Low Stat'ers with interviews

[Just kiss me]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

This is for those of us with very low stats that have landed interviews, talking about gpa of (0-3.3) and MCAT of (0-25).
Let's share our stories medicine is not just about stats.

 

[ProudMD]

A 3.3 GPA isn't THAT low for MD schools, but a sub 25 MCAT is going to be lethal unless you have something absolutely extraordinary.

 

[maccu5000]

50% of people from my undergrad with a GPA of 3.0-3.3 are accepted into MD directly out of undergrad. They had MCATs of >=30. Institution, rigor of coursework, and EC's matter a lot. Good advising will help maximize an applicant's potential of getting interviewed and accepted.

I have a non-trad friend (30's, doctorate in non-BCPM) with a 3.3 cGPA, 3.3 sGPA, and <30 MCAT (on retake) accepted to a prestigious east coast school. Not URM, no connections. If you have lower stats, you need to make up for it in other ways. Many schools will have a holistic review.

 

[ReggieNoble22]

50% of people from my undergrad with a GPA of 3.0-3.3 are accepted into MD directly out of undergrad. They had MCATs of >=30. Institution, rigor of coursework, and EC's matter a lot. Good advising will help maximize an applicant's potential of getting interviewed and accepted.

I have a non-trad friend (30's, doctorate in non-BCPM) with a 3.3 cGPA, 3.3 sGPA, and <30 MCAT (on retake) accepted to a prestigious east coast school. Not URM, no connections. If you have lower stats, you need to make up for it in other ways. Many schools will have a holistic review.

What school?

 

[maccu5000]

What school?

Staying anonymous--a national university in the top 11-20 range.

 

[Doug Underhill]

Statistically speaking, high MCAT (33+) and low GPA is much better off than the reverse. Also, the GPA shouldn't be that low- I'm talking ~3.4, not 3.0.

 

[maccu5000]

https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/2013factstable24.pdf

For context, about 30-35% of all applicants with a GPA of 3.0-3.4 and an MCAT of 30-32 are accepted to medical school. (Also 20-25% of people with that GPA and a a 27-29 MCAT get an acceptance).

Who are those 30%? Probably mostly people who go to good undergrad institutions, have good EC's, letters of rec, medical experience, and advising. It is not impossible for people with low stats to get in. Many do.

 

[NYCdude]

A big reason why I love medicine is that it isn't based entirely on intellectual capability, but places a large emphasis on things like emotional intelligence and social acumen. Granted, you should be an intellectually impressive person if your profession deals with other people's lives, but it's not the end all. People probably wouldn't care if a physicist was friendly or not, he just has to be damn good at physics. But no one will put up with a brilliant doctor who doesn't care about anyone (House is a fictional tale).

 

[ProudMD]

For MD schools, 27-29 is considered low but still conquerable if everything else is very strong, and/or there are other factors at play (generous in-state schools, non-trad status, others). But when the MCAT is under a 25, then I am afraid that MDs are out of the question unless there's something extraordinary.

I don't think the OP is going to get any responses from people with MCAT <25 who have achieved success with MD schools.

 

[Just kiss me]

Well standing on 8 rejections and one interview, but I love the long apologetic rejection letters 🙂, one of them actually said "I know you will be disappointed with this decision but we highly considered your application." Well 30 more schools waiting to hear from, not losing hope, but I'm on the lower side of my given stat bracket but still hoping.

 

[knv2u]

A 3.3 GPA isn't THAT low for MD schools, but a sub 25 MCAT is going to be lethal unless you have something absolutely extraordinary.

Yes it is. The average admitted MD applicant has a cumulative average GPA around 3.7.

 

[ProudMD]

Yes it is. The average admitted MD applicant has a cumulative average GPA around 3.7.

What I meant is that a 3.3 can be overcome relatively easily with a high MCAT, good ECs, and other factors. However, a 25 is almost always lethal when it comes to MD schools. Dozens of undergrads from my alma mater get into medical schools (even top 30s) with 3.3 science GPAs, but these individuals almost always have 34+ MCAT scores. My GPA was a 3.3, and I got accepted to my top choice.

 

[efle]

Yeah, a 3.3 at a good school won't kill an app, but combined with a 25 MCAT you have a ~20% chance though your actual number changes a lot with +/- URM status in that range (for example, same stats on an african american applicant has 66% chance)

 

[efle]

wow, some of this is crazy.

2.80-2.99 GPA, 27-29 MCAT, African American 45% accepted
2.80-2.99 GPA, 27-29 MCAT, Asian 6%

I need to stop telling people a sub 3.0, sub 30 is not MD competitive, at least until I make sure they're Privileged

 

[Boolean]

wow, some of this is crazy.

2.80-2.99 GPA, 27-29 MCAT, African American 45% accepted
2.80-2.99 GPA, 27-29 MCAT, Asian 6%

I need to stop telling people a sub 3.0, sub 30 is not MD competitive, at least until I make sure they're Privileged

This is not new news. We have threads about this at least once a month.

 

[DoctorLacrosse]

This is not new news. We have threads about this at least once a month.

once a day***

 

[grdxribeiro]

you need to make up for it in other ways. Many schools will have a holistic review.

 

[efle]

This is not new news. We have threads about this at least once a month.

my first time seeing how big the differences are is all

 

[Boolean]

my first time seeing how big the differences are is all

It's fairly sizable, that's for sure. There's any number of factors that can influence the difference being that large (contribution to diversity, etc), but it is quite the difference nevertheless.

 

[efle]

stop changing ur damn avatar you feel like a stranger now

 

[Boolean]

stop changing ur damn avatar you feel like a stranger now

xoxo

 

[lisi326]

A big reason why I love medicine is that it isn't based entirely on intellectual capability, but places a large emphasis on things like emotional intelligence and social acumen. Granted, you should be an intellectually impressive person if your profession deals with other people's lives, but it's not the end all. People probably wouldn't care if a physicist was friendly or not, he just has to be damn good at physics. But no one will put up with a brilliant doctor who doesn't care about anyone (House is a fictional tale).

I don't want to bring you down too hard, but this is an incredibly naive and just plain wrong view of medicine. Medicine places a TON of weight on intellectual capacity and VERY LITTLE on emotional intelligence and social skills. Your social skills basically just need to be >10th percentile of humanity, and if your scores are good enough, you'll be properly rewarded. And people with social skills in the 90th percentile will be denied with bad stats.

People put up with brilliant physicians/surgeons who have absolutely no people skills all the time. Can you honestly say you've never heard a friend/family member/stranger say "yeah, his bedside manner is TERRIBLE, but he's such a good doctor that I don't care"? People are willing to forgive a lot of extreme personality flaws if they think their doctor will fix their problems, especially in the surgical side of things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not agreeing with the way things are (I think smart people with good social skills make very good doctors), but I just don't want you to be disappointed when you get to med school and see how many of your classmates are obviously brilliant but completely inept at social interactions, and then watch them transition to working with patients and cringe endlessly at how terrible they are. Social skills/emotional intelligence are good, but good stats are a lot more important in med school admissions and will take you a lot further.

 

[NYCdude]

I don't want to bring you down too hard, but this is an incredibly naive and just plain wrong view of medicine. Medicine places a TON of weight on intellectual capacity and VERY LITTLE on emotional intelligence and social skills. Your social skills basically just need to be >10th percentile of humanity, and if your scores are good enough, you'll be properly rewarded. And people with social skills in the 90th percentile will be denied with bad stats.

People put up with brilliant physicians/surgeons who have absolutely no people skills all the time. Can you honestly say you've never heard a friend/family member/stranger say "yeah, his bedside manner is TERRIBLE, but he's such a good doctor that I don't care"? People are willing to forgive a lot of extreme personality flaws if they think their doctor will fix their problems, especially in the surgical side of things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not agreeing with the way things are (I think smart people with good social skills make very good doctors), but I just don't want you to be disappointed when you get to med school and see how many of your classmates are obviously brilliant but completely inept at social interactions, and then watch them transition to working with patients and cringe endlessly at how terrible they are. Social skills/emotional intelligence are good, but good stats are a lot more important in med school admissions and will take you a lot further.

Well, that goes against all the stuff I've been writing in essays and saying during interviews. No one has put it to me this way, yet. But thank you for your candidness. 😀

 

[Holmwood]

I don't want to bring you down too hard, but this is an incredibly naive and just plain wrong view of medicine. Medicine places a TON of weight on intellectual capacity and VERY LITTLE on emotional intelligence and social skills. Your social skills basically just need to be >10th percentile of humanity, and if your scores are good enough, you'll be properly rewarded. And people with social skills in the 90th percentile will be denied with bad stats.

People put up with brilliant physicians/surgeons who have absolutely no people skills all the time. Can you honestly say you've never heard a friend/family member/stranger say "yeah, his bedside manner is TERRIBLE, but he's such a good doctor that I don't care"? People are willing to forgive a lot of extreme personality flaws if they think their doctor will fix their problems, especially in the surgical side of things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not agreeing with the way things are (I think smart people with good social skills make very good doctors), but I just don't want you to be disappointed when you get to med school and see how many of your classmates are obviously brilliant but completely inept at social interactions, and then watch them transition to working with patients and cringe endlessly at how terrible they are. Social skills/emotional intelligence are good, but good stats are a lot more important in med school admissions and will take you a lot further.

This is going to be somewhat off topic...
Stats = / = admissions
Read this if you're so inclined to... https://www.aamc.org/download/261106/data/aibvol11_no6.pdf


Furthermore, you need adequate (not just 10th percentile) social skills to make correct diagnoses (trust = better patient history) as well as keep patients compliant with their meds (not to mention pimping up those satisfaction scores). However, the social skills aren't just for the patient.

In medicine, you tend to also work with other physicians and health professionals as a team to care for the patient. You can't coordinate effectively if you're socially inept.

 

[Just kiss me]

Well I think being compassionate and kind is important in medicine.I wrote a great P.S about my passion and compassion and I demonstrated such in many activities throughout undergrad, I went to the poorest neighborhoods of Baltimore to educate people, i volunteered in homeless clinics, i spent so much time with the poor, that despite my very low stats i should get more interviews. I was given an award by my school as the most qualified community outreach leader so hey, I might not have the stats, but I'm driven by this thing.

 

[godawg300]

I think there was some data having an MCAT lower than 25 made you much more likely to fail medical school. So I think having a 3.3 GPA can be fine but an Mcat lower than 25 isn't a good sign that you will be able to handle medical school.

 

[efle]

I might not have the stats, but I'm driven by this thing.

Well that's good, I'd be happy to have a doctor who struggled a lot with science coursework and medical reasoning but really cared about me!


/s

Give me the genius doctor who puts things a little too bluntly instead, please.

 

[lisi326]

Well, that goes against all the stuff I've been writing in essays and saying during interviews. No one has put it to me this way, yet. But thank you for your candidness. 😀

I'm sorry if I came off as rather abrasive there. It was just something that I was/have been very disappointed in in my 3.5 years of med school, and I just want to give you a little view of what it's like out in the real world of medicine. Keep believing in the the value of holistic views of what makes a good doctor - I'm right there with you. I do think we're starting to come around to looking at more than just stats, though. The top schools will be the slowest to do that.

This is going to be somewhat off topic...
Stats = / = admissions
Read this if you're so inclined to... https://www.aamc.org/download/261106/data/aibvol11_no6.pdf


Furthermore, you need adequate (not just 10th percentile) social skills to make correct diagnoses (trust = better patient history) as well as keep patients compliant with their meds (not to mention pimping up those satisfaction scores). However, the social skills aren't just for the patient.

In medicine, you tend to also work with other physicians and health professionals as a team to care for the patient. You can't coordinate effectively if you're socially inept.

I'm not going to argue against the first point for the sake of the thread, but I can tell you (as a 4th year med student) that many of our most highly regarded doctors and surgeons are some of the most socially inept people I can imagine. Although we're working towards a more holistic admissions process, there are still A LOT of physicians from the older generations running around, barely being able to effectively communicate with their patients and colleagues and routinely pissing off a lot of people. Social skills were not regarded as being necessary to being a good doctor until somewhat recently. And I still get arguments against that notion all the time from my classmates.

 

[NYCdude]

I'm sorry if I came off as rather abrasive there. It was just something that I was/have been very disappointed in in my 3.5 years of med school, and I just want to give you a little view of what it's like out in the real world of medicine. Keep believing in the the value of holistic views of what makes a good doctor - I'm right there with you. I do think we're starting to come around to looking at more than just stats, though. The top schools will be the slowest to do that.



I'm not going to argue against the first point for the sake of the thread, but I can tell you (as a 4th year med student) that many of our most highly regarded doctors and surgeons are some of the most socially inept people I can imagine. Although we're working towards a more holistic admissions process, there are still A LOT of physicians from the older generations running around, barely being able to effectively communicate with their patients and colleagues and routinely pissing off a lot of people. Social skills were not regarded as being necessary to being a good doctor until somewhat recently. And I still get arguments against that notion all the time from my classmates.

You're obviously very well acquainted with the topic. Do you by any chance know of any studies that deal with doctor-patient social interactions and the quality of resultant treatment outcomes?

 

[Boolean]

Well I think being compassionate and kind is important in medicine.I wrote a great P.S about my passion and compassion and I demonstrated such in many activities throughout undergrad, I went to the poorest neighborhoods of Baltimore to educate people, i volunteered in homeless clinics, i spent so much time with the poor, that despite my very low stats i should get more interviews. I was given an award by my school as the most qualified community outreach leader so hey, I might not have the stats, but I'm driven by this thing.

Anyone can be passionate and show compassion. A doctor must be more than that. Compassion does not make up for lacking ability (i.e. GPA and MCAT), it merely complements an already ideal candidate. Many premeds did exactly what you did and in addition to that managed to ascertain the GPA and MCAT required to get into medical school.

 

[DoctorLacrosse]

Well that's good, I'd be happy to have a doctor who struggled a lot with science coursework and medical reasoning but really cared about me!


/s

Give me the genius doctor who puts things a little too bluntly instead, please.

genuine question here, not trying to be a jerk at all... but have you actually worked in healthcare at all before?

in all my years of working in hospitals and private practices, the only physicians I've ever witnessed get actual documented complaints against them were the ones who didn't treat patients with respect or were just not friendly to them. I've even seen MISTAKES get let go by patients because the doctor who made it was extremely pleasant to them throughout their stay. you'd be surprised how important it is to patients for their physician to be social and to have a good bedside manner. maybe this would be less important for things like surgery/anesthesia, but for EM, IM, Peds, family med, etc. having strong social skills is extremely important, at least from my experiences.

 

[Boolean]

genuine question here, not trying to be a jerk at all... but have you actually worked in healthcare at all before?

in all my years of working in hospitals and private practices, the only physicians I've ever witnessed get actual documented complaints against them were the ones who didn't treat patients with respect or were just not friendly to them. I've even seen MISTAKES get let go by patients because the doctor who made it was extremely pleasant to them throughout their stay. you'd be surprised how important it is to patients for their physician to be social and to have a good bedside manner. maybe this would be less important for things like surgery/anesthesia, but for EM, IM, Peds, family med, etc. having strong social skills is extremely important, at least from my experiences.

I don't see how your point is related to theirs. @efle along with myself would rather the doctor who is more skilled over one who is not. Is it important to have a caring and compassionate doctor? Of course. That said, I would prefer having the physician with greater clinical skills treating me.

Look at House M.D. for example. House is a jerk, but he is effective and possesses incredible clinical skills.

 

[efle]

genuine question here, not trying to be a jerk at all... but have you actually worked in healthcare at all before?

in all my years of working in hospitals and private practices, the only physicians I've ever witnessed get actual documented complaints against them were the ones who didn't treat patients with respect or were just not friendly to them. I've even seen MISTAKES get let go by patients because the doctor who made it was extremely pleasant to them throughout their stay. you'd be surprised how important it is to patients for their physician to be social and to have a good bedside manner. maybe this would be less important for things like surgery/anesthesia, but for EM, IM, Peds, family med, etc. having strong social skills is extremely important, at least from my experiences.

Oh I'm not downplaying the usefulness of a good bedside manner, the doctors personality is HUGE for example in maintaining a healthy private practice when patients won't come back if they dislike you. It's always best to be a great person and have the right brain for medicine. I'm just trying to point out that no amount of congeniality or passion will make me want a doctor with a 40th or lower MCAT percentile and a track record of B's.

 

[eatingcake]

Anyone can be passionate and show compassion. A doctor must be more than that. Compassion does not make up for lacking ability (i.e. GPA and MCAT), it merely complements an already ideal candidate. Many premeds did exactly what you did and in addition to that managed to ascertain the GPA and MCAT required to get into medical school.

Why isn't compassion part of the "ideal" candidate's package?

 

[Boolean]

Why isn't compassion part of the "ideal" candidate's package?

Because there is no quantitative way to measure compassion and it is something that is subjective dependent upon the reviewer. Some view acts of compassion differently. For example, look at the thread regarding the student getting arrested over feeding the homeless. Some love it, some hate it.

 

[godawg300]

Oh I'm not downplaying the usefulness of a good bedside manner, the doctors personality is HUGE for example in maintaining a healthy private practice when patients won't come back if they dislike you. It's always best to be a great person and have the right brain for medicine. I'm just trying to point out that no amount of congeniality or passion will make me want a doctor with a 40th or lower MCAT percentile and a track record of B's.

Lol. You won't ever know your doctors MCAT or gpa. If that's the case, better not go to most primary care providers as they probably had lower step 1 scores than all the derm, optho, rad onc, and plastic surgeons. If someone got into med school, passed step 1, is board certified, I'm not sure why their mcat and GPA would be relevant. That's such a silly thing to say. Strong social and communication skills allow doctors to pick up on subtle differences and key clues that can often help correctly diagnose a patient. I had an interview with a dean of a top medical school that actually told me a story about a surgeon that didn't listen to a thing his patient said and proceeded to operate on the wrong arm because his inability to actually listen to his patient. Ideally you get a doctor that has enough social aptitude and intelligence. If you simply are judging a doctors ability by their test scores, then by all means, plastic surgeons, dermatologist, and other top specialist are the best doctors around. Primary care doctors won't even compare. If someone gets into med school, does well enough, get board certified, why would their mcat be a measure of how good of a doctor they are?

 

[eatingcake]

Because there is no quantitative way to measure compassion and it is something that is subjective dependent upon the reviewer. Some view acts of compassion differently. For example, look at the thread regarding the student getting arrested over feeding the homeless. Some love it, some hate it.

Yeah, I momentarily exited the context of the thread when I read your response. In terms of the admission process, I agree. But, outside of the sphere of the admissions process and things that are quantifiable, an ideal physician demonstrates compassion.

 

[Boolean]

Yeah, I momentarily exited the context of the thread when I read your response. In terms of the admission process, I agree. But, outside of the sphere of the admissions process and things that are quantifiable, an ideal physician demonstrates compassion.

Oh, certainly. An ideal physician demonstrates many things, most of which cannot be so simply put down in words. My response is from a purely admissions perspective. My apologies for not clarifying.

 

[lisi326]

You're obviously very well acquainted with the topic. Do you by any chance know of any studies that deal with doctor-patient social interactions and the quality of resultant treatment outcomes?

A few results from a quick pubmed search:

Perspect Med Educ. 2012 Nov;1(4):192-206. doi: 10.1007/s40037-012-0025-0. Epub 2012 Sep 27.
Encounters between medical specialists and patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms; influences of communication on patient outcomes and use of health care: a literature overview.
Weiland A1, Van de Kraats RE, Blankenstein AH, Van Saase JL, Van der Molen HT, Bramer WM, Van Dulmen AM, Arends LR.

Abstract
Medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) burden patients and health services due to large quantities of consultations and medical interventions. The aim of this study is to determine which elements of communication in non-psychiatric specialist MUPS care influence health outcomes. Systematic search in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase. Data extraction comprising study design, patient characteristics, number of patients, communication strategies, outcome measures and results. Elements of doctor-patient communication were framed according to symptoms, health anxiety, satisfaction, daily functioning and use of health care. Eight included studies. Two studies described the effect of communication on patient outcome in physical symptoms, three studies on health anxiety and patient satisfaction and one study on daily functioning. Two studies contained research on use of health care. Qualitative synthesis of findings was conducted. Communication matters in non-psychiatric MUPS specialist care. Perceiving patients' expectations correctly enables specialists to influence patients' cognitions, to reduce patients' anxiety and improve patients' satisfaction. Patients report less symptoms and health anxiety when symptoms are properly explained. Positive interaction and feedback reduces use of health care and improves coping. Development of communication skills focused on MUPS patients should be part of postgraduate education for medical specialists.

Int J Public Health. 2011 Jun;56(3):319-27. doi: 10.1007/s00038-010-0212-x. Epub 2010 Nov 13.
The relationship between social support, shared decision-making and patient's trust in doctors: a cross-sectional survey of 2,197 inpatients using the Cologne Patient Questionnaire.
Ommen O1, Thuem S, Pfaff H, Janssen C.

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Empirical studies have confirmed that a trusting physician-patient interaction promotes patient satisfaction, adherence to treatment and improved health outcomes. The objective of this analysis was to investigate the relationship between social support, shared decision-making and inpatient's trust in physicians in a hospital setting.
METHODS:
A written questionnaire was completed by 2,197 patients who were treated in the year 2000 in six hospitals in Germany. Logistic regression was performed with a dichotomized index for patient's trust in physicians.
RESULTS:
The logistic regression model identified significant relationships (p < 0.05) in terms of emotional support (standardized effect coefficient [sc], 3.65), informational support (sc, 1.70), shared decision-making (sc, 1.40), age (sc, 1.14), socioeconomic status (sc, 1.15) and gender (sc, 1.15). We found no significant relationship between 'tendency to excuse' and trust. The last regression model accounted for 49.1% of Nagelkerke's R-square.
CONCLUSIONS:
Insufficient physician communication skills can lead to extensive negative effects on the trust of patients in their physicians. Thus, it becomes clear that medical support requires not only biomedical, but also psychosocial skills.

Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Sep;76(3):328-35. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.07.031. Epub 2009 Aug 14.
Patient-doctor interaction in rehabilitation: the relationship between perceived interaction quality and long-term treatment results.
Dibbelt S1, Schaidhammer M, Fleischer C, Greitemann B.

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
A body of evidence suggests that good interaction is crucial for high-quality medical practice and has a considerable impact on treatment outcomes. Less is known about the role and significance of doctor-patient interaction in rehabilitation. The study aim was to capture perceived quality of doctor-patient interaction in rehabilitation by a rating instrument (P.A.INT-Questionnaire. P.A.INT is the abbreviation for Patient-Arzt-Interaktion (German)) and to examine the relationship between perceived quality of interaction and long-term treatment outcomes.
METHODS:
Referring to the approach of Bensing [Bensing JM. Doctor patient communication and the quality of care. Utrecht: NIVEL; 1990] we defined "quality of interaction" in terms of three dimensions: (1) affective behaviour, i.e. empathy, positive regard and coherence [Rogers CR. Die nicht direktive Beratung München: Kindler Studienausgabe [Counselling and psychotherapy, 1942]. Boston; 1972]; (2) instrumental behaviour: providing and collecting information, structuring and reinforcement; (3) participation and involvement of patients. Two parallel versions of the questionnaire were developed for patients and physicians. Seven rehabilitation clinics in north western Germany participated in the multi-centre study. Sixty-one doctors and their four hundred and seventy patients evaluated both their shared dialogues upon admission, discharge and ward round. Furthermore, patients rated their health status on admission (t0), discharge (t1) and six months after discharge (t2) with the IRES-3 (Indicators of Rehabilitation Status Questionnaire, Version 3).
RESULTS:
(1) Comparisons of patient and physician evaluations on admission revealed the following: affective quality of contact (empathy and coherence) was rated positively and without discrepancies by both patients and physicians. On the other hand, instrumental behaviour (information and structuring) was rated less positively by patients than by physicians. (2) Patients who rated the dialogue on admission more positively showed stronger treatment effects with respect to pain as well as to anxiety at discharge and six months after discharge. Analysis for single scales of the P.A.INT-Questionnaire revealed that this is due to affective and instrumental quality of the dialogues.
CONCLUSION:
Our results suggest a correlation between perceived interaction quality, as defined by our questionnaire and treatment effects six months after discharge. Comparisons of patient and physician evaluations showed that physicians seem to be successful in building relationships on the affective level, but less successful on the instrumental level (i.e. information, structuring and reinforcement). They also perceive disturbances on the relational and organisational level more strongly than patients.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS:
Our data underline the importance of interaction quality for the success of rehabilitation and thus the importance of specific skills such as providing and collecting information, recognizing patients' concerns and goals as well as reinforcement of health related action. Regular training and supervision should be provided to support physicians and to enhance their competence in dealing with patients concerns.

 

[efle]

Lol. You won't ever know your doctors MCAT or gpa. If that's the case, better not go to most primary care providers as they probably had lower step 1 scores than all the derm, optho, rad onc, and plastic surgeons. If someone got into med school, passed step 1, is board certified, I'm not sure why their mcat and GPA would be relevant. That's such a silly thing to say. Strong social and communication skills allow doctors to pick up on subtle differences and key clues that can often help correctly diagnose a patient. I had an interview with a dean of a top medical school that actually told me a story about a surgeon that didn't listen to a thing his patient said and proceeded to operate on the wrong arm because his inability to actually listen to his patient. Ideally you get a doctor that has enough social aptitude and intelligence. If you simply are judging a doctors ability by their test scores, then by all means, plastic surgeons, dermatologist, and other top specialist are the best doctors around. Primary care doctors won't even compare. If someone gets into med school, does well enough, get board certified, why would their mcat be a measure of how good of a doctor they are?

I don't actually care about the MCAT score, or Step score, or GPA in and of themselves, I care about what they indicate: this person is not as academically capable as others offering the same service. As I said before, yes good communication can only be a good thing, but no it is not something to make up for a 23 MCAT 3.1 GPA. This is like hiring a high school student with a C- in math classes to do your taxes because he just seems so empathetic.

 

[efle]

A few results from a quick pubmed search:

Perspect Med Educ. 2012 Nov;1(4):192-206. doi: 10.1007/s40037-012-0025-0. Epub 2012 Sep 27.
Encounters between medical specialists and patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms; influences of communication on patient outcomes and use of health care: a literature overview.
Weiland A1, Van de Kraats RE, Blankenstein AH, Van Saase JL, Van der Molen HT, Bramer WM, Van Dulmen AM, Arends LR.

Abstract
Medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) burden patients and health services due to large quantities of consultations and medical interventions. The aim of this study is to determine which elements of communication in non-psychiatric specialist MUPS care influence health outcomes. Systematic search in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase. Data extraction comprising study design, patient characteristics, number of patients, communication strategies, outcome measures and results. Elements of doctor-patient communication were framed according to symptoms, health anxiety, satisfaction, daily functioning and use of health care. Eight included studies. Two studies described the effect of communication on patient outcome in physical symptoms, three studies on health anxiety and patient satisfaction and one study on daily functioning. Two studies contained research on use of health care. Qualitative synthesis of findings was conducted. Communication matters in non-psychiatric MUPS specialist care. Perceiving patients' expectations correctly enables specialists to influence patients' cognitions, to reduce patients' anxiety and improve patients' satisfaction. Patients report less symptoms and health anxiety when symptoms are properly explained. Positive interaction and feedback reduces use of health care and improves coping. Development of communication skills focused on MUPS patients should be part of postgraduate education for medical specialists.

Int J Public Health. 2011 Jun;56(3):319-27. doi: 10.1007/s00038-010-0212-x. Epub 2010 Nov 13.
The relationship between social support, shared decision-making and patient's trust in doctors: a cross-sectional survey of 2,197 inpatients using the Cologne Patient Questionnaire.
Ommen O1, Thuem S, Pfaff H, Janssen C.

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Empirical studies have confirmed that a trusting physician-patient interaction promotes patient satisfaction, adherence to treatment and improved health outcomes. The objective of this analysis was to investigate the relationship between social support, shared decision-making and inpatient's trust in physicians in a hospital setting.
METHODS:
A written questionnaire was completed by 2,197 patients who were treated in the year 2000 in six hospitals in Germany. Logistic regression was performed with a dichotomized index for patient's trust in physicians.
RESULTS:
The logistic regression model identified significant relationships (p < 0.05) in terms of emotional support (standardized effect coefficient [sc], 3.65), informational support (sc, 1.70), shared decision-making (sc, 1.40), age (sc, 1.14), socioeconomic status (sc, 1.15) and gender (sc, 1.15). We found no significant relationship between 'tendency to excuse' and trust. The last regression model accounted for 49.1% of Nagelkerke's R-square.
CONCLUSIONS:
Insufficient physician communication skills can lead to extensive negative effects on the trust of patients in their physicians. Thus, it becomes clear that medical support requires not only biomedical, but also psychosocial skills.

Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Sep;76(3):328-35. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.07.031. Epub 2009 Aug 14.
Patient-doctor interaction in rehabilitation: the relationship between perceived interaction quality and long-term treatment results.
Dibbelt S1, Schaidhammer M, Fleischer C, Greitemann B.

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
A body of evidence suggests that good interaction is crucial for high-quality medical practice and has a considerable impact on treatment outcomes. Less is known about the role and significance of doctor-patient interaction in rehabilitation. The study aim was to capture perceived quality of doctor-patient interaction in rehabilitation by a rating instrument (P.A.INT-Questionnaire. P.A.INT is the abbreviation for Patient-Arzt-Interaktion (German)) and to examine the relationship between perceived quality of interaction and long-term treatment outcomes.
METHODS:
Referring to the approach of Bensing [Bensing JM. Doctor patient communication and the quality of care. Utrecht: NIVEL; 1990] we defined "quality of interaction" in terms of three dimensions: (1) affective behaviour, i.e. empathy, positive regard and coherence [Rogers CR. Die nicht direktive Beratung München: Kindler Studienausgabe [Counselling and psychotherapy, 1942]. Boston; 1972]; (2) instrumental behaviour: providing and collecting information, structuring and reinforcement; (3) participation and involvement of patients. Two parallel versions of the questionnaire were developed for patients and physicians. Seven rehabilitation clinics in north western Germany participated in the multi-centre study. Sixty-one doctors and their four hundred and seventy patients evaluated both their shared dialogues upon admission, discharge and ward round. Furthermore, patients rated their health status on admission (t0), discharge (t1) and six months after discharge (t2) with the IRES-3 (Indicators of Rehabilitation Status Questionnaire, Version 3).
RESULTS:
(1) Comparisons of patient and physician evaluations on admission revealed the following: affective quality of contact (empathy and coherence) was rated positively and without discrepancies by both patients and physicians. On the other hand, instrumental behaviour (information and structuring) was rated less positively by patients than by physicians. (2) Patients who rated the dialogue on admission more positively showed stronger treatment effects with respect to pain as well as to anxiety at discharge and six months after discharge. Analysis for single scales of the P.A.INT-Questionnaire revealed that this is due to affective and instrumental quality of the dialogues.
CONCLUSION:
Our results suggest a correlation between perceived interaction quality, as defined by our questionnaire and treatment effects six months after discharge. Comparisons of patient and physician evaluations showed that physicians seem to be successful in building relationships on the affective level, but less successful on the instrumental level (i.e. information, structuring and reinforcement). They also perceive disturbances on the relational and organisational level more strongly than patients.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS:
Our data underline the importance of interaction quality for the success of rehabilitation and thus the importance of specific skills such as providing and collecting information, recognizing patients' concerns and goals as well as reinforcement of health related action. Regular training and supervision should be provided to support physicians and to enhance their competence in dealing with patients concerns.

This is all regarding subjective/perceptual effects like pain and trust. Got anything that says surgeons do better when patients like them more?

 

[godawg300]

I don't actually care about the MCAT score, or Step score, or GPA in and of themselves, I care about what they indicate: this person is not as academically capable as others offering the same service. As I said before, yes good communication can only be a good thing, but no it is not something to make up for a 23 MCAT 3.1 GPA. This is like hiring a high school student with a C- in math classes to do your taxes because he just seems so empathetic.

Okay, a 23 is a little extreme, but are you seriously going to think that a 32 vs 40, that the 40 physician is going to be much better? What about a 230 step 1 vs 250? These are test that provide one metric and for the most part past a certain threshold don't indicate that one person will be a better doctor. I'm not sure where that line is, but I don't buy that a 40 mcat is much more academically capable than a 32 for example. What about if someone retakes the 23 and gets a 30? It's just not black and white. In any event, I think these tests have value but they aren't the be all.

 

[lisi326]

This is all regarding subjective/perceptual effects like pain and trust. Got anything that says surgeons do better when patients like them more?

Again, VERY quick pubmed search:

Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014 Sep 18;8:1239-53. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S62925. eCollection 2014.
Short- and long-term subjective medical treatment outcome of trauma surgery patients: the importance of physician empathy.
Steinhausen S1, Ommen O2, Antoine SL1, Koehler T3, Pfaff H4, Neugebauer E1.

Abstract
PURPOSE:
To investigate accident casualties' long-term subjective evaluation of treatment outcome 6 weeks and 12 months after discharge and its relation to the experienced surgeon's empathy during hospital treatment after trauma in consideration of patient-, injury-, and health-related factors. The long-term results are compared to the 6-week follow-up outcomes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS:
Two hundred and seventeen surgery patients were surveyed at 6 weeks, and 206 patients at 12 months after discharge from the trauma surgical general ward. The subjective evaluation of medical treatment outcome was measured 6 weeks and 12 months after discharge with the respective scale from the Cologne Patient Questionnaire. Physician Empathy was assessed with the Consultation and RelationalEmpathy Measure. The correlation between physician empathy and control variables with the subjective evaluation of medical treatment outcome 12 months after discharge was identified by means of logistic regression analysis under control of sociodemographic and injury-related factors.
RESULTS:
One hundred and thirty-six patients were included within the logistic regression analysis at the 12-month follow-up. Compared to the 6-week follow-up, the level of subjective evaluation of medical treatment outcome was slightly lower and the association with physician empathy was weaker. Compared to patients who rated the empathy of their surgeon lower than 31 points, patients with ratings of 41 points or higher had a 4.2-fold higher probability to be in the group with a better medical treatment outcome (3.5 and above) on the Cologne Patient Questionnaire scale 12 months after discharge from hospital (P=0.009, R (2)=33.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.440-12.629).
CONCLUSION:
Physician empathy is the strongest predictor for a higher level of trauma patients' subjective evaluation of treatment outcome 6 weeks and 12 months after discharge from the hospital. Interpersonal factors between surgeons and their patients are possible key levers for improving patient outcomes in an advanced health system. Communication trainings for surgeons might prepare them to react appropriately to their patients' needs and lead to satisfactory outcomes for both parties.

Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Aug;132(2):212e-220e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31829586fa.
Optimizing patient-centered care in breast reconstruction: the importance of preoperative information and patient-physician communication.
Ho AL1, Klassen AF, Cano S, Scott AM, Pusic AL.

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
In breast reconstruction, achieving patient satisfaction is a central goal. While much is known about clinical variables that may influence satisfaction, little is known about how the process of care may affect patient perceptions of outcome. The aim of this study was to examine how preoperative information and interactions with the surgical and medical teams might influence patient satisfaction with the outcome.
METHODS:
A multicenter, cross-sectional study design was used. The BREAST-Q (breast reconstruction module) was administered in a postal survey to a cohort of breast reconstruction patients in North America. The association between patient satisfaction with the process of care and satisfaction with the outcome of breast reconstruction was evaluated using linear regression. Multivariate regression models were constructed to control for confounders and to identify predictors of outcome.
RESULTS:
The study sample (n=510; response rate, 66 percent) was characterized by a mean age of 54.3±9.3 years (range, 21.0 to 81.0 years) and a mean body mass index of 25.2±4.3 (range, 16.3 to 48.9). On multivariate analysis, satisfaction with information and satisfaction with the plastic surgeon predicted higher satisfaction with breasts (information, p<0.001; plastic surgeon, p=0.003; R(2)=0.29) and higher satisfaction with overall outcome (satisfaction with information, p<0.001; satisfaction with plastic surgeon, p<0.001; R(2)=0.31).
CONCLUSIONS:
Patient-centered care is an important aspect of quality of care. Patients' levels of satisfaction with preoperative information and their interaction with their plastic surgeon significantly influence satisfaction with their breasts and overall outcome. Future research to develop methods to enhance information delivery and the surgeon-patient relationship may optimize outcomes in breast reconstruction patients.

Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2011 Dec;16(5):591-600. doi: 10.1007/s10459-011-9278-3. Epub 2011 Feb 2.
The effect of surgeon empathy and emotional intelligence on patient satisfaction.
Weng HC1, Steed JF, Yu SW, Liu YT, Hsu CC, Yu TJ, Chen W.

Abstract
We investigated the associations of surgeons' emotional intelligence and surgeons' empathy with patient-surgeon relationships, patient perceptions of their health, and patient satisfaction before and after surgical procedures. We used multi-source approaches to survey 50 surgeons and their 549 outpatients during initial and follow-up visits. Surgeons' emotional intelligence had a positive effect (r = .45; p < .001) on patient-rated patient-surgeonrvelationships. Patient-surgeon relationships had a positive impact on patient satisfaction before surgery (r = .95; p < .001). Surgeon empathy did not have an effect on patient-surgeon relationships or patient satisfaction prior to surgery. But after surgery, surgeon empathy appeared to have a significantly positive and indirect effect on patient satisfaction through the mediating effect of patients' self-reported health status (r = .21; p < .001). Our study showed that long-term patient satisfaction with their surgeons is affected less by emotional intelligence than by empathy. Furthermore,empathy indirectly affects patient satisfaction through its positive effect on health outcomes, which have a direct effect on patients' satisfaction with their surgeons.

 

[efle]

Those are still all subjective measures. First is "do I feel better" (subjective outcome scale) second is "did I like my boob job" third is "am I satisfied with my surgery". Al of these show that friendly docs help patients feel better. I'm looking for do friendly docs have lower complication rates etc. It is absolutely true that a nice doc helps patientsfeel good. Still iisn't what I'd want first and foremost in my neurosurgeon

 

[Holmwood]

I'm sorry if I came off as rather abrasive there. It was just something that I was/have been very disappointed in in my 3.5 years of med school, and I just want to give you a little view of what it's like out in the real world of medicine. Keep believing in the the value of holistic views of what makes a good doctor - I'm right there with you. I do think we're starting to come around to looking at more than just stats, though. The top schools will be the slowest to do that.



I'm not going to argue against the first point for the sake of the thread, but I can tell you (as a 4th year med student) that many of our most highly regarded doctors and surgeons are some of the most socially inept people I can imagine. Although we're working towards a more holistic admissions process, there are still A LOT of physicians from the older generations running around, barely being able to effectively communicate with their patients and colleagues and routinely pissing off a lot of people. Social skills were not regarded as being necessary to being a good doctor until somewhat recently. And I still get arguments against that notion all the time from my classmates.

No apologies necessary. Your observations are valid. I have seen either spectrum of doctors at my hospital as well.

However, there is still the need for doctors with better social skills after we have seen a large proportion of patients being misdiagnosed, given subpar treatment, or given excessive/unnecessary treatment.

Here's a pretty good article to read: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/12-million-americans-misdiagnosed-each-year-study-says/

As I have said before, you can't rely on the basic tests and physical alone. And you can't get an effective patient history if patients can't be entirely truthful with you. You've already heard that, and may not agree with me, but that's okay. I have this as an example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178804

Furthermore, physicians aren't just healers. They are also advocates and counselors. If you're socially inept, how are you going to talk to a patient about aborting a fetus with severe birth defects? Or how are you going to talk to a patient about alerting authorities after suspected abuse or rape? Not all clinicians have to deal with ethical issues such as these, but I believe those physicians are the exemption rather than a representative example...

Lest we forget that the title of Doctor comes from the root word docēre which means to teach. And teaching inherently requires some degree of social skills to effectively convey the subject matter.

Perhaps with more sophisticated technology, we wouldn't need social skills. But then again, that's the age of automated diagnosis/treatment/counseling where human doctors are no longer needed.



On a side note, I very well understand my position as a pre-med and your position as a 4th year medical student. But what I have written is not just my personal opinion, but also the collective opinion of other doctors, professionals, and patients I've spoken to for the past 4 years.

 

[lisi326]

No apologies necessary. Your observations are valid. I have seen either spectrum of doctors at my hospital as well.

However, there is still the need for doctors with better social skills after we have seen a large proportion of patients being misdiagnosed, given subpar treatment, or given excessive/unnecessary treatment.

Here's a pretty good article to read: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/12-million-americans-misdiagnosed-each-year-study-says/

As I have said before, you can't rely on the basic tests and physical alone. And you can't get an effective patient history if patients can't be entirely truthful with you. You've already heard that, and may not agree with me, but that's okay. I have this as an example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21178804

Furthermore, physicians aren't just healers. They are also advocates and counselors. If you're socially inept, how are you going to talk to a patient about aborting a fetus with severe birth defects? Or how are you going to talk to a patient about alerting authorities after suspected abuse or rape? Not all clinicians have to deal with ethical issues such as these, but I believe those physicians are the exemption rather than a representative example...

Lest we forget that the title of Doctor comes from the root word docēre which means to teach. And teaching inherently requires some degree of social skills to effectively convey the subject matter.

Perhaps with more sophisticated technology, we wouldn't need social skills. But then again, that's the age of automated diagnosis/treatment/counseling where human doctors are no longer needed.

On a side note, I very well understand my position as a pre-med and your position as a 4th year medical student. But what I have written is not just my personal opinion, but rather the collective opinion of other doctors, professionals, and patients I've spoken to for the past 4 years.

I think you and I are arguing the same side 🙂 I 100% agree with everything you're saying. I most certainly think that having good social skills makes you a better physician in many different ways. All I'm saying is that in the real world.... these qualities are not necessarily seen in all of the "best" physicians in the place. Nor are they highly valued amongst the people recruiting the newer generations of attendings, residents, and med students. I've had many discussions with my classmates where they argued that the qualities you spoke of are not important to being a good physician. Indeed, I've even had patients tell me they're not important. What we idealistically think is not reflected in real-life healthcare. That's all I'm saying 🙂

 

[Just kiss me]

An exam cannot speak of your capabilities ever, I could have just had a bad day. GPA similar story, I could have had 2 full time jobs and being a full time student. Don't be so narrow minded, by the way my MCAT is 21 and i still have one interview and hopefully many more to go.

 

[efle]

21 MCAT
1 interview

Nice! I'm sure you'll get accepted. bump thread with "I told you so" on the big day OK?

To anybody out there with a <25 who actually wants a shot at Med school...retake.

 

[Just kiss me]

I surely w

21 MCAT
1 interview

Nice! I'm sure you'll get accepted. bump thread with "I told you so" on the big day OK?

To anybody out there with a <25 who actually wants a shot at Med school...retake.

I surely will.

 

[Holmwood]

I think you and I are arguing the same side 🙂 I 100% agree with everything you're saying. I most certainly think that having good social skills makes you a better physician in many different ways. All I'm saying is that in the real world.... these qualities are not necessarily seen in all of the "best" physicians in the place. Nor are they highly valued amongst the people recruiting the newer generations of attendings, residents, and med students. I've had many discussions with my classmates where they argued that the qualities you spoke of are not important to being a good physician. Indeed, I've even had patients tell me they're not important. What we idealistically think is not reflected in real-life healthcare. That's all I'm saying 🙂

If I sound confrontational, I apologize deeply...

It's just not an established fact that the most highly skilled physicians rarely have any social skills. I'm just not a fan of people propagating this misconception as fact.

I feel like we're sort of not on the same page. I would like to emphasize that though physicians need effective communication skills, they don't have to be the most likable person in the room. You can have an abrasive personality, but still garner the trust of your patients through effective communication. Having a likable personality certainly makes things easier, but it is by no means essential.

It's sort of like that one professor who's amazing at teaching, but is terrible to students during office hours. I'm sure we've all experienced that at some point.

: /