Midwest Help

[Radiologyreviews2015]

Hey all, I thought I'd change it up here and ask some opinions on some programs I'm having trouble separating in the Midwest. Too many Californians/NE people on SDN! Haha.

So far, I have CCF, Indiana, Wisconsin, NW, and UPMC as my top 5. I did not get interviews to Mayo, MIR, or Michigan (1st tier Midwest I guess).

CCF, Indiana, and UPMC are really similar in my mind with all having huge volume/pathology and in similar sized cities/metro area with similar weather. CCF has a good name in medicine but for some reason people don't seem to like it on AM or SDN. It is a bit attending-driven but I saw that as both a pro and con and I liked that they only had 8 residents/year and have all fellowships and unlimited resources. UPMC seemed weak in IR and I didn't really like travelling to multiple hospitals although their mammo/peds seemed really top notch. Indiana I viewed as a solid "all around" program with nothing exceptional but nothing weak either.

Wisconsin seemed more "academic" and had what seemed like a strong neuro section (one of my interests). I also liked the smaller town feel of Madison. Residents seemed really happy.

NW seemed to have a good name and awesome downtown location but I'm not sure I can afford living in Chicago. Didn't get a good feel for the program or residents on interview day.

I really am thinking CCF = Indiana = UPMC > NW > Wisconsin and really having trouble separating the top 3. Any thoughts/help would be much appreciated since I did not rotate at any of these places.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[futureradres12345]

I'm confused, your ranking doesn't really match up with what you said about each program. Wisconsin seems like the only program that had nothing but positives in your description, yet you ranked it behind all the others?

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

I suspect the answers will fall along the line of "choose based on location"

 

[shark2000]

Your question is not clear to me.

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

Sorry, stream of consciousness and didn't make things clear...

When I said Wisconsin was more academic, I actually viewed that as a negative as I don't want to go into academia and I felt their volume/pathology was lower.

As far as my specific question, I guess I was hoping for a reputation rank as I'd like to stay in the Midwest or a rank on how graduates from these programs are perceived when looking for jobs. Really, any insight on any of these programs would be nice since I was only at them for a day apiece.

 

[shark2000]

Sorry, stream of consciousness and didn't make things clear...

When I said Wisconsin was more academic, I actually viewed that as a negative as I don't want to go into academia and I felt their volume/pathology was lower.

As far as my specific question, I guess I was hoping for a reputation rank as I'd like to stay in the Midwest or a rank on how graduates from these programs are perceived when looking for jobs. Really, any insight on any of these programs would be nice since I was only at them for a day apiece.

I repeat this again. If you want to stay in Ohio after you are done go to CCF. The same for Indiana and Pittsburgh.

Your impression of UW is wrong. UW is an excellent radiology department in the country and is definitely better than other programs on your list.

UW has one of the best MSK and one of the best Body sections in the country. Very solid Neuro department.

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

I repeat this again. If you want to stay in Ohio after you are done go to CCF. The same for Indiana and Pittsburgh.

Your impression of UW is wrong. UW is an excellent radiology department in the country and is definitely better than other programs on your list.

UW has one of the best MSK and one of the best Body sections in the country. Very solid Neuro department.

OP said NW not UW

 

[DrBowtie]

OP said NW not UW

UW = Wisconsin in the Midwest.

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

I repeat this again. If you want to stay in Ohio after you are done go to CCF. The same for Indiana and Pittsburgh.

Your impression of UW is wrong. UW is an excellent radiology department in the country and is definitely better than other programs on your list.

UW has one of the best MSK and one of the best Body sections in the country. Very solid Neuro department.

When someone says XXX program has a strong body section or a strong MSK section, etc, how exactly is that determined? Does that mean the section has a lot of faculty members who are famous? (and in turn, how is this determined? number of original research papers published? number of book chapters written? being president of XYZ national organization? giving frequent talks at national meetings?) or does it mean that the way the local academic practice is setup facilitates the best training experience in terms of case volume, diversity, autonomy (I don't understand how one can know this without having trained there)? Or, graduates of those fellowships go on to become famous?

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

I repeat this again. If you want to stay in Ohio after you are done go to CCF. The same for Indiana and Pittsburgh.

Your impression of UW is wrong. UW is an excellent radiology department in the country and is definitely better than other programs on your list.

UW has one of the best MSK and one of the best Body sections in the country. Very solid Neuro department.

Thank you for your opinion. Having only one day at Wisconsin must have not shown me all that I needed to know. It just couldn't compare to the volume of CCF, UPMC, Indiana so I didn't know what to make of it. As I said before, I really am not interested in academics but I'm getting the sense that Wisconsin is more like Michigan - lower volume but high-powered faculty? I also am curious about the previous post and what makes a section a good section.

I've been leaning toward CCF since I want to do PP and their volume is insanely high, but am really concerned about all the negative press it seems to get on here and Aunt Minnie. What am I missing about it?

 

[shark2000]

UW = Wisconsin in the Midwest.

OP talked about Wisconsin in his post. Read it again.

 

[shark2000]

Thank you for your opinion. Having only one day at Wisconsin must have not shown me all that I needed to know. It just couldn't compare to the volume of CCF, UPMC, Indiana so I didn't know what to make of it. As I said before, I really am not interested in academics but I'm getting the sense that Wisconsin is more like Michigan - lower volume but high-powered faculty? I also am curious about the previous post and what makes a section a good section.

I've been leaning toward CCF since I want to do PP and their volume is insanely high, but am really concerned about all the negative press it seems to get on here and Aunt Minnie. What am I missing about it?

High volume won't make you good necessarily. You will gain the speed 6 month-one year after you start your private practice.

But the quality of the teaching will stay with you. Not easily achievable after you are done with training.

It is surprising to me that how many medical students think excellent academic departments can not prepare them for private practice jobs. Even at MGH, 80% of their trainees end up in private practice and they do very well.

If one of your major criteria to choose a program is insanely high volume, you have to do your homework again.

 

[DrBowtie]

OP talked about Wisconsin in his post. Read it again.

I know. Why did you quote me? I was clarifying for the poster above me.

 

[DrBowtie]

Thank you for your opinion. Having only one day at Wisconsin must have not shown me all that I needed to know. It just couldn't compare to the volume of CCF, UPMC, Indiana so I didn't know what to make of it. As I said before, I really am not interested in academics but I'm getting the sense that Wisconsin is more like Michigan - lower volume but high-powered faculty? I also am curious about the previous post and what makes a section a good section.

I've been leaning toward CCF since I want to do PP and their volume is insanely high, but am really concerned about all the negative press it seems to get on here and Aunt Minnie. What am I missing about it?

Your impression of Wisconsin matches mine. Good department but very academic oriented. MSK fellowship has a great reputation.

Body section does some niche things like Ablation and CT Colonography where they publish a ton of research. Not sure how comfortable you'd be with that without doing a body fellowship there.

All those programs are good and you'll get good training at all of them.

 

[Radiologyreviews2015]

OP talked about Wisconsin in his post. Read it again.

My apologies. I thought you were referring to University of Washington when I wrote that.

 

[InternationlDoc]

Out of that list I'd go NW. Great location and to be frank they have a very good IR program (huge in Onc). Location matters bro; you're staying 4 years. Need a good life outside as well.

Wisconsin is equivalent to NW; actually better academically. Fantastic body faculty (their body fellowship is great). I've met them and they are world class. MSK and neur sections legit too. Madison is a great town.

UPMC is great; but its pittsburg.

My 2 cents

 

[DrBowtie]

Out of that list I'd go NW. Great location and to be frank they have a very good IR program (huge in Onc). Location matters bro; you're staying 4 years. Need a good life outside as well.

Wisconsin is equivalent to NW; actually better academically. Fantastic body faculty (their body fellowship is great). I've met them and they are world class. MSK and neur sections legit too. Madison is a great town.

UPMC is great; but its pittsburg.

My 2 cents

Curious about the bolded. Asked an upper level who interviewed there for body fellowship and said they do a day a week of ablation and a day a week of academic time/research. Would be good for an academic career but not so much for PP.

 

[shark2000]

Curious about the bolded. Asked an upper level who interviewed there for body fellowship and said they do a day a week of ablation and a day a week of academic time/research. Would be good for an academic career but not so much for PP.

I don't agree with this part. Its body fellowship is excellent for both private practice and academics.

The strength of their body fellowship is not just limited to research and ablations. Its body and its MSK fellowships are top notch in all aspects. It prepares you for private practice very well.

Why some people still have the wrong impression that top notch academic departments can not prepare them for private practice?

 

[deleted564680]

I don't agree with this part. Its body fellowship is excellent for both private practice and academics.

The strength of their body fellowship is not just limited to research and ablations. Its body and its MSK fellowships are top notch in all aspects. It prepares you for private practice very well.

Why some people still have the wrong impression that top notch academic departments can not prepare them for private practice?

Maybe it's not the departments but the focus that those departments place on research? There are a lot of people (myself included) that have no interest in research or anything to do with academia so a place that stresses it heavily may not be a good fit. I'm only speculating though. I certainly could see the advantage of the education component brought by those faculty that are top in their field.

 

[DrBowtie]

I don't agree with this part. Its body fellowship is excellent for both private practice and academics.

The strength of their body fellowship is not just limited to research and ablations. Its body and its MSK fellowships are top notch in all aspects. It prepares you for private practice very well.

Why some people still have the wrong impression that top notch academic departments can not prepare them for private practice?

Spending one fifth of your fellowship doing research and one fifth of your fellowship doing a procedure rarely done by body trained people outside of academia doesn't seem like the best way to spend the year if you won't do either in PP.

Plenty of other top notch academic places you can learn and gain practical experience for 100% of your year, not just 60%.

 

[shark2000]

Spending one fifth of your fellowship doing research and one fifth of your fellowship doing a procedure rarely done by body trained people outside of academia doesn't seem like the best way to spend the year if you won't do either in PP.

Plenty of other top notch academic places you can learn and gain practical experience for 100% of your year, not just 60%.

You opened a can of worm. Body fellowship is in fact the 5th year of residency by itself and even 50% of it is enough.

Many fellowships give you one or half a day academic day.

Now let me ask you. Who said we exactly need one year of MSK fellowship or one year of body fellowship or one year of mammo fellowship? Why are you concerned so much about that one fifth of research time or one fifth of ablation?

Your logic is wrong. The most important thing is that a UW body fellow is an excellent trained body imager who be a good fit for both academic and private practice jobs. It doesn't mean other top notch places won't prepare you. But many of these top notch places also have one academic day and also they do many things that you won't do in private practice.

Examples:
MGH, BWH and UCLA body fellowships: All of them do ablations and procedures that you won't do in private practice.
Most academic top notch places give you half a day or one day research day.
Most big name programs are referral centers (for example transplant centers) that you spend a lot of your time reading imaging studies that you won't see in private practice like transplant US and etc.

To give you more hard time, I am going to also talk about neuro. Many top neuro programs have pathologies that you won't see in private practice. Neuro fellowship requires you to do 2 months of angio that is barely done by diagnostic neurorads in private practice.

Bottom line: Since you don't want to waste your time, don't do a neuro fellowship. Also since you don't want to waste your time don't do body fellowship at any top programs because many of them do ablations and procedures that you won't do in private practice. The rest of them also have pathologies that you won't see in private practice.

Long story short, in order to save your time read normal CXR and normal head CTs your entire training. You don't need to learn other things since you rarely will see them in private practice.

 

[DrBowtie]

You opened a can of worm. Body fellowship is in fact the 5th year of residency by itself and even 50% of it is enough.

Many fellowships give you one or half a day academic day.

Now let me ask you. Who said we exactly need one year of MSK fellowship or one year of body fellowship or one year of mammo fellowship? Why are you concerned so much about that one fifth of research time or one fifth of ablation?

Your logic is wrong. The most important thing is that a UW body fellow is an excellent trained body imager who be a good fit for both academic and private practice jobs. It doesn't mean other top notch places won't prepare you. But many of these top notch places also have one academic day and also they do many things that you won't do in private practice.

Examples:
MGH, BWH and UCLA body fellowships: All of them do ablations and procedures that you won't do in private practice.
Most academic top notch places give you half a day or one day research day.
Most big name programs are referral centers (for example transplant centers) that you spend a lot of your time reading imaging studies that you won't see in private practice like transplant US and etc.

To give you more hard time, I am going to also talk about neuro. Many top neuro programs have pathologies that you won't see in private practice. Neuro fellowship requires you to do 2 months of angio that is barely done by diagnostic neurorads in private practice.

Bottom line: Since you don't want to waste your time, don't do a neuro fellowship. Also since you don't want to waste your time don't do body fellowship at any top programs because many of them do ablations and procedures that you won't do in private practice. The rest of them also have pathologies that you won't see in private practice.

Long story short, in order to save your time read normal CXR and normal head CTs your entire training. You don't need to learn other things since you rarely will see them in private practice.

I've clearly hit a nerve with you.

My only point is that there are good academic places that you can spend more time doing stuff you'll be doing in your career. You have to do a fellowship, might as well make it count. IF you have zero interest in research, it's probably a bad FIT to go to a place with a 20% research time expectation.

Your neuro point is irrelevant due to its ACGME accreditation rules where you must do a certain number of angios. It's unlike body or MSK where there is variability and you can choose a program with a modality/procedure mix suited to your desire and strengths.

You seem to think that I'm advocating training in weak community programs for private practice. I'm not. All I'm saying is that evaluating a program residency or fellowship based upon substance and fit is important.

 

[shark2000]

I've clearly hit a nerve with you.

My only point is that there are good academic places that you can spend more time doing stuff you'll be doing in your career. You have to do a fellowship, might as well make it count. IF you have zero interest in research, it's probably a bad FIT to go to a place with a 20% research time expectation.

Your neuro point is irrelevant due to its ACGME accreditation rules where you must do a certain number of angios. It's unlike body or MSK where there is variability and you can choose a program with a modality/procedure mix suited to your desire and strengths.

You seem to think that I'm advocating training in weak community programs for private practice. I'm not. All I'm saying is that evaluating a program residency or fellowship based upon substance and fit is important.

Nope, I am not upset.

I am not arguing anymore with you but your opinion is biased.

 

[DrBowtie]

Nope, I am not upset.

I am not arguing anymore with you but your opinion is biased.

All opinions are biased, including yours.

 

[shark2000]

All opinions are biased, including yours.

Not as much as yours.

 

[deleted564680]

...so how about CCF and Indiana? How are they