Fellowship Matchlist
Started by Urticaria80
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
For what specialty?
Like fellowships for Internal Medicine
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Have you tried the Googlez?
I found the fellowship match for IM at UNLV in about 0.00037429 seconds: http://medicine.nevada.edu/las-vegas/internal-medicine/residents/residency-information/fellowships
Here's the list for Case: http://www.metrohealth.org/upload/docs/Medical Services/Dept of Medicine/careerdestinations.pdf
Or you know cardiology and then cardiac imaging super fellowship...
since when has imaging been something that medicine covers
Echo. Cardiac MR is variable Rads vs. Cards.
ERCP for GI
For perhaps a few decades- since cardiologists started doing M mode echo's. A lot of cardiac imaging takes an actual clinician (like coronary angiograms) or nuclear scans. It is hard for a radiologist to read a nuclear scan when they actually have to see a patient, read an EKG and then read the scan.
So u want radiologists and only radiologists to read imaging? Are u willing to be available 24/7/365 for that?
You read basic imaging on your IM rotation and on your ER rotation.
To be fair, yes. Most larger places have 24/7 radiology coverage in house or via telerad.
We have seen Radiology take back turf such as vascular US due to availability and prompt results.
There is a difference in glancing at a chest film to look for a pneumo or edema, bone film for fx and providing a read. Can't tell you how many times I've called about "corner findings" such as subtle free air that isn't seen bc they just look for their line placement.
Last edited:
Hey we've all got anecdotes. I have lots of anecdotes where I've picked up plenty that the radiologist didn't or knew enough about the patient not to lose my shiz about the findings and didn't use any of the radiology suggestions. I'm not hating on radiology. I don't think I am a radiologist. Good lord am I glad I'm not a radiologist and I'm glad someone is. But let's not oversell things too much here. You probably find extra stuff all the time but is it relevant in the clinical context for which the clinician ordered the imaging in the first place?? Probably not. For most of my chest imaging I give about this many ****s (zero) what the radiologist says. I care about what I think. Granted I don't read a whole CT chest, am glad you do, and think you should get paid as much money as you can possibly get to do so. Those of us with a niche can and do look at imaging in our niche just fine
you give " this many ****s (zero)" when you don't have to place your name on the line as the one who made the read. if you had to put your name on the line, I'm pretty sure you'd care more
everyone always says they're cool with making their own reads, but they're not doing it on paper for a reason
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Why would I take liability when I DON'T have too? Think about it. I would if I needed to but I don't. Which isn't my fault because there are these people called "radiologists" who do that. It's just the world we live in. Don't make it somehow my problem.
Though in a *practical* sense I "put my name on the line" with the interventions I do or things I ok by my "reads". Like central line placement, drainage of pleural effusions, placement of chest tubes, or endobronchial biopsies for instance. My read leads directly to my clinical and medical decision almost always.
Of course I do get extra and more information from the radiologist. I work closely with my radiology colleagues. I am in no way putting down the profession or the specialty and what it does. I'm giving a perspective that simply points out that it's not just radiologists and ******s. Those with a niche and regular use of the imaging can be just as good or perhaps in even better with years of experience *in those few niche* than the radiologist many many times. It's not something said to hurt anyone's feelings. It's just the truth. Don't get dogmatic.
When the FP and IM residents call me about a patient and tell me "the radiologist hasn't read it yet" I give them a little ass chewing and tell them to look at their own films and tell me what they think.
I'm with you. Sub specialists are able to look at their own stuff and evaluate for their specific reason more than adequately. Examples like pulm transplant and ct surg for aneurysm or dissection tx. There are just too many nuances in treatment for a radiologist to know.
The problem is when people get too cocky and think their evaluation is complete without ever having a search pattern.
Similar threads
