MGH/McLean vs. everything else

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

MDchouette

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
132
Reaction score
11
I am choosing between MGH/McLean and a well-respected program in the city where I would like to live in the long term. This "other city" program is, from what I have read here, similar to Duke and Emory in its reputation.

About me: I would like to be an academic psychiatrist. I would like to ultimately be in a position of leadership (program director, department chair). I would like to do clinical research.

Am I a fool to turn down MGH/McLean? Assuming that I can publish and do good research at the "other city" program, would there be any real career difference for me if I went to MGH/McLean, if I want to ultimately return to the "other city"?

Thanks for any advice. PMs are great, too.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I am choosing between MGH/McLean and a well-respected program in the city where I would like to live in the long term. This "other city" program is, from what I have read here, similar to Duke and Emory in its reputation.

About me: I would like to be an academic psychiatrist. I would like to ultimately be in a position of leadership (program director, department chair). I would like to do clinical research.

Am I a fool to turn down MGH/McLean? Assuming that I can publish and do good research at the "other city" program, would there be any real career difference for me if I went to MGH/McLean, if I want to ultimately return to the "other city"?

Thanks for any advice. PMs are great, too.

(can't speak for Emory)
If you went to Duke, I would be hard pressed to assert that it would be a career killer. As far as I can see, as long as you do well and get involved with research and all the other stuff you need to do to have a prominent career in academic psychiatry, your going to Duke would not be a stumbling block.

-AT.
 
There is something to be said for the Harvard stamp on your CV (especially MGH, especially in psychiatry). Not going to MGH won't ruin your career and going to MGH won't necessarily make your career, but carrying the Harvard label with you is only a helpful thing when it comes to job finding and contract negotiations down the line.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
There is something to be said for the Harvard stamp on your CV (especially MGH, especially in psychiatry). Not going to MGH won't ruin your career and going to MGH won't necessarily make your career, but carrying the Harvard label with you is only a helpful thing when it comes to job finding and contract negotiations down the line.

Is this true about the other Harvard programs (Cambridge, Longwood) or is MGH special? I liked Longwood A LOT but I'm interested in academics and child and everyone keeps telling me MGH is a better "fit"...
 
I am choosing between MGH/McLean and a well-respected program in the city where I would like to live in the long term. This "other city" program is, from what I have read here, similar to Duke and Emory in its reputation.

About me: I would like to be an academic psychiatrist. I would like to ultimately be in a position of leadership (program director, department chair). I would like to do clinical research.

Am I a fool to turn down MGH/McLean? Assuming that I can publish and do good research at the "other city" program, would there be any real career difference for me if I went to MGH/McLean, if I want to ultimately return to the "other city"?

Thanks for any advice. PMs are great, too.

Not going to McLean would not do any damage to your academic career aspirations. Your accomplishments (ability to care for patients and do research) after your training ends determines how successful you will be, not the name attached to your residency training program. A lot of programs turn out excellent academic psychiatrists.
 
If you take a look, nationwide, at department chairs and other notable faculty, you will find they trained at a variety of places. You would certainly get excellent training at MGH/McLean but I would think you would get that elsewhere too. It might make as much sense to train in the city where you ultimately see yourself settling. A few examples:

Jeff Lieberman of Columbia - St. Vincent's
Henry Nasrallah of U Cincinnati - trained at U Rochester
Peter Whybrow of UCLA - trained at UNC
Jack Barchas of Cornell - trained at Stanford
Rosenbaum of MGH - trained at MGH
David Kupfer of Western Psych - trained at Yale
 
Thanks to all for your thoughtful responses.

I'm interested in GmailQueen's question about the relative academic currency gained by going to Longwood, if anyone is up for answering this...
 
MGH/McLean is generally considered one off the top 5 training programs with one of the top 5 faculties. Serious academics would disagree over its placement within the top 5. Outside of Boston and outside of its alumni, I don't think academic psychiatrists see it as clearly better than the other elite places. In other words, if you are just looking at rep, you are just as likely to get the opportunity to get to the next level (eg, a top-notch research-oriented fellowship) from any of several places. If you ask your non-medically-oriented cousin, however, he or she will be far more impressed by your having trained at Harvard than, say, at UCSF, because your cousin will never have heard of UCSF even though it is one of the great medical meccas of the world. If you want to impress your cousin and can get into MGH, have at it.

In general, however, YOU (and your talent, motivation, effort) are much more important than your specific training program. And you + mentor can be the biggest single factor, and the big name places tend to have big names because they tend to have lots and lots of well-connected, productive teachers who can not only be role models but can help get you a job. But it's not clear cut.

For example, MGH has more big name academic psychiatrists and is more difficult to get into than Longwood, but, IMHO, if you go to Longwood and get successfully mentored by--for example--its chair, who is a neuroimaging expert, you are much more likely to get a top-notch research fellowship than if you are a solid generalist MGH resident. This is true not just because you will know more but because Dr. Silbersweig has neuroimaging street cred and will push/ensure your acceptance at his or another program. A similar comparison can be made in New York between Columbia/Cornell [which are probably the 2 most difficult programs to get into in the city and probably have the biggest elite faculties] and NYU/Sinai/Einstein/St. Vincent's, etc which are very strong in lots of areas and are a better choice for certain types of residents. IMHO, a similar situation is also seen in Northern California, where UCSF and Stanford are more famous but UC Davis may be at least as likely to propel certain residents into academic careers because of comfort/fit, etc.

It is true that MGH/McLean and its peers have a higher number of researchers with international street cred, but it is also true that you may not connect up with an approachable mentor if you don't feel comfortable with the program. Further, if you and the program are a bad match, you may flail clinically and will likely be unable to take advantage of the research options that might be available only to those who are cruising with the basic material.

Anyway, while it's impossible to give a specific answer, and I do have a bias towards going to as rigorous a program as you can get into, I also think you should go to the place that feels like the best fit. You can create your career as you go along.

Oh, and by the way, there's a BIG difference between being a department chair at a medical school and a PD; most of the former are serious, hard core researchers, and most of the latter are clinicians with relatively lightweight research. Occasionally, people go from training director to chair, but it's increasingly unusual because it calls for different skillsets and cv's.
 
I'm not sure anybody can tell you where the best "fit" for you is...that's something you have to feel out for yourself. If you loved MGH/McLean, that's where you should go. Or, if you want to be a "thought leader" in the field, be a nationally known researcher or academic and don't mind sacrificing the "perfect fit" to get started down that path...

But the feel of a program and how you feel about its residents and attendings are what make up your day to day to life once residency begins. And it sucks to be working as hard as resident works and hating the people with whom you're toiling at 2AM.

So I put a high value on "fit" and I'm thrilled at my residency experience. But that doesn't mean you have to...

As for Longwood and academic currency, I can tell you (because a little birdie told me...) that all of Longwood's residents matched to their #1 fellowship choices this year. That includes several in C&A who matched at MGH, Cambridge, Stanford, etc. Longwood has an excellent track record at matching their residents to the top C&A fellowships in the country. So you certainly wouldn't be dooming your professional career by trying to match at Longwood, particularly if you want to be a child psychiatrist! :p
 
I'll begin with my usual disclosure that I am a proud Longwood alum and shameless shill for the program....

Longwood grads go on to do whatever they want. The program has an excellent track record of placing their residents in top rank fellowships with recent grads going on to CL (MGH, BWH), Child (MGH, Cambridge, Columbia, UCLA), Forensics (UMass, MGH), and Addictions (NYU). I loved my time there, am still in touch with many of my classmates (going to see a bunch of them at a wedding next week, in fact), and cannot count the number of doors that have been opened for me (rightly or wrongly) by my experiences there.
 
To the original poster, I don't think you'd be a fool at all. I'm also applying right now, and I think I have probably similar career goals as far as academia (although with interests in community/child/global psych)...I'd like to stay on the east coast (where I'm in med school)...but besides that, I'm looking for the best program.

For me, that program so far has been NYU, which I will be ranking ahead of MGH/McLean, Cornell, and Columbia (all three of which I really like and are great programs...I just loved NYU)...I haven't had a moment's thought about whether or not NYU is as prestigious, blah blah blah.

The real question is, is going to the non-MGH/McLean program going to close doors for you? If the other program is truly comparable to Duke level, then the answer is a definite no.
 
To the original poster, I don't think you'd be a fool at all. I'm also applying right now, and I think I have probably similar career goals as far as academia (although with interests in community/child/global psych)...I'd like to stay on the east coast (where I'm in med school)...but besides that, I'm looking for the best program.

For me, that program so far has been NYU, which I will be ranking ahead of MGH/McLean, Cornell, and Columbia (all three of which I really like and are great programs...I just loved NYU)...I haven't had a moment's thought about whether or not NYU is as prestigious, blah blah blah.

The real question is, is going to the non-MGH/McLean program going to close doors for you? If the other program is truly comparable to Duke level, then the answer is a definite no.

I don't think anyone would disagree with your rationale here - if a program feels like the best fit, then it probably is (always trust your limbic radar). That said, the OP's initial question seems to have been MGH/McLean (for rep) vs. other program (for geography). From my experience in fulfilling career goals, rep can overcome geography, but geography can't necessarily overcome rep.
 
I'm a 2nd year DO student, whose dream is to attend McLean's/MGH psych. residency.

There was a post on this forum somewhere for International grads discussing potential competitive USMLE board scores in order to be competitive for consideration by McLean's/MGH and it stated that you would need a 240 or better. Does this hold true for grads of US schools as well?

And, what do folks think the odds of a DO student getting a residency at McLean's? I don't believe they've taken a DO student in the past, so I worry that perhaps they continue to cling to the whole MD > DO philosophy.

Any thoughts?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm a 2nd year DO student, whose dream is to attend McLean's/MGH psych. residency.

There was a post on this forum somewhere for International grads discussing potential competitive USMLE board scores in order to be competitive for consideration by McLean's/MGH and it stated that you would need a 240 or better. Does this hold true for grads of US schools as well?

And, what do folks think the odds of a DO student getting a residency at McLean's? I don't believe they've taken a DO student in the past, so I worry that perhaps they continue to cling to the whole MD > DO philosophy.

Any thoughts?

You're talking about MGH my friend. You have to be a superstar to even get an interview. Here's some perspective, MGH might take 3, maybe 4 or so students from a top 20 med school graduating class, and those are the top in their class. To be looked at, you need to be from a brand name medical school, be the top in that class including AOA and scores, and then have research to back it up. That's the MGH profile. "Oh yes, I graduated from Cornell med school, got AOA with honors on my rotations, Step 1 very competitive, and have a publication." DO is not even in their vocabulary I would wager. I came from a famous med school and this was my experience.

Why is that your dream anyway? Something I learned from the match process: it's not a matter of where you think you 'deserve' to be interviewed, it's a matter of who the directors figure out are the best fits for their program.
 
I'm a 2nd year DO student, whose dream is to attend McLean's/MGH psych. residency.

There was a post on this forum somewhere for International grads discussing potential competitive USMLE board scores in order to be competitive for consideration by McLean's/MGH and it stated that you would need a 240 or better. Does this hold true for grads of US schools as well?

If you apply you have next to no chance, whereas if you don't apply you have no chance. It is not about your USMLE scores alone, more important for MGH/McLean will be contacts for foreigners. For DOs, you would have to have compensated for going to an osteopathic medical school in every other way I would imagine to get even an interview (e.g. have a PhD, big name PIs writing letters, multiple first author publications, excellent LoRs from well known people in the field, high USMLE scores etc.)

There are many, many programs where you can get comparable or even better training. If it's your dream it's probably for reasons of prestige. If that's the case, then that is incongruous with your osteopathic status.

It has nothing to do with the perceived quality of your medical education. I can tell you the education at a few 'top 10' medical schools is lackluster. The point is, those students were able to get in, and that is what gets them into top residencies to a certain extent.
 
DO isn't less than an md but it is true there are a few places where DOs aren't given much of a chance and I'd say MGH is one of those places. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with you or you can't get into an excellent prestigious program. It just means youre probably not what that particular program is looking for (and even the best applicants arent a perfect fit with every program). It certainly doesn't hurt to try applying if you'd feel better having tried.
Sometimes the rubrics that programs use to judge us ARE mistaken. The year that I didn't match I had interviewed at a certain well regarded midwest program that doesnt take many DOs (but does take a few granted). One of the MDs they chose over me that year ended up getting fired apparently and showed up on this board doing their best to embarrass the program leadership with a number of negative allegations. Since I'm still employed and on good terms at the program that I ended up at, I feel I can safely say that whatever criteria they used to decide that person was a better pick than me was mistaken. :) These programs are run by humans who are capable of making mistakes, misjudging us, or being swayed by things like prestige and ego. Don't ever let someone else's judgement stop you from becoming a great psychiatrist though. Some residencies make it easier to learn and make connections than others do but with the right motivation you can "bloom where you're planted"
 
Sometimes the rubrics that programs use to judge us ARE mistaken. The year that I didn't match I had interviewed at a certain well regarded midwest program that doesnt take many DOs (but does take a few granted). One of the MDs they chose over me that year ended up getting fired apparently and showed up on this board doing their best to embarrass the program leadership with a number of negative allegations. Since I'm still employed and on good terms at the program that I ended up at, I feel I can safely say that whatever criteria they used to decide that person was a better pick than me was mistaken. :)

that individual was a DO actually, but yes they were certainly mistaken in picking that person over you anyway...
 
You're talking about MGH my friend. You have to be a superstar to even get an interview. Here's some perspective, MGH might take 3, maybe 4 or so students from a top 20 med school graduating class, and those are the top in their class. To be looked at, you need to be from a brand name medical school, be the top in that class including AOA and scores, and then have research to back it up. That's the MGH profile. "Oh yes, I graduated from Cornell med school, got AOA with honors on my rotations, Step 1 very competitive, and have a publication." DO is not even in their vocabulary I would wager. I came from a famous med school and this was my experience.

Why is that your dream anyway? Something I learned from the match process: it's not a matter of where you think you 'deserve' to be interviewed, it's a matter of who the directors figure out are the best fits for their program.

This is a bit of an exaggeration. You need to have all the boxes checked (including the MD box) but you don't have to be the top of your class at a top 20 school. A good, interesting candidate, yes, but ROAD qualifications are by no means required for Psychiatry at MGH.
 
This is a bit of an exaggeration. You need to have all the boxes checked (including the MD box) but you don't have to be the top of your class at a top 20 school. A good, interesting candidate, yes, but ROAD qualifications are by no means required for Psychiatry at MGH.

I like your optimism, but having just gone through the match I fear such is not the case. But if you can get an interview, more power to you.
 
Why McLean's/MGH?

I'm from Massachusetts originally, have worked in the Mass. Mental health system for 10+ years prior to going to medical school. And would like to return to Mass. The wife is also from Mass, and a residency elsewhere would separate her from her family for another 4+ years. So that's kind of why Massachusetts...

Why McLean's? I think they have the most varied patient population. In addition to your typical in-patient population, they also treat eating disorders. I believe they do a lot of work with personality disorders and PTSD (Judith Herman MD author of Trauma and Recovery was on staff there). While reputation means little to me, I think McLean's reputation results in attracting patients with rarer conditions, that may not be seen in smaller community settings (True DID, conversion disorders, some of the rarer personality disorders, etc.). AND they have a strong focus on psychotherapy in a world that seems to want psychiatrists to be prescription pad monkeys. I'm afraid that my chances to perform psychotherapy beyond residency will be few and far between, so I'd like to get as strong of a psychotherapy experience as possible during my training.

So, if I have to do residency in Massachusetts, My preference would be McLean's...I'll still attempt to do clinical rotations, and apply to other Psych programs in the area.

Does that sound reasonable?

--Sean

(From what I've been hearing from all of the program directors that lecture as part of our preclinical ed., they all say the same thing: Professionalism, dedication, and hard work on clinical rotations at the program you're applying to carries a lot more weight than any of the other criteria...which may not hold water for McLean's which needs to protect a reputation, as someone else mentioned previously...)
 
Last edited:
We understand that it's a top notch program. So is Longwood, btw, the program that arose from the collapse of Mass Mental Health, whom I believe has taken DOs in the past (not sure about that).

I think what is confusing is how frequently people act like the fact that they aren't likely to get a position at the most prestigious programs in the field in the most desirable cities must be a matter of systemic discrimination against the letters after their name rather than the fact that the individual just may not be at the level the program would want. And while you may very well be someone who later fulfills all the criteria that such a prestigious program would require for admission, you aren't that person yet. And the vast majority of people aren't, regardless of where they go to medical school.
 
Interesting to see this thread of mine revived. Very happy I ended up at Longwood rather than MGH. It's a better fit for me.

I am trying to remember whether we even interviewed any DOs last year.... I can't think of one. That doesn't mean we don't interview DOs and it definitely doesn't mean that you shouldn't apply to Longwood (you should!), especially if you have a connection to Mass Mental.

You can get DBT training at Longwood with Liz Simpson, who trained under Linehan and is generally one of the most knowledge people about psychotherapy (especially third wave CBTs) and the treatment of difficult patients whom I have met, ever. She's also nice and really really funny. All the DBT patients with rare exception have sexual trauma histories. We see less veteran PTSD during PGY1-3 but you can rotate at the VA as a fourth year if you want exposure to this.

I would look at University of Maryland. I was very impressed with their program and they have a similar setup to MGH/McLean of tertiary academic center (UMaryland) and private psychiatric hospital with national cred (Sheppard Pratt).
 
I like your optimism, but having just gone through the match I fear such is not the case. But if you can get an interview, more power to you.

Not optimism, personal experience. I'm not saying you don't need research, 225+ on Step 1, good recs, an interesting story etc, what I am saying is you don't need to have the numbers etc of a xompetitive derm or ortho candidate to be considered there.
 
Not optimism, personal experience. I'm not saying you don't need research, 225+ on Step 1, good recs, an interesting story etc, what I am saying is you don't need to have the numbers etc of a xompetitive derm or ortho candidate to be considered there.

Just because psych isn't a competitive field doesn't mean that there aren't a group of extremely competitive candidates who would have their pick of residencies in any field. The MD/PhDs, stellar Ivy grads, AOAs with a bunch of pubs and crazy Step scores from top 20 med schools, etc. Those candidates will all be competing for MGH/McLean and UCSF spots.
 
Just because psych isn't a competitive field doesn't mean that there aren't a group of extremely competitive candidates who would have their pick of residencies in any field. The MD/PhDs, stellar Ivy grads, AOAs with a bunch of pubs and crazy Step scores from top 20 med schools, etc. Those candidates will all be competing for MGH/McLean and UCSF spots.

No doubt about it. They are competitive, just not to the extreme of some other specialties. This is not to bash Psychiatry in any way. In fact, I think it's an asset. Most of these candidates are probably much more well-rounded, human and interesting than your typical super-competitive orthopod (to make a sweeping generalization about my already generalized statement).

Look at the schools where the residents come from at MGH/McLean, Columbia, Cornell, and UCLA, and UCSF. There are several Ivies and PhD's, but even more people who didn't have either of these two check boxes checked, but were strong candidates for other reasons.
 
We understand that it's a top notch program. So is Longwood, btw, the program that arose from the collapse of Mass Mental Health, whom I believe has taken DOs in the past (not sure about that).

I think what is confusing is how frequently people act like the fact that they aren't likely to get a position at the most prestigious programs in the field in the most desirable cities must be a matter of systemic discrimination against the letters after their name rather than the fact that the individual just may not be at the level the program would want. And while you may very well be someone who later fulfills all the criteria that such a prestigious program would require for admission, you aren't that person yet. And the vast majority of people aren't, regardless of where they go to medical school.

So, I don't think I quite understand your post.

You state, "…while you may very well be someone who later fulfills all the criteria that such a prestigious program would require for admission, you aren't that person yet."

Somehow you've determined from the information that I posted that I'm not a competitive candidate for McLean's. The information that I provided was that I am a DO student, married, a prior Massachusetts resident with a work history in mental health care in the Boston area.

So, I'm not sure which part of that excludes me from competition, unless…wait a minute…maybe it's that I'm attending a DO school.

But you also state, " I think what is confusing is how frequently people act like the fact that they aren't likely to get a position at the most prestigious programs in the field in the most desirable cities must be a matter of systemic discrimination against the letters after their name."

So what did you base your assumptions on? Do prestigious institutions exclude candidates based upon marital status? Employment history? States of origin? Or might it be a belief that osteopathic physicians are somehow inferior to allopathic physicians?

:eyebrow:
 
Last edited:
So, I don't think I quite understand your post.
You state, "…while you may very well be someone who later fulfills all the criteria that such a prestigious program would require for admission, you aren't that person yet."
I must have misunderstood you. When you mentioned your preclinical attendings, I thought you were implying that you were still an underclassmen, and thus had not yet been a clinical student. Hence, "you aren't that person yet". If that's not the case, then most of what I said didn't make sense, and I apologize.

I don't know anything about you, of course. If I'm doing the math right, about 95% of American medical graduates going into psychiatry wouldn't reasonably be able to match at MGH. At the same time, every year there are many DO posters who complain about programs that are not "DO-friendly" as if their DO status would be the only reason they wouldn't match at a program that 95% of other applicants wouldn't match at as well. Statistically speaking, that seems unlikely.

There are lots of great programs, and lots of these great programs are more progressive about osteopaths. If you're a good candidate, you'll wind up somewhere good. But lots of good candidates don't match at MGH regardless of the letters at the end of their name.
 
Somewhat related to original topic, but for people interested in an academic career, if you would love to eventually be an attending at your own medical school (close to extended family, like the city,/etc), is it worth it to try to go somewhere more prestigious for residency, or would staying at your home program and making a good impression probably set you up better?
 
Does that sound reasonable?

No it does not. There are a number of programs in the Massachusetts area. MGH/McLean (NOT McLean's) does not have the most diverse patient population out of those, diversity is not something either of these hospitals care about. They don't like poor people and McLean in particular tends to cater to the very wealthy. They do have some big name psychoanalysts (e.g. John Gunderson) who I am sure do mentor residents, but the focus of most of the units that residents rotate on is heavily biological, i.e. putting patients on a shedload of drugs. That many of the patients are complex and treatment resistant is great on the one hand, but does not reflect the diversity of general psychiatric practice, nor the sociodemographic or ethnic diversity you would see at other programs.

IIRC Longwood has not taken any DOs in the last 10 years at least (i.e. never). On the other hand, the cambridge health alliance program which does give you a range of diversity you do not see with MGH/McLean and a heavy emphasis on psychotherapy. It is not for everyone, and they probably don't carry enough patients (was told by a resident on some rotations they start with 1 patient!!!) it is probably more attainable and still well regarded. That said previous DOs have gone to NECOM or NYCOM (so regional bias).

p.s. no one is saying that DO students are worse than MD students. As I have said many 'top 10' medical students are woeful and aren't getting the experience they need which they may get at lesser 'ranked' medschools. However where you went to med school says something about you and you academic capabilities/achievements/ambitions, and you may be the best doctor in the world but if you weren't good enough to get into a well regarded (even if wrongly) medschool you might find yourself in the scrap heap. It's not discrimination at all, it's life.

We can discern not what you said, but what you didn't say that you do not factors than surmount your inability to get into a well regarded medschool. You would have told us "I have multiple first author pubs include in the Nature, Science, Archives of General Psychiatry, a PhD, run my own lab, involved in my local NAMI branch, leader of the Psych SIG, and led a medical mission to Botswana to help orphaned children." That you didn't speaks volumes. But it makes a change from the folks who do post that and then ask if they have any chance of matching into even the Jamaica hospital...
 
and led a medical mission to Botswana to help orphaned children.

Lol, I agree with everything you said in your post, but your choice of Botswana is interesting - per capita, one of the wealthiest countries in Africa :)
 
I ran a NAMI branch, have a PhD with a Science publication, and earned a silver medal in javelin from the 2008 Olympics. All I want to know is if I will match at Jamaica Hospital. Like I really need to know. MGH already rejected me.
 
I ran a NAMI branch, have a PhD with a Science publication, and earned a silver medal in javelin from the 2008 Olympics. All I want to know is if I will match at Jamaica Hospital. Like I really need to know. MGH already rejected me.

You expect to match in New York City despite a SILVER medal? Try Nebraska.
 
You expect to match in New York City despite a SILVER medal? Try Nebraska.

Nebraska usually fills with their own. That gold would've really helped.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile
 
One of the chief residents at MGH ended up losing his medical license for performing CPR on a guy who wasn't having a heart attack. He ended up moving to California trying to get into Hollywood.
 
One of the chief residents at MGH ended up losing his medical license for performing CPR on a guy who wasn't having a heart attack. He ended up moving to California trying to get into Hollywood.

can't wait for arrested development to come back just hope it isn't a dud.
 
can't wait for arrested development to come back just hope it isn't a dud.
This is the most meaningful thing said on this thread to date...
 
Just wanted to chime in on the earlier question of "Am I a fool to turn down MGH/McLean?"

I'd like to report (with some confidence, now that I'm out of residency) that the answer to that is a resounding no! I was a top candidate: good scores, good schools, heavily recruited by a number of top programs across the country including MGH/McLean and I ultimately chose to go to Longwood over any of them. I am so happy with that decision! I ended up in my top pick for fellowship with a great balance between research and clinical time, and am headed for a career in academic psychiatry.

The mentorship I've gotten throughout my training has been outstanding, and as someone who finds an enjoyable work environment important, I'm also happy to say that my colleagues and mentors are a pleasure to work with and learn from. I've been given positions of leadership and "chances" to try things that technically might have been a little advanced for me at that stage of my training (e.g. extra time to devote to my research when I did not yet have any publications to back up my desire to be a researcher), but being in the Longwood program has been without a doubt the best way to catalyze my career.

So in short: go to where you feel you will get the best training, which is a combination of a number of factors - yes the usual suspects of caseload diversity, etc., but also mentorship and opportunity, much of which is personality-driven and culture-driven. Sometimes the best place for the latter two is not actually the place with the most famous name. What you choose to do with your training is then up to you. Good luck!
 
You're talking about MGH my friend. You have to be a superstar to even get an interview. .

Depending on your definition of 'superstar', I would disagree with this somewhat.

You have to be a somewhat above average US allo med student to generally be considered strongly at MGH. To be really competitive, I'd say you should be in the top 1/3-1/4(by board scores and grades) at a typical state medical school...or if you go to a "good" medical school(ie top 25ish) the top half would probably be ok. If you go to a med school like Hopkins then thats another matter and just not having any red flags would make you competitive at MGH.

MGH may be the most competitive psych program in the country.......but it's a big program, and it's still psych. It's MUCH easier in psych to match at a top 5 program like MGH(include Cornell, Columbia, USCF in the mix) than it is too match anywhere(even the least desirable programs) in something like urology.....you're just talking about massively different standards.
 
I am choosing between MGH/McLean and a well-respected program in the city where I would like to live in the long term. This "other city" program is, from what I have read here, similar to Duke and Emory in its reputation.

About me: I would like to be an academic psychiatrist. I would like to ultimately be in a position of leadership (program director, department chair). I would like to do clinical research.

Am I a fool to turn down MGH/McLean? .

gosh no....the vast majority of academic psychiatrists in chair and vice chair positions across the country are not mgh trained. That's a silly way to look at it(since MGH is one of 100+ programs), but there are plenty of chairs in this country who not only didn't go to MGH but also didn't train at the other 4 or so considered "top" programs. There are even many chairs who didn't train at what are considered top 15-20 programs....
 
You're responding to a very old post. The person is probably a PGY2 by now.
 
MGH may be the most competitive psych program in the country.......but it's a big program, and it's still psych. It's MUCH easier in psych to match at a top 5 program like MGH(include Cornell, Columbia, USCF in the mix) than it is too match anywhere(even the least desirable programs) in something like urology.....you're just talking about massively different standards.

In making this statement, please don't assume that no competitive students go into psych. I and several of my classmates were headed into surgical subspecialties before settling on psych.

Yes, the standards are different, but there are a subset of psych applicants who are competitive to match into competitive specialties but decide later on psych. At least 4 other classmates who went into psych could have matched into a surgical subspecialty somewhere. One of our dermatology-bound classmates was torn about going into psych. In my residency class, we have a former surgeon. While there is some credence to the statement above, please don't assume the bottom of the barrel students go into psych. Top of the barrel like psychiatry as well.
 
MGH may be the most competitive psych program in the country.......but it's a big program, and it's still psych. It's MUCH easier in psych to match at a top 5 program like MGH(include Cornell, Columbia, USCF in the mix) than it is too match anywhere(even the least desirable programs) in something like urology.....you're just talking about massively different standards.

I scored close to the average for a dermatologist on my steps and had a solid record from a top twenty five school (including significant research with a first author publication and from what I hear great rec letters) and did not get interviews at some competitive programs. I did get in somewhere I am very happy with but I think you are both overestimating the competitiveness of urology and underestimating the competitiveness of psych at some places.

That said, of course urology is more competitive overall. I believe that psych draws some very talented people too, who could have chosen a more competitive specialty if they wanted.
 
Top