A New Medical School Ranking System: Social Mission Score

[TheFlashMD]

A study from the Annals of Internal Medicine trying to evaluate schools' penchant for graduating PCPs, providors for underserved regions, and minority ratios.

Nice to have a study that reflects more than just NIH research dollars.

Appendix (with rankings of three metrics, and overall score):
http://www.annals.org/content/suppl/2010/06/03/152.12.804.DC1/152-12-804-Appendix.pdf

Link to full text study:
http://www.annals.org/content/152/12/804.full?aimhp

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[organdonor]

Nice to have a study that reflects more than just NIH research dollars

True, but any rankings are going to be just as equally arbitrary unless the criteria they use are "applicability to TheFlashMD." NIH funding, mission score, cost, distance from home, fit, are all criteria that need to be considered. My #1 choice school that I will be attending was not my #1 because US News said they were (they didn't) or because they have the best mission score (they don't). Mostly cost, some legacy, and distance. But if someone is looking for a school with a focus on underserved or producing primary care physicians, this would be a good resource.

I might add that it is refreshing to see MD and DO schools ranked together, especially with most of the criteria that they use in the study.

 

[TheFlashMD]

True, but any rankings are going to be just as equally arbitrary unless the criteria they use are "applicability to TheFlashMD."

Thanks for making quick assumptions. Not only am I not interested in primary care, don't have plans to practice in underserved areas necessarily, nor am I minority, I never endorsed picking a school based upon such rankings. My school is also not ranked highly. I do, however, believe while imperfect, this study offers additional(actually medical educationally relevant) information regarding school choice rather than who has the most research dollars.

 

[krs881]

Thanks Flash for posting this! I'll be attending a "northeastern, urban" med school that the authors say tend to rank lower in social mission (though it's not in the bottom 20!), but that is in part because I wanted to study in the community I am from and where I hope to spend the good portion of the rest of my life (New Haven). I suppose part of my career plan is to figure out what "community medicine" means for me in practice.

Here's the link to the top 20 and bottom 20 "social mission schools" if that is easier for some to read than the appendix --

http://www.annals.org/content/152/12/804/T1.large.jpg

 

[Penner]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

 

[auburnO5]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

 

[Espadaleader]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

Hey, Hold on a second. That list is true. The top tier schools are interested in other things. Morehouse's mission is purely social, and they aim their students to work in urban, inner-city areas. Who better to work in these areas than the underprivileged themselves? As for better off, we need both. We need Hopkins for what they do and Morehouse for the same. I understand where you're coming from, the "inverse list". It just depends on what your personal mission is. Don't knock the mission.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

Yes, because all the amazing things they do at major research institutions to help old people live longer really contributes to society.

 

[KeyzerSoze]

Yes, because all the amazing things they do at major research institutions to help old people live longer really contributes to society.

That's asinine.

 

[morning]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

Thank goodness. PLEASE don't apply to MSU or U of M. The less drooling gunners in my class, the better.

 

[Penner]

Thank goodness. PLEASE don't apply to MSU or U of M. The less drooling gunners in my class, the better.

Haha okay I won't!

 

[TooMuchResearch]

That's asinine.

Yes, many of the things done at major research institutions are asinine.

 

[eablackwell]

Alright guys, let's not pretend any one place has a monopoly on asinine things. I'm sure there's plenty to go around.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

Alright guys, let's not pretend any one place has a monopoly on asinine things. I'm sure there's plenty to go around.

Nah, that's asinine

 

[Neuronix]

I am very unhappy with the name of this scoring system. It implies that the social service provided by some providers is unimportant compared to the social service provided by others. I wrote more about this here:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/blog.php?b=3947

 

[Fiddlergirl]

It's interesting the USHS was ranked in the lowest 20. I'm assuming that's because all of their graduates go directly on to active duty. How is serving your country in the armed forces not part of a "social mission?"

 

[csmittyB]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. ....

This may be true to some extent, but I also think the list show what the grads were interested in doing with their life. Not everyone wants to be a Radiodermopedic surgeon. UCSF was ranked 61 while UC Irvine was 93. Do you really think UCSF grads couldn't match into good specialties/get jobs in desirable locations compared to Irvine grads? Hell, the DO school I'll be attending ranks lower (39) than UC Davis (24) and UC San Diego (32).

 

[NickNaylor]

My top choice is ranked last on the social missions score. I am such a horrible human being.

 

[Tatastrophy]

Social mission? More like, which students couldn't match into good specialties/couldn't get jobs in desirable locations. Is it a surprise that Penn, Duke, Harvard, Cornell, Columbia, Hopkins, and Northwestern are all at the bottom of the PCP list? Or that Penn, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, and Hopkins are on the bottom of the "social mission" ranking? Course not. I'll argue though that if we had to choose between Johns Hopkins or Morehouse College, society would be better off without Morehouse.

Thanks though, I'll definitely be using this list (albeit inversely from how the authors wanted us to use it) when deciding which med school to go to.

way to sound like an enormous tool.
good luck hitting the rock bottom of this list adcoms at those schools might not seek out people passionate about helping the underserved as much as the top of the list but I assure you that they are quite adept at picking out conceited little pre-meds with delusions of grandeur.

 

[Penner]

way to sound like an enormous tool.
good luck hitting the rock bottom of this list adcoms at those schools might not seek out people passionate about helping the underserved as much as the top of the list but I assure you that they are quite adept at picking out conceited little pre-meds with delusions of grandeur.

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

 

[BBender716]

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

Wow. first of all, it's a great achievement to get in at all. Secondly, there's more to consider than a school's rank when choosing a medical school to attend so before you start crapping on other people's medical schools, get in first and then be happy and thankful for getting in wherever you wind up. I can only hope it won't be where I end up attending.

 

[Penner]

Wow. first of all, it's a great achievement to get in at all. Secondly, there's more to consider than a school's rank when choosing a medical school to attend so before you start crapping on other people's medical schools, get in first and then be happy and thankful for getting in wherever you wind up. I can only hope it won't be where I end up attending.

Sorry, was I too truthful for you? Don't worry, you didn't get in anywhere that I'm even applying to. Rankings certainly aren't the most important factor to me, and I said nothing to give evidence that I believe a school's rank is the only factor that should be considered when choosing a medical school.

And I don't consider being in the top 43% of an applicant pool as a "great achievement" - are you kidding me, the average intelligence of a pre-med is pretty sad.

 

[BBender716]

Sorry, was I too truthful for you? Don't worry, you didn't get in anywhere that I'm even applying to. Rankings certainly aren't the most important factor to me, and I said nothing to give evidence that I believe a school's rank is the only factor that should be considered when choosing a medical school.

Well that's a relief.

 

[Penner]

Well that's a relief.

Yup, that low MCAT score saved you.

 

[BBender716]

Yup, that low MCAT score saved you.

 

[metallica81788]

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

Sorry, was I too truthful for you? Don't worry, you didn't get in anywhere that I'm even applying to. Rankings certainly aren't the most important factor to me, and I said nothing to give evidence that I believe a school's rank is the only factor that should be considered when choosing a medical school.

And I don't consider being in the top 43% of an applicant pool as a "great achievement" - are you kidding me, the average intelligence of a pre-med is pretty sad.

You're really cool.

I wish I could make myself seem and feel better by belittling other people.

 

[GoSpursGo]

And I don't consider being in the top 43% of an applicant pool as a "great achievement" - are you kidding me, the average intelligence of a pre-med is pretty sad.

In any case, society needs their PCPs. So yay for these schools.

Society also needs specialists and researchers. So yay for the other rankings too.

There, I trust everyone's happy now

 

[BBender716]

In any case, society needs their PCPs. So yay for these schools.

Society also needs specialists and researchers. So yay for the other rankings too.

There, I trust everyone's happy now

What nobody needed was another Lakers' championship.

 

[GoSpursGo]

What nobody needed was another Lakers' championship.

Ugh. I'm not going to get away from that tonight, am I?

 

[BBender716]

Ugh. I'm not going to get away from that tonight, am I?

I'm right there with ya. lol

 

[morning]

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

I dunno why everything is about numbers and medical school rankings with you. I hope you reply to this with something like, "oh, you're just saying that because your future MCAT score is probably going to be lower than my future MCAT score and also you're probably going to go into family medicine!"

But don't let me give you any ideas. Come up with a reply on your own and use my suggestions as a starting block. Maybe I'm just jealous that I don't have an MDapps profile? Maybe it's because I'm poor?

I'm sure you can figure out some numbers-related reason for me to be laughing at you. I have faith in you.

 

[Ilovewater]

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

So in other words, you're going to fake being a nice/sane person. Wow.

 

[NotAsking4Much]

Hahaha and you sound like someone compensating mentally for not being able to get into a decent medical school. Have fun at your unranked medical school, and don't worry about my chances of getting into medical school . (It's hilarious when people think I'll be talking with this kind of tone on my PS or during my interviews)

No offense...but your attitude really makes me hope you didn't apply to my school either and it IS "ranked." And if you did, I guarantee you your interviewers can spot this a mile away. Trust me...however smart you think you are, they're smarter.

Rankings only mean that much...it's what you do with it that matters.

I hope you realize that whatever school you apply - you're going to be surrounded by people more brilliant than you. At some point in life, you're going to get a reality check. Whether or not you have it now or later, that's your life decisions...but we'll all get it.

 

[Mute98]

as a member of one of those minority groups, its almost insulting that minority ratios is actually a criterion

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Relax with the insults guys. If someone's posts are bothering you, just click the ignore button.

Honestly, I think this social "ranking" is as useless as the research rankings are. I don't get how research is less important in terms of "social service" than primary care is, or vice versa. I hope people realize that the clinical guidelines physicians use are a result of extensive research. Even in the absence of research for the gray areas, existing work is used to guide treatment plans.

 

[FlowRate]

This was easily the most stupid article I've ever read. "lol schools that graduate more minorities into primary care are better."

(note, this does NOT imply that graduating more minorities is a bad thing nor is it meant to imply that minorities themselves can only get into PC.)

 

[morning]

This was easily the most stupid article I've ever read. "lol schools that graduate more minorities into primary care are better."

(note, this does NOT imply that graduating more minorities is a bad thing nor is it meant to imply that minorities themselves can only get into PC.)

Did you actually read the study or are you just reacting?

You have to understand what they're getting at here.

It's not about what schools teach the best or how good the resulting doctors are, it's about whether a school is contributing to an underrepresented segment of America. A school that graduates more URMs and/or sends more physicians into underserved areas is by definition better at graduating more URMs and sending more physicians into underserved areas.

Do you get it now?

Nowhere in the study do they take a dump on research universities or say that one model is better than another model. It's not about superiority. It's about listing the universities that provide primary care doctors, minorities and rural or inner city medicine doctors. To say that this study is ridiculous for focusing on this is like complaining that a cancer research study is biased or shortsighted because it doesn't focus on AIDS. Both are equally valid inquiries, but people will choose to focus on one or the other.

Background: The basic purpose of medical schools is to educate physicians to care for the national population. Fulfilling this goal requires an adequate number of primary care physicians, adequate distribution of physicians to underserved areas, and a sufficient number of minority physicians in the workforce.



Measurements: The percentage of graduates who practice primary care, work in health professional shortage areas, and are underrepresented minorities, combined into a composite social mission score.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Did you actually read the study or are you just reacting?

You have to understand what they're getting at here.

It's not about what schools teach the best or how good the resulting doctors are, it's about whether a school is contributing to an underrepresented segment of America. A school that graduates more URMs and/or sends more physicians into underserved areas is by definition better at graduating more URMs and sending more physicians into underserved areas.

Do you get it now?

Background: The basic purpose of medical schools is to educate physicians to care for the national population. Fulfilling this goal requires an adequate number of primary care physicians, adequate distribution of physicians to underserved areas, and a sufficient number of minority physicians in the workforce.



Measurements: The percentage of graduates who practice primary care, work in health professional shortage areas, and are underrepresented minorities, combined into a composite social mission score.

I understand what the study is trying to say. I still think it's a pretty useless metric to measure med schools by. I just don't understand why/how they think working in primary care > research. One can make the argument that research can provide more of a social service (ie. helps more people) than being a pure PCP (ie. not contributing to research). In a few years (maybe shorter), I can easily see a bunch of threads on SDN telling premeds not to look at the social rankings just the way we currently have threads telling people how useless the USNews rankings are.

 

[NotAsking4Much]

What needs to happen is on a legislative level. There needs to be financial incentives for individuals to practice in the rural and underserved communities.

In these rural areas, there are no research centers hence the research oriented clinicians will never go over there. Furthermore, an individual who grew up in the city will not take his sizable salary and live in a middle of a village for no reason.

While there is all this debate about a shortage of doctors, the real issue is that we have a disproportional amount of doctors by geographical region. If you live in NYC, SF, or LA - if you can pay, there are a surplus of doctors competing for your business. In a large portion of the country, even if you can pay, there is perhaps at most 1 family practice doctor with the nearest mass of specialists hundreds of miles away. This is something the government has to address and rectify via financial means (really the only way to alter people's behaviors).

 

[morning]

I understand what the study is trying to say. I still think it's a pretty useless metric to measure med schools by. I just don't understand why/how they think working in primary care > research. One can make the argument that research can provide more of a social service (ie. helps more people) than being a pure PCP (ie. not contributing to research). In a few years (maybe shorter), I can easily see a bunch of threads on SDN telling premeds not to look at the social rankings just the way we currently have threads telling people how useless the USNews rankings are.

I don't see anywhere where they say that working in primary care > research.

During the latter half of the 20th century, with federal and
state support, medical education expanded to meet population
needs (1). However, 3 specific interrelated issues
challenged medical educators and policymakers: an insufficient
number of primary care physicians, geographic
maldistribution of physicians, and the lack of a representative
number of racial and ethnic minorities in medical
schools and in practice.

That's the gist of their study. The word "research" appears like two or three times, in the context of USNews rankings being inadequate for measuring primary care-focused universities.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

I don't see anywhere where they say that working in primary care > research.

During the latter half of the 20th century, with federal and
state support, medical education expanded to meet population
needs (1). However, 3 specific interrelated issues
challenged medical educators and policymakers: an insufficient
number of primary care physicians, geographic
maldistribution of physicians, and the lack of a representative
number of racial and ethnic minorities in medical
schools and in practice.

That's the gist of their study. The word "research" appears like two or three times, in the context of USNews rankings being inadequate for measuring primary care-focused universities.

I understand that. But, based on the way they "rank" med schools, they're suggesting that schools that focus on research are of a lower value than those that focus on putting out PCPs. You realize that's there's more to studies than what's actually written in them right? They don't have to explicitly state that primary care > research...the implication seems pretty obvious based on their criteria for "ranking" schools.

And that's what I'm arguing against. How can one suggest (as this study does) that physician-scientists/researchers have less of a "social mission" value than PCPs? I stand firmly by my statement that this social mission ranking is just as useless, if not more, than the US News rankings.

 

[morning]

I understand that. But, based on the way they "rank" med schools, they're suggesting that schools that focus on research are of a lower value than those that focus on putting out PCPs. You realize that's there's more to studies than what's actually written in them right? They don't have to explicitly state that primary care > research...the implication seems pretty obvious based on their criteria for "ranking" schools.

And that's what I'm arguing against. How can one suggest (as this study does) that physician-scientists/researchers have less of a "social mission" value than PCPs? I stand firmly by my statement that this social mission ranking is just as useless, if not more, than the US News rankings.

Social mission is a dumb term for it and I agree that research has just as much of a "social mission" as primary care. But I understand that there is a very valid point they are trying to get at and quantify. It doesn't have to be termed "social mission" and I wish they hadn't phrased it that way because it really just pisses people off and distracts them from the study.

However, I disagree with you that "They don't have to explicitly state that primary care > research...the implication seems pretty obvious based on their criteria for "ranking" schools."

The rank is for a specific thing - how many URMs and primary doctors a school graduates in order to serve underrepresented communities. This is a study quantifying PRIMARY CARE physicians. Obviously research is not going to factor heavily into it. Why would research be a criteria for this study? Are there many physician-scientists working in Hardin, Montana or Meridian, Mississippi?

Do you think the research ranking in USNews does not rank university research programs correctly because URM enrollment isn't a factor in the criteria?

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Social mission is a dumb term for it and I agree that research has just as much of a "social mission" as primary care. But I understand that there is a very valid point they are trying to get at and quantify. It doesn't have to be termed "social mission" and I wish they hadn't phrased it that way because it really just pisses people off and distracts them from the study.

I agree that calling it social mission is definitely one reason people are annoyed by it.

However, I disagree with you that "They don't have to explicitly state that primary care > research...the implication seems pretty obvious based on their criteria for "ranking" schools."

We'll agree to disagree then. It seems pretty obvious to me that the social ranking implies than physician-scientists/researchers have less value than PCPs similar to how the US News ranking suggests that PCPs have a lower value than physician-scientists/researchers.

The rank is for a specific thing - how many URMs and primary doctors a school graduates in order to serve underrepresented communities. This is a study quantifying PRIMARY CARE physicians. Obviously research is not going to factor heavily into it. Why would research be a criteria for this study? Are there many physician-scientists working in Hardin, Montana or Meridian, Mississippi?

Sure, they're trying to quantify the value of PCPs...but by doing so, they're placing those that favor research at a lower tier. Going back to how the authors call this a social mission ranking and the way some of the things in the study are worded, they are placing a higher value on PCPs compared to researchers. It's the same thing with the US News rankings. They place research at a higher value than primary care...hence, they have Harvard, Hopkins, etc, in the top 10. This social mission ranking is essentially the inverse of the US News rankings, and just as useless too.

Do you think the research ranking in USNews does not rank university research programs correctly because URM enrollment isn't a factor in the criteria?

I don't really care about the US News rankings since I think they're pretty useless as well. I have an equally low opinion of this social mission ranking.

 

[Neuronix]

Nowhere in the study do they take a dump on research universities or say that one model is better than another model.

Then they should call it the "Underserved and Minority Care" score. Or they could even call it the "Primary Care" score. In calling it a "Social Mission" score, the authors belittle the social missions of medical schools whose primary purpose is not to create primary care physicians for underserved areas, but have other important social missions.

I particularly found Fiddlergirl's post funny. USHS ranks low because their graduates serve the military. Are they not serving an important social mission as well?

To put it another way, if USNews changed their research ranking to "Best Medical Schools" ranking, then I would be similarly annoyed. You call your ranking what it is without value judgements. Yes, the USNews research ranking is based mostly on NIH funding (including all affiliates, something the authors of this study did not take into account when discussing research funding), and as such I think it is currently the best reflection of which schools are top schools for research. If students believe that the schools that do the most research are prestigious or better or whatever nonsense the trolls of pre-allo want to say, that's up to them. That's some value judgment that people are making based on the USNews research ranking. But that doesn't mean USNews should call itself the "prestige" ranking or the "socially best" ranking. Call a spade a spade, without creating a judgemental name.

If someone thinks they have a better ranking, they can call it their own "Research Ranking". Just like these authors could have called their ranking a "Primary Care" ranking. The USNews rankings are very poor for Primary Care, so they're mostly ignored anyway.

As a white man who grew up very disadvantaged in mostly minority neighborhoods, I'm also continually insulted by the entire discussion about URMs. Diversity is not measured in skin color. But that's a discussion for elsewhere.

 

[mfrizzo3]

Sorry, was I too truthful for you? Don't worry, you didn't get in anywhere that I'm even applying to. Rankings certainly aren't the most important factor to me, and I said nothing to give evidence that I believe a school's rank is the only factor that should be considered when choosing a medical school.

And I don't consider being in the top 43% of an applicant pool as a "great achievement" - are you kidding me, the average intelligence of a pre-med is pretty sad.

Does your mommy still make you school lunches?

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Then they should call it the "Underserved and Minority Care" score. Or they could even call it the "Primary Care" score. In calling it a "Social Mission" score, the authors belittle the social missions of medical schools whose primary purpose is not to create primary care physicians for underserved areas, but have other important social missions.

Agree strongly with this.

My med school is in the bottom quartile on this so-called "social mission" score (because we send tons of people into competitive sub-specialties). But I would argue that we have an excellent "social mission" - our hospital provides tons and tons of indigent care, huge focus on service to the underserved regions of our city, etc. "Social mission" is a misnomer and imho a value judgment.

 

[Penner]

I dunno why everything is about numbers and medical school rankings with you.

It's not?

I hope you reply to this with something like, "oh, you're just saying that because your future MCAT score is probably going to be lower than my future MCAT score and also you're probably going to go into family medicine!"

You're just saying that because your future MCAT score is probably going to be lower than my future MCAT score and also you're probably going to go into family medicine! Happy?

But don't let me give you any ideas. Come up with a reply on your own and use my suggestions as a starting block. Maybe I'm just jealous that I don't have an MDapps profile? Maybe it's because I'm poor?

I'm sure you can figure out some numbers-related reason for me to be laughing at you. I have faith in you.

Reply to what? What exactly did you say in your post that's worth replying to? It's all about numbers and rankings to me? They're not unimportant to me, but you're certainly exaggerating to claim they are everything to me.

 

[Penner]

No offense...but your attitude really makes me hope you didn't apply to my school either and it IS "ranked." And if you did, I guarantee you your interviewers can spot this a mile away. Trust me...however smart you think you are, they're smarter.

I guarantee you I will not have this attitude in my applications nor during my interviews.

Rankings only mean that much...it's what you do with it that matters.

I hope you realize that whatever school you apply - you're going to be surrounded by people more brilliant than you. At some point in life, you're going to get a reality check. Whether or not you have it now or later, that's your life decisions...but we'll all get it.

Err okay thanks for those words of wisdom there. Real deep stuff. You chose to go to Yale which is in freaking New Haven - you probably care about rankings way more than I do.

 

[ButImLETired]

My top choice is ranked last on the social missions score. I am such a horrible human being.

Hehehe congrats, I'll be going to hell right along with you.
For what it's worth, some of those rankings are likely to be very different now (it's been almost 10 years since they've done that study). I know for my school, the year after that study was done we started an "office of diversity" which drastically increased the URM population within the med school. I'm sure other places had similar changes.

On the other hand, I agree that calling it "social mission" is a little melodramatic. There are so many factors that weren't accounted for. But I am glad that med schools like Morehouse and Michigan State, which have committed themselves to training students who'll serve the underserved, are up at the top where they belong. They may not bathe in NIH dollars, but their mission is an important one and if they get to say they're "in the top 10" for what they really care about, then that's awesome.

And Penner, please don't come here. Though I guess we're too low-ranked/southern/insert stereotype here for you, so phew, we're probably not on your list.

 

[FlowRate]

Social mission is a dumb term for it and I agree that research has just as much of a "social mission" as primary care. But I understand that there is a very valid point they are trying to get at and quantify. It doesn't have to be termed "social mission" and I wish they hadn't phrased it that way because it really just pisses people off and distracts them from the study.

However, I disagree with you that "They don't have to explicitly state that primary care > research...the implication seems pretty obvious based on their criteria for "ranking" schools."

The rank is for a specific thing - how many URMs and primary doctors a school graduates in order to serve underrepresented communities. This is a study quantifying PRIMARY CARE physicians. Obviously research is not going to factor heavily into it. Why would research be a criteria for this study? Are there many physician-scientists working in Hardin, Montana or Meridian, Mississippi?

Do you think the research ranking in USNews does not rank university research programs correctly because URM enrollment isn't a factor in the criteria?

It shouldn't matter to the extent that it becomes a ranking. A much more useful and color-blind metric would be better. For example, "what % of graduated students work in an underserved area after graduation/residency." It shouldn't matter what color of skin or specialty they are in. (or take IM, FM, EM, and OBGYN)