A final top 30 IM programs list for posterity's sake

[Scaredshizzles]

Well as you all know by now, I've been spending waay too much time analyzing prestige and fellowship placement potential of various im programs. Truly the unfortunate workings of an idle mind with nothing better to do at the moment. I present a final top 30 list, which I think is the result of a fair amount of scientific/objective measures, although I'm sure most will disagree with the measures that I looked at. Keep in mind that I didn't apply to a few of these and did not interview at even more. I didn't want to post this earlier, lest my dumb attempt at an objective list should sway one's last minute ROL decisions, which really should be more about subjective comfort at the programs you interviewed at.

I basically looked at three factors: 1. competitiveness (which I judged by the percentage of residents in the program who hailed from the USNWR top 12 med schools (the research ranking.) I know this is a really bad way to measure it, but I was limited in terms of other objective measures that I could have used. 2. percentage of residents (over the last 3 years) who go on to what I consider the three most competitive IM subspecialties (Cards, GI, and H/O--> I know allergy-immuno is competitive by some measures, but not too many people are really interested in that-->it is an easy way to increase earning potential considerably though without decrease quality of life.) and 3. Of those residents who do go on to those subspecialties, what percentage are at placed at top 10 fellowship programs. (I did not strictly define the top 10, but I loosely based it on USNWR reputation rank of the hospitals, as well as what I saw people on SDN applying for fellowships thought. )

1. JHU
2. BWH
3. MGH
4. UCSF
5. Columbia
6. UPenn
7. Duke
8. Stanford
9. Washington U
10. U of Washington
11. U of Michigan
12. UTSW
13. Cornell
14. UCLA
15. Northwestern
16. BIDMC
17. Mayo
18. Emory
19. U of Chicago
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. Vanderbilt
23. UPitt
24. Baylor
25. OHSU
26. NYU
27. UAB
28. UNC
29. Boston U
30. UCSD

Others considered: Maryland, CCF, UVa, U of Colorado, Ohio State, Case, U of Iowa, U of Minnesota, UW-Madison.


If this exercise taught me anything, there are really a lot of good programs out there. Even if you're not so fortunate to match to one of these 30 or so programs, if you really stand out at another residency program, you can still do quite well in terms of fellowship. And obviously some of the other programs are really fantastic at education. Geography is a huge factor in terms of fellowship placement though.

And finally, I know a ton of people will disagree with my ranking strongly. But I did try to do it objectively, but just keep in mind what factors I was looking at. If you disagree strongly with the list, it is probably because you disagree with what I took into account.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[indiamacbean]

could you please post the stanford and ucsf fellowship match over the last three years and where people went?

 

[chitown82]

Well as you all know by now, I've been spending waay too much time analyzing prestige and fellowship placement potential of various im programs. Truly the unfortunate workings of an idle mind with nothing better to do at the moment. I present a final top 30 list, which I think is the result of a fair amount of scientific/objective measures, although I'm sure most will disagree with the measures that I looked at. Keep in mind that I didn't apply to a few of these and did not interview at even more. I didn't want to post this earlier, lest my dumb attempt at an objective list should sway one's last minute ROL decisions, which really should be more about subjective comfort at the programs you interviewed at.

I basically looked at three factors: 1. competitiveness (which I judged by the percentage of residents in the program who hailed from the USNWR top 12 med schools (the research ranking.) I know this is a really bad way to measure it, but I was limited in terms of other objective measures that I could have used. 2. percentage of residents (over the last 3 years) who go on to what I consider the three most competitive IM subspecialties (Cards, GI, and H/O--> I know allergy-immuno is competitive by some measures, but not too many people are really interested in that-->it is an easy way to increase earning potential considerably though without decrease quality of life.) and 3. Of those residents who do go on to those subspecialties, what percentage are at placed at top 10 fellowship programs. (I did not strictly define the top 10, but I loosely based it on USNWR reputation rank of the hospitals, as well as what I saw people on SDN applying for fellowships thought. )

1. JHU
2. BWH
3. MGH
4. UCSF
5. Columbia
6. UPenn
7. Duke
8. Stanford
9. Washington U
10. U of Washington
11. U of Michigan
12. UTSW
13. Cornell
14. UCLA
15. Northwestern
16. BIDMC
17. Mayo
18. Emory
19. U of Chicago
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. Vanderbilt
23. UPitt
24. Baylor
25. OHSU
26. NYU
27. UAB
28. UNC
29. Boston U
30. UCSD

Others considered: Maryland, CCF, UVa, U of Colorado, Ohio State, Case, U of Iowa, U of Minnesota, UW-Madison.


If this exercise taught me anything, there are really a lot of good programs out there. Even if you're not so fortunate to match to one of these 30 or so programs, if you really stand out at another residency program, you can still do quite well in terms of fellowship. And obviously some of the other programs are really fantastic at education. Geography is a huge factor in terms of fellowship placement though.

And finally, I know a ton of people will disagree with my ranking strongly. But I did try to do it objectively, but just keep in mind what factors I was looking at. If you disagree strongly with the list, it is probably because you disagree with what I took into account.

I appreciate your attempt to create this ranking of sorts. Despite many people thinking rankings are overrated, they are valuable (to a certain extent).

Having said this, I think there are some definitely problems with your list. I'm curious - did you use a spreadsheet or something where we can see how you weighted the factors you took into consideration. Perhaps you can post that. However, I must say that regardless of how a spreadsheet might determine a program's rank, there is certainly an "intangible" or "other" category that can significantly alter a program's overall standing. This X factor is often hard to quantify.

I don't have time (right now) to dissect your list entirely, but Stanford is not a top 10 program, BIDMC > UTSW/UCLA, UCLA is too high, Chicago > Northwestern, Emory is too high, etc.

In all, this is a nice exercise (since we all have time now) and I'm sure this thread will lead to some interesting dialogue.

Personally, I think it is less useful to assign absolute ranks as much as it is to assign tiers. For instance, your top 4 can easily be interchanged and hence should constitute Tier 1. User IMPassion posted a similar thread (using Tiers) in January - take a look at that.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

could you please post the stanford and ucsf fellowship match over the last three years and where people went?

UCSF has some version of a fellowship match list on their website, although it isn't the same as the one handed out. Stanford was one of the few programs (along with BWH) which has no information on their web site, so I will post that for the forum..They only had it for the three years leading up to 2008, nothing for 2009, and they also double listed those who became chief. (i.e. kind of shady.) They had 30 residents/year, I think that has gone up now.

2008:
GI: UNC, UCSF, CPMC, UCLA, OHSU, Stanford x 2, USC x 2
Cards: Stanfordx4, UTSW, UCLA, Wisc-Madison
H/o: Stanford x 5
PulmCC: UCSF

2007
GI: Stanford x 3
Cards: Stanford x 5, U Colorado, Cleveland Clinic, UWashington, Duke
H/o: Stanford x 2
One person went on to do radiology at Hopkins after completing IM categorical?

2006:
GI: UCSF
Cards: MGH, Stanford x 4, Cornell
H/o: Stanford x 3
Pulm-CC: Stanford
ID: UW, UCSF, Stanfordx3
Rheum: Hopkins, Stanford


Not particularly strong out of house, and no one goes to the east coast, in spite of a ton of residents from the big name east coast schools. (HMS, Upenn, Columbia, Duke, Hopkins, UCSF, Stanford usually account for 2/3 of their residents.)

 

[Scaredshizzles]

I appreciate your attempt to create this ranking of sorts. Despite many people thinking rankings are overrated, they are valuable (to a certain extent).

Having said this, I think there are some definitely problems with your list. I'm curious - did you use a spreadsheet or something where we can see how you weighted the factors you took into consideration. Perhaps you can post that. However, I must say that regardless of how a spreadsheet might determine a program's rank, there is certainly an "intangible" or "other" category that can significantly alter a program's overall standing. This X factor is often hard to quantify.

I don't have time (right now) to dissect your list entirely, but Stanford is not a top 10 program, BIDMC > UTSW/UCLA, UCLA is too high, Chicago > Northwestern, Emory is too high, etc.

In all, this is a nice exercise (since we all have time now) and I'm sure this thread will lead to some interesting dialogue.

Personally, I think it is less useful to assign absolute ranks as much as it is to assign tiers. For instance, your top 4 can easily be interchanged and hence should constitute Tier 1. User IMPassion posted a similar thread (using Tiers) in January - take a look at that.

Yes, I agree, a tiered approach makes more sense.

And no, I don't have a spreadsheet, it isn't that precise. I just happened to have looked at some point at all 3 of those factors for almost all of those programs, LOL.

As far as Emory over other southern programs, they have a pretty strong match list. The other thing is that Emory has long kind of been considered a top 10 cards program, and they match a ton in house. Northwestern's match list recently has been stronger than UChicago and they have also gotten more grads of top ten med schools.

UCLA has fairly strong in house fellowships, although they don't draw a lot of residents from the big name med schools. Still, with the new RRUMC, I think it is probably a very reputable place to train and do fellowships at.

Stanford is a strange one for me, it seems like a program on the decline. Yet they still have like over 2/3 of their residents from top 10 med schools. Their fellowship match is very much inhouse, but most would agree they have top ten programs in cards (arguably as good as UCSF) and h/o.

 

[skirabbit]

Omg, I can't believe how obsessed people are over these "rankings". I'm truly wondering what was your point in posting this thread?...don't we have enough rankings on sdn from individuals e.g. yourself (who I doubt spent the weeks if not months it would take to calculate a list based on the criteria you describe you used)? USNews already have rankings for IM programs AND individual specialties which they have been doing for years and is still pointless. Do you honestly think your list is more official than theirs? I respect that you waited until after the rank list was due to post this, but feel it is completely unnecessary and more of an attempt to either draw attention to yourself or to stir up the usual sdn drama, just as every other rank list out there has down in sdn's history.

 

[ID15]

I would say #'s 8-30 all are very subjectively placed. Would like to see the numbers on this as some don't quite fit (BIDMC, Yale, Vandy too low, Stanford, UTSW, NW too high, etc) You could have quite a few in the 20's move into the teens and some in the teens move to high top 10, and vice versa. I guess it's just fun to make lists.

 

[gutonc]

Omg, I can't believe how obsessed people are over these "rankings". I'm truly wondering what was your point in posting this thread?...don't we have enough rankings on sdn from individuals e.g. yourself (who I doubt spent the weeks if not months it would take to calculate a list based on the criteria you describe you used)? USNews already have rankings for IM programs AND individual specialties which they have been doing for years and is still pointless. Do you honestly think your list is more official than theirs? I respect that you waited until after the rank list was due to post this, but feel it is completely unnecessary and more of an attempt to either draw attention to yourself or to stir up the usual sdn drama, just as every other rank list out there has down in sdn's history.

The USNWR rankings are less than useless (based as they are on research funding, nothing else). Any other attempt at ranking programs is just useless. I guess the latter is "better." Kind of like being the winner of an ugliest person contest.

 

[skirabbit]

The USNWR rankings are less than useless (based as they are on research funding, nothing else). Any other attempt at ranking programs is just useless. I guess the latter is "better." Kind of like being the winner of an ugliest person contest.

Actually, the USNews rankings for best hospitals, IM programs, subspecialties, etc are NOT based on research funding, but the MED SCHOOL rankings are. It explains how they came to the rankings on their website...

Regardless, you're right, the USNews rankings are mostly useless, as are the thousands of rankings created by individuals on sdn. Just sick of seeing these types of threads which are obviously filled with subjective input.

Anyway, best of luck to everyone on their rank lists.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

Omg, I can't believe how obsessed people are over these "rankings". I'm truly wondering what was your point in posting this thread?...don't we have enough rankings on sdn from individuals e.g. yourself (who I doubt spent the weeks if not months it would take to calculate a list based on the criteria you describe you used)? USNews already have rankings for IM programs AND individual specialties which they have been doing for years and is still pointless. Do you honestly think your list is more official than theirs? I respect that you waited until after the rank list was due to post this, but feel it is completely unnecessary and more of an attempt to either draw attention to yourself or to stir up the usual sdn drama, just as every other rank list out there has down in sdn's history.

Well I agree with most of this, except that USNWR does not have a ranking for IM programs. It has a ranking for med schools that prepare students well for a career in IM instead...i.e. basically it just meshes the research and primary care rankings together because of the idea that primary care is a big part of internal medicine. Yale might prepare students well for IM, but Yale NHH isn't robust enough to get any of the Yale med students to stay there for training in im.

Anyway, this was kind of meant as my farewell thread to this, since I had already exerted so much effort and time here over the last couple of months. Take it or leave it. (I imagine 90% will leave it, but 10% might find it useful in the future.)

 

[ResidentMD]

Omg, I can't believe how obsessed people are over these "rankings". I'm truly wondering what was your point in posting this thread?...don't we have enough rankings on sdn from individuals e.g. yourself (who I doubt spent the weeks if not months it would take to calculate a list based on the criteria you describe you used)? USNews already have rankings for IM programs AND individual specialties which they have been doing for years and is still pointless. Do you honestly think your list is more official than theirs? I respect that you waited until after the rank list was due to post this, but feel it is completely unnecessary and more of an attempt to either draw attention to yourself or to stir up the usual sdn drama, just as every other rank list out there has down in sdn's history.

The entire day today, I was wondering what would happen on this OCD-IM forum after 9 PM tonight. And lo behold.

I appreciate your attempt to create this ranking of sorts. Despite many people thinking rankings are overrated, they are valuable (to a certain extent).

Having said this, I think there are some definitely problems with your list. I'm curious - did you use a spreadsheet or something where we can see how you weighted the factors you took into consideration. Perhaps you can post that. However, I must say that regardless of how a spreadsheet might determine a program's rank, there is certainly an "intangible" or "other" category that can significantly alter a program's overall standing. This X factor is often hard to quantify.

I don't have time (right now) to dissect your list entirely, but Stanford is not a top 10 program, BIDMC > UTSW/UCLA, UCLA is too high, Chicago > Northwestern, Emory is too high, etc.

In all, this is a nice exercise (since we all have time now) and I'm sure this thread will lead to some interesting dialogue.

Personally, I think it is less useful to assign absolute ranks as much as it is to assign tiers. For instance, your top 4 can easily be interchanged and hence should constitute Tier 1. User IMPassion posted a similar thread (using Tiers) in January - take a look at that.

I purposely did not comment on this thread, but you pretty much said all I wanted to.

I would say #'s 8-30 all are very subjectively placed. Would like to see the numbers on this as some don't quite fit (BIDMC, Yale, Vandy too low, Stanford, UTSW, NW too high, etc) You could have quite a few in the 20's move into the teens and some in the teens move to high top 10, and vice versa. I guess it's just fun to make lists.

Agreed. There was a discussion a few months earlier in which JDH71 highlighted this - barring a few differences, rank 8-30 are essentially the same; they may turn heads in different circles (i.e.different subspecialties, different regions). Moreover, nearly 30 programs fit in the rank 8-30 (as is mentioned in the last line of the original post). So rank 8-30 is different for each person, based on his/her own personal preferences; in academia and the BIG PICTURE, they are largely looked at in the same vein, and people look more at what you made out of the opportunities that were presented to you there, because all of them provide pretty much what you want.

 

[skirabbit]

Well I agree with most of this, except that USNWR does not have a ranking for IM programs. It has a ranking for med schools that prepare students well for a career in IM instead...i.e. basically it just meshes the research and primary care rankings together because of the idea that primary care is a big part of internal medicine. Yale might prepare students well for IM, but Yale NHH isn't robust enough to get any of the Yale med students to stay there for training in im.

Anyway, this was kind of meant as my farewell thread to this, since I had already exerted so much effort and time here over the last couple of months. Take it or leave it. (I imagine 90% will leave it, but 10% might find it useful in the future.)

I understand. I wish you the best.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

T
Agreed. There was a discussion a few months earlier in which JDH71 highlighted this - barring a few differences, rank 8-30 are essentially the same; they may turn heads in different circles (i.e.different subspecialties, different regions). Moreover, nearly 30 programs fit in the rank 8-30 (as is mentioned in the last line of the original post). So rank 8-30 is different for each person, based on his/her own personal preferences; in academia and the BIG PICTURE, they are largely looked at in the same vein, and people look more at what you made out of the opportunities that were presented to you there, because all of them provide pretty much what you want.

I would actually extend this argument further to say there isn't a ton of difference between 5-30. I went to a place like UPenn expecting to see everyone matching into top tier cards and GI fellowships, and instead I saw quite a number of people who wind up matching to places like Drexel, in between those matches to UPenn, Hopkins, and Brigham. So none of the programs really guarantee you a great fellowship, outside of maybe those big 4...which I think you would have to really be a bad resident to not match well out of.

Take UPenn's 08 cards match for example:
Stanford, UPennx2, Mt Sinai, BMCx2, Lankenau, Cooper, Vandy.

No such thing as a sure thing, lol.

 

[chitown82]

I would actually extend this argument further to say there isn't a ton of difference between 5-30. I went to a place like UPenn expecting to see everyone matching into top tier cards and GI fellowships, and instead I saw quite a number of people who wind up matching to places like Drexel, in between those matches to UPenn, Hopkins, and Brigham. So none of the programs really guarantee you a great fellowship, outside of maybe those big 4...which I think you would have to really be a bad resident to not match well out of.

I noticed this as well but then again, personal preference for location becomes more important in fellowship than it does in residency. More people are married and have kiddos to deal with when applying for fellowship compared to those applying for residency. Outside the "big" 5 or 10, I'd venture to say a smaller fraction of residents are interested in purely academic medicine/research and because of this location may trump reputation.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

I noticed this as well but then again, personal preference for location becomes more important in fellowship than it does in residency. More people are married and have kiddos to deal with when applying for fellowship compared to those applying for residency. Outside the "big" 5 or 10, I'd venture to say a smaller fraction of residents are interested in purely academic medicine/research and because of this location may trump reputation.

Yes, for private practice people, the place you do your training isn't as important as if you get to know some hot shot private practice doc who will let you into his or her group.

I also think Upenn's list might be hurt a little by the fact that they take on residents more based on merit than what med school they went to. (I.e. outside of UPenn students, not as many come from top ten med schools.) Unfortunately, fellowship directors probably take into account what med school a resident went too also. While UPenn wasn't uber impressive in terms of cards or GI, they did have a superstar h/o match list.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

Anyhow, I won't post any further on these matters. I knew it would be controversial, but I figured it might be a useful starting point for people in the future, even if they only use it to disagree with it. I tried to look at some of the big factors that a lot of people look at. But of course I cannot capture the subjective measures that most people eventually make the tough decisions in life based on. I can tell you my ROL definitely did not adhere to this ranking that I made. I took geography, patient demographics and the feel that I got from PDs/ residency leadership into account. I also considered how well they fed me on the interview day.

 

[Instatewaiter]

I also think Upenn's list might be hurt a little by the fact that they take on residents more based on merit than what med school they went to. (I.e. outside of UPenn students, not as many come from top ten med schools.) Unfortunately, fellowship directors probably take into account what med school a resident went too also. While UPenn wasn't uber impressive in terms of cards or GI, they did have a superstar h/o match list.

Hahah god forbid the programs take people based on merit... rather than school name

You seriously think fellowship PDs are placing that much emphasis on where a candidate went to medical school? That's like saying residencies care about where you did undergrad. I doubt that is the reason why Penn's list is less impressive.

 

[jdh71]

I put my fork into this light socket once, and I still kind of like my general rankings better.

As mentioned I think we all generally agree who the "elite" programs are, and I don't know if you mean for the order to necessarily be strictly in order . . . because, for instance, I easily like Penn over Columbia, and there is no way I'd put Stanford so high, or even Pitt on the list.

Like was said before it's a "general gestalt" and I imagine this is a better gestalt of the way things are kind of seen from the East coast and I think I throw in more of a west coast bias with my list earlier this season (ie. the "big names" in the gestalt of one coast that pop up despite being located in another region of the country)

 

[jdh71]

You seriously think fellowship PDs are placing that much emphasis on where a candidate went to medical school? That's like saying residencies care about where you did undergrad. I doubt that is the reason why Penn's list is less impressive.

They care.

The farther you move up the academic ladder, it becomes far less about what you know and what you've done and more about who you know, and where you've been.

It's not exactly fair, but it's the way it is. I didn't make the rules, but I do try and play them . . . at least if I want to keep moving up.

 

[souljah1]

I would actually extend this argument further to say there isn't a ton of difference between 5-30. I went to a place like UPenn expecting to see everyone matching into top tier cards and GI fellowships, and instead I saw quite a number of people who wind up matching to places like Drexel, in between those matches to UPenn, Hopkins, and Brigham. So none of the programs really guarantee you a great fellowship, outside of maybe those big 4...which I think you would have to really be a bad resident to not match well out of.

Take UPenn's 08 cards match for example:
Stanford, UPennx2, Mt Sinai, BMCx2, Lankenau, Cooper, Vandy.

No such thing as a sure thing, lol.

While reading throught this thread, I felt over and over how silly it is to do terrible science in order to develop a rank list of programs. I promise you that by the time you get mid-way through residency you will look back at your poor attempt at ranking programs and see more flaws than sophistication. It's a waste of time. More important than how many people got cards or gi fellowships and what is the rank of those places - you should seek to find this out: How many people received strong career mentorship and picked fellowships that they truly enjoy, and then found a fellowship that caters to their career priorities?

When I got to this post, I felt the need to clear things up....Just because you seem to care so much about names, I've provided the actual match for your 3 most competitive specialties for the match in 2008.

Penn's 2008 Cards match was:
Stanford x2, Penn x 4, Hopkins, Brigham, Mount Sinai (best transplant in nyc), Northwestern, Univ Colorado, Jefferson, Wash Hosp, Boston Univ

If you need to know GI:
Wash U, UCSF x 2, Jefferson, UCLA, Tufts, Penn x2

If you need to know A/I:
Mount Sinai, Mass General

Looking at this at face value, someone like you would probably assume that the person who went to Tufts for GI must not have been courted by any other "stronger programs". Could not be further from the truth. For example, I might know for a fact that the person who went to Univ Colorado for Cards did so b/c they LOVE to ski and had a very specific research mentor identified at Univ Col AND ranked that program higher than many "top programs". That person got exactly what they wanted. Or, the person who went to Mt Sinai for A/I might have done so b/c they have family in NYC - which happened to be important to them. Or, the person who chose to go to Tufts for GI might have ranked Tufts higher than other top programs that they interviewed at b/c they are very interested in advanced endoscopy, grew up in Boston, and felt that Tufts had a better balance of clinical work/research than other "top programs" in Boston where there were fewer scopes done by fellows. My point is that it is a very individualized process so unless you can measure individual concerns on your excel sheet, you are missing the mark big time.

During my residency, I watched nearly all of my colleagues match at the places that they wanted to. Our PD and our Chair work closely with our housestaff to help them find the best matched programs for their career interests, and then advocate strongly to get them there. I will say that Cards and GI are popular at Penn, but not nearly as popular as they are at the Harvard programs or Hopkins.

That being said, Penn has incredible clinical training in cardiology and GI (especially Liver) during residency. This comes with ample research opportunities. I had more CCU time than I needed, but it served me very well. Everything from MI to shock to balloon pumps to VADs to transplants - tons of clinical experience. To contrast, I might know a Penn medicine trained fellow at one of the Harvard programs that is shocked that senior residents there can't comfortably place central lines in the CCU and constantly ask for supervision. This fellow feels like a resident all over again because they need to write admit notes on all admissions to the CCU and is not allowed to provide sufficient autonomy to the senior residents b/c the attendings don't want it done. Higher ranked, yes. Better training, not sure.

To over-simplify and think that better places put more people into cardiology is suspect. People at the "most competitive" places might also be interested in the "most competitive specialties" b/c they are the "most competitive" people. Hard to know.

To everyone applying, I wish the best and hope that all of you match at a program where you can flourish.

 

[unimaginative]

One thing is for sure this post puts scared****zles in contention for number one in the Sdn top 30 lamest members of all time. He does have some heavy competition from the hsdn children so it'll be interesting too see what happens.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

Looking at this at face value, someone like you would probably assume that the person who went to Tufts for GI must not have been courted by any other "stronger programs". Could not be further from the truth. For example, I might know for a fact that the person who went to Univ Colorado for Cards did so b/c they LOVE to ski and had a very specific research mentor identified at Univ Col AND ranked that program higher than many "top programs". That person got exactly what they wanted. Or, the person who went to Mt Sinai for A/I might have done so b/c they have family in NYC - which happened to be important to them. Or, the person who chose to go to Tufts for GI might have ranked Tufts higher than other top programs that they interviewed at b/c they are very interested in advanced endoscopy, grew up in Boston, and felt that Tufts had a better balance of clinical work/research than other "top programs" in Boston where there were fewer scopes done by fellows. My point is that it is a very individualized process so unless you can measure individual concerns on your excel sheet, you are missing the mark big time.
.

I said I wouldn't comment further, but I thought I should say something about this. This is the exact reason why you try to do this objectively. While the reasons you gave are all very plausible, there is absolutely no reason to think that doesn't happen at every single program out there..i.e. people choosing less prestigious fellowships for a number of reasons. I thought Columbia's fellowship placement was pretty consistently stronger. As far as why your list on 2008 matches is different from mine..for one I think you posted the list of people who entered the NRMP fellowship match last year, as opposed to the year before which I was using. Also I believe you included chiefs in a different way. UPenn's match list last year was stronger. At the same time the list from 3 years ago was weaker than the one from two years ago. On the whole, Columbia's list looked stronger to an outsider. I'm sure you feel different as someone who chose UPenn. Did you say you went to UCSF for med school? You must have felt strongly about UPenn to begin with to choose it over UCSF.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

Hahah god forbid the programs take people based on merit... rather than school name

You seriously think fellowship PDs are placing that much emphasis on where a candidate went to medical school? That's like saying residencies care about where you did undergrad. I doubt that is the reason why Penn's list is less impressive.

Why do residency programs ask you for undergrad education? I imagine some people would be impressed with Harvard or Princeton for undergrad. I think med school is even more important than that to fellowship PDs, rightly or wrongly.

 

[sport29883]

Why do residency programs ask you for undergrad education? I imagine some people would be impressed with Harvard or Princeton for undergrad. I think med school is even more important than that to fellowship PDs, rightly or wrongly.

I dont even know why I am replying - but the importance given to the med school isnt as much as you think. Many IMGs get into great fellowships every year; and most PD have NOT heard of their med school. It may be more so for internal purposes e.g. Bayview grad who has done med school at Hopkins, or a California-born/schooled person wanting to return back to the state.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

I dont even know why I am replying - but the importance given to the med school isnt as much as you think. Many IMGs get into great fellowships every year; and most PD have NOT heard of their med school. It may be more so for internal purposes e.g. Bayview grad who has done med school at Hopkins, or a California-born/schooled person wanting to return back to the state.

Yes, I don't mean to imply it is a very important factor. But even if you look at the survey of IMPDs and Fellowship PDs regarding factors involved in the fellowship match, place of med school is one of the 18 factors they looked at...And it did not rank last out of those 18. So it does have some significance. Place of residency training outranked med school.

The reason why IMGs do better in the fellowship match than the residency match is because they tend to have more publications (more important to fellowships than to IM programs), because now they have real US clinical experience through residency, and because they tend to have much higher step scores compared to other AMGs in their respective residency programs.

 

[QofQuimica]

Personally, I think it is less useful to assign absolute ranks as much as it is to assign tiers. For instance, your top 4 can easily be interchanged and hence should constitute Tier 1. User IMPassion posted a similar thread (using Tiers) in January - take a look at that.

Along with tiers, I would argue that if you're going to do a ranking like this, you should separate it into broad geographic regions (e.g., South, West, Midwest, NE). As shocking as this may be to some of you from the coasts, not everyone wants to live in Baltimore, Boston, or NYC.

But I agree with those who said that rankings like this are mostly pointless, not only because no one agrees on a proper ranking methodology, but also because it completely discounts the individual efforts of the residents themselves. Also, coming from a "top-tier" program may be helpful in general, but it's not going to be very helpful if you manage to alienate the powers that be at your institution and no one is willing to go to bat for you. I think jdh makes an excellent point that the farther along in the process you go, the more important who you know becomes.

 

[jrspect]

Along with tiers, I would argue that if you're going to do a ranking like this, you should separate it into broad geographic regions (e.g., South, West, Midwest, NE). As shocking as this may be to some of you from the coasts, not everyone wants to live in Baltimore, Boston, or NYC.

But I agree with those who said that rankings like this are mostly pointless, not only because no one agrees on a proper ranking methodology, but also because it completely discounts the individual efforts of the residents themselves. Also, coming from a "top-tier" program may be helpful in general, but it's not going to be very helpful if you manage to alienate the powers that be at your institution and no one is willing to go to bat for you. I think jdh makes an excellent point that the farther along in the process you go, the more important who you know becomes.

How can I get to know important people? Is there a self-help book? Just kidding. Although I really don't know anyone important, so I could use advice. Thank you.

 

[ResidentMD]

How can I get to know important people? Is there a self-help book? Just kidding. Although I really don't know anyone important, so I could use advice. Thank you.

Work hard, work smart, be sincere, and keep your eyes and ears open. Not joking.

 

[jrspect]

Work hard, work smart, be sincere, and keep your eyes and ears open. Not joking.

I do work hard and am smart. But it still hasn't happened. Now what? Let's say I know of someone important who I think could be useful to my future. How do I go about getting to know that person and making an impression on them? I wish I knew how to schmooze.

 

[Mental Gymnast]

Was told by my advisor that University of Hawaii medicine prelim is the most competitive internal medicine residency (for obvious reasons). I guess that ends the days of a "Top 4" tier in internal medicine residencies... Now it's "top 5" with University of Hawaii on top and BWH, JHU, MGH, UCSF all hanging on with their nails and teeth

Can someone inform USNews stat please?

 

[Moonglow]

For academic IM residency, perceptions have stayed the same:

1. JHU
2. MGH
3. UCSF
4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W
7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington
10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW
12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC
16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

 

[ResidentMD]

For academic IM residency, perceptions have stayed the same:

1. JHU
2. MGH
3. UCSF
4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W
7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington
10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW
12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC
16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

Whose perceptions?

Where is Mayo?

Brighams at #6....

And I love the Baylor IM program and despise BIDMC similarly, but there is no way BIDMC is below BCM.

 

[Phineus]

For academic IM residency, perceptions have stayed the same:

1. JHU
2. MGH
3. UCSF
4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W
7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington
10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW
12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC
16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

Hi Moonglow:
If you are feeling up to it could you please include a one-liner about each program as to include the most common perception, both good and bad. Thanks.

 

[ID15]

For academic IM residency, perceptions have stayed the same:

1. JHU
2. MGH
3. UCSF
4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W
7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington
10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW
12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC
16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

Who's perception - yours? This list is going to have a few glaring inaccuracies according to most people's 'perception'

 

[jrspect]

For academic IM residency, perceptions have stayed the same:

1. JHU
2. MGH
3. UCSF
4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W
7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington
10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW
12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC
16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern
20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

That's an interesting list, but the first one is closer than this one. I can tell from the places I got interviews and the many places I was rejected from, that this list probably is not accurate.

 

[littlecbug]

I'm an IM resident. Here's my opinion based mainly on reputation, competitiveness to get an interview and match, and ease of obtaining fellowship interviews at top places in Cards/GI, from talking to residents and attendings over the years.

Top Tier (there's no point to splitting hairs here, since no doors will be closed for fellowship):
JHU
MGH
BWH
UCSF

Tier 1b:
Penn
Columbia
Duke

Tier 2:
UCLA
UMichigan
UChicago
WashU
Stanford
UTSW
UW
Cornell
BIDMC

 

[IMtoHO]

I'm an IM resident. Here's my opinion based mainly on reputation, competitiveness to get an interview and match, and ease of obtaining fellowship interviews at top places in Cards/GI, from talking to residents and attendings over the years.

Top Tier (there's no point to splitting hairs here, since no doors will be closed for fellowship):
JHU
MGH
BWH
UCSF

Tier 1b:
Penn
Columbia
Duke

Tier 2:
UCLA
UMichigan
UChicago
WashU
Stanford
UTSW
UW
Cornell
BIDMC

1. What's the deal with Tier 1b- is an education at BWH/JHU that much better than one at Duke?
2. Does going to these programs close certain doors? I can't imagine a UPenn grad being looked down upon compared to his JHU colleague.

 

[ResidentMD]

I'm an IM resident. Here's my opinion based mainly on reputation, competitiveness to get an interview and match, and ease of obtaining fellowship interviews at top places in Cards/GI, from talking to residents and attendings over the years.

Top Tier (there's no point to splitting hairs here, since no doors will be closed for fellowship):
JHU
MGH
BWH
UCSF

Tier 1b:
Penn
Columbia
Duke

Tier 2:
UCLA
UMichigan
UChicago
WashU
Stanford
UTSW
UW
Cornell
BIDMC

1. What's the deal with Tier 1b- is an education at BWH/JHU that much better than one at Duke?
2. Does going to these programs close certain doors? I can't imagine a UPenn grad being looked down upon compared to his JHU colleague.

For some reason, though its funny, I agree with the tier 1b concept. Again, your tier 2 probably has 10 more programs in it, that include Baylor, UAB, Vandy, UNC...or UNLESS, is there a -------- ----------tier 2B?

 

[chitown82]

I'm an IM resident. Here's my opinion based mainly on reputation, competitiveness to get an interview and match, and ease of obtaining fellowship interviews at top places in Cards/GI, from talking to residents and attendings over the years.

Top Tier (there's no point to splitting hairs here, since no doors will be closed for fellowship):
JHU
MGH
BWH
UCSF

Tier 1b:
Penn
Columbia
Duke

Tier 2:
UCLA
UMichigan
UChicago
WashU
Stanford
UTSW
UW
Cornell
BIDMC

I like the tier approach and I agree with this assessment. Outside of the "tier 1" institutions, programs in "tier 2" are reasonably interchangeable.

 

[littlecbug]

1. What's the deal with Tier 1b- is an education at BWH/JHU that much better than one at Duke?
2. Does going to these programs close certain doors? I can't imagine a UPenn grad being looked down upon compared to his JHU colleague.

All other factors being equal, when it comes to fellowship interviews, jhu/bwh/mgh/ucsf residents have a slight edge compared to other places when it comes to fellowship interviews. It's just the way it is. Personally I think the training at Tier 1 and Tier 1b places are fantastic and the education is hardly different.

 

[Scaredshizzles]

I like the tier approach and I agree with this assessment. Outside of the "tier 1" institutions, programs in "tier 2" are reasonably interchangeable.

And I actually think the difference between tier 1B and tier 2 is not that large. The difference is essentially that they will place 1-2 persons per year into programs like MGH/BWH/JHU for GI or cards fellowships, whereas tier 2 programs only place a person at those programs once every 3-4 years. However, all three of those tier 1B programs actually don't favor their own residents as much as you would hope for fellowships and not as much as several of the tier 2 programs interestingly. That is why you get a mix of Jefferson or Lenkanau with the JHU/BWH in the case of UPenn. Similarly with Duke you get the Wake Forest's or cards at MUSC (MUSC is actually a pretty good GI program though.)

 

[Moonglow]

Academic IM residency, perceptions by group:

1. JHU




2. MGH
3. UCSF

4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W

7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington

10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW

12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC

16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern

20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

 

[Scaredshizzles]

Academic IM residency, perceptions by group:

1. JHU




2. MGH
3. UCSF

4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W

7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington

10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW

12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC

16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern

20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

Yes, we get it moonglow. You're at Hopkins. And you think highly of the programs that Hopkins most frequently interacts with (Duke for example) in terms of recruiting med students from or sending out to fellowships tom etc. And JHU and HMS will always be a rivalry. You see the BWH's competitiveness as a rival to JHU, so you placed them 6th. We get it. Thanks.

 

[jbz24]

1. MGH
2. BWH
3. UCSF
4. Columbia
5. Penn
...
...
...
57. JHU

 

[stankem]

Academic IM residency, perceptions by group:

1. JHU




2. MGH
3. UCSF

4. Duke
5. Penn
6. B&W

7. Washington U.
8. UCLA
9. U. Washington

10. U. Michigan
11. UT-SW

12. Columbia
13. Baylor College
14. Cornell
15. BIDMC

16. Stanford
17. Vanderbilt
18. U. Chicago
19. Northwestern

20. Yale
21. Mt. Sinai
22. UPitt

I have to disagree. Hopkins is limited by lack of name recognition from the public (lower ranked undergrad, D1 only in lacrosse (feminine sport))

 

[Scaredshizzles]

I have to disagree. Hopkins is limited by lack of name recognition from the public (lower ranked undergrad, D1 only in lacrosse (feminine sport))

Thank you, I was hoping someone would bring this up. At least Harvard has a D1 basketball team. Hopkins just has lax, and their lax team isn't even as newsworthy as Duke's.

 

[Phineus]

Moonglow:
Do you believe that at the end of residency, physician competency and skill is ranked as follows: JHU >> MGH/UCSF > Duke/UPenn/BWH > others?

 

[QofQuimica]

How can I get to know important people? Is there a self-help book? Just kidding. Although I really don't know anyone important, so I could use advice. Thank you.

Actually, there is a perfect self-help book.

All kidding aside, what Resident said is right. It requires a little bit of assertiveness, initiative, persistence, and serendipity. Oh, and talking to people at research conferences never hurts.

 

[ResidentMD]

A few of the comments on this thread makes me say this repeatedly -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0J4bk6Mw2g&feature=related

Shizzles, you are interesting - you make some random comments at times, and then come up with something reasonably sensible.

Moonglow....less said the better.

 

[texasguy]

Thanks!