Best top 5 Neurology residencies?

[CSUram]

The source is from my program's epileptologist who did his fellowship at Barrow's. He said that the fellows read the bulk of the eegs at the hospital. Sorry I don't have first hand experience or knowledge though.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[LocusCeruleous]

test

 

[UMHawkDoc]

I'm currently an M4 applying in neurology, and was wondering if anybody had specific input on any rising or falling programs. I understand the frustration with the ranking lists, but was hoping that somebody could offer advice on any programs making drastic changes. Thanks.

 

[chessodoc]

I'm currently an M4 applying in neurology, and was wondering if anybody had specific input on any rising or falling programs. I understand the frustration with the ranking lists, but was hoping that somebody could offer advice on any programs making drastic changes. Thanks.

Ditto

 

[darksideone]

I'm currently an M4 applying in neurology, and was wondering if anybody had specific input on any rising or falling programs. I understand the frustration with the ranking lists, but was hoping that somebody could offer advice on any programs making drastic changes. Thanks.

Congrats. You just gave typhoonegator and other mods a stroke by bumping this thread. We are now leaderless.

In all seriousness what do you want in a program? Research? Strong clinical training? Electives? Ability to get early career award? What are you looking for?

 

[Nerdologist]

1st group
Partners
UCSF
UPenn
WashU

2nd group
Hopkins
Columbia
Mayo-Rochester
Stanford

3rd group
UMiami
Yale
UCLA
BIDMC

4th group
Cornell
UPitt
Duke
UVa

5th group
Emory
Cleveland Clinic
Mt. Sinai
Vanderbilt

6th group
Northwestern
University of Washington
Baylor
URochester

7th group
Rush
Case Western
UAB
UNC

8th group
NYU
Georgetown
OHSU
MUSC


9th group
UT Southwestern
UCSD
Thomas Jefferson
UChicago


10th group
UT Houston
Wake Forest
Barrow
UFlorida

 

[maddog2020]

You are mad, sir. You have been posting on this thread for over 3 years and should know better than to post such a list. What is the source of your information. You have several programs listed here that are in disarray (no chairman, declining faculty etc). Perhaps your post was just an "Official 2012" joke

 

[chessodoc]

Wait Im curious, which ones of those are in disarray? And how do you know? Please help a clueless struggling applicant.

 

[darksideone]

Wait Im curious, which ones of those are in disarray? And how do you know? Please help a clueless struggling applicant.

You could look at the websites of the programs. You could talk with faculty at your school/your dept PD. That would help you figure how a department was doing.

 

[typhoonegator]

Oh, dear god no. If I didn't believe in free speech so strongly I would delete this abomination of a thread. Although, I suspect another would rise in its place. I'm getting twitchy just being in here.

 

[darksideone]

Oh, dear god no. If I didn't believe in free speech so strongly I would delete this abomination of a thread. Although, I suspect another would rise in its place. I'm getting twitchy just being in here.

I know you are having heart palpitations right now. But please don't stroke out on us. We need you around here to be our fearless leader. You could just lock it as the thread is old, beaten itself dry and doesn't really offer much. But it would still be searchable for someone to read through and stroke out from.

 

[typhoonegator]

Maybe that was part of a joke and I missed it, but closing a thread just because he doesn't agree with the content is very immature. It's harmless fun to most.... and I don't think there is ANYTHING that isn't ranked in the USA.

I don't close threads because I disagree with the content. That was the entire point of my post. But you haven't been here for the last 5+ years to see what happens when people try to objectively rank programs using purely subjective criteria. But it might be best if you refrain from calling the moderator of the Neurology forum immature until he's done something more deserving of that epithet.

 

[UMHawkDoc]

Congrats. You just gave typhoonegator and other mods a stroke by bumping this thread. We are now leaderless.

In all seriousness what do you want in a program? Research? Strong clinical training? Electives? Ability to get early career award? What are you looking for?

I'm looking for a well-rounded program that has a strong reputation. I'm not very interested in basic science research, but would be interested in doing some clinical research as a resident. The point of asking my original question is to get a heads up on any programs that I may want to avoid. I am currently deciding exactly which interviews I want to book flights to, etc, and don't want to spend the money to visit a program only to find out that they are on a significant downslide. Any advice or information anyone could offer in this regard would be greatly appreciated!

 

[typhoonegator]

I'm looking for a well-rounded program that has a strong reputation. I'm not very interested in basic science research, but would be interested in doing some clinical research as a resident. The point of asking my original question is to get a heads up on any programs that I may want to avoid. I am currently deciding exactly which interviews I want to book flights to, etc, and don't want to spend the money to visit a program only to find out that they are on a significant downslide. Any advice or information anyone could offer in this regard would be greatly appreciated!

You might personally find downsides at any program, so I can't give you my "iron lock" guarantee anywhere, but if you are looking at any of the top 4 "groups" mentioned in Nerdologist's ranking system above (not that I endorse any such system) you would do very well at any of those programs.

There are many programs outside that list that are outstanding, but given that you won't/can't define your interest outside of basic vs. clinical, it probably isn't worth breaking down those programs by any of their myriad subtypes. Are you interested in the methylome or interactome? How about QA/QC? Health disparities? Costs? Outcomes? RNA-seq? Stroke treatments? Animal models of neurodegeneration? Subjective memory impairments in a clincal setting? VA patients in a general clinical practice? Those are the kind of interests that matter if you really want to break things down to a high level of granularity. If you don't have that level of training/experience, then pick the program that makes you happy.

You shouldn't care if you pick a Ferrari or a Hyundai if you can't really tell the difference. Both are great -- they're just built for different things.

 

[darksideone]

I take a different approach than my friend typhoonegator. I don't think it is fair to say there are only "4" top programs to which one would get the best training. I know typhoon didn't mean it this way. Personally I think one needs to do this by region more, as many times these lists also incorporate "bias" in that people want to live in certain areas of the country as well. Not to say those programs aren't great, but location increases their desiredness. If you take Mayo Rochester and put that program in Boston/LA/SF/NYC, people would be knocking down doors to get in.

For me, in very simplistic terms would organize them into something like this in no particular order:

Midwest:
- Cleveland Clinic
- Mayo
- WashU

West Coast:
- UCSF
- Stanford
- UCLA

East Coast:
- Hopkins
- Partners
- Columbia
- UPenn

Southeast:
- Duke
- Miami
- Emory

Southwest:
- UTSW
- Baylor

This is just looking at 4 regions of the country, and finding the best overall 2-4 programs there. This is not meant to mean anything as this isn't all inclusive or comprehensive.

 

[typhoonegator]

I take a different approach than my friend typhoonegator. I don't think it is fair to say there are only "4" top programs to which one would get the best training.

No, no! I meant the top 4 "tiers" listed above as a general starting point, not 4 programs. Anybody who thinks there is an objective "top 5" residencies is selling you something. Partners, Penn, UCSF, and Mayo are all great at what they do -- but they aren't all great at everything. Not by a long shot. Maybe one of the things they aren't great at is what's most important to you.

 

[darksideone]

No, no! I meant the top 4 "tiers" listed above as a general starting point, not 4 programs. Anybody who thinks there is an objective "top 5" residencies is selling you something. Partners, Penn, UCSF, and Mayo are all great at what they do -- but they aren't all great at everything. Not by a long shot. Maybe one of the things they aren't great at is what's most important to you.

I figured I misunderstood what you meant. Some how I mistook what you wrote as top 4 programs rather than 4 groups. My fault on that.

Typhoon makes another great point, certain programs will offer unique opportunities that others might not. A place like UCSF or Hopkins will offer a greater opportunity to get exposed to neuro-HIV than say a program like Mayo. So if you are really interested in neuro-HIV, it might be worthwhile to focus on those programs that have a strong clinical and research training in this area. I know only a small % of medical students going into neurology know what they want to do, which is great and they are lucky to be ahead of the game in many ways. However for the majority you don't know. So in that regard it might be better to focus on programs that are well rounded and will offer you exposure to many different areas of neurology. Others know they want to go right into private practice, so going to a research intense program might not be the best use of time.

 

[neuralesque]

No, no! I meant the top 4 "tiers" listed above as a general starting point, not 4 programs. Anybody who thinks there is an objective "top 5" residencies is selling you something. Partners, Penn, UCSF, and Mayo are all great at what they do -- but they aren't all great at everything. Not by a long shot. Maybe one of the things they aren't great at is what's most important to you.

Specifically regarding the four programs you mentioned - Penn, Partners, UCSF, and Mayo - could you perhaps elaborate on their ostensible reputations? aka - what they're best 'known for'?
I know it's hard to make generalizations and programs can rapidly oscillate, but I don't have room in my schedule to interview at all of them and so I'm really searching for anything to help narrow it down.
My impressions from talking to my PD and other residents is that Partners has a reputations for being malignant, UCSF will work you hard but is the best, and Mayo has awesome clinical training, but perhaps lacks in acute care. Haven't heard much about UPenn. Any thoughts?
Thanks!

 

[typhoonegator]

Specifically regarding the four programs you mentioned - Penn, Partners, UCSF, and Mayo - could you perhaps elaborate on their ostensible reputations? aka - what they're best 'known for'?
I know it's hard to make generalizations and programs can rapidly oscillate, but I don't have room in my schedule to interview at all of them and so I'm really searching for anything to help narrow it down.
My impressions from talking to my PD and other residents is that Partners has a reputations for being malignant, UCSF will work you hard but is the best, and Mayo has awesome clinical training, but perhaps lacks in acute care. Haven't heard much about UPenn. Any thoughts?
Thanks!

Oh boy, opening a can of worms but here goes.

Partners: Ridiculous Harvard resources make it very attractive for researchers and clinician-scientists. Tons of research money pours through, and success begets success. Acute care and ICU neurology are strengths, less outpatient exposure. No program can really get away with being malignant anymore with all the restrictions, but MGH certainly isn't a touchy-feely place.

UCSF: San Francisco is very hilly. Clinically very strong, outstanding research infrastructure as well, with a bit of the venture-capital bent that is more common on the left coast. A great place to train as I think their hospital coverage system, which previously was very unwieldy and malignant, has been vastly improved.

Penn: A very well-rounded place, might offer the broadest clinical training of any of these four, with a bit less depth at certain levels. Great core faculty interacting with residents. A bit less research-intense than Partners or UCSF. Steve Galetta is one of the most respected program directors in the country, deservedly so. Good city for foodies.

Mayo: A very different attitude than you will find anywhere else. Despite their reputation as a boutique for 3rd opinions, they actually do care for a large local community. I don't think they are particularly lacking in acute care, although they aren't a crazy trauma center or anything. You'd get a great education there, and for the rest of your career you could say that you do things "the Mayo way" and watch other people roll their eyes at you. They suit up every day. Even with the local communities served, it is going to be a very different clinical experience than going to Emory and working at Grady. It just is.

 

[darksideone]

I might add while I did not apply to Partners, I have heard from a few that did, that while there on an interview/sub-I many of the residents don't know each other due to the program being so big. Not sure if that matters to you, but I wanted a program where the residents knew each other, helped each other out if someone needed their call covered for a family emergency and just be fun and hang out together. Maybe things are different and typhoon can speak to that.

Another thing worth mentioning if it matters to you, is cost of living of Boston/SF/Philly is significantly different than say Rochester, MN. To the point if you are married and have a family, you won't be able to buy a house most likely. Also commuting times is another thing worth thinking about.

 

[typhoonegator]

I might add while I did not apply to Partners, I have heard from a few that did, that while there on an interview/sub-I many of the residents don't know each other due to the program being so big. Not sure if that matters to you, but I wanted a program where the residents knew each other, helped each other out if someone needed their call covered for a family emergency and just be fun and hang out together. Maybe things are different and typhoon can speak to that.

Another thing worth mentioning if it matters to you, is cost of living of Boston/SF/Philly is significantly different than say Rochester, MN. To the point if you are married and have a family, you won't be able to buy a house most likely. Also commuting times is another thing worth thinking about.

Partners is big. I don't think anyone would argue with the statement that having 14 or whatever residents in your class is going to result in less intimate knowledge of each other than in a 5 resident class. But you also might find people with more like-minded interests, or love interests even, because the pool is a bit larger. Any program with residency spread over multiple hospitals is going to have a problem like that, just because you won't be swimming in the same pool every day, and you need a bunch of residents to cover multiple services.

 

[UMHawkDoc]

I take a different approach than my friend typhoonegator. I don't think it is fair to say there are only "4" top programs to which one would get the best training. I know typhoon didn't mean it this way. Personally I think one needs to do this by region more, as many times these lists also incorporate "bias" in that people want to live in certain areas of the country as well. Not to say those programs aren't great, but location increases their desiredness. If you take Mayo Rochester and put that program in Boston/LA/SF/NYC, people would be knocking down doors to get in.

For me, in very simplistic terms would organize them into something like this in no particular order:

Midwest:
- Cleveland Clinic
- Mayo
- WashU

West Coast:
- UCSF
- Stanford
- UCLA

East Coast:
- Hopkins
- Partners
- Columbia
- UPenn

Southeast:
- Duke
- Miami
- Emory

Southwest:
- UTSW
- Baylor

This is just looking at 4 regions of the country, and finding the best overall 2-4 programs there. This is not meant to mean anything as this isn't all inclusive or comprehensive.

How would you compare programs like Michigan, Pittsburgh, UWashington, OHSU or Virginia to some of the programs you listed in your top regional programs? I'm leaning towards programs that are not in huge cities, but am wondering how some of the programs in "college town" settings stack up.

 

[neuralesque]

Thanks so much, I appreciate your insight!

 

[darksideone]

How would you compare programs like Michigan, Pittsburgh, UWashington, OHSU or Virginia to some of the programs you listed in your top regional programs? I'm leaning towards programs that are not in huge cities, but am wondering how some of the programs in "college town" settings stack up.

What are your career goals and aspirations? What field of neurology are you interested in and could see yourself going into? Do you want to do academics or private practice? Those are many questions that you might have to think about.

Those programs that you listed are solid places. I don't have any personal experience with them, just what I have heard about them and friends that have trained/are training there.

I would only consider UVa and Michigan "college towns" on your list as the other 3 are in fairly large and diverse cities.

 

[LocusCeruleous]

It makes a difference where you live. A lot of people stay on or go into private practice in the surrounding communities.

 

[LocusCeruleous]

I do not know what the website says but this is just not the case. I rotated through Barrow a while back and the residents were reading many EEGs per day. They were even reading the acute EEGs. You might speak with the residency program director, Dr. Chung. He is an epileptologist and would know about how many EEGs the residents actually read.

Test

 

[Nerdologist]

Official 2013-2014 Neurology Residency Rankings

1st group
UCSF
Partners
UPenn
Hopkins

2nd group
Stanford
WashU- St Louis
Columbia
Yale

3rd group
Mayo-Rochester
Miami
UCLA
Duke

4th group
Pitt
BIDMC
Emory
University of Virginia

5th group
Cornell
Mt. Sinai
Vanderbilt
Cleveland Clinic

6th group
Northwestern
University of Washington
Case Western
Baylor

7th group
MUSC
University of North Carolina
NYU
University of Alabama

8th group
University of Michigan
OHSU
University of Maryland
University of Rochester

9th group
Rush
UT Houston
Wake Forest
UT Southwestern

10th group
University of Cincinnati
UChicago
Thomas Jefferson
Georgetown

 

[ButIwantneuro]

.

 

[Elipsis]

Here we go... (again)

 

[Jubears09]

Here we go... (again)

I found this very interesting: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21482917 (I'm not arguing about the helpfulness of using no. of future academicians as a measure of program strength, but at least this is objective and not a bunch of people listing opinions without any support)

I'd love to hear if anyone knows of other objective data on the relative strength of programs that might be helpful (combining neurology and neurosurg kind of ruins US news for me).

But since we all love making lists, IMO the top tier should be 5 and include columbia and nerdologists's groups 2-6 should all be lumped together + UT southwestern, UWub, and UMichigan as a second tier. I personally think Yale, Stanford, WashU, UM, Mayo, UCLA, and BIDMC make up a top layer of that second group, but they're all close enough that it doesn't matter so much.

 

[typhoonegator]

 

[neurologist]

Since, apparently (and unfortunately), this thread seems to have acheived zombie-like undead status, you should just "sticky" it so we don't have to see it keep popping up among the real discussions . . .

 

[Thama]

Since, apparently (and unfortunately), this thread seems to have acheived zombie-like undead status, you should just "sticky" it so we don't have to see it keep popping up among the real discussions . . .

It either needs a sticky or the guillotine. There is no in-between.

 

[danielmd06]

Back from the vaults. Again.

 

[2heavy]

Held out on commenting on this for a few years but........1st and 2nd group need to be merged and Stanford has no business being above Wash U, Rochester, or Columbia and probably a few more programs based on number of faculty, size and composition of inpt. service, publications, and just about every other objective category. U Rochester might not be a huge name to the general public but in neurology it is a top-notch program. Yale also has no place near the top except as an undergrad. institution. There is no way to separate Partners, Penn, Hopkins, Wash U, UCSF except by splitting hairs such as who has the better cafeteria and I would argue that they all lose to Dartmouth for great hospital food. It is really a matter of 10 programs making up the top tier and then a bunch in the middle.

 

[2heavy]

otherwise I pretty much agree with this list

 

[typhoonegator]

I don't want to sticky it because I feel like it gives some sort of tacit approval to this charade. And I can't kill it because it technically does nothing against TOS. It seems destined to habitual resurrection to argue whether UT Houston should be ranked above UT Southwestern, which is a totally worthwhile use of everyone's time.

 

[TUGM]

#1 school of all time is Hogwarts, followed very closely by Walkerville Elementary. All other schools and programs just aren't worth going to.

 

[drzing]

if i ask For Medical Advice Here Can You kill it? lol its a stretch

 

[TUGM]

lol sabotage might be the only option now...

 

[Plecopotamus]

And I can't kill it because it technically does nothing against TOS.

Actually, Nerdologist is falsely representing himself as a medical student in his status (and although it's not against TOS, I think calling the list "Official" is a jerk move).

I, for one, really wish I could un-see these lists. They've biased my experience and it makes me second guess my experiences at these places.

 

[oopsy]

I found having a general list of really large tiers helpful for those of who were new to the field and trying to figure out where to apply in the first place. A long list of programs with particular rigor, research, and training opportunities was indeed helpful of places to look into and check out as to whether or not I wanted to apply. The most high-yield discussions where sorted by fellowships of interest.

But a list that somehow sorts all neurology training into a neat, 4-school system is kind of garbage. If you've ever applied, interviewed, and seen how personal the ranking process is, it's easy to see how uninterpretable this list is.

I am just going through the application cycle this year, and I can now speak as someone who looked at these lists fretting over where to apply this summer, to someone who has interviewed and seen the other side. There is a farcical difference between the most prestigious programs, and the differences that matter to me are likely irrelevant to you. I can honestly say the difference is entirely fit and feel with no meaningful difference in training or education.

The people who say otherwise are either those who weren't competitive enough to interview (and gain first-hand experience), or those who weren't mature enough to consider anything besides the ego-massage of being an <institution of interest>-trained neurologist.

 

[Elipsis]

Agree with the above wholeheartedly

 

[play274]

Oh my ... how is this old thread still alive? People have continued posting on it as recently as 12-8-13? I would have to admit that my initial post on 1-14-05 has go to be a touch out of date.

 

[Nerdologist]

Official 2014-2015 Neurology Residency Rankings

1st group
Partners
UPenn
Columbia
UCSF

2nd group
Hopkins
WashU- St Louis
Stanford
Duke

3rd group
UCLA
Mayo-Rochester
Miami
Pitt

4th group
Yale
BIDMC
Mt. Sinai
Emory

5th group
University of Virginia
Cornell
Vanderbilt
Northwestern

6th group
Cleveland Clinic
University of Washington
NYU
Baylor

7th group
University of Michigan
MUSC
Rush
Case Western

8th group
OHSU
University of Alabama
University of Rochester
University of Colorado

9th group
University of Maryland
UT Houston
University of North Carolina
Thomas Jefferson

10th group
University of Iowa
Brown
Wake Forest
Georgetown

 

[drzing]

Official 2014-2015 Neurology Residency Rankings

1st group
Partners
UPenn
Columbia
UCSF

2nd group
Hopkins
WashU- St Louis
Stanford
Duke

3rd group
UCLA
Mayo-Rochester
Miami
Pitt

4th group
Yale
BIDMC
Mt. Sinai
Emory

5th group
University of Virginia
Cornell
Vanderbilt
Northwestern

6th group
Cleveland Clinic
University of Washington
NYU
Baylor

7th group
University of Michigan
MUSC
Rush
Case Western

8th group
OHSU
University of Alabama
University of Rochester
University of Colorado

9th group
University of Maryland
UT Houston
University of North Carolina
Thomas Jefferson

10th group
University of Iowa
Brown
Wake Forest
Georgetown

Why do you keep bringing this thread back? You, Nerdologist, applied in 2008 and have brought this post back EVERY YEAR SINCE. THESE ARE NOT TRUE RANKINGS! THEY MEAN ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!

 

[Dharma]

13th group

My garage. My bathroom. My thinking stump in the backyard.

 

[Acherona]

Nerdologist apparently has an unhealthy obsession with neurology rankings. Every single one of his posts relates to rankings or interviews. I think when you are applying it feels overwhelming to have to compare so many places, and lists like these feed into the decision-fatigue. Unfortunately there is really no shortcut for going to the place and checking it out for yourself. Places also change really quickly, one year a place may be up and the next year it is down so these lists become outdated really quickly. I hope students applying will be smart enough to understand the uselessness of these lists. I rotated or have been a resident or fellow at a number of institutions which range from "mediocre" to "top" and if I were blind to the name of the institution I probably would have no idea which was considered "better". In fact, neurology residency is highly standardized and the similarities between programs are much greater than the differences. You only learn this with experience though.

 

[TUGM]

Great post by Acherona. The vast majority of neurology programs will provide you with the resources to graduate as a competent neurologist. Sure some programs might get more NIH funding than others, but you may not want to be an academically-oriented researcher in the future! Find a program that is right for you personally, given your interests and particularities you are looking for, and don't give too much importance to the brand names when it comes to the selection process. Good luck to all the applicants this cycle!

 

[TUGM]

13th group

My garage. My bathroom. My thinking stump in the backyard.

Most of my life epiphanies and revelations have happened during intensive time spent in the crapper.