.

[deleted1095841]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[indecisiveconvention]

WashU seems to have the edge for you, especially with a stronger match list, matching back to CA, and strong and well connected neuroscience research departments that are very accepting of students. It is true that grading is more lenient. As far as class size, that is a personal preference - smaller classes tend to be more coherent (up to a certain minimum threshold) while it might be easier to get lost in the crowd with higher class sizes (but perhaps OK once you find your clique?).

 

[deleted1065184]

Seems like you prefer WashU tbh, but would urge you to ignore perceived prestige differences. Both are absolute powerhouses when it comes to research and academic medicine. The matchlist differences are probably very strongly influenced by where people *want* to match (UMich is ~ 40-50% in-state, whereas WashU is ~ 5% in-state and has plenty of students from the Midwest, East Coast, West Coast, and South). This in no way means you'll have trouble matching back to California.

Lastly, the crime in St. Louis is highly concentrated in a few socioeconomically disadvantaged/marginalized neighborhoods (none of which are Central West End, which is where WashU is located). This in itself could be a con though, because St. Louis is extremely segregated.

 

[mellex17]

I agree that you seem to be leaning towards WashU more so if that is true then go with your gut.

I am currently making the same decision though and wanted to add a few points that are personally making me lean towards Michigan: 1) While WashU has a 18 month preclinical, many of those weeks are devoted to clinical immersions and "EXPLORE" so WashU and Michigan actually have about the same number of weeks of basic science instruction (45 vs 46); 2) WashU does not have a significant M1-M2 summer that you can do research during (WashU has 2 weeks, Michigan has 6 weeks); 3) While you are right that Michigan has harsher clerkship grading, WashU (historically) has internal ranking by thirds for preclinical

 

[deleted1065184]

While you are right that Michigan has harsher clerkship grading, WashU (historically) has internal ranking by thirds for preclinical

Historically yes, but not anymore I don't think

 

[mellex17]

Historically yes, but not anymore I don't think

You may be right—Current students in the Facebook group/info sessions didn't seem to be sure if this would be changing with the new curriculum

 

[Banco]

There is no prestige difference. You can match neurosurgery from both places well. You can match into California from both places. You can't decipher match lists like this within the same tier. Both have "top" neurosurgery residencies.

Go where it is either cheaper or where you liked it the best. Look into their home departments for research that interests you maybe. But seeing as you haven't even heard from WashU, get excited about going to Michigan - it is an absolutely amazing school.

 

[betablocker7]

Tough to decide between the two at this a point as you are WL'd at Wash U. Michigan is a great school and you should feel proud for getting accepted there. It has a beautiful campus in the icy domain of the Midwest and a vibrant athletic culture.

But seeing as you are interested in a competitive specialty at an academic center, Wash U would be my pick. Both are great schools, but Wash U has a historically stronger academic reputation in medicine and will hold more sway with the top residencies, including the CA ones. A significant differences as you noted is that Wash U's grading is more lenient, while Michigan's is harsher. If you do not excel in the stratification process, it will hurt your prospects compared to classmates and compared to students at other peer schools who are not stratified. In addition, harsher grading will naturally make your rotations more competitive with your classmates, where students are vying for a limited amount of Honors grades. Quality of life is important, especially when med school is already stressful. Less relevant since you want to match in CA, Wash U has stronger home residencies as a safety net.

If you like arctic beauty, Ann Arbor will have a pretty Winter Wonderland to showcase every winter; snow will be your friend. St. Louis is a bigger city with more to do, although there is undoubtedly more crime.

 

[betablocker7]

How did you come to this conclusion? Is it based on the match lists, or did you see/hear professors or PDs making comments to this effect?

If I do happen to excel though, will going to Michigan help me? In other words, does an all-Honors transcript from Michigan mean more to PDs than an all-Honors transcript from WashU?

Concluded from a combination of talking with PD's/professors, historical match lists, and my own+classmates' experience on the residency trail. I only provide this perspective to assist if you get off the WL at Wash U, but Michigan is still an excellent school that will get you great interviews. Many applicants would sell their soul to be in your spot. And in a vacuum, an all-Honors transcript in a stratified setting is certainly more impressive and helpful than an all-Honors transcript where everyone gets Honors. If you kill it at Michigan, that will get the PD's attention in a way that a generic Honors transcript at Wash U won't. Have to add the disclaimer that it still doesn't necessarily counterbalance institutional reputation; as an extreme case, Harvard is all p/f grading, but nearly all their students match at the best programs because it's Harvard lol. Ofc there is only one Harvard and Wash U =/= Harvard so the decision is not as clear-cut

I wouldn't stress about it lone_cypress. They are both top-notch schools and not a huge difference between them. You are already an amazing applicant to have earned these interviews and gotten acceptances, and that work ethic will help you succeed regardless at the next level. If you feel strongly about Wash U, a LOI is always going to help your chances of getting off the WL, as the school especially likes interest from applicants. You will do great!

 

[Banco]

Thanks for the advice. It definitely makes me feel better about the situation. By the way, which other schools would be in the same tier as Michigan and WashU, in your view? I'm just trying to calibrate my view to a more sane vantage point after being influenced/poisoned by US News for so long.

I mean the typical research powerhouses fall into this category. Pitt, Penn, Columbia, NYU etc. There’s probably 20+ schools that fit this mold. In my view the differences in such a category are minimal and individual factors should come into play.

You’re at this point over analyzing if you’re trying to compare transcripts and how PDs view them. Both schools are surgical powerhouses - realize you’ll be equally as successful at both and you’ll have to work equally as hard for a specialty like neurosurgery.

 

[deleted1065184]

I mean the typical research powerhouses fall into this category. Pitt, Penn, Columbia, NYU etc. There’s probably 20+ schools that fit this mold. In my view the differences in such a category are minimal and individual factors should come into play.

You’re at this point over analyzing if you’re trying to compare transcripts and how PDs view them. Both schools are surgical powerhouses - realize you’ll be equally as successful at both and you’ll have to work equally as hard for a specialty like neurosurgery.

Definitely second this point. At this level, the only meaningful differences between schools are personal preferences and financial aid. Wrt research, the particular field you're interested in matters FAR more than the name or reputation.

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

Here, I'd probably go with whatever school gives you the most money (both known to be pretty generous, but I'm not sure about WashU coming off the WL), and then happiness factors like location, school size, etc.

 

[mr_unlimited]

I echo what everyone else has been saying -- both are really great schools, you'll have plenty of opportunities at either, and you should feel very proud of yourself for a very successful application cycle.

If you are very committed to neurosurgery, I do think Wash U is the significantly better option. Michigan has 1-2 med student match into neurosurgery every year (Match List Search), which is pretty typical of top-20 schools. I don't know about previous years, but Wash U had five people match into neurosurgery this year (Students celebrate Match Day virtually or masked, socially distanced | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis), which is very impressive for such a competitive specialty. And since you're in the field, you probably know that if you're interested in connectomics, the epicenter of the human connectome project is a great place to be.

So if I were you, I'd send a letter of intent to Wash U. Best of luck!

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

I echo what everyone else has been saying -- both are really great schools, you'll have plenty of opportunities at either, and you should feel very proud of yourself for a very successful application cycle.

If you are very committed to neurosurgery, I do think Wash U is the significantly better option. Michigan has 1-2 med student match into neurosurgery every year (Match List Search), which is pretty typical of top-20 schools. I don't know about previous years, but Wash U had five people match into neurosurgery this year (Students celebrate Match Day virtually or masked, socially distanced | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis), which is very impressive for such a competitive specialty. And since you're in the field, you probably know that if you're interested in connectomics, the epicenter of the human connectome project is a great place to be.

So if I were you, I'd send a letter of intent to Wash U. Best of luck!

Well sort of. From Student Outcomes | Medical Student Admissions it looks like from 2016-2019 the neurosurgery matches are 8/470. When you deal with such limited data with so many confounding variables, I wouldn't say that the results are statistically significant. An equally valid conclusion is that there are more people interested in neurosurgery at WashU, which based on my generalization of the high stats "gunner" people WashU attracts, I wouldn't be surprised. If you think that environment with similar interests is important, I think WashU makes sense.

 

[deleted1065184]

I echo what everyone else has been saying -- both are really great schools, you'll have plenty of opportunities at either, and you should feel very proud of yourself for a very successful application cycle.

If you are very committed to neurosurgery, I do think Wash U is the significantly better option. Michigan has 1-2 med student match into neurosurgery every year (Match List Search), which is pretty typical of top-20 schools. I don't know about previous years, but Wash U had five people match into neurosurgery this year (Students celebrate Match Day virtually or masked, socially distanced | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis), which is very impressive for such a competitive specialty. And since you're in the field, you probably know that if you're interested in connectomics, the epicenter of the human connectome project is a great place to be.

So if I were you, I'd send a letter of intent to Wash U. Best of luck!

Interesting and helpful point...also worth adding that Michigan's graduating class size is ~170 whereas WashU's is ~105. So that's ~0.5-1% of the class going into neurosurgery vs. ~5%. Hard to say if it's due to any school-specific factors or not, but it's undeniable that there are far more neurosurgeons coming out of WashU than Michigan.

 

[mr_unlimited]

Well sort of. From Student Outcomes | Medical Student Admissions it looks like from 2016-2019 the neurosurgery matches are 8/470. When you deal with such limited data with so many confounding variables, I wouldn't say that the results are statistically significant. An equally valid conclusion is that there are more people interested in neurosurgery at WashU, which based on my generalization of the high stats "gunner" people WashU attracts, I wouldn't be surprised. If you think that environment with similar interests is important, I think WashU makes sense.

We have data from 2016-2021 for both schools, so we might as well use all of it. Over that timespan, 7 students from Michigan matched into neurosurgery, versus 16 from Wash U. I'm not gonna run a t-test but I think that's a pretty meaningful difference, especially when you take into account that Wash U graduates less students (as I'mInDer! points out).

I agree that the higher match rate into neurosurgery also likely reflects more student interest in that specialty, but I also think that student interest in a specialty reflects the quality of clinical/research opportunities available at the school more so than high stats "gunner" status.

 

[deleted1065184]

Well sort of. From Student Outcomes | Medical Student Admissions it looks like from 2016-2019 the neurosurgery matches are 8/470. When you deal with such limited data with so many confounding variables, I wouldn't say that the results are statistically significant. An equally valid conclusion is that there are more people interested in neurosurgery at WashU, which based on my generalization of the high stats "gunner" people WashU attracts, I wouldn't be surprised. If you think that environment with similar interests is important, I think WashU makes sense.

You're ignoring the fact that in 2020 and 2021, there were an additional 8 matches....so 16 matches total in just 5 years. By contrast, in the same 5 year span (2016-2021), Michigan has matched just 7 (Match List Search) despite having a much larger class size each year. I agree that it's hard to say how much is due to preference vs. being unable to match, but there is a major gap in the percentage of students who match into neurosurgery from Michigan vs. WashU.

 

[deleted1065184]

We have data from 2016-2021 for both schools, so we might as well use all of it. Over that timespan, 7 students from Michigan matched into neurosurgery, versus 16 from Wash U. I'm not gonna run a t-test but I think that's a pretty meaningful difference, especially when you take into account that Wash U graduates less students (as I'mInDer! points out).

I agree that the higher match rate into neurosurgery also likely reflects more student interest in that specialty, but I also think that student interest in a specialty reflects the quality of clinical/research opportunities available at the school more so than high stats "gunner" status.

I see we said basically the same thing lol

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

It's one of the flaws I think of trying to analyze these match lists in that much detail. If you look at Harvard's match list, you'll see they matched 2/170ish students to neurosurgery (sorry, I don't have the time to look back at too much data, but aggregate data is better, of course. Just using the last match list approach that was used before to show that it's foolish). Is anyone gonna say that WashU has a significant advantage matching to neurosurgery than Harvard? Let's look at Doximity's top program for neurosurgery, UCSF. They match 1-2 each year out of 160. Is anyone going to say that WashU has a significant advantage in matching to neurosurgery over UCSF?

I thin this is another example of SDN trying to read too much into match lists. Neurosurgery is a very intense and demanding specialty, and it doesn't appeal to everyone. To look at the match lists and determine if a school confers a "significant" advantage at these levels is an ill-advised endeavor.

I think if you're interested in neurosurgery, WashU might be a good place not because it gives you a "significant" advantage, but it might have the culture of like-minded people who might make you more successful if you thrive on that.

 

[mr_unlimited]

It's one of the flaws I think of trying to analyze these match lists in that much detail. If you look at Harvard's match list, you'll see they matched 2/170ish students to neurosurgery (sorry, I don't have the time to look back at too much data, but aggregate data is better, of course. Just using the last match list approach that was used before to show that it's foolish). Is anyone gonna say that WashU has a significant advantage matching to neurosurgery than Harvard? Let's look at Doximity's top program for neurosurgery, UCSF. They match 1-2 each year out of 160. Is anyone going to say that WashU has a significant advantage in matching to neurosurgery over UCSF?

I thin this is another example of SDN trying to read too much into match lists. Neurosurgery is a very intense and demanding specialty, and it doesn't appeal to everyone. To look at the match lists and determine if a school confers a "significant" advantage at these levels is an ill-advised endeavor.

I think if you're interested in neurosurgery, WashU might be a good place not because it gives you a "significant" advantage, but it might have the culture of like-minded people who might make you more successful if you thrive on that.

I never intended to imply that the decision should be made on match lists alone; I just wanted to add one additional factor that wasn't getting mentioned that I think should be part of the deliberation. I also want to stress that in no way do I mean to imply that Michigan "underperforms" or whatever in neurosurgery, because clearly their match rate is on par with other top-20 schools that are great for neurosurgery. I was just refuting your original claim that there is no significant difference in the match rate into neurosurgery between the two schools -- what that difference means, I agree, is ambiguous.

At the end of the day, it's not about which school is "best" for neurosurgery but what school is going to give you the best opportunities to thrive in that specialty. The OP mentioned research interests in areas where I know that Wash U is especially strong. I don't want to go into neurosurgery myself, but I have spoken to neurosurgeons at Wash U and I know medical students who are interested in that field who feel well-supported there. My opinion that Wash U could be better for the OP is not just based on the match list, although I get that my first post may have made it seem that way -- just wanted to focus on something more (seemingly) objective than my subjective impressions of Wash U.

 

[deleted1065184]

It's one of the flaws I think of trying to analyze these match lists in that much detail. If you look at Harvard's match list, you'll see they matched 2/170ish students to neurosurgery (sorry, I don't have the time to look back at too much data, but aggregate data is better, of course. Just using the last match list approach that was used before to show that it's foolish). Is anyone gonna say that WashU has a significant advantage matching to neurosurgery than Harvard? Let's look at Doximity's top program for neurosurgery, UCSF. They match 1-2 each year out of 160. Is anyone going to say that WashU has a significant advantage in matching to neurosurgery over UCSF?

I thin this is another example of SDN trying to read too much into match lists. Neurosurgery is a very intense and demanding specialty, and it doesn't appeal to everyone. To look at the match lists and determine if a school confers a "significant" advantage at these levels is an ill-advised endeavor.

I think if you're interested in neurosurgery, WashU might be a good place not because it gives you a "significant" advantage, but it might have the culture of like-minded people who might make you more successful if you thrive on that.

I am in agreement that it could be that there is just more interest, but I do not believe that WashU is any more gunnery than peer schools. What I do think is that UCSF has an equally strong focus on primary care and Harvard matriculates a fair amount of people who are interested in primary care, whereas the average WashU student is not. What's difficult to know is if a higher relative interest in neurosurgery has influenced relative resources for those interested in that area. It's entirely possible that WashU allocates more resources and mentorship for people interested in neurosurgery, thus giving it an advantage. Every school has relative strengths and weaknesses, so I do not believe it is valid to automatically assume that the resources for those interested in neurosurgery are equivalent just because schools are peers. Basically, it could be both/and instead of either/or. There might be more WashU students interested AND there may be better resources than the majority of schools, and it's entirely possible that those two aspects influence one another.

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

I never intended to imply that the decision should be made on match lists alone; I just wanted to add one additional factor that wasn't getting mentioned that I think should be part of the deliberation. I also want to stress that in no way do I mean to imply that Michigan "underperforms" or whatever in neurosurgery, because clearly their match rate is on par with other top-20 schools that are great for neurosurgery. I was just refuting your original claim that there is no significant difference in the match rate into neurosurgery between the two schools -- what that difference means, I agree, is ambiguous.

At the end of the day, it's not about which school is "best" for neurosurgery but what school is going to give you the best opportunities to thrive in that specialty. The OP mentioned research interests in areas where I know that Wash U is especially strong. I don't want to go into neurosurgery myself, but I have spoken to neurosurgeons at Wash U and I know medical students who are interested in that field who feel well-supported there. My opinion that Wash U could be better for the OP is not just based on the match list, although I get that my first post may have made it seem that way -- just wanted to focus on something more (seemingly) objective than my subjective impressions of Wash U.

I am in agreement that it could be that there is just more interest, but I do not believe that WashU is any more gunnery than peer schools. What I do think is that UCSF has an equally strong focus on primary care and Harvard matriculates a fair amount of people who are interested in primary care, whereas the average WashU student is not. What's difficult to know is if a higher relative interest in neurosurgery has influenced relative resources for those interested in that area. It's entirely possible that WashU allocates more resources and mentorship for people interested in neurosurgery, thus giving it an advantage. Every school has relative strengths and weaknesses, so I do not believe it is valid to automatically assume that the resources for those interested in neurosurgery are equivalent just because schools are peers. Basically, it could be both/and instead of either/or. There might be more WashU students interested AND there may be better resources than the majority of schools, and it's entirely possible that those two aspects influence one another.

I think you both are saying the same thing so I'll respond to both. Right, I might be inclined to believe that WashU provides more resources for matching into neurosurgery, but I guess that data should be provided outside of match proportion (not match rate, which I take to be more of the people who try to match and don't). If you said that WashU has a top neurosurgery program (which it does but not noticeably according to Doximity, and actually Michigan has stronger surgery programs in general) or it has top research in that field (which I'm not familiar with) then I say WashU is where you want to be. But I have not heard of that, nor has anyone provided significant evidence, so I would not be inclined to say that it is a "significantly better option." If you said Hopkins, Harvard, or UCSF for neurosurgery, no arguments here. Those schools have elite neurosurgery programs and have more research funding than they know what to do with. Just another reminder that match lists should be read with a grain of salt. I think you can pick on general trends and among different tiers, you can compare. But within a same tier, it's really hard to divine useful information.

 

[deleted1065184]

I think you both are saying the same thing so I'll respond to both. Right, I might be inclined to believe that WashU provides more resources for matching into neurosurgery, but I guess that data should be provided outside of match proportion (not match rate, which I take to be more of the people who try to match and don't). If you said that WashU has a top neurosurgery program (which it does but not noticeably according to Doximity, and actually Michigan has stronger surgery programs in general) or it has top research in that field (which I'm not familiar with) then I say WashU is where you want to be. But I have not heard of that, nor has anyone provided significant evidence, so I would not be inclined to say that it is a "significantly better option." If you said Hopkins, Harvard, or UCSF for neurosurgery, no arguments here. Those schools have elite neurosurgery programs and have more research funding than they know what to do with. Just another reminder that match lists should be read with a grain of salt. I think you can pick on general trends and among different tiers, you can compare. But within a same tier, it's really hard to divine useful information.

I'm kind of confused about why you are continuing to mention neurosurgery residency reputation, when the conversation is about the number of students who match into neurosurgery *period*. Sending 1 student to UCSF or Harvard for neurosurgery is not better than sending 5 to less prestigious neurosurgery programs. But on that note, it's worth mentioning that according to Doximity, WashU's neurosurgery residency is top 10 by reputation and research output, whereas Michigan is top 10 in neither. Also, I don't think other surgical residency programs are relevant at all to this conversation.

To be clear, I did not at any point make the claim that WashU has better resources for neurosurgery. We cannot prove that any more than we can prove whether there are more WashU students interested in neurosurgery or if they are more gunnery. On all sides, these are merely suggestions of potential contributors. And I also want to make it very clear that I never said that either school was a significantly better or worse option for neurosurgery. I just pointed out that there's a difference in the number of people going into neurosurgery and discussed a couple of potential reasons why.

Either way, the convo is becoming kind of circular and doesn't really matter at the moment anyway since OP is not accepted to WashU lol

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

I'm kind of confused about why you are continuing to mention neurosurgery residency reputation, when the conversation is about the number of students who match into neurosurgery *period*. Sending 1 student to UCSF or Harvard for neurosurgery is not better than sending 5 to less prestigious neurosurgery programs. But on that note, it's worth mentioning that according to Doximity, WashU's neurosurgery residency is top 10 by reputation and research output, whereas Michigan is top 10 in neither. Also, I don't think other surgical residency programs are relevant at all to this conversation.

To be clear, I did not at any point make the claim that WashU has better resources for neurosurgery. We cannot prove that any more than we can prove whether there are more WashU students interested in neurosurgery or if they are more gunnery. On all sides, these are merely suggestions of potential contributors. And I also want to make it very clear that I never said that either school was a significantly better or worse option for neurosurgery. I just pointed out that there's a difference in the number of people going into neurosurgery and discussed a couple of potential reasons why.

Either way, the convo is becoming kind of circular and doesn't really matter at the moment anyway since OP is not accepted to WashU lol

I used doximity rankings (which I know are not that credible but we have to go off something) to show that that is a better metric because you get better opportunities to match into the field (relevant research and better letters not not mention residency matching bias) . I'm not saying we should follow the doximity rankings, but the residency strength is a good measure. Even then I break them up into tiers.. And you mentioned washu is top 10 in neurosurgery but failed to mention that michigan is at 14, and within that tier they're no different.

This discussion is important to show others that looking at a match list, seeing one school has 5 matches one year in a super specialized field and comparing it to another school with 2 and saying that one is a significantly better option is not a good way to read match lists. If that is not emphasized people might make the same mistake.

In general, I'm against putting too much emphasis on match lists because there are too many factors. That needs to be emphasized. Going to a program with a great residency program is a good reason

 

[deleted1065184]

I used doximity rankings (which I know are not that credible but we have to go off something) to show that that is a better metric because you get better opportunities to match into the field (relevant research and better letters not not mention residency matching bias) . I'm not saying we should follow the doximity rankings, but the residency strength is a good measure. Even then I break them up into tiers.. And you mentioned washu is top 10 in neurosurgery but failed to mention that michigan is at 14, and within that tier they're no different.

This discussion is important to show others that looking at a match list, seeing one school has 5 matches one year in a super specialized field and comparing it to another school with 2 and saying that one is a significantly better option is not a good way to read match lists. If that is not emphasized people might make the same mistake.

In general, I'm against putting too much emphasis on match lists because there are too many factors. That needs to be emphasized. Going to a program with a great residency program is a good reason

Yeah, Michigan is #14 for reputation, but #21 for research output whereas WashU is #8. I agree that the difference is insignificant, but you're asserting that there's a significant difference between UCSF/Harvard and WashU, but not WashU and Michigan. I don't think there's a significant difference between any of them.

Regardless, I agree that there shouldn't be too much weight placed on match lists. But I do think it's worth trying to investigate why a certain school may match a far higher percentage in a particular specialty (4-5% vs <1% is a 4- to 5-fold difference, regardless of the reason). This, ofc, is best gauged by talking to actual faculty members and students at those schools to ask about the resources and mentorship.

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

Yeah, Michigan is #14 for reputation, but #21 for research output whereas WashU is #8. I agree that the difference is insignificant, but you're asserting that there's a significant difference between UCSF/Harvard and WashU, but not WashU and Michigan. I don't think there's a significant difference between any of them.

Regardless, I agree that there shouldn't be too much weight placed on match lists. But I do think it's worth trying to investigate why a certain school may match a far higher percentage in a particular specialty (4-5% vs <1% is a 4- to 5-fold difference, regardless of the reason). This, ofc, is best gauged by talking to actual faculty members and students at those schools to ask about the resources and mentorship.

I can agree on that. If there's something about WashU and neurosurgery that I don't know about, happy to change my mind. Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse here, just have seen a lot of talks about match lists on here and I just want us as a group to be mindful of how hard it is to read it.

 

[deleted1065184]

I can agree on that. If there's something about WashU and neurosurgery that I don't know about, happy to change my mind. Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse here, just have seen a lot of talks about match lists on here and I just want us as a group to be mindful of how hard it is to read it.

I definitely think your points are valid. I think, in general, people have a tendency to look for shortcuts to help them find the best school for them...whether it's USNWR ranking, PD rankings, matchlists, etc.

But ofc it's not that simple. So I understand emphasizing that just looking at a match list doesn't usually tell you too much unless you have more context.

 

[Banco]

I echo what everyone else has been saying -- both are really great schools, you'll have plenty of opportunities at either, and you should feel very proud of yourself for a very successful application cycle.

If you are very committed to neurosurgery, I do think Wash U is the significantly better option. Michigan has 1-2 med student match into neurosurgery every year (Match List Search), which is pretty typical of top-20 schools. I don't know about previous years, but Wash U had five people match into neurosurgery this year (Students celebrate Match Day virtually or masked, socially distanced | Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis), which is very impressive for such a competitive specialty. And since you're in the field, you probably know that if you're interested in connectomics, the epicenter of the human connectome project is a great place to be.

So if I were you, I'd send a letter of intent to Wash U. Best of luck!

I think you make a good point that OPs specific research interests may be better supported at WashU.

The entire analysis of how many students go into neurosurgery is a waste of time. Simple question what if 2 Michigan students applied, 2 matched. Vs. 5 WashU students applied, only 3 matched? We have no idea other than very superficial assumptions getting this granular.

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

Ahh now it makes more sense, I see both @I'mInDer! And @mr_unlimited were accepted to washu. Are we gonna list our biases or no lol 😆

 

[deleted1065184]

Ahh now it makes more sense, I see both @I'mInDer! And @mr_unlimited were accepted to washu. Are we gonna list our biases or no lol 😆

Lol I got accepted to WashU and some other schools I really liked 😊, but I've always considered Michigan as a peer school to WashU and every other "top" school. In all fairness, I said from the beginning that OP should ignore any perceived prestige differences and would not have trouble matching back to the West Coast from either school! I have friends from all over who either go to or have gone to Michigan and they all got their first or second choice.

Didn't really consider neurosurgery matching until it was brought up later. But after seeing the numbers, I do think it's meaningful that there are more folks going into neurosurgery from WashU, if for no other reason than there being a bigger community. Nobody here can say if it's due to neurosurgery-specific resources and mentorship, baseline interest in the field, or some mixture of both.

OP does seem to prefer WashU based on their pros/cons, but I personally think they should go to Michigan at this point.

 

[mr_unlimited]

On the whole, let me just say that I agree with the other posters in that match lists are hard to interpret -- we don't know how many people from both schools "wanted" to match into neurosurgery, which means we can't really derive success rates for students in both schools. I could have done a better job communicating that in my post which set of this storm lol. And, something we haven't even mentioned, most people change their mind wrt their intended speciality from first year to residency match, so picking a school based solely on its strength in a particular specialty is already not the best strategy. But anyways, I think we're always going to have to make decisions based on incomplete information, so you have to ask yourself, what's most likely given the data, and my judgement is that if one school is sending a higher proportion of students to neurosurgery compared to another school, it has at least *something* to do with the quality of opportunities in that specialty at that institution. But I get that there are other ways of assessing the latter that some applicants may prefer -- each method has its pros and cons.

Yes, as has been pointed out, I did get into Wash U, and I'm also deciding between really great schools. I thought the point of this forum was so that fellow applicants who are making similar decisions can share their thought processes amongst themselves. It doesn't really affect me in anyway whether the OP ultimately chooses to go to Wash U given the chance, so I don't see why I am expected to disclose this info.

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

Relax, guys, I was just joking lol

 

[deleted1065184]

Relax, guys, I was just joking lol

I know lol

 

[mr_unlimited]

Haha sorry for over-reacting, hard to read tone over text

 

[BritainKittenMittens]

One thing I should mention is that I'm interested in integrating technology (techniques/approaches from electrical and computer engineering) into my research in neuroscience. Does this affect things? (I remember some of you said that WashU is slightly better than Michigan for neuroscience)

Oh if you're interested in integrating technology (or any interdisciplinary field, for that matter), I change my vote to Michigan. I think WashU has the stronger neuroscience program, but when it comes to engineering programs Michigan dominates, and most grad programs for that matter.

You can compare Michigan's programs to WashU's. Michigan is one of the best engineering schools in the world, and having access to strong neuroscience and engineering faculty will be instrumental.

 

[mr_unlimited]

Don't know if Michigan has something similar, and can't speak to Wash U's strength in engineering outside of neuro-engineering, but you should check this out: Center For Innovation In Neuroscience and Technology - About Us: CINT

 

[Banco]

One thing I am beginning to realize is quite important is the culture at each of the schools. What is the culture like at Michigan or WashU? Is one more hierarchical? Some people told me WashU has a lot of "gunners." Is that true?

Reach out to current students about these questions.