academics vs private practice

[troubled]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Can someone please explain to me what is meant by an academic career in Pathology? What if someone is certified only in AP what are the options as far as jobs? And does that limit a person to only University based research positions? And what does private practice entail? I am an IMG and am really confused by the options.

 

[troubled]

also if someone does AP as 3 yr program can he do a fellowship in CP and get board certified?
Thanks.

 

[yaah]

An academic career is generally university based. A component usually includes research and/or publications. Not all academics do research or publish, but most do or at least participate. They also teach, but that is becoming less important, sadly. The way to become "professor" is not to teach (med students and residents), but to hole up in a lab.

Private practice is generally working for a private lab or hospital where research and publication are less important, and often not done at all.

Ap or CP only trainees usually go into academics, but not always, depending on what fellowships they do. You cannot do a CP fellowship and get CP boarded without doing residency in CP - as part of the boards includes certification of training. Most private practice people are AP/CP trained unless they work for a niche industry or lab.

 

[elperro]

So how does the daily variety and difficulty of cases differ between academic path and private practice? I get the general hunch that there would be less variety, and the difficult cases would be sent out for referral much of the time. Is there any truth to this viewpoint, if so, what are the main differences in variety of cases that one would see? Would it get monotonous to be a private practice doc that sees all the same types of things all the time? I would love to work in academics, but I do NOT want to do research. I like to teach, but it sounds like that is not the way to reach full career potential in academics from what Yaah said.

 

[yaah]

Well, difficult cases don't happen only at tertiary care centers - oftentimes the diagnosis is made outside, and confirmed at the tertiary center. You may not see lots of certain things that generally come out at tertiary centers (like lung lobectomies, sarcoma resections, etc) but you see lots of biopsies.

But yes, teaching is not an academic priority anymore, oddly. While teaching is valued, it is only valued if it is in addition to providing another function - like an established surgical pathologist who gets lots of consults, or someone who brings in research money, etc. It's unfortunate that teaching hospitals often neglect what should be their primary function. I guess neglect would be a harsh word, because resident education is often a large priority - but it seems to NOT be a priority when recruiting new faculty.

 

[miko2005]

But yes, teaching is not an academic priority anymore, oddly. While teaching is valued, it is only valued if it is in addition to providing another function - like an established surgical pathologist who gets lots of consults, or someone who brings in research money, etc. It's unfortunate that teaching hospitals often neglect what should be their primary function. I guess neglect would be a harsh word, because resident education is often a large priority - but it seems to NOT be a priority when recruiting new faculty.

I agree that it seems unfair that teaching is not emphasized. However, its like that in every field in academics (non-medicine). My husband is in academics in physics and faculty are never hired based on teaching, but primarily based on research. Teaching is viewed as a necessary evil of a sort 😀 .