Pathology programs strongly prefer PhD holders?

[danierrr]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello all,

I've read from two different sources now that many pathology programs have strong preferences for PhD degree holders, so much so that the "name" pathology programs take them almost exclusively, filling leftover spots to vanilla US MD's.

As a medical student interested in pathology but not interested in getting a PhD, this naturally concerns me a little. Are there programs I shouldn't bother applying to unless I have a PhD? I'm naturally more interested in top programs because I want the best residency training I can get, and am willing to work for it.

I'd love to hear from those in the know 🙂

danierrr

 

[yaah]

Not true.

Candidates with PhDs are often (but not always) competitive candidates because of their experience and research background, as well as their career goals. These factors make them desirable for top programs. But many MDs fit these categories as well. True, many programs cater more to residents with academic goals and research backgrounds, but if this doesn't sound like you than these programs aren't going to be good choices for you anyway.

I am "just" an MD and got interviews everywhere I applied and favorable welcomes at every program I visited.

 

[mlw03]

I'm naturally more interested in top programs because I want the best residency training I can get, and am willing to work for it.

"top program" is so vague as to be silly to try and define it. for any given candidate, top should mean a program that allows them to reach their career goals. if you want to be an academic/researcher, one should try to go to a program who nurtures such tendencies. if you want to do private practice, go to a place that is strong in teaching surg path since that's the bread and butter for most pathologists. there's nothing wrong with wanting a strong name for residency, but there's a lot more than name when it comes to medical training.

besides, unless you're actually willing to go get a PhD just to help your residency application, it's all a moot point anyway. but as yaah said (and i hope to experience this year), being "just an MD" will open plenty of doors if you've done well in med school and have shown a sincere interest in your field of choice. this is true for pretty much all applicants to all specialties.

 

[danierrr]

Thanks for the reply, yaah, not just for replying but for replying with what I was hoping to hear 😉

So it boils down to which programs are trying to churn out research pathologists (since they'd prefer PhD's) and which are churning out diagnostic pathologists (since PhD-level research experience isn't a plus). . .

I'm assuming the "name" programs based at high-powered academic medical centers are all the research-over-diagnostics type? Or perhaps not? There's a list of "best" Path residency programs on SDN, but there's no way a Pathology n00b like myself knows which program emphasizes what.

Scutwork.com was outdated and incomplete :/ so I'm hoping you could help a brutha' out again 🙂

 

[danierrr]

mlw03 -- I apologize for not recognizing the distinctions earlier. I'm just a first-year following up on disturbing things I'd read about Path residency programs.

If you can point me to a list of programs strong in various aspects of pathology, I'd be happy to give up equating "top programs" with "name programs" 🙂

danierrr

 

[yaah]

Thanks for the reply, yaah, not just for replying but for replying with what I was hoping to hear 😉

So it boils down to which programs are trying to churn out research pathologists (since they'd prefer PhD's) and which are churning out diagnostic pathologists (since PhD-level research experience isn't a plus). . .

I'm assuming the "name" programs based at high-powered academic medical centers are all the research-over-diagnostics type? Or perhaps not? There's a list of "best" Path residency programs on SDN, but there's no way a Pathology n00b like myself knows which program emphasizes what.

It also isn't a black/white issue. Not all programs want solely research-type candidates, and not all want exclusively private practice bound. Many try to get something of a mix and aren't going to shut out any candidate who has a serious interest in the program and a good application. Someone with a PhD who applies to a residency at a community program may raise some eyebrows simply because it doesn't make a lot of sense. It goes both ways. Also, a lot of research in terms of advancement of the field comes from people who are the strongest diagnostically. At the U of Michigan program, for example, the GI path faculty are outstanding teachers and diagnosticians, but they also advance the field a lot.

And your assumption is not really valid. Many of the best diagnostic programs are also the best programs for research-minded individuals. If I start naming them I offend people so I hesitate to. I also don't have direct experience with a lot of programs so I can't really claim to be an expert on them. Some programs you would expect to favor researchers often don't. The Johns Hopkins program, for example, churns out a lot of private practice pathologists from its residency program. Brigham has a research "bias" so to speak, yet on their faculty is one of the best diagnosticians in the world (Fletcher).

Ultimately, you are going to have to do your own research. Program websites are good places to start, and many will provide you with information or even a resident to correspond with and ask questions of if you like. Advisors at your med school can also help. It's good to cast your net wide during applications and think about interviewing at many places.

 

[danierrr]

Once again, thanks for the advice, yaah 🙂

The examples you gave really do show how fuzzy the distinction is. Generalities make life easier and it sucks that there aren't any to be found here.

I guess that three years down the road, I'll bug the pathology faculty at my medical school, hopefully by then with some idea of what exactly I want to make of myself. 🙂

 

[DarksideAllstar]

I think you should look at any program you are interested in regardless of what the perception is on these forums or through word of mouth. I am at a program where there is a supposed bias towards MD/PhD candidates, which if you look at the number of MD only candidates, you'll see it isnt as skewed as people think. In many instances, programs have to take what they can get through the match (ie just because they rank all MDPhDs at the top of their list doesn't mean that those MDPhDs will rank them), thus they end up with a mix of PGY1s who are straight MD and MDPhd. A lot of faculty on residency selection committees do not share the same views on candidates as the department chair (focus on training diagnosticians vs basic scientists), so keep that in mind.

You should worry less about what how you perceive programs define competitive applicants and focus on things that will actually make you a competitive candidate for any specialty that you decide to do (Step 1 scores, 3rd year clerkship grades, letters of rec, strong performance on audition rotations, AOA, etc). There is a thread around here which essentially lists peoples backgrounds, stats, etc and where they matched-- might be helpful.

Good luck.

 

[LADoc00]

Oooo dude, dont put a dorky graduation picture of yourself as your avatar.

DONT BE THAT GUY.

 

[CameronFrye]

Oooo dude, dont put a dorky graduation picture of yourself as your avatar.

DONT BE THAT GUY.

Of course, we're all posting on an internet message board about pathology.

I think we all might be that guy.

 

[danierrr]

Of course, we're all posting on an internet message board about pathology.

I think we all might be that guy.

*sobbing*

Told off by pathologists. New low. But I do admire SDN honesty!