internal medicine in Cali- help

[gfarahma]

How competitive are california internal medicine residencies? Is an away rotation there necessary if I'm applying from out of state?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Rogue_Leader]

A lot of it depends on where you want to be. SF and LA are pretty competitive, but Northern Cali is easier to get into. A lot also depends on if you want a university program and want to do fellowship, or if you'd be happy with a community program. If just being anywhere in Cali is all that matters, then it's not too hard to accomplish. If getting into UCSF is what you're looking for, then you have to start playing the game of away rotations and whatnot. I don't think programs place any importance on state of residence the way state funded med schools do.

 

[velo]

If getting into UCSF is what you're looking for, then you have to start playing the game of away rotations and whatnot.

I'd be careful about this, apparently UCSF is pretty notorious for not placing too much weight on away rotations. They state more or less as a matter of policy that away rotations don't guarantee an interview and a classmate of mine did an away rotation there to try and improve his chances and didn't get an interview. I'm not saying don't do an away rotation; just don't feel obligated to do one and know that it doesn't necessarily change your chances significantly to do so.

 

[indiamacbean]

As a UCSF resident and someone who came from out of state, I wouldn't say that away rotations are necessary. UCSF is famous for not interviewing their away rotation students if they are not excellent and this year many of their own students did not get interviews for IM. My sense is that you really have to shine on an away rotation and it leaves a lot up to chance. Definetly if you are going to come to UCSF, do NOT do a sub-i. you will not shine in comparison to the UCSF students simply based on the fact that the hospitals can be difficult to navigate and you'll spend the first one-two weeks simply figuring out which forms to use and how to run the computers. I got interviews everywhere I applied and did no away rotations. if you look really strong on paper I think that it can do more harm than good but I may have a biased opinion.

 

[gfarahma]

Thx guys, that was helpful. I'm really interested in one of the UC schools- and I look pretty good on paper but a bunch of people were telling me that since Cali is so competitive an away rotation is necessary.

 

[orientedtoself]

dude, looking at your other posts. . . are you an ms1??? it's way too early to be worrying about this.

 

[gfarahma]

No I'm MS3, my sister is applying to MS1 so I put in posts for her occassionally ur very observant

dude, looking at your other posts. . . are you an ms1??? it's way too early to be worrying about this.

 

[LidoEpi]

I didn't do an away rotation and I landed one of the more competitive UC's. Aways will help if you use the away to not only do well but SCHMOOZE. It's all about schmoozing.

 

[bof]

"How competitive are california internal medicine residencies? Is an away rotation there necessary if I'm applying from out of state? "

-california IM residencies are more competitive that other locations because many people want to train in california (same is true for some other specific geographical locations, eg NYC).
-away rotations are not necessary (even if you apply from out of state). my thoughts on away rotations are that they can help you if you are a average/marginal candidate and do very well. if you are soild on paper an away rotation will not make a huge difference, and may actually hurt you (at the more competitive programs). i think away rotations are great mainly because it lets you see how a program operates and whether you want to spend 3 years of your life there. i would recommend that you do a few away rotations in california programs. do one at a program that may be a reach for you to get in and another at one you have a solid chance of getting to. good luck.

 

[Fexofenadine]

Traditionally, it's been said that the coasts (West and East) are tougher to get into than the middle part of the country. The good news is that California, in particular, has a lot of great IM programs. Though UCSF, UCLA, and Stanford are all phenomenal (regardless of where in the country they are located), they are made slightly more competitive by being in California. I heard that UCSD and UCD were competitive also (not 100% sure b/c only applied to UCSF, UCLA, and Stanford)

I would say that a slightly above average candidate (Step 1--230s) from any U.S. med school will be competitive at a lot of the california programs including--Kaiser, Cedars, Scripps, UCI, USC, LLU, UCSF-Fresno etc... And these programs have good success for fellowship placement. Remember there is more to an applicant than Step 1 scores and class rank. To make yourself a bit more competitive, I would consider doing away rotations, beef up your research, and get good letters. Best of luck!

 

[MAC10]

Traditionally, it's been said that the coasts (West and East) are tougher to get into than the middle part of the country. The good news is that California, in particular, has a lot of great IM programs. Though UCSF, UCLA, and Stanford are all phenomenal (regardless of where in the country they are located), they are made slightly more competitive by being in California. I heard that UCSD and UCD were competitive also (not 100% sure b/c only applied to UCSF, UCLA, and Stanford)

I would say that a slightly above average candidate (Step 1--230s) from any U.S. med school will be competitive at a lot of the california programs including--Kaiser, Cedars, Scripps, UCI, USC, LLU, UCSF-Fresno etc... And these programs have good success for fellowship placement. Remember there is more to an applicant than Step 1 scores and class rank. To make yourself a bit more competitive, I would consider doing away rotations, beef up your research, and get good letters. Best of luck!

230 is SLIGHTLY above average? Really! Have things changed this much since i matched 4 yrs ago???

 

[Fexofenadine]

230 is SLIGHTLY above average? Really! Have things changed this much since i matched 4 yrs ago???

Last year's national average was in the 220s, in light of the slight increase in the "passing" score. This means the general scores from applicants will be higher.

 

[MadameLULU]

My step one score sheet says that the mean for recent test administrations was 218.

 

[Fexofenadine]

My step one score sheet says that the mean for recent test administrations was 218.

I am pretty sure that the national avg on step 1 for last year's class was in the 220s, which was higher than the 219 national avg at the time that I took the test (2006). Of note, the 2007 test administration also saw a rise in the required min passing score. I remembered being very impressed with the third year's step 1 scores at my med school... so many in the 250s, only to find out the nat average was higher than when I took it. I think we are going to come across more 220s than when I applied this past year...I still think 230 is slightly above avg in that sense. A complete applicant needs more than a good step 1.

 

[MadameLULU]

I am pretty sure that the national avg on step 1 for last year's class was in the 220s, which was higher than the 219 national avg at the time that I took the test (2006). Of note, the 2007 test administration also saw a rise in the required min passing score. I remembered being very impressed with the third year's step 1 scores at my med school... so many in the 250s, only to find out the nat average was higher than when I took it. I think we are going to come across more 220s than when I applied this past year...I still think 230 is slightly above avg in that sense. A complete applicant needs more than a good step 1.

Your claim that a higher step score in 2007 was due to them increasing the minium passing score does not make sense. A higher step average (if in fact it was in the 220s, which I have a hard time believing) is due to more people scoring questions correctly.

 

[Fexofenadine]

Your claim that a higher step score in 2007 was due to them increasing the minium passing score does not make sense. A higher step average (if in fact it was in the 220s, which I have a hard time believing) is due to more people scoring questions correctly.

There was the same percentage of people who have passed the USMLE Step 1 in 2006 vs. 2007 (93% of 18000+ test takers each year) despite the rise in the minimum passing score. Let’s consider this hypothetical example as follows:
(1) 2006 Test X (passing score 5)
From 10 test takers: 10,10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 5, 5, 4,4
Average: 7.8
Percent passing: 80%

(2) 2007 Test X (passing score 6)
From 10 test takers: 10,10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 6, 6, 4,4
Average: 8.0
Percent passing: 80%

Based on this example, it is not logical to see an increase in the national average on Step 1 if the minimum passing score is higher? It’s logical right? Because if the percent passing (93%) has not changed, you expect that more people are scoring higher than 185 in 2007 than in 2006 (because the old 2006 requirement to pass was only 183). Does this mean that the NBME has to inflate the USMLE step 1 score in order to keep the same percent passing? I don’t know the answer to that, but the reality is that if you average more people w/ 185s vs. 183s, the 185s group is going to have a higher average. The reality is that the national average was in the 220s for the 2007 test administrations and this cycle of residency applicants. If the national average is 220s, then a 230 only becomes slightly above average. I have no reason to inflate the national average on Step 1 for the 2007 administration.

Here’s another thought. When I took the SAT 1 in 1999, I scored a 1480 on the exam. At this time, the SAT 1 saw an inflation in the scoring system, because the ETS wanted to inflate the national average to 1000 vs. 890 from the early 1990s. Therefore, people scoring in the 1300s-1400s were no longer hard to come by when I graduated from high school. When my sister took the exam in 1992, she scored in the mid-1300s (when the national average was in the 800s). This puts her in a very select group of people. A 1300 in my day was slightly below average at my high school when I graduated in 2000.

 

[Slitherin]

The mean was 218 in 2007, at least that is what my score report says. I am not sure why you think it is in the 220's.

 

[Fexofenadine]

The mean was 218 in 2007, at least that is what my score report says. I am not sure why you think it is in the 220's.

Slitherin,
You and I must be getting different score reports as my step reports (Steps 1 &2) do not contain the national average. This made sense to me as the national average cannot be released until the end of the testing cycle, so if you take it earlier, how can the national average be contained on the report. All reports have to be uniform so it would be incorrect to suggest that your report contains the step 1 national average on it.

I spoke to a "Rhonda" from the USMLE and she states that the national average is only released to the medical school, not to individuals and is not available on the USMLE website.

I then proceeded to my dean's office and the 2007 USMLE step 1 national average was recorded to be 222. This is an accurate number. My dean even jokingly said that the Class of 2010 and 2011 have some really big shoes to fill since the Class of 2009 recorded the highest USMLE score average in our school's history (which was previous held by my Class of 2008). If it matters to you, I think you should verify this info with your own medical school. Facts are facts! I cannot make up facts.

 

[Freakingout]

Slitherin,
You and I must be getting different score reports as my step reports (Steps 1 &2) do not contain the national average. This made sense to me as the national average cannot be released until the end of the testing cycle, so if you take it earlier, how can the national average be contained on the report. All reports have to be uniform so it would be incorrect to suggest that your report contains the step 1 national average on it.

I spoke to a "Rhonda" from the USMLE and she states that the national average is only released to the medical school, not to individuals and is not available on the USMLE website.

I then proceeded to my dean's office and the 2007 USMLE step 1 national average was recorded to be 222. This is an accurate number. My dean even jokingly said that the Class of 2010 and 2011 have some really big shoes to fill since the Class of 2009 recorded the highest USMLE score average in our school's history (which was previous held by my Class of 2008). If it matters to you, I think you should verify this info with your own medical school. Facts are facts! I cannot make up facts.

I had heard that this year's average was 222