" to rank these programs. They are all great in their own respect.
GopherBrain - I agree with you in that "point is more to submit your own opinions" and that can add to make some good/helpful conversation. It is not a myth that Rochester is a strong program; heck - one of my attendings was from Rochester; he's an amazing clinician and academician. However, I felt that there are many other outstanding programs (ie. Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, WashU, UCLA, BI, Cornell, Stanford, Yale, Baylor, U of Washington, Emory, Duke, Mount Sinai, Michigan) that I liked a touch better, which seemed to have tons of respect and very strong residents, as well. Of course, if one were to love academics and be married and/or love upstate New York, then Rochester would likely move up their list. Personally, I am interested in academics, but I thought that the other programs ranked above Rochester had more to offer in terms of location and a couple other factors.
syrinx - As I stated above, Rochester is definitely a strong program. I guess we can all agree that we all have different rankings/heard different opinions on these programs. Four years ago, I did not apply to Rochester, but I have learned to respect it more during my residency. Thank you for you input on this program.
Hopefully, over the next few years, we can all continue to add to this board and help answer some questions for the next batch of applicants. (The more opinions, the better this forum will be.) FYI, my OCD-nature and a couple informative PM's have induced me to up my so-called "list" to 82, with a couple minor changes within the final tier. As mentioned before, this board is truly addictive, but - alas - I love the field of neurology and truly enjoy hearing about others' experiences in their residencies. Take care, and best of luck to you all!
-274
tofurious - I do not believe that Utah (43) and Rochester (20) being strong programs are a myth. I did not interview at either program, but I believe that I ranked them both pretty highly. I do agree that - as you mentioned - places can change very quickly - with chairman instability, faculty change, and other factors.
jacksonianmarch - Perhaps I underrated Utah. I do know that Utah (and Colorado) has a very strong neuromuscular program, Utah also is well-known (even on the East Coast) for it's neurogenetics, and Anne Osborn is well known from her neuroradiology-fame. With respect to Rochester, the location leaves much to be desired, and they do not have the commercial reputation of Mayo Clinic (in the 'other Rochester' ... ha - and that reminds me of the story of a resident that I met at my UCSF interview - whose travel agent mixed up his plane tickets for Rochester-MN and Rochester-NY!). Nonetheless, for many years, Rochester has been very well known for being a program that has a sound base and tradition; it has the ability to churn out academicians. Also, as you stated, it's only a 'judgement' on my part; there truly is no single correct "way" to rank these programs. They are all great in their own respect.
GopherBrain - I agree with you in that "point is more to submit your own opinions" and that can add to make some good/helpful conversation. It is not a myth that Rochester is a strong program; heck - one of my attendings was from Rochester; he's an amazing clinician and academician. However, I felt that there are many other outstanding programs (ie. Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, WashU, UCLA, BI, Cornell, Stanford, Yale, Baylor, U of Washington, Emory, Duke, Mount Sinai, Michigan) that I liked a touch better, which seemed to have tons of respect and very strong residents, as well. Of course, if one were to love academics and be married and/or love upstate New York, then Rochester would likely move up their list. Personally, I am interested in academics, but I thought that the other programs ranked above Rochester had more to offer in terms of location and a couple other factors.
syrinx - As I stated above, Rochester is definitely a strong program. I guess we can all agree that we all have different rankings/heard different opinions on these programs. Four years ago, I did not apply to Rochester, but I have learned to respect it more during my residency. Thank you for you input on this program.
Hopefully, over the next few years, we can all continue to add to this board and help answer some questions for the next batch of applicants. (The more opinions, the better this forum will be.) FYI, my OCD-nature and a couple informative PM's have induced me to up my so-called "list" to 82, with a couple minor changes within the final tier. As mentioned before, this board is truly addictive, but - alas - I love the field of neurology and truly enjoy hearing about others' experiences in their residencies. Take care, and best of luck to you all!
-274
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2003
- Messages
- 576
- Reaction score
- 7
There is no question that certain programs have a great X section, but let us not forget that we are going to be trained in general neurology before we even get to the specialty sections. The top-tier programs play listed were top programs because they were strong in MOST subspecialties of neurology, not JUST neuromuscular or neurogenetics. Just like you can't rank medical schools based entirely on their OB faculty and number of graduates going into OB, a single division's strength is hardly an accurate reflection of a WHOLE program/department's future even though the division may be the entire REASON for the department's "strong" reputation.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2002
- Messages
- 179
- Reaction score
- 1
play274, i really appreciate alll your insight, and the thoughtful list above...but it's unclear to me how one person could possibly have enough insight into so many programs so as to come up with such an extensive list. or what criteria you are using. granted, you might know the reputation of an institution, the name and so on, and know quite a bit about which well-known neuro folks are there(lots of name dropping above), but i would argue that neither is necessarily reflective of the actual quality of the neurology _residency program_ (i.e. its also very easy to look in US News and World Reports and see which Neuro depts they rate as top, but again, that doesnt always translate to the training program). there might be a great number of well known folks at many of these places with whom the neuro residents have very little actual contact/teaching. not to mention all the other aspects that make a training program good (granted, some being very subjective, and what kind of training you're looking for). i would argue fellowship placement, again isn't always such a great indicator. without naming people, i can think of a few neuro programs off the top of my head, with really enormously well known people in 3 different fields(no exaggeration, i mean huge), with whom residents have little or no contact. sure, perhaps they draw many other quality people to the dept/their subspecialty in the dept, but ultimately im not sure if it's worthwhile to rank places this way...not to mention that docs who spend 11 months in the lab to emerge for one month on the wards (sometimes reluctantly) to teach general neurology/something not in their specialty dont always make for an ideal situation...i would argue that these very people, and your relationship with them, can do more for your future/fellowship than a "name". neuro is a small community, especially the subspecialties, so figuring out how acessible people are is important. you can goto many, not so top programs and do well for fellowship because there is a strong person there in a particular field..also while the name of a place matters to some degree, i think some people on here place too much emphasis on this, ive seen too many posts making reference to "ivy league"(one even included northwestern in this), myself and virtually every applicant i spoke to on my 12 interviews felt pretty negatively about 2 ivy league programs we interviewed at, who knows if the name would get us anywhere.. anyway, enough of my rambling. i suppose i think that one person presuming that they know enough/anything about programs so that they would be able to rank 50 of them or so in a row seemed kinda silly to me..and i felt like posting since ultimately people trolling next yr will try to use it as some guide (hey guys, i think almost every person i know going into neuro, maybe 8 people, ranked programs that were below the top 20 above many of the top 20 up there.).
ok
wow thats a long paragraph.
scm
ok
wow thats a long paragraph.
scm
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 1
scm said:
I second this notion -- Thanks Andy Kaufman!
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2004
- Messages
- 414
- Reaction score
- 0
My roommate just showed me his email saying that Baylor has lost Appel (the most significant loss), Chiu, Derman, and Rosenfield to Methodist (to be affiliated with Cornell). Apparently they will still be Baylor adjunct faculty and they will be available for elective rotations, but it looks like for all intents and purposes they're gone.
I'm seriously reconsidering applying there. Anyone have any thoughts/experience with this school?
I'm seriously reconsidering applying there. Anyone have any thoughts/experience with this school?
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 0
Of course 274s list is not perfect, but it is by far the most thorough piece of work on the topic. I feel that the value of this list lies not in its being a definitive measure, but in its being a very good measure to start from. For e.g. as a beginner to the application process in august, i had no idea that Boston U was far below the other boston programs.
I feel that its a good tool for people beginning their quest into neurology.
I feel that its a good tool for people beginning their quest into neurology.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
scm:
I hope that my "list" (post #8 in this thread) has sufficient disclaimer to echo your post, and thank you for the compliment. Your points are critical ones that I strongly agree with.
In retrospect, I believe that I may have overstepped my bounds by listing so many programs. Let me recount as to how it happened. When I initially posted my list, I was going to simply write in five programs; I didn't have interest in doing more than adding my "two cents." Then, I started looking back at how I found programs to rank and realized that I missed out on a lot of strong program by simply going with the "ivy/traditional" names. As a matter of fact, by early December, I found that I made the mistake of not applying to a couple of very intriguing programs, and - of course - I applied to two and interviewed at them; I thoroughly enjoyed my interviews at those two "add-on" programs. Therefore, after making a short-list for this board, I felt that it would be helpful to have a large list that one can stare at and rearrange as they feel fit (ie. considering location, impression of their friends and colleagues, etc.); I also tried to take out my East Coast bias and to be as impartial as possible (which was obviously impossible to completely succeed in doing). After an initial list of 42 programs, I received a number of PM's asking for advice and potentially extending the list (although there are a set number of people who post here, it has become evident to me that there are many people who have an account and only PM); thus, I further ammended and added them to my original post. Many of the PM's were quite insightful and ... that's how I created this rank list.
It is impossible to know about all these programs to fairly rank them all.
Nonetheless ... surprisingly, after a four year residency and (hopefully) a couple of national/international neurology conferences per year, I have found that I have gained a certain degree of working knowledge (and - in many cases - intimate knowledge) of most of the programs that encompass this large list; of course, I am rather OCD and have an avid interest in news/perspectives of residents, fellows, and attendings from other programs. As you have mentioned, "neurology is a small community," and I have truly heard bits of almost every single program that I placed on my list - via (1) my own interviews five years ago, (2) impressions of friends, (3) impressions and backgrounds of my attendings in my program which is really quite large, (4) meeting residents from other programs at about 2-3 conferences per year in which many residencies send at least one resident, and (5) osmosis - haha ... well, okay - don't include number 5! But seriously, you'll be amazed at the culture of neurology; as corny as it sounds, it truly is its own community, and neurologists love to tell you about their residency programs.
I will reiterrate that my list is extremely imperfect. I sincerely hope that I did not make any preconception of having omnipotent knowledge of all neurology programs. Heck - if I did have "omnipotent knowledge of all neurology programs," that would make either (a) God or (b) the biggest nerd on the earth; the truth is than I am definitely not choice "a." What about choice "b"? Errr ... (shh!) - okay ... fine: the jury is still out on choice "b."
I understand your concern, and it is true that my list is simply one person's opinion which would be impossible to thoroughly and perfectly accomplish; one should note that I am graduating from a large program on the East Coast and will likely have unpurposeful bias (ie. I didn't know the Biller was definitely chair of Loyola - a Midwestern program). Moreover, different candidates will have very different lists, and all these lists will be "correct" for each individual.
It is my hope that my list isn't used as an absolute rank list for neurology programs. I also do not want anyone to (a) gain pomp from having their program listed highly or (b) feel insecure from having their program unlisted or listed low. *Rather, I hope that neurology applicants can use it as a map of program names that can be used to be rearranged. If I could go back five years, I wish that I placed all the names onto a sheet of paper and pared them down as I went along (rather than "adding as I went along" - as I had done). Thank you for your comment; it an important point, and I definitely agree with you, scm.
To all:
I sincerely hope that you all have wonderful careers. In addition, I look forward to the potential of meeting you some day - although neither of us will know that we posted on this board; I always enjoy making new friends. The field of neurology is smaller than I initially thought it would be; you will meet and repeatedly "reunion" (at meetings/etc.) with more co-interviewees, residents, fellows, attendings, drug reps, and post-docs than you can imagine.
Welcome to the field that captured my heart and ... enjoy! Your future in neurology has just begun!
-274
I hope that my "list" (post #8 in this thread) has sufficient disclaimer to echo your post, and thank you for the compliment. Your points are critical ones that I strongly agree with.
In retrospect, I believe that I may have overstepped my bounds by listing so many programs. Let me recount as to how it happened. When I initially posted my list, I was going to simply write in five programs; I didn't have interest in doing more than adding my "two cents." Then, I started looking back at how I found programs to rank and realized that I missed out on a lot of strong program by simply going with the "ivy/traditional" names. As a matter of fact, by early December, I found that I made the mistake of not applying to a couple of very intriguing programs, and - of course - I applied to two and interviewed at them; I thoroughly enjoyed my interviews at those two "add-on" programs. Therefore, after making a short-list for this board, I felt that it would be helpful to have a large list that one can stare at and rearrange as they feel fit (ie. considering location, impression of their friends and colleagues, etc.); I also tried to take out my East Coast bias and to be as impartial as possible (which was obviously impossible to completely succeed in doing). After an initial list of 42 programs, I received a number of PM's asking for advice and potentially extending the list (although there are a set number of people who post here, it has become evident to me that there are many people who have an account and only PM); thus, I further ammended and added them to my original post. Many of the PM's were quite insightful and ... that's how I created this rank list.
It is impossible to know about all these programs to fairly rank them all.
Nonetheless ... surprisingly, after a four year residency and (hopefully) a couple of national/international neurology conferences per year, I have found that I have gained a certain degree of working knowledge (and - in many cases - intimate knowledge) of most of the programs that encompass this large list; of course, I am rather OCD and have an avid interest in news/perspectives of residents, fellows, and attendings from other programs. As you have mentioned, "neurology is a small community," and I have truly heard bits of almost every single program that I placed on my list - via (1) my own interviews five years ago, (2) impressions of friends, (3) impressions and backgrounds of my attendings in my program which is really quite large, (4) meeting residents from other programs at about 2-3 conferences per year in which many residencies send at least one resident, and (5) osmosis - haha ... well, okay - don't include number 5! But seriously, you'll be amazed at the culture of neurology; as corny as it sounds, it truly is its own community, and neurologists love to tell you about their residency programs.
I will reiterrate that my list is extremely imperfect. I sincerely hope that I did not make any preconception of having omnipotent knowledge of all neurology programs. Heck - if I did have "omnipotent knowledge of all neurology programs," that would make either (a) God or (b) the biggest nerd on the earth; the truth is than I am definitely not choice "a." What about choice "b"? Errr ... (shh!) - okay ... fine: the jury is still out on choice "b."
I understand your concern, and it is true that my list is simply one person's opinion which would be impossible to thoroughly and perfectly accomplish; one should note that I am graduating from a large program on the East Coast and will likely have unpurposeful bias (ie. I didn't know the Biller was definitely chair of Loyola - a Midwestern program). Moreover, different candidates will have very different lists, and all these lists will be "correct" for each individual.
It is my hope that my list isn't used as an absolute rank list for neurology programs. I also do not want anyone to (a) gain pomp from having their program listed highly or (b) feel insecure from having their program unlisted or listed low. *Rather, I hope that neurology applicants can use it as a map of program names that can be used to be rearranged. If I could go back five years, I wish that I placed all the names onto a sheet of paper and pared them down as I went along (rather than "adding as I went along" - as I had done). Thank you for your comment; it an important point, and I definitely agree with you, scm.
To all:
I sincerely hope that you all have wonderful careers. In addition, I look forward to the potential of meeting you some day - although neither of us will know that we posted on this board; I always enjoy making new friends. The field of neurology is smaller than I initially thought it would be; you will meet and repeatedly "reunion" (at meetings/etc.) with more co-interviewees, residents, fellows, attendings, drug reps, and post-docs than you can imagine.
Welcome to the field that captured my heart and ... enjoy! Your future in neurology has just begun!
-274
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2004
- Messages
- 414
- Reaction score
- 0
play274,
have you considered being moderator of this forum?
have you considered being moderator of this forum?
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
Fantasy Sports:
I am definitely not an internet maven ... although I do enjoy reading Bradley's on-line! I leave the moderating to the moderators. After all, I plan on keeping my day job (which also qualifies as a night job during residency). Take care and have fun.
-274
I am definitely not an internet maven ... although I do enjoy reading Bradley's on-line! I leave the moderating to the moderators. After all, I plan on keeping my day job (which also qualifies as a night job during residency). Take care and have fun.
-274
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2004
- Messages
- 414
- Reaction score
- 0
I was wondering if anyone had thoughts on my above post that might have gotten lost amongst the others:
My roommate just showed me his email saying that Baylor has lost Appel (the most significant loss), Chiu, Derman, and Rosenfield to Methodist (to be affiliated with Cornell). Apparently they will still be Baylor adjunct faculty and they will be available for elective rotations, but it looks like for all intents and purposes they're gone.
I'm seriously reconsidering applying there. Anyone have any thoughts/experience with this school?
My roommate just showed me his email saying that Baylor has lost Appel (the most significant loss), Chiu, Derman, and Rosenfield to Methodist (to be affiliated with Cornell). Apparently they will still be Baylor adjunct faculty and they will be available for elective rotations, but it looks like for all intents and purposes they're gone.
I'm seriously reconsidering applying there. Anyone have any thoughts/experience with this school?
- Joined
- May 13, 2004
- Messages
- 305
- Reaction score
- 3
Bump
Since already people seem to be asking about the best neuro programs out there, here's a good thread for you all to read.
Although I have to say, something probably unpopular, you can get a good education no matter what residency you go to. And 10 years from now your patient is not going to care what residency program you went to.
Since already people seem to be asking about the best neuro programs out there, here's a good thread for you all to read.
Although I have to say, something probably unpopular, you can get a good education no matter what residency you go to. And 10 years from now your patient is not going to care what residency program you went to.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- 21
I am such a hypocrite.
I've said again and again that I think the top tier of programs are essentially identical in quality, but it irks me every time I see a list where UCSF isn't #1.
I've said again and again that I think the top tier of programs are essentially identical in quality, but it irks me every time I see a list where UCSF isn't #1.
- Joined
- May 27, 2004
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 2
I agree with all of you that Partners and UCSF are the top 2 programs for many many reasons.
After that, I think it really depends on what area of neurology you are most interested in. For example, in the fields that I am interested in:
NICU:
JHU
Columbia
Mayo
INR:
WashU
UCLA
and so forth. Epilepsy (Stanford), Movement Disorders (Columbia), MS (UofC), ALS (Baylor), Autonomic disorders (Mayo), Pediatrics (UPenn), etc. I don't know enough about areas of neurology outside of vascular, so I cannot comment as much on them. But the point is that unless you end up going to UCSF or Partners, you should probably taylor your program choice to your interests. If you really care only about reputation, then here is my ranking based on what I have heard about regarding fellowship matches, program selectivity, and opportunities:
1. Partners
2. UCSF
3. JHU
4. Columbia
5. WashU
6. UPenn
7. BIDMC
8. UCLA
9. Stanford
10. Mayo
B
After that, I think it really depends on what area of neurology you are most interested in. For example, in the fields that I am interested in:
NICU:
JHU
Columbia
Mayo
INR:
WashU
UCLA
and so forth. Epilepsy (Stanford), Movement Disorders (Columbia), MS (UofC), ALS (Baylor), Autonomic disorders (Mayo), Pediatrics (UPenn), etc. I don't know enough about areas of neurology outside of vascular, so I cannot comment as much on them. But the point is that unless you end up going to UCSF or Partners, you should probably taylor your program choice to your interests. If you really care only about reputation, then here is my ranking based on what I have heard about regarding fellowship matches, program selectivity, and opportunities:
1. Partners
2. UCSF
3. JHU
4. Columbia
5. WashU
6. UPenn
7. BIDMC
8. UCLA
9. Stanford
10. Mayo
B
W
Wales1
I appreciate reading everyone's impressions about top tier schools and so forth. Does anyone know what the most life/family-friendly programs are and where you also get nice, solid neurology training? The top tier programs seem a little intense with call and so forth (Q3 or Q4 for life...). I applaud anyone looking into these programs. That's wonderful. Any suggestions on where the rest of us should apply?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
I think you all should check out Mayo Rochester for yourselves. It is a tremendous program academically as well as being a people minded program. Half of the residents are married with kids so it works well for families. But the bottom line is, this is where I felt I was going to get the best clinical training. I interviewed at all the top programs and chose this place because other programs did not have the resident minded training, ancillary support, set curriculum like Mayo. And it is a big myth that fellows run this place. Residents run the neurology services. Come see for yourselves.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
GopherBrain said:I am such a hypocrite.
I've said again and again that I think the top tier of programs are essentially identical in quality, but it irks me every time I see a list where UCSF isn't #1.
Agreed. I hope that my previous list didn't 'irk' you. As a matter of fact, I do not believe that I would change the top of my list very much, but - with another year of aging - I would definitely change around some of the 20-80 ranked programs on my rather flippant list.
FYI, if one were to make a list of "most competitive programs to match into," it would be safe to postulate that UCSF and UCLA would be ranked #1 and #2, respectively. Although I may have East Coast-bias, I am quite aware that there are too many of you itching for some California sun (and fog, of course).
neuro74: Yes, Mayo (MN) is a very impressive program. They really seem to treat their residents like family up there. BTW, do the residents enjoy their interactions with Peter Dyck? The new edition (4th) of Peripheral Neuropathy is amazing; he even has onion-bulbing on the text cover ... and the contents are even better than the cover.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 0
play274 said:
Dr. P. Dyck is great. I was seeing a patient referred to me for muscular weakness, when during the examination I noted that the patient had significant pes cavus with likely hereditary PN. When I walked out of the patient room, Dr. Dyck was walking by doing his own clinic. He is laid back that you can ask him to give his opinion on this patient's PN. Totally cool. He is like the modern father of PN and will make time to discuss cases that he is not even staffing.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 57
- Reaction score
- 7
neuro74 said:
I enjoy hearing accounts of people's interactions with neurologists like Dyck (Mayo), Asbury (Penn), and Aminoff (UCSF). I've had some interaction with the latter two attendings, and they're brilliance is made even more impressive with their congeniality and sincere interest in getting to know you on a personal basis. Although we have a number of caustic attendings (ie. Landau), I love the fact that there are so many genuine people in neurology.
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2005
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 0
274,
Top picks by current Rochester faculty and residents:
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/neuro/sign/today/handbook/chapter6.html
Top picks by current Rochester faculty and residents:
http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/neuro/sign/today/handbook/chapter6.html
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 12
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi! Of all the programmes you listed would you be able to advise me as to which of them are IMG friendly? Mystep 1 socres were bad..198=81 thus i'm only looking towards the less competitive programmes...would greatly appreciate your help..
play274 said:
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2005
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 0
The lower tier programs in that big list are generally IMG friendly, cause these programs have difficulty getting american grads. So these programs look for IMGs to fill their seats, but here is the catch.. all the bloody IMGs run after these programs and hence usually only the high scoring IMGs get through.dorkess said:
But don't loose hope...U definitely need to score well in ur step 2. Plus US experience really helps, and the usual research+publications.
By now the 80-plus program list is somewhat famous (if not infamous) among people looking for neuro residencies, even if it is somewhat old. What I was wondering was whether anyone had any feel for what kinds of Step 1 scores correlated with what tiers (or however one would want to break it down). If I were to guess at this point (just beginning to do my homework), I'd think the top 3-4 programs would want step 1 scores of 235+, then maybe 230+ for the next 2-3, then maybe 225+ for the next 10 or so? Is that somewhere in the ballpark? Or is there more to it than that... say, the Cali. schools are all looking for 230+ because they can get them due to location or something?
Just a general idea would be nice...
Thanks!
Just a general idea would be nice...
Thanks!
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 326
- Reaction score
- 6
Wow, that is an interesting list. I am surprised that Mayo and UPenn are not ranked higher, i.e. #3-5. I have heard that Mayo is absolutely fantastic with regards to excellent education during residency and overall friendliness of the program. I would suspect that any residency program would be fine for private practice, and that if you are aiming for a special fellowship then it would be very good to go the higher ranked places, or at least at a place where you would want to do fellowship.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- 21
If I could choose to abuse my moderator power and delete one thread from this forum just because it annoyed me, this would be it. It offers artificial precision, which is always attractive, especially to an audience as anxious as residency applicants. Please, take this whole thing with a huge mound of salt.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2003
- Messages
- 5,251
- Reaction score
- 140
Oh, God, we just had the match 2 months ago . . . is it that time again already . . . . ?
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,909
- Reaction score
- 2,940
your quote of the numbers seem really high to me. I go to columbia and i don't get the impression that we have 235+ everywhere. (i guess if we do i'm screwed.)
