Are these really the top 10 anesthesia program in the country??

[aimedicine]

Are these really the top 10 anesthesia program in country???
According to Doximity the top 10 anesthesia program are:

1)UCSF
2)MGH
3)B&W
4)Duke
5)Stanford
6)Hopkins
7)UPenn
8)Mayo-Roch
9)Univ. of Mich.
10)UPMC

https://www.doximity.com/residency_navigator/programs#residency_specialty_id=40

OUR RESIDENCY RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Doximity’s Residency Navigator is a tool built to help medical students make informed residency decisions
and to increase transparency in the residency match process. Residency Navigator is comprised of two major
parts – (1) reputation data and (2) objective data. The former is derived from peer nominations from over
17,000 verified physicians. The latter is complied from a variety of public sources as well as our proprietary
Doximity database, which covers all U.S. physicians, regardless of membership with Doximity.
Residency ranking lists made available to the public are based solely the reputational component of
Residency Navigator and reflects opinions of physicians who have trained and are board-certified in the
respective specialties.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted171991]

#1 UCSF:

Top Subspecialties by Alumni
[1.] Critical Care Medicine 12%

P.S. Just couldn't help it, based on recent discussions.

 

[deleted171991]

What the heck?

#2 MGH:

Top Subspecialties by Alumni
Critical Care Medicine 17%

Either Doximity is wrong about the data (I won't comment on the ranking), or...

P.S. This must be old data. Look at the percentage subspecializing. Way too low.

 

[deleted126335]

Sure they are. Just ask them.

There are probably another twenty that say they are in the top ten. Just ask them.

The above are probably pretty close to being the ten most desired by med students in the match. Which is not quite what you asked.

 

[aimedicine]

This was probably the only list (that i've found) that is close to being objective...according to their methodology, their list was based on opinions of board certified anesthesiologists.

 

[Orin]

...according to their methodology, their list was based on opinions...

No, this would be the definition of subjective.

 

[1029384756x]

No, this would be the definition of subjective.

lol

 

[aimedicine]

No, this would be the definition of subjective.

Ha this guy here is funny, Seinfeld status.

But if u read my OP, it said that the list is based on peer nomination from 17,000 verified board certified anesthesiologist and objective data...iI was too lazy to type all of that cause I assumed people would actually know what I mean without me having to actually spell it out

 

[1029384756x]

But if u read my OP, it said that the list is based on peer nomination from 17,000 verified board certified anesthesiologist and objective data...iI was too lazy to type all of that cause I assumed people would actually know what I mean without me having to actually spell it out

You're still describing a subjective ranking system.
An objective ranking system would take into consideration facts that are not subject to personal opinion. Such as board exam pass rate/scores, average Step scores of accepted residents, fellowship match rates, post-residency job placement, research funding, etc.

 

[aimedicine]

You're still describing a subjective ranking system.
An objective ranking system would take into consideration facts that are not subject to personal opinion. Such as board exam pass rate/scores, average Step scores of accepted residents, fellowship match rates, post-residency job placement, research funding, etc.

"....AND OBJECTIVE DATA"

 

[aimedicine]

Residency Navigator is comprised of two major
parts – (1) reputation data and (2) objective data. The former is derived from peer nominations from over
17,000 verified physicians. The latter is complied from a variety of public sources as well as our proprietary
Doximity database, which covers all U.S. physicians, regardless of membership with Doximity

 

[deleted171991]

Except that the "objective" data is many years old. There is no way only less than 50% of the grads pursue fellowships, or that Critical Care is among their top choices. That must have been back in the times when one could do Critical Care + Cardiac in 18 months, which ended about 7-10 years ago AFAIK. So it's very old "data".

 

[aimedicine]

Except that the "objective" data is many years old. There is no way only less than 50% of the grads pursue fellowships, or that Critical Care is among their top choices. That must have been back in the times when one could do Critical Care + Cardiac in 18 months, which ended about 7-10 years ago AFAIK. So it's very old "data".

TOP SUBSPECIALTIES BY ALUMNI Data is derived from Doximity user profile data, including alumni
who graduated within the past 10 years, taking into account current subspecialty, board certification,
and fellowship data. The most common subspecialties for alumni following their residency are displayed.
Any discrepancy between the overall percentage who sub-specialize and the aggregate top specialty
percentages is because physicians may have more than one sub-specialty

So ffp you maybe right, but like i said earlier this is the only source that i can find that actually comes close to being comprehensive and objective....every other list i found on this site or on the internet have been based solely on either NIH funding or random med student opinions...i'm just saying ill rather value the "opinions" of board certified anesthesiologist combined with objective data (board pass rates, fellowship, etc...) albeit some of the data might be old...but i think we can all agree that UCSF, MGH, B&W, Duke, Stanford, Hopkins, Upenn, Mayo are amongst the top 8 programs in the country....U of M and UPMC maybe debatable but both of those programs have very solid reputation and tremendous alumni reach so i can live with them being number 9 and 10

 

[gasblaster]

Except that the "objective" data is many years old. There is no way only less than 50% of the grads pursue fellowships, or that Critical Care is among their top choices. That must have been back in the times when one could do Critical Care + Cardiac in 18 months, which ended about 7-10 years ago AFAIK. So it's very old "data".

Agree that the percentage pursuing fellowship is much higher than 50%, although Critical Care is still popular at a lot of these institutions from what I've seen.

 

[anbuitachi]

I feel like the field is changing so much, last 10 years include a lot of old data

 

[Orin]

Residency Navigator is comprised of two major
parts – (1) reputation data and (2) objective data.

BEST MATCH/PROGRAM RANKING The default rank for programs prior to any filters being applied –
such as location, preferences, or fellowships – is based on the count of peer nominations, in descending
order, with geographical regional weighting to accommodate for population variances

The overall rank you see there is purely based on the # of people who said this place is a "Top 5" program. That was used to generate a top-10 list. It's basically a popularity contest, with maybe somewhat qualified judges. Though honestly, the peers don't even need to have trained in the states, they just need to be boarded. And really, you know my training was better than yours right?

If you want to rank it based on their objective data...

These are the top 10 programs for % into a fellowship:
1. University of Cincinnati Medical Center/College of Medicine 48%
2. Massachusetts General Hospital 47%
3. Cleveland Clinic Foundation 45%
4. Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium 44%
5. McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University 43%
6. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center 43%
7. Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School 43%
8. Boston Medical Center 43%
9. University of North Carolina Hospitals 42%
10. UPMC Medical Education 42%

These are the top 10 programs for %tile of peer reviewed publications:
1. New York Presbyterian Hospital (Cornell Campus) 99%
2. Massachusetts General Hospital 98%
3. New York Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia Campus) 98%
4. Mayo Clinic College of Medicine (Rochester) 97%
5. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center 97%
6. University of California (San Francisco) 97%
7. Brigham and Women's Hospital 95%
8. Johns Hopkins University 94%
9. University of Michigan 93%
10. University of Washington 93%

The rankings that would be interesting to see would be the ones based on the opinions of program directors rather than "specialists," as the PDs might have some sense for the pulse of training programs. I'm really hoping this next accreditation system has some public reporting about the quality of programs.

 

[deleted50478]

There is no remotely objective way of ranking by quality of training provided. You can't quantify mentorship and independent practice opportunities.

The only meaningful ranking is reputation anyway. That's what gets you fellowships and jobs. Employers don't know if you are good or not.

Almost all ranking is self-fulfilling prophesy.

 

[BuzzPhreed]

Well, let's just talk about Doximity in general here.

They are basically using your information to make money for themselves. "Vertical social platform" which tricks you into "joining" them by sending you emails from colleagues. They then boast about the number of doctors that they have who joined to increase their investments and drive their stock price. What they don't tell you is the number of doctors who regularly use their services. Which I don't imagine is very many in the grand scheme of things. Certainly have not figured out what they can do for an anesthesiologist. And neither have they, apparently, so they produce a semi-bogus list that requires you to log-in to see the entire list.

I just don't like how they got started (worth looking into and understanding if you don't already), I don't like the "predatory" feel of how they run their business, and I don't trust someone like a for-profit business to shepherd all the sensitive information that they are.

Don't let this latest ranking ploy trick you into "joining" Doximity. You're already in there... at least all of the sensitive information about you is. You shouldn't have to become a member to access your own information. Information they never sought your permission to solicit and use in the first place.

 

[norwood]

If you want to rank it based on their objective data...

These are the top 10 programs for % into a fellowship:

That's an awfully big leap, to assume that everyone everywhere wants to do a fellowship, and therefore the percent going into fellowship indicates the strength of a program.

I was at "one of the 20 programs that will tell you it's in the top 10" (as one residency director memorably, and correctly, put it), could have easily done fellowship, and had no interest in doing one. Same was true for others in my class. On the other hand, of the 3 weakest residents in my class, all 3 did fellowships.

If you feel like doing fellowship, more power to you, but it doesn't equal program strength.

 

[Orin]

If you feel like doing fellowship, more power to you, but it doesn't equal program strength.

I agree, sort of. There's probably a slight but proportional relationship.

This was just an example of the objective data from the dox-poll as compared to the popularity/pissing contest lists.

 

[gratefulgas]

Based on my anecdotal experience interviewing at far too many of these programs in recent months, I agree that UPMC is probably among the best programs, NYMC is probably among the worst, and the rest of this list is probably total horse$hit.

 

[aimedicine]

Based on my anecdotal experience interviewing at far too many of these programs in recent months, I agree that UPMC is probably among the best programs, NYMC is probably among the worst, and the rest of this list is probably total horse$hit.

Agree, UPMC was a very pleasant surprise. They even gave you a UPMC anesthesia T-shirt at the end of the interview.