Path to competitive residencies....

[drizzt3117]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I didn't realize we were talking about top programs. My bad. I thought we were simply talking about matching into competitive residencies.

the post you quoted was specifically talking about top programs. Most of the competitive fields have about 33% aoa iirc, with a few being higher. That said, the top programs in the most competitive fields have much higher stats, research, etc and most candidates are from top schools. Take from that what you will.

I agree with TexasPhysisan, you can match into any specialty without AOA (if that's what he is saying anyway ).

Is there a ranking for residency programs? Or are top programs based on hearsay/word of mouth?

Generally most people in a given field will have a general hierarchy of which programs are the best in each speciality. There are different things that really help set residencies apart, from resident autonomy, case load, culture, research, patient population etc. Generally this correlates pretty well with competitiveness but geography plays a big part as well, programs on the coasts are a bit more competitive. In my field of interest (rads) programs like MIR and UM are a little less competititive than perhaps less prestigious programs like UCLA, Cornell, etc bc of geography.

 

[randombetch]

the post you quoted was specifically talking about top programs. Most of the competitive fields have about 33% aoa iirc, with a few being higher. That said, the top programs in the most competitive fields have much higher stats, research, etc and most candidates are from top schools. Take from that what you will.



Generally most people in a given field will have a general hierarchy of which programs are the best in each speciality. There are different things that really help set residencies apart, from resident autonomy, case load, culture, research, patient population etc. Generally this correlates pretty well with competitiveness but geography plays a big part as well, programs on the coasts are a bit more competitive. In my field of interest (rads) programs like MIR and UM are a little less competititive than perhaps less prestigious programs like UCLA, Cornell, etc bc of geography.

(Hoody always does this... When she replies to one of your posts, and you reply back, she looks at your latest reply with no regard as to what you originally said. She doesn't really know how to read coherently)

 

[TexasPhysician]

Harvard doesn't have AOA so they probably would.

That was my point. 😀

 

[TexasPhysician]

Is there a ranking for residency programs? Or are top programs based on hearsay/word of mouth?

No composite ranking for residency programs that I am aware of.

It is word-of-mouth, what you get out of interviewing, read past reviews on SDN, look at research, etc. It also depends on what you want in a residency. If you want to be the best PCP you can, going to a name program like UCLA would probably hurt you. Their FM folk compete with IM, peds, ob/gyn, fellows, etc. for procedures. Residencies in FM at places like JPS in Fort Worth that have almost 0 competition for procedures provide much better training for private practice. JPS also has some of the most prestigious fellows for FM - did you know they have an interventional pain fellowship for family medicine? That is something many people don't know.

For psychiatry, Harvard has 4 affiliated programs. 3 of them are considered top tier. 1 is considered lower tier.

On the other hand, there are some obvious ones like rad onc being competitive at MD Anderson in Houston.

Baylor (top 25 school) has had too many recent problems in ortho to be that competitive. Vanderbilt on the other hand has great ortho faculty.

Cali and NE are generally more competitive than elsewhere. When it gets closer to applying, start asking around in your field.

 

[loljkttyl]

1) You can use the U.S. News specialty rankings (http://health.usnews.com/best-hospitals/rankings) but they only list the following specialties: ENT, geriatrics, neurology/neurosurgery, ophtho, orthopedics, psychiatry, rehab, and urology.

2) Another useful site is http://www.matchapplicants.com, which aggregates user-submitted Step 1 and 2 board scores for every program for competitive specialties in the US. You can roughly compare the unofficial avg board scores between programs to get a rough idea of which programs are more desirable. It's not super reliable. It's not super accurate. And it's a fairly small sample size. But it's basically all we have for now, and many applicants use this site when trying to compile a list of reach/target/safety schools.

 

[TexasPhysician]

1) You can use the U.S. News specialty rankings (http://health.usnews.com/best-hospitals/rankings) but they only list the following specialties: ENT, geriatrics, neurology/neurosurgery, ophtho, orthopedics, psychiatry, rehab, and urology.

2) Another useful site is http://www.matchapplicants.com, which aggregates user-submitted Step 1 and 2 board scores for every program for competitive specialties in the US. You can roughly compare the unofficial avg board scores between programs to get a rough idea of which programs are more desirable. It's not super reliable. It's not super accurate. And it's a fairly small sample size. But it's basically all we have for now, and many applicants use this site when trying to compile a list of reach/target/safety schools.

Based on the field I applied to, #1 is useless. I didn't even rank a program ranked in their top 10 - huge disappointment.

 

[loljkttyl]

Based on the field I applied to, #1 is useless. I didn't even rank a program ranked in their top 10 - huge disappointment.

I think it's not entirely useless but also not entirely accurate. Many times on SDN, things are categorized as the word of God or a piece of useless s***. In reality, I think things fall more along a spectrum. The U.S. News specialty rankings most likely fall somewhere in between. It's not amazing, but at least it's some sort of objective standard that's out there for people to get a very quick and rough idea of reputation.