Anyone know anything about the AP residency at the NIH?

[Ludy]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just wondering if anyone has any info on the AP program at the NIH. I think it looks really interesting, especially for those of us planning on an academic career, but no one I've spoken to at my school is familiar with it. I would LOVE to be near DC, and from what I hear, the programs at GW and Georgetown aren't so hot, so this is an alternative... plus the opportunity for substantial research during residency, especially in molecular diagnostics, appeals to me.
Here's the website with the program description:
NIH AP Residency

 

[PathProspect]

Just wondering if anyone has any info on the AP program at the NIH. I think it looks really interesting, especially for those of us planning on an academic career, but no one I've spoken to at my school is familiar with it. I would LOVE to be near DC, and from what I hear, the programs at GW and Georgetown aren't so hot, so this is an alternative... plus the opportunity for substantial research during residency, especially in molecular diagnostics, appeals to me.
Here's the website with the program description:
NIH AP Residency

You posted this about a year ago -- I now have the same question! Have you learned anything about the prgram??

thanks!

 

[Gfunk6]

For some reason, there seems to be notoriously little information (anywhere) on NIH residency programs. I was interested in the NCI program in Rad Onc but I was thwarted in all my efforts to obtain more information. I guess the only option would be email the program itself.

 

[beary]

Sorry to bump a question from 2003, but now I have the same question again! I will email the NIH itself to actually get some real info, but was looking for anything "word of mouth."

 

[bananaface]

You get major props for bumping instead of making a new thread.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Sorry to bump a question from 2003, but now I have the same question again! I will email the NIH itself to actually get some real info, but was looking for anything "word of mouth."

One of my fellow classmates interviewed at that program. The guy I did a path research elective month for during 4th year med school also did his residency out there (he's an MD/PhD who is only AP certified). So I have heard these two things via word of mouth:

(1) NIH really strives to train people who want to be research scientists (aka, physician-SCIENTISTS). They are heavily recruiting MD/PhD types. Their program is not very big and they are quite selective.

(2) The breadth of AP training at NIH is somewhat limited. If you're interested in being a general surgical pathologist, NIH is probably not the best place for you.

 

[CameronFrye]

One of my fellow classmates interviewed at that program. The guy I did a path research elective month for during 4th year med school also did his residency out there (he's an MD/PhD who is only AP certified). So I have heard these two things via word of mouth:

(1) NIH really strives to train people who want to be research scientists (aka, physician-SCIENTISTS). They are heavily recruiting MD/PhD types. Their program is not very big and they are quite selective.

(2) The breadth of AP training at NIH is somewhat limited. If you're interested in being a general surgical pathologist, NIH is probably not the best place for you.

Yeah, it's probably not a place to consider if you have any thought of private practice down the line. We do have one faculty member here who did the NIH residency and then a GI fellowship at Hopkins. He does some surg path signout with tons of research (he was also a mudphud).

 

[DrBloodmoney]

All I will say is that NIH residents have to come to do outside elective rotations at our program to get bread-and-butter pathology. Like general cyto and even high-volume surg path experience. *shivers*

 

[1Path]

(2) The breadth of AP training at NIH is somewhat limited. If you're interested in being a general surgical pathologist, NIH is probably not the best place for you.

After having spent the past 2 years in the path department at NIH as a predoctoral fellow, I'll have to disagree with this as well. The residents are required to do outside rotations at community facilities (GW, Suburban, Walter Reed for example) to get that depth of experience folks are always speaking about.

 

[LADoc00]

I think you are taking your chances if you train here, unless you are 100% positive you want to do research. I was told by numerous mentors in academia to walk away from this one (some of whom had done post docs there even). Still, I think it would be interesting, personally speaking.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

After having spent the past 2 years in the path department at NIH as a predoctoral fellow, I'll have to disagree with this as well. The residents are required to do outside rotations at community facilities (GW, Suburban, Walter Reed for example) to get that depth of experience folks are always speaking about.

This I didn't know...it makes sense that NIH would fill in the deficiencies by having residents get exposure to different hospitals. That being said, let me put it another way...my impression from talking to one of my classmates as well as one of my attendings is that you don't go here if you're dead set on community practice. This echoes what LADoc00 is saying. There appear to be many other preferential programs that emphasize community practice geared training than NIH. It's not a matter of what training exists...it's a matter of how suited the training is to your goals. NIH appears to train scientists...and although my knowledge is based on hearsay (as I said before), it makes total sense to me.

Irregardless of whatever arguments are made, I have increasingly become aware of one thing this early in training. Nothing beats experience. You gots to put in your time to be a competent pathologist. So what if you did 3-4 years of residency training at one place vs. another. After minimum AP training, you're not gonna be competent. You have to do fellowships and have more post-residency experience, either in an academic or community practice setting, to be a better pathologist. So maybe my argument is a bit moot.

 

[1Path]

Irregardless of whatever arguments are made, I have increasingly become aware of one thing this early in training. Nothing beats experience. You gots to put in your time to be a competent pathologist. So what if you did 3-4 years of residency training at one place vs. another. After minimum AP training, you're not gonna be competent. You have to do fellowships and have more post-residency experience, either in an academic or community practice setting, to be a better pathologist. So maybe my argument is a bit moot.

Here's what I know after "looking at the NIH model" from the premed perspective and of course, from reading a lot of what you guys have said in the pathology thread on SDN. 7 or 8 years from now when I'm finishing up school, I'll be doing a COMBINED AP/CP residency. Even though I LOVE cancer research and AP only would do, the idea of being a throughly trained pathologist has marinated for a minute or two in my mind.

Now, back to med school applications! 😡

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Here's what I know after "looking at the NIH model" from the premed perspective and of course, from reading a lot of what you guys have said in the pathology thread on SDN. 7 or 8 years from now when I'm finishing up school, I'll be doing a COMBINED AP/CP residency. Even though I LOVE cancer research and AP only would do, the idea of being a throughly trained pathologist has marinated for a minute or two in my mind.

Now, back to med school applications! 😡

Well may the force be with you.