Originally posted by Voxel:
•I agree that it may not be as competitive as GI or cardiology, but if he wants to go to a top program, it will be competitive. Try getting a fellowship at Sloan-Kettering or MD-Anderson, you better be top notch. I'm sure you are happy to get a consult and your patients are not. I think we all know why it is not as competitive as cardiology or GI, even though the compensation is similiar.
Iserson's book is outdated in terms of competitiveness. Just look at radiology.•••
I agree with Voxel about the iserson book. The information is outdated and outmoded. In medicine, this is usually the case if it is older than a year when it comes to residencies and fellowships as trends change very quickly.
I also agree that Heme/Onc is less competitive than GI and Cardiology. That doesn't make it non-competitive though. GI and Cards are arguably the hardest fields in all of medicine to enter when you consider the sheer number of applicants per spot. Heme/Onc is a very competitive field, even in smaller programs. Compensation, lifestyle, procedures, and increasing ability to offer a cure are reasons why interest in this evolving specialty have made it very very competitive. Don't be fooled by using GI and Cardiology, the toughest fields to enter, as a meter.
Another poster cited FMG's in the field. This is a very poor meter as well. What might be said of IM residencies isn't necessarily the case with fellowship. There are a large number of FMG's in cardiology for example. Take a look at the amsa web site. FMG's get into fellowships for a number of reasons. For example there are a number of FMG only medicine programs. Those programs are going to take a certain number of their own residents into fellowship spots regardless of where they went to medical school. There are many other reasons why FMG's get fellowship spots, including that many of em are just as good and even better than some AMG.
Having said that. If you are prepared to work hard, you can get these fellowships.