Just wondering..

[hematogone]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi,

I am a 4th year med student, and applied for both Path and Radiology. Though I was interested in Path early on, Rads actually grew on me after doing a rotation in it early in the 4th year. So needless to say, I really do enjoy both, and can see myself being happy doing either.

So my question is.. Do you think one has a more promising career training at a top tier Pathology program, or a middle tier or community Radiology program? It appears that I'm quite competitive for Path, but not as much so for Rads.

I hope I'm not opening up a can of worms with this thread, and of course I ultimately will make the most informed decision I can. But I am just curious to hear some opinions.

Thanks.

 

[mlw03]

I think the overwhelming consensus on here will be that radiologists have better career prospects that pathologists, on the whole - with respect to job opportunities, geographic flexibility, and mean salary. Pathology is a great career, but you simply cannot do a residency (and probably a fellowship) and then say with a high degree of certainty that you will get a job in the location you desire.

 

[scienceguy19]

This is an example of yet another probably competitive applicant dissuaded from going into path due to the poor job market or lower salaries.

to think that we'll advance our field by increasing the number of training spots is a bit foolish; it leads to a poorer job market and lower caliber of applicants...

for pathology to compete with other specialties to prevent other specialties from encroaching on our turf, we need strength in intelligence. we need innovators, leaders, and bright people. A group of ten newly minted pathologists of average intelligence is inferior to one highly intelligent pathologist.

I think the overwhelming consensus on here will be that radiologists have better career prospects that pathologists, on the whole - with respect to job opportunities, geographic flexibility, and mean salary. Pathology is a great career, but you simply cannot do a residency (and probably a fellowship) and then say with a high degree of certainty that you will get a job in the location you desire.

 

[pathchic1]

It all depends on what you consider a "promising career". Do you want to do research, teach, community practice? Do want to stay in a particular geographic region? What kind of place are you going to want to have your family (since most people end up practicing near where they train)?

Don't look at money, it becomes less and less of a factor as life goes on, whereas the real issues in life become more. A good candidate from either background has good job prospects.

 

[mlw03]

Heck, this is how I feel about my particular subspecialty within pathology. I've heard from a few residents, "Forensic path is neat, but the job market is so niche and I can make way better money doing a GI fellowship." And I can't argue with them. Society gets to decide how to value various professions, but I agree that there are likely many med students who choose to pursue other areas of medicine rather than pathology because of job and/or salary concerns.

This is an example of yet another probably competitive applicant dissuaded from going into path due to the poor job market or lower salaries.

to think that we'll advance our field by increasing the number of training spots is a bit foolish; it leads to a poorer job market and lower caliber of applicants...

for pathology to compete with other specialties to prevent other specialties from encroaching on our turf, we need strength in intelligence. we need innovators, leaders, and bright people. A group of ten newly minted pathologists of average intelligence is inferior to one highly intelligent pathologist.

 

[hematogone]

It all depends on what you consider a "promising career". Do you want to do research, teach, community practice? Do want to stay in a particular geographic region? What kind of place are you going to want to have your family (since most people end up practicing near where they train)?

Don't look at money, it becomes less and less of a factor as life goes on, whereas the real issues in life become more. A good candidate from either background has good job prospects.

I would say geographic location (West Coast) and non-academic job opportunities are huge for me. To be honest, I'm not gung-ho about doing lots of research, but that could certainly change. It does sound like private practice jobs are hard to come by for both path and rads, based on what I've heard...

Also, even though I'm not big on doing research, I do have a pretty strong interest in teaching.

To me, independent of job market, salary, etc., both fields are awesome, and complement each other well. But for the rank list, I'm thinking that the practical and logistical issues, such as ultimate job opportunites (which I know nobody can predict for certain) will come into play.

Thanks everybody for your input, and I'm definitely open to hearing more.

 

[deleted314957]

I would say geographic location (West Coast) and non-academic job opportunities are huge for me. To be honest, I'm not gung-ho about doing lots of research, but that could certainly change. It does sound like private practice jobs are hard to come by for both path and rads, based on what I've heard...

Also, even though I'm not big on doing research, I do have a pretty strong interest in teaching.

To me, independent of job market, salary, etc., both fields are awesome, and complement each other well. But for the rank list, I'm thinking that the practical and logistical issues, such as ultimate job opportunites (which I know nobody can predict for certain) will come into play.

Thanks everybody for your input, and I'm definitely open to hearing more.

every and their brother wants private practice and the west coast but you will not be able to call the shots like it was 30 years ago in pathology

 

[Entgegen]

I'd say look around on AuntMinnie.com and see what they have to say about their job market. It seems that the radiology job market is a little better than path, but you sure won't be able call any shots when job hunting, especially if you're limiting yourself to the West Coast.

 

[hematogone]

Assuming one goes to a "name brand" program for residency as well as fellowship (and performs well, has people skills, good CV, etc.), does anybody know how the job market currently is for academic jobs vs. private practice ones (particularly on the West Coast)?

What is the consensus on getting a job in the Kaiser system? I've heard it's hard. Anybody know otherwise?

 

[Tissue issue]

I would say geographic location (West Coast) and non-academic job opportunities are huge for me. To be honest, I'm not gung-ho about doing lots of research, but that could certainly change. It does sound like private practice jobs are hard to come by for both path and rads, based on what I've heard...

Also, even though I'm not big on doing research, I do have a pretty strong interest in teaching.

To me, independent of job market, salary, etc., both fields are awesome, and complement each other well. But for the rank list, I'm thinking that the practical and logistical issues, such as ultimate job opportunites (which I know nobody can predict for certain) will come into play.

Thanks everybody for your input, and I'm definitely open to hearing more.

Hematogone- I'll add my advice to the other opinions you've heard. I don't think that there is a huge difference in the job opportunities (ease of getting a job) between path and rays based on how things look now. Different story if you were trying to decide between on of the two and a medical or surgical subspecialty. One exception to that is interventional radiology- they are sought after. You will probably still get paid more as a radiologist in ten years than a pathologist- the current locums rate for a radiologist is three times that given to a pathologist. If you like the two roughly equally, radiology is your better bet. However, if you like pathology a good deal more, go with path.