Current fellows in the job market are getting cool offers in this Post C-19 era. Is the experience the same across all other pathology subspecialties?
is it true garbage collectors in NYC can make 100k?
They are path trained dermpath fellows. The lowest offer they got was $350k.Are talking about Dermatologists with dermpath training or Pathologists with dermpath training? There's a huge difference between the two.
Yes, starting.450k starting? How much is partnership salary lol?
No it’s certainly not. NYC starting offers for general path are in 250k range.
When it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Probably a catch somewhere, but maybe there are unicorns in the world.450k starting? How much is partnership salary lol?
these are ads for dp jobs onlineWhen it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Probably a catch somewhere, but maybe there are unicorns in the world.
*Must be Dermatology and Dermatopathology.these are ads for dp jobs online
there are more jobs with better offers that do not have online ads
![]()
yay...an uptick in melanocytic consults after all the bcc/scc/sebKs have been cherry picked.It will be interesting to see if we have an uptick of derm trained dermpath fellowship apps in the next few years.
Well the Kaiser one clearly states Path trained dermpaths only*Must be Dermatology and Dermatopathology.
Pathology-Dermatopathology will not be considered.
What does this mean?The Naples ad also says NOT private equity. PE has taken over virtually every derm office in our territory.
Are they talking simple sk bcc shaves and punches, or big melanoma excisions?For that kind of money, you'd have to do at least 45 cases (88305-26s)/day averaged out over the workdays of the year to make your salary, benefits notwithstanding. But from the unsolicited locums emails I'm getting, dermpath groups want people who can do in excess of 90 cases/day - which they say is pretty standard in dermpath practice.
I can't imagine it would be anything other than punch and shave biopsies. But remember, only about half (2/3 if your lucky) of the average dermpath biopsy volume is SCC, BCC, AK, and SKs. The rest is all the inflammatory or pigmented lesions, nevi, lymphoid, and melanoma cases that only the truly masochistic enjoy dealing with.Are they talking simple sk bcc shaves and punches, or big melanoma excisions?
Masochistic lolI can't imagine it would be anything other than punch and shave biopsies. But remember, only about half (2/3 if your lucky) of the average dermpath biopsy volume is SCC, BCC, AK, and SKs. The rest is all the inflammatory or pigmented lesions, nevi, lymphoid, and melanoma cases that only the truly masochistic enjoy dealing with.
Oh come on dude, it's not like that. Overwhelming majority of melanomas are no brainers and take one quick glance. Yes including the nevoid type. Inflammatories are kinda fun, especially if there is a modicum of clinical info. Lymphomas, ditto. It's the funny compound nevi in young people, recurrent/traumatized melanocytics, superficial biopsies, weird spindle cells, etc which truly make you sweat. Usually its no more 5% of cases a day in my neck of woods.I can't imagine it would be anything other than punch and shave biopsies. But remember, only about half (2/3 if your lucky) of the average dermpath biopsy volume is SCC, BCC, AK, and SKs. The rest is all the inflammatory or pigmented lesions, nevi, lymphoid, and melanoma cases that only the truly masochistic enjoy dealing with.
Oh come on dude, it's not like that. Overwhelming majority of melanomas are no brainers and take one quick glance. Yes including the nevoid type. Inflammatories are kinda fun, especially if there is a modicum of clinical info. Lymphomas, ditto. It's the funny compound nevi in young people, recurrent/traumatized melanocytics, superficial biopsies, weird spindle cells, etc which truly make you sweat. Usually its no more 5% of cases a day in my neck of woods.
Doesn't make sense. Derm trained do better on the ITE and boards, why would they refer out more melanocytic lesions?yay...an uptick in melanocytic consults after all the bcc/scc/sebKs have been cherry picked.
Some folks are just wedded to consulting everything- necessary or not. It’s the comfort of the principal of divided and diminished responsibility.Doesn't make sense. Derm trained do better on the ITE and boards, why would they refer out more melanocytic lesions?
I don't think derm-trained dermpaths consult any more than path-trained. Maybe the poster is referring to dermatologists (not fellowship trained in dermpath) that read their own easy cases and send out anything hard. I've never actually met any of those, but supposedly they exist.Doesn't make sense. Derm trained do better on the ITE and boards, why would they refer out more melanocytic lesions?
That makes even less sense. Why would a Derm do extra fellowship training only to send out their own patient's biopsies for consultation?Some folks are just wedded to consulting everything- necessary or not. It’s the comfort of the principal of divided and diminished responsibility.
please reread my post. there was nothing surreptitious, ulterior or snide. just stating facts i have seen among paths for decades. derms, gi’s, neuros, all comers. some really do.That makes even less sense. Why would a Derm do extra fellowship training only to send out their own patient's biopsies for consultation?
If there were a real shortage of us, we’d refuse. Do an all-or-nothing. I remember that.There are a number of regular dermatologists in the community who have no Dermpath Fellowship training (just the dermpath training they get in residency, which for many programs is quite extensive) who will have an in house lab and read all their own SK, BCC, SCC, AK, IDN, and other bread and butter easy dermpath cases (Probably ~50-80% of their own biopsies) and then send anything remotely challenging or high liability (inflammatory or melanocytic) to an actual board fellowship trained dermpath. This isn't a common practice, but there are many older dermatologists who do this and I have seen multiple times in real life.
What fact did you state? I asked why Derm trained dermpaths would refer out more melanocytic lesions compared to path trained dermpaths and I'm not quite sure we got an answer to that yet.please reread my post. there was nothing surreptitious, ulterior or snide. just stating facts i have seen among paths for decades. derms, gi’s, neuros, all comers. some really do.
Cherry picking to transfer liabilityWhat fact did you state? I asked why Derm trained dermpaths would refer out more melanocytic lesions compared to path trained dermpaths and I'm not quite sure we got an answer to that yet.
We're really struggling with the word "why" here. Why do you all think that path trained more adept at handling the liability? Derm trained see the patients and apparently know the histopathology better. Why would they send it out to someone who's never seen the patient and statistically speaking, not as competent? My personal experience has been the complete opposite of what you're saying. Path trained generally hedge more and consult more.Cherry picking to transfer liability
It has nothing to do with who is more skilled.We're really struggling with the word "why" here. Why do you all think that path trained more adept at handling the liability? Derm trained see the patients and apparently know the histopathology better. Why would they send it out to someone who's never seen the patient and statistically speaking, not as competent? My personal experience has been the complete opposite of what you're saying. Path trained generally hedge more and consult more.
For someone telling me that pathologists are more willing to take on liability, you aren't too great at expressing a controversial opinion.It has nothing to do with who is more skilled.
I don't think the opinion is controversial.For someone telling me that pathologists are more willing to take on liability, you aren't too great at expressing a controversial opinion.
You're talking about private practice vs. academia, not derm trained DP vs. path trained. Path trained DP's in private practice are very "profit-minded". Look at this thread lol. Most of what is talked about in this pathology forum is money and profits. Whereas many derms take a paycut to do the fellowship. Many derm trained DP's are in academics, accept referrals, and are thought leaders.I don't think the opinion is controversial.
Thinly veiled insults are a bad look.
I will explain in detail.
Profit minded derm DPs can breeze through ak/sk/bcc in no time flat. Challenging melanocytic lesions take longer and are more legally risky. Sending these out to someone else 1. Transfers the time sink to them and 2. Transfers the liability. Both are profitable decisions.
The reason path DPs are accepting referrals are 1. Path oversupply 2. Academic referral centers being path dominant and 3. The present thought leaders in dermpath are mostly path DPs
There.
It was the not controversial, thinly veiled insult of post #13 that started this.I think I started this screed and it has blown out of proportion as regards derm DP’s vs path DP’s. My simple statement was that there are a good number of pathologists, of ALL or no subspeciality, who have a habit of sending out ( or in-housing) a much larger than “average” number of consults for garbage (as well as legit tough consult cases). Who knows the reason? I, personally, think it provides a false sense of ass covering thru the erroneous principle of “divided and diminished responsibility “. i.e. “ well they called it that too. So, right or wrong, I’m covered”. The obvious fallacy is that multiplication of the same erroneous dx does not make it correct. I base this on 30+ yrs of experience/observation.
The west coast is their havenI don't think derm-trained dermpaths consult any more than path-trained. Maybe the poster is referring to dermatologists (not fellowship trained in dermpath) that read their own easy cases and send out anything hard. I've never actually met any of those, but supposedly they exist.
C'mon, everyone talks about money (derm or path). Who does not want to be well compensated?You're talking about private practice vs. academia, not derm trained DP vs. path trained. Path trained DP's in private practice are very "profit-minded". Look at this thread lol. Most of what is talked about in this pathology forum is money and profits. Whereas many derms take a paycut to do the fellowship. Many derm trained DP's are in academics, accept referrals, and are thought leaders.
Now if you could "explain in detail" why you think that derm trained DP's in private practice refer out more than path trained DP's in private practice, that would be fantastic.
Yep, I didn't have much to say about it because I didn't quite get it. When I think about it, I think it makes an assumptive jump that if derm trained apps go up, not all of them will get a spot, and some will then go on to just read without fellowship, subsequently sending out more things that they weren't trained to handle since they didn't do a fellowship. That could very well be true, but I think most who don't get a fellowship will likely just practice derm and not read path. That could be an incorrect assumption on my part though.It was the not controversial, thinly veiled insult of post #13 that started this.
You are correct, a send out does not necessarily make a diagnosis correct. It does, however, make it difficult for anyone to accuse the sending pathologist of negligence, which is the important legal word.I think I started this screed and it has blown out of proportion as regards derm DP’s vs path DP’s. My simple statement was that there are a good number of pathologists, of ALL or no subspeciality, who have a habit of sending out ( or in-housing) a much larger than “average” number of consults for garbage (as well as legit tough consult cases). Who knows the reason? I, personally, think it provides a false sense of ass covering thru the erroneous principle of “divided and diminished responsibility “. i.e. “ well they called it that too. So, right or wrong, I’m covered”. The obvious fallacy is that multiplication of the same erroneous dx does not make it correct. I base this on 30+ yrs of experience/observation.
I'm not the one who said only one side cares about money.C'mon, everyone talks about money (derm or path). Who does not want to be well compensated?
It's not productive to compare ourselves, the current basis of remuneration is currently in favor of the procedure-based subspecialties. I was told once upon a time pathologists were the cream of the crop so they may be going through a phase now where their specialty is not as desired because of compensation and job security but remember, Derm was always this way too. So let's be guided.
So is this what pathologists do? Just make fun of other specialities that they could've never dreamed of becoming? Have fun on the internet guys.Thinly veiled?...I thought it was pretty overt.
Yeah we are a miserable bunch here on SDN lol. Just a FYI. Like Webb said we compete with each other for scraps.So is this what pathologists do? Just make fun of other specialities that they could've never dreamed of becoming? Have fun on the internet guys.
Lol. Talk about insecure. I want to screen gomers for moles about as much as I want a hemorrhoid. Go pretend to be a pathologist somewhere else.So is this what pathologists do? Just make fun of other specialities that they could've never dreamed of becoming? Have fun on the internet guys.
...I believe we are having fun? Not sure if that's an insult or a salutation...So is this what pathologists do? Just make fun of other specialities that they could've never dreamed of becoming? Have fun on the internet guys.