SF Bay area dermatology programs

[SKDP]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I am an aspiring dermatologist, and would love your advice on residency programs on the west coast. I just completed a derm rotation at my home school on the east coast, and was told by a few faculty that I should apply to derm! I was very excited because I had always wanted to be a dermatologist. I plan to to do 3 aways on the west coast. I reallly want to match into a derm program in Northern Cali Bay area. Any advice on matching to a programs there?

PS. I have honored all my core rotations, and got junior AOA. My step 1 is 268, and I want to put off step 2 until after the match. I am lacking derm research, but I am making it up by writing 5 case reports.

 

[pupster]

I am an aspiring dermatologist, and would love your advice on residency programs on the west coast. I just completed a derm rotation at my home school on the east coast, and was told by a few faculty that I should apply to derm! I was very excited because I had always wanted to be a dermatologist. I plan to to do 3 aways on the west coast. I reallly want to match into a derm program in Northern Cali Bay area. Any advice on matching to a programs there?

PS. I have honored all my core rotations, and got junior AOA. My step 1 is 268, and I want to put off step 2 until after the match. I am lacking derm research, but I am making it up by writing 5 case reports.

LOL...good luck putting off step 2 until after the Match if you want to go to UCSF....

http://www.dermatology.ucsf.edu/edu...cants/InstructionsforResidencyApplicants.aspx

"UCSF requires a passing score on USMLE Step II (both CS and CK) for all trainees beginning a UCSF GME program. To meet this requirement, the University requires that all residency training programs (including dermatology) only rank candidates who have taken the Step II exams and received a passing score reported to us through ERAS before the rank day deadline in February."

 

[SKDP]

LOL. Thanks for pointing that out. Seems like that I have to start cramming for CK.

 

[Bloom57]

I think that doing 3 away derm away electives is excessive. Medical school is there for you to learn and explore other fields.. you will have time to just do derm later. I was at the SID last week and heard a couple of attendings say that an applicant with too many derm aways seems boring and not well-rounded.

That said, I know you really want to be in the bay area. Maybe pick one school to do an away at. max 2. I would focus more on your research, and maybe even try to do some research with a program you are considering. Additionally, you can have 2 personal statements.. one for all other programs and one for the SF schools emphasizing your desire to be in the area... (i have nooo idea if this works but have heard that people do it)

 

[Sondar]

I am an aspiring dermatologist, and would love your advice on residency programs on the west coast. I just completed a derm rotation at my home school on the east coast, and was told by a few faculty that I should apply to derm! I was very excited because I had always wanted to be a dermatologist. I plan to to do 3 aways on the west coast. I reallly want to match into a derm program in Northern Cali Bay area. Any advice on matching to a programs there?

PS. I have honored all my core rotations, and got junior AOA. My step 1 is 268, and I want to put off step 2 until after the match. I am lacking derm research, but I am making it up by writing 5 case reports.

I was in your shoes not long ago. You have great stats, but really lack derm research. There is no guarantee that you will match in derm, PERIOD. If you love derm that much, you should be happy to match in any decent derm programs across the country. There are only two programs in the Bay Area: UCSF and Stanford. They are two of the best programs in the country. I know plenty of people who did not get interviews there (after having rotated there). Good luck!

 

[SKDP]

I was in your shoes not long ago. You have great stats, but really lack derm research. There is no guarantee that you will match in derm, PERIOD. If you love derm that much, you should be happy to match in any decent derm programs across the country. There are only two programs in the Bay Area: UCSF and Stanford. They are two of the best programs in the country. I know plenty of people who did not get interviews there (after having rotated there). Good luck!

Does anyone out there have any good advice on matching at UCSF or Stanford? I am not from California, but am engaged to someone who just accepts a position in the Silicon Valley😍. How about UC Davis? I know it is not in the Bay Area and is not regarded in the same category as UCSF or Stanford.

 

[pupster]

Does anyone out there have any good advice on matching at UCSF or Stanford? I am not from California, but am engaged to someone who just accepts a position in the Silicon Valley😍. How about UC Davis? I know it is not in the Bay Area and is not regarded in the same category as UCSF or Stanford.

Marry someone who is already an attending at Stanford (and a ROCKSTAR in the field), and you too can change from OB-GYN to Dermatology....

http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/dermatology/faculty/Annelynn_Chang/
http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/dermatology/faculty/Howard_Chang/

-OR-

Perhaps these videos will also be informative/suggestive...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfMMddGRjHM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk3A6WgifJo

 

[Sondar]

Does anyone out there have any good advice on matching at UCSF or Stanford? I am not from California, but am engaged to someone who just accepts a position in the Silicon Valley😍. How about UC Davis? I know it is not in the Bay Area and is not regarded in the same category as UCSF or Stanford.

Both programs are big. Doing a one year research fellowship at either places may be your best bet; you can boost your derm research experience also. I know both places have taken their research fellows in the past. UCSF is a better program, but you have to put up with craps from the big wigs. Stanford has younger clinical faculty without proven track records, and there are political instability within the department. And yes, marrying a big wig there (ie HC) will ensure you a spot. LOL. UC Davis has lots of political problems without the academic excellence of the other two. It went from a very friendly program a decade ago to one of the most malignant program in the country. Stay away. That is just my two cents.

 

[dermathalon]

Both programs are big. Doing a one year research fellowship at either places may be your best bet; you can boost your derm research experience also. I know both places have taken their research fellows in the past. UCSF is a better program, but you have to put up with craps from the big wigs. Stanford has younger clinical faculty without proven track records, and there are political instability within the department. And yes, marrying a big wig there (ie HC) will ensure you a spot. LOL. UC Davis has lots of political problems without the academic excellence of the other two. It went from a very friendly program a decade ago to one of the most malignant program in the country. Stay away. That is just my two cents.

Sorry buddy...gonna have to disagree with you on several levels here...I know people personally at all levels at all of these programs (including other West Coast programs as well...socal, oregon). Sounds like you'll need to do your homework on the west coast a little more.

Doing a one year fellowship will not be unilaterally helpful at both Stanford and UCSF. Stanford is much more friendly to their research fellows but you have to be good and work hard. The history of the match cycles proves that too. UCSF rarely takes their own fellows and I have only seen them take medical student research fellows that already had another inside track...that said, UCSF is a wonderful rotation nevertheless. The OP's board scores will be attractive to any and all programs.

Stanford:
Unproven clinical faculty? Are you kidding? SS is a stellar melanoma expert with several publications to her name. The politics may be in the research arena if anything but HC is a huge name with a lot of support to upcoming residents. Their rheum-derm faculty is wonderful, nice, and super intelligent with many years of experience. YK is an expert on CTCL and they have the CTCL center there and are excellent at it. The new PD is amazing and moved there from USC and he is highly touted and sought after. As a resident it may be worth it to go there just for the PD. They have rotations that involve a stellar county hospital that is well known (I know because I interviewed at the county hospital there for the prelim year but chose against it for other reasons). If you are going to bad mouth programs please make sure you have the information straight. To boot, the residents are happy at this program which says a lot.

UCSF:
UCSF has its share of politics among the faculty too. Anyways, the exposure is varied and I'll agree that it's an amazing program. Better than Stanford?...depends on the grading scale that you use. You will get a more varied clinical exposure since UCSF does have a great expert on things like wound healing, hair clinic, contact dermatitis, dedicated faculty for inpatient dermatology so it's definitely got all the potential for the broadest of exposure. The residents are more tired and tend to be a little unhappier and their relationship with the PD is not as good as it is between the Stanford residents and their PD. That said, I know several of the residents there that are quite happy with the experience. I agree on the sentiment that you might get craps from the big wigs but this will tend to happen at any program that has big wigs.

UC Davis:
Most malignant program in the nation? Not even close and probably the opposite. They have some of the happiest residents that I know...it's neck and neck between them and Stanford (and OHSU for that matter). They are expanding as a department and I have only heard great things from the residents that I know there. At the AAD all the residents from Davis were hanging out and seemed really fun and happy...maybe even a little too alcohol happy...funny enough the same could be said for the Stanford residents who were roving the streets together bouncing from party to party. They have amazing dermpath faculty along with several amazing research faculty. They have faculty that care about teaching and they have one of the largest burn services on the West Coast with their Shriners which means you'll frequently see true derm emergencies in both adults and children since everything gets transferred to them. Their biggest drawback is location since Sacramento is not as desirable as Palo Alto or San Francisco. Actually, this may be a strength for people that really want to go to Davis. It's a strong program with nice faculty and happy residents. I think it's about a two hour drive between SF and Davis since I interviewed at both places and just rented a car to get from one site to the next and it was a pretty straight and easy shot to get there.

Other programs to consider would be UCSD and OHSU since they are all just a short plane flight away. I have friends at both of these places too and can tell you more. They are loving their experiences at both of these places. The west coast is the west coast for a reason...it's laid back except that UCSF takes more of an east coast mentality...but it's still a great experience.

FYI, my favorite programs on the West were UCSD, OHSU, Stanford, and UC Davis... Ranked all of them above UCSF too. That said, there are some sweet programs elsewhere too but that's another discussion to be had elsewhere....

 

[Sondar]

Dermathalon's reply illustrates that different opinions do exist. I have to respectfully disagree with him on most points. I advise SKDP to take our views with a grain of salt, and do rotations at programs where s/he wants to go.
1) There are no doubt that YK at Stanford is well established now. But most of the other faculty are relatively young in comparison to UCSF. For example, I knew HC when he was a med student at HMS and MIT.
2) I do know few UCSF fellows that matched there, but I don't know the overall statistics. Regardless of where you go, you have to perform and work extremely hard (ie 80 hours a week) as a research fellow in order to match into dermatology. Once the program knows you and knows that you have to be in the area (ie family situation), they will usually accommodate unless you are just not right for them.
3) UCDavis has taken a turn for the worse in comparison to their reputation a decade a go, and that is sad to see.
4) You will find politics everywhere in academia, but my original post really highlighted the extreme cases in academia.

Once again, that is just my two cents.

 

[pupster]

Dermathalon's reply illustrates that different opinions do exist. I have to respectfully disagree with him on most points. I advise SKDP to take our views with a grain of salt, and do rotations at programs where s/he wants to go.
1) There are no doubt that YK at Stanford is well established now. But most of the other faculty are relatively young in comparison to UCSF. For example, I knew HC when he was a med student at HMS and MIT.
2) I do know few UCSF fellows that matched there, but I don't know the overall statistics. Regardless of where you go, you have to perform and work extremely hard (ie 80 hours a week) as a research fellow in order to match into dermatology. Once the program knows you and knows that you have to be in the area (ie family situation), they will usually accommodate unless you are just not right for them.
3) UCDavis has taken a turn for the worse in comparison to their reputation a decade a go, and that is sad to see.
4) You will find politics everywhere in academia, but my original post really highlighted the extreme cases in academia.

Once again, that is just my two cents.

I'm actually gonna have to agree w/ Sondar here...esp. on UCD.

YK at Stanford is pretty well established, and although HC is young, I'd say he's pretty much a superstar who has a lot of pull if he likes you.

 

[dermathalon]

Sondar and Pupster, I appreciate the difference of opinion here and wholeheartedly agree that the OP should do a rotation to make their own decision. To expand on the points and give some history to my opinions:

1. Stanford went through quite a few changes over the past two-three years (which BTW have now settled down) but they have proven clinical faculty. You can't use youth as a simple way to show that someone is not proven faculty. If you used your logic, then the two young faculty at UCSF that focus on inpatient medicine would be considered unproven...hardly true as they are very very proven and are brilliant clinicians. I already mentioned beyond YK at Stanford and they are great clinicians who have published and described new entities in the literature. They would be wonderful teachers. MK at the county hospital in San Jose is wonderful and sharp, is very experienced, and has focused on a career as a clinician-educator and they see all kinds of cases there. Both institutions have proven clinical faculty.

2. As for the fellowships. If you look at the previous match lists you can calculate the statistics for yourself (some of us have all of the match lists from previous years). I will happily post these match lists as I noticed that these previous match lists have now been taken down. I'll work on getting these match lists up again. There are hardly any UCSF matches to their post-MD research fellows in the past 10 years although there are a few that did pre-MD fellowships with them prior to matching there. These pre-MD students that eventually matched at UCSF also had amazing board scores, did amazing on their clinical rotations and would have gotten interviews at UCSF on their own merit anyway. If you look back at the match lists, you'll see that more people match into Stanford with post-MD fellowships there than at UCSF. The funny thing in this whole conversation is that UC Davis has matched more of their post-MD fellows than Stanford or UCSF in the past five years (not what I would expect from a malignant program).

3. UC Davis had a different chair approximately a decade ago and the program was actually NOT doing that well at that time with all kinds of issues. The ironic thing is that chair has changed and the program has been on a great upswing now...so I don't know where your ten years ago info is coming from...the program was actually having problems ten years ago and it's the total opposite now and the residency is growing. If anything, their reputation has been built up in the past ten years. I directly talk to the residents (the few that I know well personally so I know that they are not kissing my ...) and I get a consensus from them that they really like it there. They are a very accommodating department to their residents and the residents seem to have a lot of say there. Talk to the current residents and don't take my word for it.

4. Politics are everywhere and an unfortunate reality of academic medicine. It's ONE of the reasons (not the only one and there are many other factors too) people sometimes choose away from academics. The investigator that really pushed the research and clinical effort to use vismodegib for BCCs USED to be faculty at UCSF and they left for political reasons to Oakland. BTW, one faculty member at Stanford did some of the seminal publications on this topic. You'll find pockets of politics at every institution.

 

[dermRus]

I agree with dermathalon regarding Davis. Great program and I agree that the location is a disadvantage...it's still Cally though. Personally ranked em high.

 

[big chinchin]

.

 

[PMPLPPR]

Couldn't agree more re: comments on Stanford and their PD. You want someone who'll be an amazing mentor for your residency? The PD at Stanford is that person. Will the research dollars the program brings in help you in your residency? Likely not as much as your teaching faculty...

 

[rajasivamani]

I'm one of next year's chief residents for the program at UCD. Although I'm a little appalled at the conversation here, I think it's wonderful that we've had a chance to talk about Northern CA.

Let me dispel the circulating rumors by saying how it really works here:

We love to rank all of our residents on their inservice scores and the lowest one gets sent out into the outskirts of the Sacramento desert with a bottle of water and we have them find their way back to clinic...by foot...no cell phone, no transportation, and definitely no cow saddles...and, just to make it more interesting, we fill that bottle with hypertonic saline. And if you don't make it back, it's ok, there's a reason we expanded our residency slots...we'll be just fine. There are too many dermatologists in California anyway.

Ok enough with the corny jokes.

I love this program. Come spend time with us if you are considering Northern CA...if you prefer the Bay Area, SF and Stanford are obviously both outstanding programs. It's gorgeous up here, especially if you like outdoor activities, biking, and wine country....BUT if you don't have all of Bolognia memorized, it'll be cold SPAM lunches for you for the entire rotation. Just kidding of course, you can warm up the SPAM on Mondays and Thursdays. 😉

 

[LisaFrank]

2. As for the fellowships. If you look at the previous match lists you can calculate the statistics for yourself (some of us have all of the match lists from previous years). I will happily post these match lists as I noticed that these previous match lists have now been taken down. I'll work on getting these match lists up again. There are hardly any UCSF matches to their post-MD research fellows in the past 10 years although there are a few that did pre-MD fellowships with them prior to matching there. These pre-MD students that eventually matched at UCSF also had amazing board scores, did amazing on their clinical rotations and would have gotten interviews at UCSF on their own merit anyway. If you look back at the match lists, you'll see that more people match into Stanford with post-MD fellowships there than at UCSF. The funny thing in this whole conversation is that UC Davis has matched more of their post-MD fellows than Stanford or UCSF in the past five years (not what I would expect from a malignant program).

Are medical students eligible for dermatology research fellowships (as in the kind that are advertised to applicants who didn't match)? I've looked online and on derminterest, and I can't find pre-doctoral/medical student fellowships. Am I missing something?

I am interested in derm, and although I've shadowed during my preclinical years, I really want to get involved with research, too. I have several pubs from before med school, and I have three projects I am currently involved with, but none of them are in derm. My med school's derm program doesn't do a lot of research, and since Doris Duke and HHMI--Cloister have ended their programs, I'm trying to find ways of doing a year of derm research.

 

[deepthroat]

Stanford update:

Yes, the faculty for "specialty clinics" are outstanding: melanoma, lymphoma, rheumderm. And as far a basic science goes, yes, HC is outstanding in the lab (although unless you are in the 2+1 program, this doesn't impact you.)
Unfortunately, along with changes in leadership (new Chair) always comes a "rebuilding phase". That is where Stanford is currently. Most of the seasoned clinicians have departed recently, and there is a noticable void in basic clinical derm currently.
The two stellar pediatric dermatologists are gone, replaced by new graduates.
The MOHS surgeon is gone. Surgery has always been considered a weakness at Stanford, but in reality, without a fellowship, the positive thing was that you always got to do a LOT of surgery, and became very competent. Unfortunately, while the new surgeon is a good didactic teacher, the residents complain that they rarely get to actually do much surgery.
Dermpath has been weak for years, and they just hired two newly graduated faculty. Unfortunately, there is no one "seasoned" in the department, so the referral volume from the community is very low, which hurts dermpath training.
Their "master clinician" who did the lion's share of clinical teaching in the clinics (county hospital) also just retired.
The great new Program Director?: rumor has it he is also leaving to go back to USC.
New inpatient attending? Also just graduated this past year.
While there continues to be a lot of enthusiam within the department, unfortunately the lack of senior attendings in clinical dermatology (outside of specialty clinics) is a definite hit for Stanford. The morale is still there, but curently the senior residents are as smart as many of the new faculty, so a lot of teaching is done resident-to-resident.
Time obviously will heal this weakness, but for now, Stanford can no longer be considered to be in the same category as other top notch programs (unless you want to do basic research) due to its lack of senior clinical faculty.

 

[PMPLPPR]

Wow, a lot of turnover at Stanford! USC is sure lucky to get their program director back

 

[dermathalon]

My opinions and I've editorialized like crazy:

Surgery: UCD and UCSF have stronger surgery programs and have a fellowship. UCD has access to more laser training because of affiliated faculty. UCSF has more prominent faculty in cosmetics.

Peds: UCSF is biggest. Stanford is big as well with emphasis on EB and they will continue to grow. New faculty will be not so new faculty for new applicants...they will be fine. UCD does not have a peds derm faculty person right now.

Dermpath: UCSF has biggest service and faculty are huge names in the field and have excellent teaching. UCD has a strong service as well with seasoned dermpath faculty and superb teaching.

Rheumderm: Strong at all three. The immunobullous faculty are sharp at all three.

Lymphoma: Strongest at Stanford.

Inpatient: No question that UCSF has the strongest and most robust service. Burn unit at UCD is bigger. Stanford has new faculty and this will continue to grow....Santa Clara Valley has a burn unit and so they see share of derm emergencies. UCD sees advanced emergency cases due to one of most robust burn units in northern CA with both Shriners and UCD main burn unit.

Subspecialties: UCSF has the most subspecialties followed by Stanford and then UCD.

Research: All of northern CA programs have strong research faculty. Stanford is impressive with HC. The clinical trial unit at UCD is probably best run at this point as their faculty seems to be the most prominent on lecture circuits. UCSF does not have much of a clinical trial unit although they have several new hires that make their epidemiology stronger including one that was recent recipient of derm foundation grant. They also already have very sweet faculty at the VA that are well published in epidemiological studies. All three departments have talented residents performing research as well. 2+2s at UCSF and UCD while 2+1 at Stanford.

Location: SF is arguably one of prettiest cities. Stanford located in a very pretty area as well and less foggy and overcast than SF. UCD is in Sacramento which is hotter and not as attractive of a city compared to SF or Palo Alto but has great outdoor activities and closer to Tahoe and the northern part of northern CA which can be stunning. All three offer outdoor activities. SF is beautiful, especially when it not overcast, and Marin county is not that far away with beautiful hiking and camping area. SF wins if you like urban appeal. Stanford is closer to beaches (highway 1 and santa cruz), redwood forests, has amazing jogging and biking trails. UCD is the closest to wine country.

Size: All three programs are large. UCSF and Stanford are slightly larger.

Resident happiness: UCD are the happiest

Extras: UCD has big name affiliated faculty that teach lasers and cosmetics. UCSF and Stanford have access to county hospitals that provide a whole bunch of interesting cases. UCSF has international visiting faculty who provide an extra level of dermatology training.

All three programs have advantages and disadvantages. There's no need to bash any one of them down. The Stanford program will always carry the Stanford name which is honestly the best recognized by the general public. Yes, those with knowledge of medicine realize that UCSF is a huge name but the general public will recognize Stanford for so many other reasons (Sports, history of having an ex-president's daughter, etc.). The name recognition, however, will not make you a better dermatologist and a lot of it is on the individual resident.

Hopefully this is helpful....if not, so be it.

 

[EastTo]

Stanford update:

Yes, the faculty for "specialty clinics" are outstanding: melanoma, lymphoma, rheumderm. And as far a basic science goes, yes, HC is outstanding in the lab (although unless you are in the 2+1 program, this doesn't impact you.)
Unfortunately, along with changes in leadership (new Chair) always comes a "rebuilding phase". That is where Stanford is currently. Most of the seasoned clinicians have departed recently, and there is a noticable void in basic clinical derm currently.
The two stellar pediatric dermatologists are gone, replaced by new graduates.
The MOHS surgeon is gone. Surgery has always been considered a weakness at Stanford, but in reality, without a fellowship, the positive thing was that you always got to do a LOT of surgery, and became very competent. Unfortunately, while the new surgeon is a good didactic teacher, the residents complain that they rarely get to actually do much surgery.
Dermpath has been weak for years, and they just hired two newly graduated faculty. Unfortunately, there is no one "seasoned" in the department, so the referral volume from the community is very low, which hurts dermpath training.
Their "master clinician" who did the lion's share of clinical teaching in the clinics (county hospital) also just retired.
The great new Program Director?: rumor has it he is also leaving to go back to USC.
New inpatient attending? Also just graduated this past year.
While there continues to be a lot of enthusiam within the department, unfortunately the lack of senior attendings in clinical dermatology (outside of specialty clinics) is a definite hit for Stanford. The morale is still there, but curently the senior residents are as smart as many of the new faculty, so a lot of teaching is done resident-to-resident.
Time obviously will heal this weakness, but for now, Stanford can no longer be considered to be in the same category as other top notch programs (unless you want to do basic research) due to its lack of senior clinical faculty.

Where did all these faculty members go, other institutions or retired/private practice?

How's USC (if they're getting back the PD everyone seems to talk about), UCI, UCSD or UCLA? I realize the thread has been pitting only northern california places but I feel like many of the southern programs would maybe even better places to consider. Though I have no connections to CA so probably will not get any interviews.

 

[PMPLPPR]

USC is the hidden gem among the big names in the Western region. However, you have to thrive in an autonomous environment. Most programs have a VA for their "hands on" experience, but most of the residents' time is at County where it is all autonomous--doing Mohs sections and repairs yourself. You get a great cosmetics exposure: injectables, liposuction, lasers and (if you want) blepharoplasties and hair transplants. In addition, it has one of the best didactic programs in the country. The patient population is largely hispanic so some may be intimidated by the language barrier but the pathology is unmatched. You will see every crazy infection and inflammatory dermatosis at County and nearly every genodermatosis in Spitz at CHLA. My two cents as a former resident

 

[exeunt]

.

 

[WaylonS]

sorry to bring up an old thread but.. as someone from the bay area who would love to match back to the bay area for derm... i know derm is a tough game, and i would definitely be happy to match anywhere, but is there anything i can do to increase my chances of matching back to the bay? i've heard neither stanford or ucsf really favor rotators--is it still worth a shot to try to do an away there? or would it be more productive to try to do research with faculty there? any advice is appreciated🙂

To add onto this, how do OHSU and UCD favor rotators? Is it easy to get an LOR?

 

[dermathalon]

This thread again...UCD and OHSU are friendly to rotators. Not sure what to say about an LOR and don't quite understand that question. Getting an LOR isn't based on location and it's based on how you interact with the faculty. So UCD and OHSU would be easy to get an LOR if you work hard and make a good impression. But I could say this for any program so not sure what you are referring to. If you are trying to ask if the faculty are approachable and nice then yes, that is the case in both programs.

OHSU is a great program and in a lovely city as long as you don't mind a little rain. If you have ever been to Portland when it is sunny, it's amazing. If you don't mind rain, then it's a winner for location. The residents seem very happy there. They have taken a lot of West coasters and portland based folks in the past but not sure if that is changing and perhaps others can comment on that.

UCD used to be smaller but they have expanded. Rumor is that they will have peds derm starting next year and that will be a huge hole that will be filled. They used to take west coasters and from big name schools like Harvard, but that seems to have changed now since many of the residents are from all over now. Their residents always seem laid back and seem to have a great time. Their faculty are pretty laid back too.

If you are really interested in Stanford and UCSF, I would still pursue rotations with them if you really want to go there as one of the rotations. I don't think they particularly favor rotators but connections are connections, if you are able to make a good impression. Clearly, both are excellent and you better have a pretty strong application on paper.

Good luck.

 

[drdude21]

A little further north, but what's the reputation of U of Washington? Do they favor rotators as well? I felt really at home when I visited Seattle and have heard fantastic things about the hospital in general, but nothing specifically about the derm program. Thanks for any input!