LOR Question

[pirdy]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm applying for IM and was wondering if people think a letter from an attending you worked with during surgery would be beneficial or is it better to stick with IM attendings? Thanks!

 

[medlaw06]

I'm applying for IM and was wondering if people think a letter from an attending you worked with during surgery would be beneficial or is it better to stick with IM attendings? Thanks!

i think as long as you have 1 from IM, you can others from other fields as well....i have 1 from IM and 1 from surg as well and i too am applying for im

 

[pirdy]

Thanks!

 

[Roadrunner]

The IM program director at my school said that all of my letters should be from IM attendings. Her point was that IM programs want to know how you work in an IM environment and they aren't as interested in what surgeons, FPs, etc. think of your performance. Keep in mind that the surgery to IM relationship is often adversarial and so a surgeon's LOR may not benefit you. Of the 3 LORs at least two should be from IM attendings or the IM chair. The third is your call, but if I were you I'd play it safe.

 

[medlaw06]

The IM program director at my school said that all of my letters should be from IM attendings. Her point was that IM programs want to know how you work in an IM environment and they aren't as interested in what surgeons, FPs, etc. think of your performance. Keep in mind that the surgery to IM relationship is often adversarial and so a surgeon's LOR may not benefit you. Of the 3 LORs at least two should be from IM attendings or the IM chair. The third is your call, but if I were you I'd play it safe.

i guess thats the way it goes at your school....and maybe schools differ, i have no idea, but the PD from my school said that it is OK to have 1 LOR from IM....and by having 1 from surg, I REALLY don't think that the PD reading the LOR at the place you are applying to is gonna think "well...since the LOR is from a surgeon, I am not gonna read it or give value to it." If the LOR is a good one, then it makes no difference whether someone from IM is saying that the candidate is a good one and has these strengths or that person is from surg, or ortho, or rads, or peds....

also, things like WHO the LOR is from also makes a difference....my IM LOR was from the department chair....I and guessing but I think his LOR will have more weight than had I gotten 1 from assistant prof...if that was the case, I may have gotten 2 IM LORs depending on other factors (see below)....

True....having more than 1 from IM is more beneficial than having 1 from IM, but then again, having 1 from IM is better than having none....

Also, is having a great LOR from surg better than having an average LOR from IM (I know....I know...you are not supposed to see the LOR, but you can kinda get an idea what kind of LOR its gonna be when you talk to the person to request a LOR from them...are they like "sure, why not." or are they like "will gladly write you one.")

my finacee is in anesthesiology at a top 10 program in NYC and had only 1 LOR from anesthesiology....true, her story is not the end all be all, but there are hundreds of thousands of applicants that have "only" 1 LOR from the field they are in....

and not giving weight to a LOR simply because of the politics and turf war b/w differentr fields is rediculous....

to the OP, you are fine....as long as you have 1 from the field you are going into and others are good, then you are golden....

(and on a side, LOR, while they have a good amount of merit, are also not the end all be all for selection, unless they are superb--which is also rare)

 

[madcadaver]

I'm applying for IM and was wondering if people think a letter from an attending you worked with during surgery would be beneficial or is it better to stick with IM attendings? Thanks!

A letter from any specialty, as long as it is strong, is great. I review applications for my IM program and, for me, I would rather see one or two strong IM letters paired with a strong letter or two from surgery, psych, peds, OB, research, or just about any other department than a handfull of strictly IM letters. There is no downside to proving that you are an excellent all around student, are well qualified for many fields, but are choosing IM.

 

[(nicedream)]

A letter from any specialty, as long as it is strong, is great. I review applications for my IM program and, for me, I would rather see one or two strong IM letters paired with a strong letter or two from surgery, psych, peds, OB, research, or just about any other department than a handfull of strictly IM letters. There is no downside to proving that you are an excellent all around student, are well qualified for many fields, but are choosing IM.

Since you review apps - how much weight would you say is given to the dean's letter? If it were negative, would that be of significant detriment to the application?

 

[TommyGunn04]

Since you review apps - how much weight would you say is given to the dean's letter? If it were negative, would that be of significant detriment to the application?

The "dean's letter," which is now officially referred to as the "Medical Student Performance Evaluation" or MSPE, is generally rather objective, so if your MSPE is "negative," that suggests that you didn't do all that well in med school. The MSPE has a rather strict format that's mandated by the AAMC, so schools don't really have the leeway to subjectively make it positive or negative if they don't have the objective data to back it up (such as grades, which they're required to list, clerkship comments/evaluations, etc.).

So I'd imagine that a negative dean's letter would be given quite a bit of weight! Perhaps you're misunderstanding the content of the MSPE?

 

[(nicedream)]

The "dean's letter," which is now officially referred to as the "Medical Student Performance Evaluation" or MSPE, is generally rather objective, so if your MSPE is "negative," that suggests that you didn't do all that well in med school. The MSPE has a rather strict format that's mandated by the AAMC, so schools don't really have the leeway to subjectively make it positive or negative if they don't have the objective data to back it up (such as grades, which they're required to list, clerkship comments/evaluations, etc.).

So I'd imagine that a negative dean's letter would be given quite a bit of weight! Perhaps you're misunderstanding the content of the MSPE?

Probation during first year for violation of mandatory attendance policy and a scathing evaluation by a faculty member from first semester for same. Both items are in my file.
Grades and scores are good.

 

[TommyGunn04]

ahhhh, I see. And they've mentioned these negative items in your MSPE? I'd definitely be ready to have a good explanation on interviews. Honestly I'm not sure how much it would really matter, since it was first year. My understanding is that medicine programs really don't care about preclinical grades. As long as there wasn't a pattern of you getting negative evals after that episode I don't think it'll be a big deal.

 

[(nicedream)]

ahhhh, I see. And they've mentioned these negative items in your MSPE? I'd definitely be ready to have a good explanation on interviews. Honestly I'm not sure how much it would really matter, since it was first year. My understanding is that medicine programs really don't care about preclinical grades. As long as there wasn't a pattern of you getting negative evals after that episode I don't think it'll be a big deal.

I don't know if they will be included in the MSPE - I assumed they included everything.
Thanks for the optimism, I needed it today.