Northwestern has open positions from PGY 1-4

[gbwillner]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Is it just me or does this post sound elitist, aka "I'm better than thou"?

Yup- that's why I voted for Obama...

 

[pathstudent]

I don't buy the "no program is perfect. all programs have issues argument".

The top 5 programs (UCSF, University of Wash, JHU, BWH, and Stanford) don't have more than one unexpected opening every 5 years, let along openings in all years at one time.

Northwestern was having issues drawing residents when I was a med student and only filled 1 of 4 spots when I was applying in 2004. The thing NW has going for it is that based on location (Michigan Ave/Navy Pier/grant Park) it is the #1 program in Chicago and top 5 in the US.

 

[exPCM]

The case load at Northwestern has likely not changed at all since the problems began.

The format of how the cases get processed and how residents fit into that process is changing.

A few things I thought were very strong about Northwestern...the daily morning conference is very formal. I got the impression the program is higher pressure with residents being forced to publicly display their knowledge on a daily basis to other attendings and residents through the morning conferences. Also, all the residents are expected to do research. I got the impression that the atmosphere is highly academic and I have spoken to people who graduated from the program that it is a more formal atmosphere. I think there are too many pathology programs in the country where you can show up day after day, gross, do your service work, and then go home and not study and still skate by just fine until the boards come up and then you fail or you defer until after a fellowship to take them. I am sure that Northwestern residents are generally more intelligent and stronger than most other pathology residency trainees.

Now this is a good post with some specifics about the program: morning conference format, research required.
Another thing that I think is good to find out at interviews is how much time residents get to preview slides.

 

[yaah]

The top 5 programs (UCSF, University of Wash, JHU, BWH, and Stanford) don't have more than one unexpected opening every 5 years, let along openings in all years at one time.

There you go again with your sort-of random list of "top 5" programs!

 

[gbwillner]

I don't buy the "no program is perfect. all programs have issues argument".

The top 5 programs (UCSF, University of Wash, JHU, BWH, and Stanford) don't have more than one unexpected opening every 5 years, let along openings in all years at one time.

Northwestern was having issues drawing residents when I was a med student and only filled 1 of 4 spots when I was applying in 2004. The thing NW has going for it is that based on location (Michigan Ave/Navy Pier/grant Park) it is the #1 program in Chicago and top 5 in the US.

Dude,
EVERYONE knows that the top 5 are University of Alabama, Texas Tech, University of Florida, University of Oklahoma, and USC. Washington hasn't even won a share of the Pac-10 title since 2000 (and is currently 0-7) and Stanford hasn't won a share since 1995. Yes, you can make a case for Texas but they don't even have a chance of winning the Big12 this year.

On a Path related note, I would just like to ask where these "top 5" programs come from. I interviewed at all except for Stanford, and really don't understand how these programs are somehow better than others. Sure, they're all better than Northwestern, no doubt, but really, where do you get this? There are a handful of other programs that I thought were far better than those on this list.

 

[yaah]

Hence my post. We have had this discussion several times before when pathstudent brings up the top 5 programs (always these 5). It's a west coast top 5, throw in a couple of east coast programs so you don't seem THAT biased. There is no consensus list for top 5 programs, nor should there be. There are too many variables, and different things are important to different people.

 

[pathstudent]

Hence my post. We have had this discussion several times before when pathstudent brings up the top 5 programs (always these 5). It's a west coast top 5, throw in a couple of east coast programs so you don't seem THAT biased. There is no consensus list for top 5 programs, nor should there be. There are too many variables, and different things are important to different people.

The only controversial program on that list would be univ of wash. Other than that, there can be no claim of bias.

Hopkins deserves to be on that list as they are sort of the vanguard of diagnostic pathlology as is BWH. UCSF and Stanford are awesome programs in an awesome metro that are the best because there are far more people that would prefer to live in the SF/Bay Area than any midwest city. Weather, cultural relevance and sophistication, and urbanity matter and SF trumps any Midwest city in all of those regards.

For the fifth pick I don't know who would be better than U W. Certainly no Midwest or interior west/plains state program.

 

[deleted57552]

Hence my post. We have had this discussion several times before when pathstudent brings up the top 5 programs (always these 5). It's a west coast top 5, throw in a couple of east coast programs so you don't seem THAT biased. There is no consensus list for top 5 programs, nor should there be. There are too many variables, and different things are important to different people.

Yeah...plus, I'm sure that if you asked 10 people, a good number would say that let's say MGH rather than UW is in the top 5

But this whole discussion of "ranked" programs is kinda silly.

 

[malchik]

The only controversial program on that list would be univ of wash. Other than that, there can be no claim of bias.

Hopkins deserves to be on that list as they are sort of the vanguard of diagnostic pathlology as is BWH. UCSF and Stanford are awesome programs in an awesome metro that are the best because there are far more people that would prefer to live in the SF/Bay Area than any midwest city. Weather, cultural relevance and sophistication, and urbanity matter and SF trumps any Midwest city in all of those regards.

For the fifth pick I don't know who would be better than U W. Certainly no Midwest or interior west/plains state program.

You obviously just like being provocative, but I can't help being provoked here. I love your "awesome" criterion. Hard to argue that logic. If "cultural relevance and sophistication" means the most bums and feces on the streets, then yes, SF trumps all. SF gets its @ss handed to it by Chicago and almost every eastern city in terms of institutions of higher learning, history, good museums, and producing sophisticated (your term) people.

 

[yaah]

yeah, see, the only reason I would live in SF would be if I was making over a million dollars a year and I couldn't find a job in dozens of other cities or regions that I would prefer to live in. So your rationale that living in SF bumps up the program is invalid for me and many others. In my personal rankings of programs, the fact that UCSF is in SF bumps it down on the list. Same with Stanford actually. I did not even apply to either one. And similar with Hopkins, which I liked but not enough to move it past #3 on my rank list (and that was only because I was 99% sure I wasn't going to go past #2 which on my list was MGH). There may be far more people in California who prefer to live in the Bay area than anywhere else in the country, but that really does not extend to the midwest or the east coast. I know Californians love to think that everyone else wants to live there (as do New Yorkers) but it really isn't true. California is basically about #40 on my list of best 50 states (for where I would want to live). And even then it's only because of San Diego. But I agree with malchik that SF beats almost all american cities except perhaps for New Orleans and Baltimore in amount of feces on the streets.

And it's interesting that you say your rankings involve diagnostic pathology yet you include BWH but not MGH. Most people I talk to would reverse them. Many people have BWH as "superior" because of the research focus. It's all kind of a personal choice.

But see, people should not get upset about this or really fight about it. Rankings are personal. There are many things that factor in. Feces content is but one of them.

 

[elburrito]

I

 

[docbiohazard]

Dude,
EVERYONE knows that the top 5 are University of Alabama, Texas Tech, University of Florida, University of Oklahoma, and USC. Washington hasn't even won a share of the Pac-10 title since 2000 (and is currently 0-7) and Stanford hasn't won a share since 1995. Yes, you can make a case for Texas but they don't even have a chance of winning the Big12 this year.

Don't have a chance? If Oklahoma can take care of Texas Tech this Saturday, then we fall into a 3-way tie, in which the highest ranked Big 12 South team goes to the championship. There's a chance that could be Texas. 🙂

In any case, all of this is far more interesting than arguing over an arbitrary "top 5" programs list. As has been said, no program is all things to all people. Different programs have vastly different strengths, feels, structures, etc.

BTW, gb, glad to see you made Assistant Mod...

DBH

 

[pathstudent]

yeah, see, the only reason I would live in SF would be if I was making over a million dollars a year and I couldn't find a job in dozens of other cities or regions that I would prefer to live in. So your rationale that living in SF bumps up the program is invalid for me and many others. In my personal rankings of programs, the fact that UCSF is in SF bumps it down on the list. Same with Stanford actually. I did not even apply to either one. And similar with Hopkins, which I liked but not enough to move it past #3 on my rank list (and that was only because I was 99% sure I wasn't going to go past #2 which on my list was MGH). There may be far more people in California who prefer to live in the Bay area than anywhere else in the country, but that really does not extend to the midwest or the east coast. I know Californians love to think that everyone else wants to live there (as do New Yorkers) but it really isn't true. California is basically about #40 on my list of best 50 states (for where I would want to live). And even then it's only because of San Diego. But I agree with malchik that SF beats almost all american cities except perhaps for New Orleans and Baltimore in amount of feces on the streets.

And it's interesting that you say your rankings involve diagnostic pathology yet you include BWH but not MGH. Most people I talk to would reverse them. Many people have BWH as "superior" because of the research focus. It's all kind of a personal choice.

But see, people should not get upset about this or really fight about it. Rankings are personal. There are many things that factor in. Feces content is but one of them.

I didn't say every single person would prefer San Francisco over Chicago or the Midwest, but San Francisco is a far more desirable city to live in for most people than any city in the Midwest. There is a reason why Chicago (the grandest most dynamic city in the Midwest) has lost almost a 1,000,000 people since 1960 and San Francisco has been a magnet for young talented people from all over the country for decades.

For sure BWH and UCSF are drawing from a much larger much more talented pool of applicants than virtually any program in the country.

 

[deleted57552]

I didn't say every single person would prefer San Francisco over Chicago or the Midwest, but San Francisco is a far more desirable city to live in for most people than any city in the Midwest. There is a reason why Chicago (the grandest most dynamic city in the Midwest) has lost almost a 1,000,000 people since 1960 and San Francisco has been a magnet for young talented people from all over the country for decades.

For sure BWH and UCSF are drawing from a much larger much more talented pool of applicants than virtually any program in the country.

I really enjoy spending time in SF and if I had a high income, I think living there would be quite cool. But it's hard for me to gauge what living in SF would be like despite my numerous visits to that city (synonymous to my experience with NYC). It all depends on the kind of life you want to live outside of medicine. I agree that SF is a magnet for younger, talented folks as I know quite a few folks from high school, college, and med school who have moved there.

I don't know if you can only cite those two programs in recruiting the top echelon of applicants though. I think the number of strong programs (in departments in various stages of evolution) are emerging and probably fighting for these candidates.

 

[LADoc00]

Hold it..what am I hearing? SF is not a magnet for jack aside from gays and small sliver of the music scene. If by SF you mean to include Silicon Valley and parts of the East Bay where there are real Biotech operations, *maybe*. SF itself IS shrinking. Fact: there was approximately the same number of people in SF in 2000 as there was in 1950!

If it is magneting young people (bwahahaha) as you claim, shouldnt the pop be sky high? I mean at least slightly larger than 1950??

I have lived in SF...LA, Boston, Midwest etc.

The talent pool at UCSF in my opinion is really no different than pools in Westwood, Chicago, StLouis and host of other cities. In fact, there are so many distractions in SF due to pop density and the inherent cultural craziness, the talent pool they do draw gets sucked into a productivity quagmire.

SF is an okay city, good if you are crazy rich, bad if you have a family, really bad if you are middle class and have a family.

SF is funky EuroAmerican urban grit with a splash of cheesy Anne Rice Vampire piede-a-terre. It can be so over the top you have to laugh (especially for those who went to the old Castro Halloween, Power exchange, 550 Space raves etc.). It gets comical quick and the SFers who do take themselves seriously (hello Gavin), are a complete joke. That said, the whole "******ed Underworld Vampire-clubber-I play too many computer games-ex-Dungeons and Dragons nerd-hippy" universe of SF is my cup of tea so I like it.

Other randoms-the food at the high end of SF SUCKS, Sonoma, Napa and even San Jose area has far better restaurants. Also they are crazy expensive. LA has vastly better and more affordable eats.
Bars in SF are very cool, once again in a cheesy grunge rock-vampire like way, but the hot chick factor in coastal LA is FAR superior.

 

[LADoc00]

yeah, see, the only reason I would live in SF would be if I was making over a million dollars a year and I couldn't find a job in dozens of other cities or regions that I would prefer to live in. So your rationale that living in SF bumps up the program is invalid for me and many others. In my personal rankings of programs, the fact that UCSF is in SF bumps it down on the list. .

Because of all the dirty hippies and liberals? Is it a "SF would be great if it wasnt for all the San Franciscans" type situation?

just curious.

 

[yaah]

Because of all the dirty hippies and liberals? Is it a "SF would be great if it wasnt for all the San Franciscans" type situation?

just curious.

Nah. The people are part of it, but other parts of it include all the hills, the expense of living there, and the fact that you can't live anywhere very close for a reasonable amount of money. The priorities of the city leadership (government) seem to be a little wacky though.

It's also close to Oakland.

 

[pathchick09]

Hello! Northwestern resident here...this thread has become quite interesting, but I'll answer your question. In the past two years (since I've been here) I can tell you where people have gone. MD Anderson (Hemepath and Surgpath), UT SW (Dermpath), U of C (Surg path), Loyola (Cyto), Pittsburgh (GU), Case Western (Hemepath), Northwestern (Hemepath), and our class graduating this year is going to Northwestern (GU), Cleveland Clinic (GI), Mt Sinai (GI), VCU (Cyto), Emory (Surgpath), U of C (Renal), Cook County ME (Forensics), Northwestern (Cyto).

I agree with yaah. Brand name isn't exactly the best thing. You have to pick what's best for you. I interviewed at a wide range of places and different people are happy at different places. MGH, JHU and Brigham are excellent but on my interviews there the residents stated that they stayed until 10pm almost every night. Not to say they weren't happy there. I think they loved their own programs, I just knew I wouldn't be happy if I worked until 10pm everyday. You have to stop worrying about what everyone else thinks and pick a place for YOU. If you are a good resident, you'll come out with a great knowledge base no matter where you go. Best of luck on interviews to everyone!

I am glad that this thread didn't degrade into a flame war, but rather only into a discussion in which feces seemed to figure prominently.

Regarding Northwestern, can anyone really dispute that it is a brand name program?

Also, could any current residents at Northwestern answer where the graduates have gone on for fellowships in the past few years, and where their fellows have gone to work?

 

[pathstudent]

Hold it..what am I hearing? SF is not a magnet for jack aside from gays and small sliver of the music scene. If by SF you mean to include Silicon Valley and parts of the East Bay where there are real Biotech operations, *maybe*. SF itself IS shrinking. Fact: there was approximately the same number of people in SF in 2000 as there was in 1950!

If it is magneting young people (bwahahaha) as you claim, shouldnt the pop be sky high? I mean at least slightly larger than 1950??

SF is by far the second most densely populated city (so per square mile the population is sky high). WHen you consider that Chicago has lost about 30% of it's population and STL has lost 60-70% since 1950, an early 20th century metropolis holding its own is doing well. I read that in the late 90s and early 2000s SF had only a 1% vacancy rate in apartments, so it wasn't like people were leaving in droves or the place was stagnant. My friends that were finishing up college told me stories of competing with 50 other "applicants" to get a room in a flat in the Mission.

NYC has the same population as it did in 1950 (more or less) and it too is a major mecca for international young talent. But NYC path programs are not in the same league as Stanford and UCSF.

 

[malchik]

UCSF and Stanford are awesome programs in an awesome metro that are the best because there are far more people that would prefer to live in the SF/Bay Area than any midwest city.

But by your criteria, NYC programs should be in the same league. What gives?

 

[pathstudent]

But by your criteria, NYC programs should be in the same league. What gives?

I bet programs in NYC capture residents that could match at a "top 5" simply because they are in NYC. If you had two similar programs with one being in NY and the other being in Akron, the NY one would be able to draw from a far larger pool of residents and faculty as NYC is a bigger draw than Akron. A young person in the Midwest is more likely to be willing/desire to live in NY or SF than a person from SF or NY would desire to live in the Midwest. That's a fact jack.

But back to the topic. The claim that NW is some awesome elite program is suspicious given there are openings in all 4 years of training. Like I said any program can have an opening once in awhile, but a mass exodus is a red flag and raises some questions, but at last NW has a great location right there in downtown.

 

[MrSunshine]

Hi Armin.

Who should one contact regarding these open positions?

 

[armin]

you can contact the program co-ordinator. Use the link I have provided and you will find her name on the webpage and there will be a link with her email. The webpage address is:


http://www.pathology.northwestern.edu/Residency/IndexAPCP.html

 

[armin]

when you use the link i gave you, then click the "Applicants" tab on the top of the page and it will take you to the page with the information you requested

 

[Napoleon1801]

I heard that Evanston-Northwestern is breaking away from Northwestern this year. They were saying on my interview up there that it was a pretty poor relationship in the past and Northwestern folks weren't letting Evanston people even rotate at their hospital. Hence Evanston's affiliation is now going to U of C.

 

[TypicalTuesday]

I heard that Evanston-Northwestern is breaking away from Northwestern this year. They were saying on my interview up there that it was a pretty poor relationship in the past and Northwestern folks weren't letting Evanston people even rotate at their hospital. Hence Evanston's affiliation is now going to U of C.

I have never had this confirmed, but I had heard that they would be affiliated with Chicago Medical School (i.e. Rosalind Franklin). Anyone know for sure?

 

[longlakeboy]

I have never had this confirmed, but I had heard that they would be affiliated with Chicago Medical School (i.e. Rosalind Franklin). Anyone know for sure?

They formed an official partnership with University of Chicago a few months ago:

http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/2008/20080714-enh.html

I liked the Evanston program a lot when I interviewed there last year. It's a community program, but quite a good one. I don't know how the switch in affiliation will affect them, if at all...

 

[ABC789]

For what it's worth, I am one of the two interns who left last year (I am the one who stayed in Pathology) and wanted to put my brief two cents in.

If any potential applicant were to ask me today whether I would recommend Northwestern, I would say, "Yes". Why? Because of all the changes/improvements the current residents have described. Go back and read about the case variety and teaching too.

The negative perceptions that some outside attendings and students have do not accurately reflect the positive direction in which the program has been heading.

Experience Northwestern. Do an elective there. Judge for yourself. 🙄

 

[rirriri]

3 years ago, the place i most wanted to go to was Northwestern...

circumstances screwed me over....BUT even then, the residents who were there had told me not to come to that program.....since then, the PD left, the chair retired.....and basically that program is going to dust.

everyone speaks so badly of the program. we had some residents go there for fellowship interviews over the last 2 years..and everyone noted how 'odd' the atmosphere there is....no one spoke very highly of it. the fall from grace...

 

[ABC789]

3 years ago, the place i most wanted to go to was Northwestern...

circumstances screwed me over....BUT even then, the residents who were there had told me not to come to that program.....since then, the PD left, the chair retired.....and basically that program is going to dust.

everyone speaks so badly of the program. we had some residents go there for fellowship interviews over the last 2 years..and everyone noted how 'odd' the atmosphere there is....no one spoke very highly of it. the fall from grace...

GO BACK AND READ ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE PROGRAM. If you don't believe programs can change and improve under NEW LEADERSHIP, then what can I say?

The fact that the former program director stepped down is GREAT 😀 and the fact that there is a new chairman (since 7/07) is ALSO GREAT 😀😀. The former PD was replaced by the assistant PD who actually does what a PD should do and that is be a true resident ADVOCATE! I cannot underscore what a resident advocate the new chairman is too. Faculty vacancies have been filled since his arrival too.

The bottom line is that the NW many of you have heard negative comments about is under INCREDIBLE NEW LEADERSHIP. Cut them a little slack, no?

For all you potential applicants out there who believe in CHANGE (wasn't this an Election Month?):
Consider Northwestern. Do an away elective. Experience the program and then decide for yourself.

 

[yaah]

Yeah, people should not discount the positive influence that a new program director and a new chair can have on a program. Obviously there can be negatives too, but change should not and does not imply negativity. If the program was in bad shape, then the change of leadership is almost certain to be an improvement.

 

[elburrito]

I

 

[exPCM]

When I compare NW to the Loyola program in Chicago which recently posted about having openings, several things stand out:
1. The Loyola program has PAs to gross biopsies and routine placentas whereas NW does not. (To compensate the NW program assigns 3 residents to gross daily)
2. I also understand that Loyola residents are given time to preview their cases before signout with the attendings.
3. The Loyola program is a little more balanced in their posted schedule with 25 months AP/20 months CP/3 months electives compared to NW.
4. Each resident at Loyola has their own desk and microscope.
5. NW apparently has a new 5 PM daily conference which I do not consider an improvement. Loyola's conferences seem to be predominantly at 8 AM and noon, and 4 PM.

 

[KeratinPearls]

When I compare NW to the Loyola program in Chicago which recently posted about having openings, several things stand out:
1. The Loyola program has PAs to gross biopsies and routine placentas whereas NW does not. (To compensate the NW program assigns 3 residents to gross daily)
2. I also understand that Loyola residents are given time to preview their cases before signout with the attendings.
3. The Loyola program is a little more balanced in their posted schedule with 25 months AP/20 months AP/3 months electives compared to NW.
4. Each resident at Loyola has their own desk and microscope.
5. NW apparently has a new 5 PM daily conference which I do not consider an improvement. Loyola's conferences seem to be predominantly at 8 AM and noon, and 4 PM.

To the current NW residents, I have some questions that should help prospective applicants:

Is it true you guys gross biopsies?

For all current applicants, ask the program whether you will be responsible for grossing small biopsies. If they say yes, don't even bother ranking the program.

Do you guys get to preview ALL your cases before signing them out with the attending?

Do the attendings have time to teach or are they tied up with their research? I think I read an earlier thread where an applicant stated an attending said he/she didn't have time to teach (something like that) during an interview.

How late are you guys grossing everyday?

I spent a few months at NW last year (not as a resident) and overall I didn't notice any problems between residents. The residents to me seemed to get along well. There was always faculty at the morning conferences. The hemepath seemed strong as there always seemed to be a hemepath conference every morning. I hear that the chair is hands off. I never saw him at the conferences other than the grand rounds. He seems to be a hardcore research-type.

Overall, most of the residents I met seemed normal.

 

[pathchick09]

We do not gross biopsies. In fact out of all the programs I interviewed at from the midwest to the east coast, I never encountered a program in which residents grossed biopsies. If I had to do that I wouldn't be a resident at NW.

We do get to preview all of our cases, including biopsies (which were not grossed by us), which is optimal since we will be looking at a lot of biopsies when we get out into practice. We do not get an extra preview day, but we have adequate time to look at them all and many 3rd and 4th years (and even me as a 2nd year) dictate their diagnoses before looking at them with the attending. I think this is important since you have to know how to word things and how crucial tumor staging summaries are in order to practice.

Attendings have time to teach when they are signing out. Several attendings do research but it doesn't get in the way of their teaching. Also, I think the residents and attendings have a good rapport. Even the old school serious attendings like to joke around while we are signing out.

As for grossing, first years might stay a little later since they are still learning. As a second year, I am usually done by 5 or 6pm, with the occasional late surgery causing me to stay an hour later or so.

Our previous chairman was hands off, but our new chairman is extremely hands on. He shows up to our weekly autopsy conference (usually given by a first year) with gloves on and dives into the organs (I am not exagerrating, even though it sounds kind of unbelievable. He's a really enthusiastic guy)

I also wanted to say something about the comment that our 5 o'clock conferences are new. Dr. Rao gives them and he has been teaching at Northwestern since before I was born and I'm pretty sure he has been giving the 5 o'clocks that long as well. One of his former residents (from at least 10 years ago) was in town a few weeks ago and she sat in our conference and talked about how he gave these conferences when she was a resident.

To the current NW residents, I have some questions that should help prospective applicants:

Is it true you guys gross biopsies?

For all current applicants, ask the program whether you will be responsible for grossing small biopsies. If they say yes, don't even bother ranking the program.

Do you guys get to preview ALL your cases before signing them out with the attending?

Do the attendings have time to teach or are they tied up with their research? I think I read an earlier thread where an applicant stated an attending said he/she didn't have time to teach (something like that) during an interview.

How late are you guys grossing everyday?

I spent a few months at NW last year (not as a resident) and overall I didn't notice any problems between residents. The residents to me seemed to get along well. There was always faculty at the morning conferences. The hemepath seemed strong as there always seemed to be a hemepath conference every morning. I hear that the chair is hands off. I never saw him at the conferences other than the grand rounds. He seems to be a hardcore research-type.

Overall, most of the residents I met seemed normal.