Pediatric Chief Year

[Bean_Bunny]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Good morning, everyone! I know that there has been some debate over the importance/advantage of doing a chief year. 2 questions-
1) How important is it to do in peds if you want to do a more competitive sub-specialty/at a prestigious place?
2) If you want to pursue academic medicine, do you think it is more important to do a chief year?

Thanks in advance. Happy holidays to all those that celebrate.

 

[MonkeyRalph]

Disclaimer: My advice is inherently biased by the fact that I, myself, have done a chief year.

After participating in and seeing three years of interview cycles at a very competitive cardiology program, here are my answers to your questions.
Probably a small majority of applicants selected to interview with us each year (barely >50%) will have completed a chief year. We have a former chief in almost every class of fellows. However, I wouldn't say that our faculty holds any extra esteem or value to those who've done a chief year because they've done a chief year. Rather, the types of people who end up doing chief years are the types of people most programs are looking for (reliable, track record of clinical success, social skills, have a firm direction and intentionality to their academic careers, etc). The same people would probably be just a highly regarded had they not done a chief year, but it's because of who they are, not what they did with their year off that makes them desirable applicants. I would say that doing a chief year is very helpful for a career in academic medicine, however you can also do research or other things that are also helpful to a career in academic medicine instead of a chief year. It's basically an easy (sorta) way to get exposure to all the facets of an academic department's goings-on and does give you good skills and a leg up when it comes to administrative duties that are often required of academicians in a pediatric department.

 

[michigangirl]

Disclaimer: My advice is inherently biased by the fact that I, myself, have done a chief year.

After participating in and seeing three years of interview cycles at a very competitive cardiology program, here are my answers to your questions.
Probably a small majority of applicants selected to interview with us each year (barely >50%) will have completed a chief year. We have a former chief in almost every class of fellows. However, I wouldn't say that our faculty holds any extra esteem or value to those who've done a chief year because they've done a chief year. Rather, the types of people who end up doing chief years are the types of people most programs are looking for (reliable, track record of clinical success, social skills, have a firm direction and intentionality to their academic careers, etc). The same people would probably be just a highly regarded had they not done a chief year, but it's because of who they are, not what they did with their year off that makes them desirable applicants. I would say that doing a chief year is very helpful for a career in academic medicine, however you can also do research or other things that are also helpful to a career in academic medicine instead of a chief year. It's basically an easy (sorta) way to get exposure to all the facets of an academic department's goings-on and does give you good skills and a leg up when it comes to administrative duties that are often required of academicians in a pediatric department.

This. Very true. I am on the other side of the coin and did not do a chief year. I never felt at a disadvantage in academic medicine because I didn't do a chief year-- but I noticed that I have a lot in common with the folks who did do a chief year-- very similar drive, ambition, and career goals. Don't do a chief year because you think it will give you a leg up. Do it for the reasons above, and if you don't mind taking an additional year as a trainee prior to moving on to fellowship/faculty positions. Do it if you don't mind some admin work and would enjoy being a guide and mentor for the residents.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Also agree that MonkeyRalph is pretty much spot on. Not yet on the other side of the fellowship application process, and not doing a chief year, but the feeling I get is that the type of people who are selected as chief are selected because they already have the characteristics that would have made them a competitive fellowship applicant and desirable for academic jobs in the first place. If you love teaching and have a great idea for a project that can improve your residency program, I say go for it, but if you are good enough to be strongly considered for a chief spot I suspect you would already do just fine without it.