Ranking the worst rad onc programs in the nation - for med students

[medgator]

Lol. This has degenerated into the absurdity that is the interview spreadsheet. Lots of accusations based on very little. I basically have enough information to comment on a single program. Maybe 2 or 3 if you count home and away rotations. Otherwise, I wouldn't even venture a guess, particularly about what life is like on a day-to-day basis in the program.

Some of us trained at these exact programs and have no problems with them being on the **** list. As others have said, in the current market, there's no reason to train at them

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[medgator]

Henry Ford? Wayne State? Rush? OHSU? Indiana?

All pretty average and probably less deserving of spots than CCF or Wisconsin

 

[drewdog1973]

All pretty average and probably less deserving of spots than CCF or Wisconsin

On what metric?

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

Some of us trained at these exact programs and have no problems with them being on the **** list. As others have said, in the current market, there's no reason to train at them

And those assessments are fair. Its clearly gone beyond that. Doesn't matter much to me either way. Just my assessment of this thread, and the need for it to be on the "thread **** list."

 

[medgator]

On what metric?

Historic program quality/reviews, size, known faculty etc. Ever know how they do us news rankings for med school or how they do the college football rankings?

Every list will have a degree of subjectivity

 

[drewdog1973]

Yes, US News is an excellent role model.

 

[metview]

Henry Ford? Wayne State? Rush? OHSU? Indiana?

Average to below average programs. Some of these places SOAPd other specialty rejects. That's all that needs to be said.

 

[metview]

On what metric?

Based on us news, doximity, sdn forum, and rad oncs (residents and faculty). No ranking system is perfect and taking an aggregate is the best we can do like in any other field.

 

[heavyluva]

The notion that where you trained translates into the quality of physician you become could not be more wrong.

One of the best rad oncs I have ever worked with came from a program that is listed as a bottom program. One of the absolute worst rad oncs who completely lacked sound clinical judgment (not to mention had major personality issues) was an MD/PhD from a top program. I would send a family member to the former without any hesitation and I would jump through hoops to make sure the latter did not treat anyone I know’s hamster.

Inherent traits like character, ethics, genuine compassion for patients, and a desire to do the right thing mean so much more than where you train. And I say this as someone who has benefited from a CV with lots of fancy names.

Some may not like “lists”. Even the best programs list generated plenty of controversies. This field has to reckon with fact that the standards for training programs is quite low and has been for some time. This has led to a large discrepancy of residency experiences even if everyone comes out “competent”.

people will always be butt hurt that their place, their friends place, the place they met someone who was “good” is up there. the argument is not that people come out of these places totally incompetent but that programs are being allowed to provide substandard and in some cases aweful residency experiences where you may as well just stayed home with perez and brady, nancy lee, and gunderson for four years and you would have learned more than from your so called “clinical program”.

in the curret environment it is truly important to not muddy the waters with suggestions that there is no such thing as a “bad program”. US MDs should avoid certain programs as the job market worsens.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

Average to below average programs. Some of these places SOAPd other specialty rejects. That's all that needs to be said.

I’ve seen a lot of programs SOAP other specialty rejects... thats pretty much how programs fill these days.

 

[drewdog1973]

I’ve seen a lot of programs SOAP other specialty rejects... thats pretty much how programs fill these days.

Based on this metric (others mentioned), Beaumont on **** list, too?

 

[metview]

Based on this metric (others mentioned), Beaumont on **** list, too?

Nope, because per other metrics (ie. Us news, rad oncs irl, doximity, forums), it's still a good program but all of the 15 programs that have been consistently mentioned are still trash.

 

[drewdog1973]

Interesting views.

 

[drewdog1973]

Based on us news, doximity, sdn forum, and rad oncs (residents and faculty). No ranking system is perfect and taking an aggregate is the best we can do like in any other field.

Tell me more about why US News and Doximity have relevance to Rad Onc training programs? I’m sincerely curious. These sound like popularity contest situations that are self fulfilling. It only seems people younger than me care about those two rankings. I’m happy to hear more, though.

 

[gmsquid]

I trained at one of the programs on the list. Can’t say which because I would dox myself, but I actually thought training was good there. I worked with people on multiple national guidelines and committees and we had standardized resident-led weekly conferences which at least a few staff attended each week. The danger at my program was if you took no initiative faculty could all function completely independently.

 

[RickyScott]

I trained at one of the programs on the list. Can’t say which because I would dox myself, but I actually thought training was good there. I worked with people on multiple national guidelines and committees and we had standardized resident-led weekly conferences which at least a few staff attended each week. The danger at my program was if you took no initiative faculty could all function completely independently.

I really doubt there was much difference in competency between residents over past 10 years. Let’s say you were the best in your class at a medium size state med school with one paper to your name. At best you would end up at a program on the list. Intellectually, are you likely to be on par with a Harvard grad. Of course. Obviously circumstances have changed and programs that SOAP/can’t attract mediocre applicants should close, despite the fact that they had excellent grads in the past.

 

[gmsquid]

I really doubt there was much difference in competency between residents over past 10 years. Let’s say you were the best in your class at a medium size state med school with one paper to your name. At best you would end up at a program on the list. Intellectually, are you likely to be on par with a Harvard grad. Of course. Obviously circumstances have changed and programs that SOAP/can’t attract mediocre applicants should close, despite the fact that they had excellent grads in the past.

But often people aren’t receiving good training at many big name programs. A rep on name isn’t the only thing that matters.

I agree there’s oversupply for sure. But program bashing isn’t always justified

 

[scarbrtj]

I really doubt there was much difference in competency between residents over past 10 years. Let’s say you were the best in your class at a medium size state med school with one paper to your name. At best you would end up at a program on the list. Intellectually, are you likely to be on par with a Harvard grad. Of course. Obviously circumstances have changed and programs that SOAP/can’t attract mediocre applicants should close, despite the fact that they had excellent grads in the past.

I just met a DO med student recently from a new-ish DO school. A school upon which we would either frown or of which we'd be unaware. He was studious, knowledgeable, personable, well-spoken, handsome, and he made a 265 on Step 1. And........... he wants to be a med onc.

 

[medgator]

Based on this metric (others mentioned), Beaumont on **** list, too?

Beaumont was **** basically after the chair and big names like kestin, vicini etc bolted to 21C iirc. Not sure how it is now though

 

[drewdog1973]

I just met a DO med student recently from a new-ish DO school. A school upon which we would either frown or of which we'd be unaware. He was studious, knowledgeable, personable, well-spoken, handsome, and he made a 265 on Step 1. And........... he wants to be a med onc.

Handsome is important

 

[metview]

Tell me more about why US News and Doximity have relevance to Rad Onc training programs? I’m sincerely curious. These sound like popularity contest situations that are self fulfilling. It only seems people younger than me care about those two rankings. I’m happy to hear more, though.

They are relevant because prestige/reputation plays component in all ranking systems. Those two website provide info purely on reputation (ie. What others think) while rad oncs IRL and forums can provide concrete examples of programs. It's important to use all resources when coming up with rankings.

Also, it's not debatable that the 10 to 15 programs (ie. Ny presby, WVU, Tennessee, Mississippi) always mentioned are poor programs. You can debate about whether places like Kansas, Kentucky, etc can be on there.

 

[Gfunk6]

This thread is very interesting and all. However, arguing which program is better or worse in the current environment is analogous to arguing for the front or rear car of a train that is about the hurtle off the tracks into an abyss.

Just sayin'

 

[RickyScott]

This thread is very interesting and all. However, arguing which program is better or worse in the current environment is analogous to arguing for the front or rear car of a train that is about the hurtle off the tracks into an abyss.

Just sayin'

First class vs economy on the titanic.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

This thread is very interesting and all. However, arguing which program is better or worse in the current environment is analogous to arguing for the front or rear car of a train that is about the hurtle off the tracks into an abyss.

Just sayin'

It’s what rad oncs do!

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

First class vs economy on the titanic.

Perhaps not the best analogy. Class and gender influenced survival

Titanic: Demographics of the Passengers

 

[fiji128]

These sorts of debates are necessary because the acgme will not provide applicants with any useful information they have regarding individual programs like case loads, resident evaluation scores, board pass rates, nature of previous issues with programs ect.... The acgme wants applicants to have as little information as possible regarding individual programs. All you get is the program accredited? are they on probation?

 

[drewdog1973]

These sorts of debates are necessary because the acgme will not provide applicants with any useful information they have regarding individual programs like case loads, resident evaluation scores, board pass rates, nature of previous issues with programs ect.... The acgme wants applicants to have as little information as possible regarding individual programs. All you get is the program accredited? are they on probation?

Debates are good

just placing Loyola (or whatever) on the **** list with no context is much less good.

 

[fiji128]

Debates are good

just placing Loyola (or whatever) on the **** list with no context is much less good.

Ya that's the problem when really no one has hard info/data on these programs other then acgme. Personally do I think Loyola is a bad or **** program? No I don't. I have heard about Loyola from second had sources and it seems like a solid mid tier type of place. Do I have data to show or prove that? Nope.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

The danger at my program was if you took no initiative faculty could all function completely independently.

I'm really interested in this statement - did they go uncovered for parts of the year? My experience is the opposite, to a degree. The faculty could, technically, function independently at my program, but it would be a scandal (slight hyperbole lol). The expectation from virtually Day 1 in my department is residents better carry the service, and if someone is falling behind, the senior residents better pick up the slack until they get their act together.

It serves as great Accidental Education, but its motivation comes from "teaching you isn't getting my grant application in any faster".

 

[gmsquid]

I'm really interested in this statement - did they go uncovered for parts of the year? My experience is the opposite, to a degree. The faculty could, technically, function independently at my program, but it would be a scandal (slight hyperbole lol). The expectation from virtually Day 1 in my department is residents better carry the service, and if someone is falling behind, the senior residents better pick up the slack until they get their act together.

It serves as great Accidental Education, but its motivation comes from "teaching you isn't getting my grant application in any faster".

They usually went uncovered for one fourth if not half the year. Similar to where I’m an attending now. Also, some residents in my residency didn’t make the strongest effort in general.

Also as an attending, the thing residents improve my efficiency on most is notes as I don’t have to rewrite the whole thing and just co-sign. (They don’t see every single one of my patients either, maybe half) When it comes to contours and treatment planning I end up re-contouring most everything. I also function without a resident many months of the year though I do have an np for help two days of the week.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

They usually went uncovered for one fourth if not half the year. Similar to where I’m an attending now. Also, some residents in my residency didn’t make the strongest effort in general.

Also as an attending, the thing residents improve my efficiency on most is notes as I don’t have to rewrite the whole thing and just co-sign. (They don’t see every single one of my patients either, maybe half) When it comes to contours and treatment planning I end up re-contouring most everything. I also function without a resident many months of the year though I do have an np for help two days of the week.

Oh wow. I have a general sense of how other institutions work - but maybe only 5-10 out of the ~90 (where I have IRL friends), and SDN just continually surprises me with how everyone can do a "RadOnc residency" but the nuts-and-bolts of that experience can be so different.

I guess that's the point of this thread, haha.

Why do you end up recontouring most everything? You mean targets and OARs? Are they "bad" or are they just not in your personal style?

 

[drewdog1973]

“Trash no good very bad contours! There are even a few lawsuits! Stay away!”

 

[medgator]

This thread is very interesting and all. However, arguing which program is better or worse in the current environment is analogous to arguing for the front or rear car of a train that is about the hurtle off the tracks into an abyss.

Just sayin'

I want my foie gras and beluga in first class at the Anderson on snowpiercer, please

 

[gmsquid]

Oh wow. I have a general sense of how other institutions work - but maybe only 5-10 out of the ~90 (where I have IRL friends), and SDN just continually surprises me with how everyone can do a "RadOnc residency" but the nuts-and-bolts of that experience can be so different.

I guess that's the point of this thread, haha.

Why do you end up recontouring most everything? You mean targets and OARs? Are they "bad" or are they just not in your personal style?

OARs mostly style, though parotids are usually way under contoured. Targets it’s hit or miss, sometimes style sometimes substance. I treat HN so most people under contour some areas and over contour others. I am very particular with my volumes.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

We’re all drunk on our own kool-aid!

 

[gmsquid]

We’re all drunk on our own kool-aid!

That we are...but I’m the one ultimately responsible for the patients outcome.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

That we are...but I’m the one ultimately responsible for the patients outcome.

As am I.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

OARs mostly style, though parotids are usually way under contoured.

But what about tubarials?!?

 

[ramsesthenice]

Perhaps not the best analogy. Class and gender influenced survival

Titanic: Demographics of the Passengers

Couldn’t agree more. Guys like Isidor Strauss couldn’t buy their way off the Titanic, but I guarantee they could but a residency slot for their kids at any program in the country. Horrible analogy 🙂

 

[yesmaster]

This thread on the worst and the best programs is cute.

Let's face it, every program should, independently or in aggregate, look deeply into their respective navels and contemplate cutting 50% of their spots. For programs that are too small, they should either shut down or merge with another program. Why the f**k are there 8 separate residency programs in NYC? Those are cheap labor positions that should be full time jobs for board-certified rad onc's. Don't even get me started on places like Willis-Knighton that want to start a residency program.

These threads on the worst and best programs foster a false and toxic narrative, that if students can get into a "best" program, they'll be safe from job market woes.

When it's 2026, no one will care how many proton gantries and NRG committee chairs your program has, because no jobs will be available, except instructor/postdoc/fellow jobs at UW and UCLA.

 

[Mandelin Rain]

If there are no bad programs, there can't be any good programs.

There are plenty of bad programs. Many have been listed here. Trust your eyes. Better yet, don't apply at all.

 

[drewdog1973]

This thread on the worst and the best programs is cute.

Let's face it, every program should, independently or in aggregate, look deeply into their respective navels and contemplate cutting 50% of their spots. For programs that are too small, they should either shut down or merge with another program. Why the f**k are there 8 separate residency programs in NYC? Those are cheap labor positions that should be full time jobs for board-certified rad onc's. Don't even get me started on places like Willis-Knighton that want to start a residency program.

These threads on the worst and best programs foster a false and toxic narrative, that if students can get into a "best" program, they'll be safe from job market woes.

When it's 2026, no one will care how many proton gantries and NRG committee chairs your program has, because no jobs will be available, except instructor/postdoc/fellow jobs at UW and UCLA.

This is exactly right and why the lists do more harm than good. It allows some percentage of programs off the hook, when all are guilty.

 

[Mandelin Rain]

Sure, every program should reduce, but.... some should reduce to zero. Permanently.

I don't think "expert" opinion here/spreadsheet/elsewhere is unimpeachable, but it's a VERY good starting point. Again, trust your own eyes, but let those eyes be more discerning in various locales.

 

[medgator]

This is exactly right and why the lists do more harm than good. It allows some percentage of programs off the hook, when all are guilty.

Larceny isn't the same thing as assault or murder. Recently created programs should bear the brunt of it, because they knew better, could argue the same for recently expanded spots from traditional solid names. CCF and mayo Rochester should go back to 2/year as much as LIJ and mayo az/jax should shut down

 

[RadOncDoc21]

My pessimistic side believes that yes I agree bad programs should be closed and overall residency positions should be reduced, however my belief is that a “good-great” program would just use that as a rationale for them to just expand more.

I think we are all in 100% agreement that absolutely nothing is going to change anytime soon or most likely ever!

 

[thecarbonionangle]

IMO Bottom tier programs to avoid due to combination or single issue: poor job placement/lack of help getting jobs, poor residency experience, subpar educational culture, board failures, tons of scut and service component which vastly outweighs education, history of resident firing/ugliness, brand new program in a saturated area/cheap labor expansion, malignancy, nepotism/corruption. This of course does not mean residents from these places are incompetent. My goal is to guide readers in choosing wisely.

NYP Methodist

Columbia

Northshore LIJ

SUNY downstate
SUNY upstate
Darthmouth

Stony Brook

Allegheny
WVU

Arkansas

Oklahoma

MUSC

Univ of Tennessee 

Baylor

UT-San Antonio

UTMB-Galveston

Texas A&M/Baylor Scott and White
Mississippi

Univ. of Kentucky

Louisville 

Case Western

UC Davis

UC Irvine 

UPMC 

Jefferson

Miami
USC
Loma Linda
Cedar Sinai
Wayne State
Iowa
Univ. Of Minnesota
Nebraska
Any “rumored” hellpit place in the works in any coast, swampy place, whatever

 

[RadOncDoc21]

IMO Bottom tier programs to avoid due to combination or single issue: poor residency experience, subpar culture of education, board failures, tons of scut and service component vastly outweighed by education, history of resident firing/ugliness, brand new program in a saturated area/cheap labor expansion, malignancy, nepotism/corruption. This of course does not mean residents from these places are not competent. My goal is to guide readers in choosing wisely.

NYP Methodist

Columbia

Northshore LIJ

SUNY downstate
SUNY upstate
Darthmouth

Stony Brook

Alleghany 

WVU

Arkansas

Oklahoma

MUSC

Univ of Tennessee 

Baylor

UT-San Antonio

UTMB-Galveston

Texas A&M/Baylor Scott and White
Mississippi

Univ. of Kentucky

Louisville 

Case Western

UC Davis

UC Irvine 

UPMC 

Jefferson

Miami
USC
Cedar Sinai
Wayne State
Iowa

Is Darth Mouth a Sith Lord? If so, are you spoiling the end of the mandalorian for me? Not cool man!

 

[evilbooyaa]

I trained at one of the programs on the list. Can’t say which because I would dox myself, but I actually thought training was good there. I worked with people on multiple national guidelines and committees and we had standardized resident-led weekly conferences which at least a few staff attended each week. The danger at my program was if you took no initiative faculty could all function completely independently.

But isn't the bolded bad for education, or is that just my opinion? The last line, however, is very important as a good thing - attendings SHOULD be able to function independently. Makes you go from being on a service for the service and being on a service for the education.

We had at least 50% attending led lectures/educational sessions, at least on the major clinical topics, and have to believe that an attending talking about an educational topic is better than a PGY-2 reading a book and teaching other residents.

Residents did journal clubs and occasional things, but definitely not on a weekly basis.

There is all sorts of scut that is not educational and is a purely service obligation that I have seen and heard of residents having to do, the vast majority of which has ZERO educational value, either ever (like calling an outside facility to obtain records because there are no ancillary staff or physicists won't do it), or after doing maybe some concrete number of times (like contouring normals, let's say 5-10 times per anatomic site).

 

[w00tz]

But isn't the bolded bad for education, or is that just my opinion? The last line, however, is very important as a good thing - attendings SHOULD be able to function independently. Makes you go from being on a service for the service and being on a service for the education.

We had at least 50% attending led lectures/educational sessions, at least on the major clinical topics, and have to believe that an attending talking about an educational topic is better than a PGY-2 reading a book and teaching other residents.

Residents did journal clubs and occasional things, but definitely not on a weekly basis.

There is all sorts of scut that is not educational and is a purely service obligation that I have seen and heard of residents having to do, the vast majority of which has ZERO educational value, either ever (like calling an outside facility to obtain records because there are no ancillary staff or physicists won't do it), or after doing maybe some concrete number of times (like contouring normals, let's say 5-10 times per anatomic site).

I think resident led didactics are fine as long as attendings are there to correct misinformation and provide their real-life experience.

 

[drewdog1973]

AlleghEny

The purposeful misspelling is a micro aggression. Astro would not take kindly to that. You want to have 300 residents? Fine, be our guest. But limit your micro aggressions, or corrective action will be taken.