Sick of crappy web sites

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

notinkansas

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
356
Reaction score
29
Why do so many residency programs have such crappy web sites? Not only are they uninformative, but they have very poor design. I mean, seriously- Are the program directors having their grade school kids make these sites? These days there is no excuse for poor design. And the information is generally not useful.
 
Lol, it is generally wise to be constructive in your criticism in order to be taken seriously. You sound whiny and entitled when all you do is complain without any focal elements for improvement.
 
Just to be clear, my question is totally serious. It would be interesting to know what prospective applicants (to an IM residency, or other) would be interested in seeing.
 
As a DO student, I love being able to have easy access to profiles of the house staff. The most important thing that I am able to tell from the resident profile is whether or not the program is DO friendly. If every resident on the staff is an MD, then I am not going to bother applying to program. Sometimes, trying to find out who the residents are at each institution is a challenge and can leave my colleagues and I in the dark of whether or not we would be taken seriously at that program.
 
aPD, its great that you are seriously interested in this question. The first issue is that on most websites you have to look a relatively long time to find the link for the residency program if you are not directed fro another website like FREIDA. Secondly, some information is outdated or missing (like special requirements for IMGs or DO students). These issues are not universal though and I observed a relationship between a program's quality and its user-friendliness and thoroughness.
 
- easily accessible minimum requirements eg is step 2 required to interview or match?
- brief description of review process. For example some programs actually say we review apps in order but only if they are complete with lors, or we don't look until after deans letter etc
- timing of interviews
- actually updated each year... So many places still have 2011dates and none of that is helpful this year bc of the change in schedule
- current resident profiles - can usually find but often requires several clicks

I am not the op but I don't think that's too much to ask...
 
Why do so many residency programs have such crappy web sites? Not only are they uninformative, but they have very poor design. I mean, seriously- Are the program directors having their grade school kids make these sites? These days there is no excuse for poor design. And the information is generally not useful.

Lol. I've seen a couple (jps and children's), but they are marginally informative. They post salaries, general info, etc. For pgy-1 through pgy-4


Sent from my iPad using SDN Mobile app.
 
It would be nice to see how many residents a program plans to match in a given year, how many are categorical/preliminary/etc...and if there is a pyramidal structure (mostly applies to sx programs).

I also appreciate the programs that freely publish their cutoffs and what exactly a 'complete application' means for them.
 
One of the best sites I've seen is the one for the med/psych program at Iowa. The design is fairly plain, but they have a lot of great content that can be useful for somebody who is considering their program. There's detailed information about the training sites, a few brief snippets from their graduates, a bit of information about current residents (very important for me, since I'd like to see whether or not the program likes to take IMGs), and a lot of other details.

I've noticed a similar thing at the website for SIU's med/psych program, although a bit less comprehensive.

UNC's psych department, surprisingly enough, actually lists their average Step 1 and Step 2 scores. I was impressed by that level of transparency, but I can imagine why people wouldn't want to do that.
 
What information would you consider helpful?

The biggest things I want to see on a programs website are:

1. The # of spots offered. Surprisingly, many programs do not seem to advertise this. Even on Freida, this can be hard to find, so our best estimate is to look at the # of spots previously matched per old NRMP reports.
2. A list of all the residents and which medical schools they attended. I don't need their pictures. This list would help me gauge my competitiveness and also see if your program has geographic bias.
3. Will there be a free night in a hotel when I interview, or do I have to pay (discounted/full price)? Is there a dinner with the residents the night before? Easiest/cheapest public transport in area, especially to/from airport?
4. When do you expect to start sending interview invitations?
5. As specifically as possible, which months/days do you expect to conduct interviews?
6. Salary, educational allowances, benefits for self/dependents, housing costs in the area, parking cost and availability, moonlighting policy.
 
5. As specifically as possible, which months/days do you expect to conduct interviews?

This is especially useful. I'm sure a lot of people think "hey, you'll know our interview schedule when we offer you an interview," but it would really help us plan our travel schedules if we knew what the potential options are for interview offers. For instance, if I knew what my interview options will be for Missouri (even though they haven't invited me yet), it will help me decide when I should schedule my interview at Kansas (which is only two hours away).
 
It would be nice to see how many residents a program plans to match in a given year, how many are categorical/preliminary/etc...and if there is a pyramidal structure (mostly applies to sx programs).

Pyramidal programs have not been in existence in the United States ACGME for several years. I suspect that you are reading the number of house staff and misinterpreting the difference between designated pre-prelim spots, nondesignated prelim spots, transitional years, and categorical residents. In academic programs, especially surgical ones, there can also be different number of residents per year as residents move in and out of the lab.
 
Pyramidal programs have not been in existence in the United States ACGME for several years. I suspect that you are reading the number of house staff and misinterpreting the difference between designated pre-prelim spots, nondesignated prelim spots, transitional years, and categorical residents. In academic programs, especially surgical ones, there can also be different number of residents per year as residents move in and out of the lab.

Thanks for clearing that up.

A combination of reading the staff rosters and hearing my army pals who want to do surgery talk about it all the time.
 
Just to be clear, my question is totally serious. It would be interesting to know what prospective applicants (to an IM residency, or other) would be interested in seeing.

Current residents, what med schools they come from would be nice(some sites don't have this list or dont put what schools they are from)
 
What information would you consider helpful?

1) # of interview invitations OFFERED last year (not just number of interviews conducted)
Last year, we sent out 348 interview invites and conducted 180 interviews for 16 categorical IM positions.
2) TIMELINE including a) when first interview invites were sent out, b) when the majority of interview invites were sent out and c) when your last interview invites were sent out. There could also be d) special explanations you feel are necessary (e.g. "we extended invitations to applicants from our home medical school much earlier than to others") -- OR, if you expect these dates to be different then last year, then just include that dates you expect for this year... with ballpark estimates for each of the three aforemention key periods
Last year, we started sending out interview invites in the first week of October. Most interview invites were sent out in the middle of the month of October. We stopped sending out interview invites in the first week of January. Please note that due to some changes in the timing of several steps of the applications process, we tentatively anticipate our interview invite schedule being offset to about a week earlier than it was last year. Please understand that this is only an estimate. If it becomes apparent that these estimates are likely to change, we will update this posting accordingly.​
3) Simple listing of each resident (no need for name or picture, but sure include it if you'd like), their home state at time of application and their medical school
  • Jeff Martin MD, CA, UCLA SOM
  • Alex Triton MD, RI, MAYO CLINIC SOM
  • Lisa Willis MD, FL, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA SOM
  • Ryan Broder DO, PA, PHILADELPHIA COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE
4) DETAILS of coverage of food, medical insurance, dental insurance, parking.
  • Residents get a food card for $350 of in-hospital food purchases per month.
  • Medical insurance is under the UnitedHealthcare program (please see details of coverage at the following link: ***) - note the details of the policy flutuate slightly from year-to-year. Yearly costs and premiums are funded completely by the residency program, residents are responsible for co-pays as outlined at the aforementioned link.
  • Dental insurance is under the Delta Dental Premium PPO program (please see details of coverage at the following link: ***) - note the details of the policy flutuate slightly from year-to-year. Yearly costs and premiums are funded completely by the residency program, residents are responsible for co-pays as outlined at the aforementioned link.
  • Residents are given free parking passes for on-site parking at all of our medical centers and satellite clinics at which they are required to rotate.

You might ask "why would they want to take the time to compile all of this information for applicants?" I'd answer "because it is a sign that the program is considerate." ... Considerate of the time and feelings of their prospective residents... and [at least in my experience with considerate people and institutions] therefore also more likely to be considerate of the time and feelings of their residents and patients. If they don't choose to be considerate when they are trying to attract people to their program, how can I imagine that they will choose to be considerate once I'm in their program and no longer have a choice? I realize I'm only one future resident and physician, but knowing that I work for - and along side - considerate human beings means the world to me... and it is the #1 thing I'm looking for in programs.

When programs send out those notices that "hey, we've received your application and are thankful that you wanted to apply to our program..." (something most programs DON'T do) that means something to me. But to take it one step further and in that initial email say "we anticipate either offering you an interview, asking you to wait a little bit longer for further evaluation or rejecting you by date X" (something I haven't seen ANY program do), then that would mean the world! Programs that thought to do that would move WAY up my list. Because they went the extra yard to essentially communicate that "hey, we realize a lot is up in the air for you and you're facing huge financial and scheduling constraints... and while we can't let you know anything definitive in terms of our decision on your application right now, we wanted to at least give you something tangible to hang your hat on."

... Little things like this matter. Especially from the more "elite" programs who have their pick of the litter. In my opinion it is when people don't NEED to kiss butt specifically to get something they want, and yet they still choose to be considerate of the people they deal with, that their true colors are revealed....

Okay. I've belabored this. You get the point. Hope this feedback is useful to you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clearing that up.

A combination of reading the staff rosters and hearing my army pals who want to do surgery talk about it all the time.

The Mil Match maintained pyramidal structure after the ACGME stopped. I cannot speak to the current status of such programs in the military match without source documentation (which was hard for me to find, not knowing where to start).

Reading House Staff rosters is a poor assessment in the ACGME world. For example, we had 4 categorical GS residents, several Designated Prelims (ie, Ortho, ENT, Uro, PRS, etc.) and several Non Designated Prelim spots. Thus the PGY-1 house officer roster in the GS department might list 15 residents but only 5 or 6 as PGY-2(with the PRS resident staying on for 3 years and a 1-2 NDP still trying to get a categorical position) and then down to 4 for PGY-3 (depending on the flow of residents into and out of the lab). However, we did not have a Pyramidal program. 4 categoricals started and 4 would finish (baring any unforeseen events). This is how most academic surgical programs work.
 
The Mil Match maintained pyramidal structure after the ACGME stopped. I cannot speak to the current status of such programs in the military match without source documentation (which was hard for me to find, not knowing where to start).

Reading House Staff rosters is a poor assessment in the ACGME world. For example, we had 4 categorical GS residents, several Designated Prelims (ie, Ortho, ENT, Uro, PRS, etc.) and several Non Designated Prelim spots. Thus the PGY-1 house officer roster in the GS department might list 15 residents but only 5 or 6 as PGY-2(with the PRS resident staying on for 3 years and a 1-2 NDP still trying to get a categorical position) and then down to 4 for PGY-3 (depending on the flow of residents into and out of the lab). However, we did not have a Pyramidal program. 4 categoricals started and 4 would finish (baring any unforeseen events). This is how most academic surgical programs work.

This really clarifies things, thank you
 
Thanks for the ideas. My program's website currently reviews most of these issues. We haven't listed resident names on our site, as I'm concerned that's a privacy issue for the residents. But I certainly could list where our housestaff are from.
 
Thanks for the ideas. My program's website currently reviews most of these issues. We haven't listed resident names on our site, as I'm concerned that's a privacy issue for the residents. But I certainly could list where our housestaff are from.

Just curious, why is this a privacy issue? Many programs include names, photos, previous institutions, etc.

There is no "personal' information per se.
 
Thanks for the ideas. My program's website currently reviews most of these issues. We haven't listed resident names on our site, as I'm concerned that's a privacy issue for the residents. But I certainly could list where our housestaff are from.

I see not having a list of current residents and where they came from as a pretty big red flag I see when looking at programs websites. It makes me wonder what the program is hiding, especially when 3/4 or more of the other programs have a list of housestaff readily available. Are they all (or mostly) foreign grads, all from the programs own medical school, or even none from the programs own med school (what do those students know that we don't?), etc.

The other stuff (stipend, benefits, curricular structure, list of places where recent graduates have been going, etc) I'm more flexible about, and is really something I'd consider more post-interview when i'd had an opportunity to ask more questions and see an apples to apples comparison.
 
I don't like when programs put all of their info on 1 page.

<-- Limited attention span here. It's like reading an 8 page long personal statement. I'd rather have it broken down with 1 paragraph max on each page. And, include lots of pictures of your program. Pictures are a huge plus! I would recommend just using standard .jpg images though. Some programs have real fancy slideshows. They are great, but if your internet is slow it can be a hassle.

To be honest, I did judge some residency programs by their websites. It makes your program look disorganized and careless if you still have your 2009 salaries/benefits listed.

In general, most programs have nice websites but there is always room for improvement.
 
Last edited:
For me websites that don't appear as cool isn't a deal breaker, but I do hate when they have links that don't work, especially when the link is supposed to give me information that would be very important.
 
Totally feel a different way. I feel like having resident names/pictures up is TMI and totally irrelevant to anything. Just tell me their medical schools and degrees. You can call them resident # 1, 2, 3 for all I care.

And things like benefits, food coverage, parking... those are things that are going to play a huge role for me. If I know a program doesn't cover medical benefits, doesn't cover food and doesn't cover parking, I am 100% not going there, regardless of their other qualities.

... One other thing I'd really like to know is whether the insititution (inpatient and outpatient) is entirely EMR or not, as that will be a make-or-break it piece of information for me as well. An institution that isn't completely EMR by now (unless they have profound financial difficulties) likely reflects a policy strong-hold by a few resistant senior attendings and a lack of forward-thinking in their decision making positions - the type of place I'd be miserable in.

I see not having a list of current residents and where they came from as a pretty big red flag I see when looking at programs websites. It makes me wonder what the program is hiding, especially when 3/4 or more of the other programs have a list of housestaff readily available. Are they all (or mostly) foreign grads, all from the programs own medical school, or even none from the programs own med school (what do those students know that we don't?), etc.

The other stuff (stipend, benefits, curricular structure, list of places where recent graduates have been going, etc) I'm more flexible about, and is really something I'd consider more post-interview when i'd had an opportunity to ask more questions and see an apples to apples comparison.
 
... One other thing I'd really like to know is whether the insititution (inpatient and outpatient) is entirely EMR or not, as that will be a make-or-break it piece of information for me as well. An institution that isn't completely EMR by now (unless they have profound financial difficulties) likely reflects a policy strong-hold by a few resistant senior attendings and a lack of forward-thinking in their decision making positions - the type of place I'd be miserable in.


Considering that HITECH mandates that hospitals/practices have an EMR by 2014, not likely to be an issue for long.
 
For DO programs, simply having a website at all would be a gigantic leap in the right direction. Unlikely, however. Amazed they've neglected this recruiting tool for so long.
 
Considering that HITECH mandates that hospitals/practices have an EMR by 2014, not likely to be an issue for long.

does it have to be ALL electronic though? my home program has EMR but still uses paper charting for a ton of stuff... sucks
 
Right, but the point is that they had to mandate it in order for it to happen. If it were up to many of these consultant physicians, they would continue blissfully scribbling their illegible hieroglyphic recommendations into paper charts - placing patient care in jeopardy each time they do so. This is no joke, at some rotations I've been at, there are consultants who hand write their consults and NOBODY except maybe that one nurse who's been there for 20 years can guess what he/she is recommending.
 
Last edited:
An institution that isn't completely EMR by now (unless they have profound financial difficulties) likely reflects a policy strong-hold by a few resistant senior attendings and a lack of forward-thinking in their decision making positions - the type of place I'd be miserable in.

That's an interesting point to consider. I never thought about too hard about using htose sorts of surrogate markers to learn about a program's culture/tendencies. It's something that we do in medicine all the time (saw a patient with a splinter hemorrhage recently, and everybody was rushing to be the first one to confirm a diagnosis of endocarditis).
 
Right, but the point is that they had to mandate it in order for it to happen. If it were up to many of these consultant physicians, they would continue blissfully scribbling their illegible hieroglyphic recommendations into paper charts - placing patient care in jeopardy each time they do so. This is no joke, at some rotations I've been at, there are consultants who hand write their consults and NOBODY except maybe that one nurse who's been there for 20 years can guess what he/she is recommending.

Yeah, I get it. I've been in hospitals and around doctors for greater than 25 years.

And yes, there are some old farts around and that sometimes without mandates, things don't get done.

But to use that as a barometer of a good residency program should probably be near the bottom of your list, IMHO. And the people deciding about EMRs are *not* the physicians and the people you will be working with on a daily basis. So what does it matter if your attendings are old farts who would prefer paper and pencil charts? They aren't designing the EMR or making the decisions about when the hospital gets one. You are assuming that medical staff makes "policy" decisions about these things. They do not. The choice of/lack thereof EMR is not a "surrogate marker" for a forward thinking medical staff. These are the decisions of hospital administration who are overwhelmingly NOT physicians.

Frankly, I almost choked on my soda reading your implication that decisions about EMRs have any significant input from medical staff. Its a well recognized phenomenon that while hospitals may survey medical staff on what they want, the final decision will be up to the "suits".

I don't want to pull out the old " you don't know what you need/want as a medical student" card but I'm going to: until you use multiple EMRs and use them consistently as a physician, its hard to say what will be useful and what won't. I used to be impressed by the EMRs with "all the bells and whistles" until I realized that the fanciest hospital system here in town has the most basic bare bones EMR and ya know what? It works. Its easy. Somehow the patient gets admitted, gets their meds and everything turns out alright.
 
Last edited:
You make a good point and you're right... and I know it ultimately comes down to the suits... I knew that even as I was writing... I was going to remove the old attending component of it, but I got lazy. Sorry for wasting your time making you read it hehe...

Still, the larger point about the institution stands. There's no GOOD excuse in 2012 to be a major academic hospital and not have a full EMR system, where ALL imaging and lab results as well as ALL notes can be read. It doesn't need to be the fanciest by any means... It just needs to be functional and legible. If an institution has somehow gotten this far without adopting one, it suggests to me that there are resistant forces - be they legal, admin, attendings, or a combination of the three - that make me skeptical. My own institution is one of these. I want so badly to stay here, but after doing rotations at other sites and away rotations, my suspicon that the lack of a comprehensive EMR system here makes the workflow dysfunctional has been confirmed several times over. If I can't read somebody's writing, name or phone number (a common occurence), then it may as well not exist. If a page gets inadvertently torn out of a chart (another common occurence), it never existed. If someone left the chart over at the other nurses station (another common occurence), then I don't find out whether ID said to start antibiotics or not... Then there's the "chart checking," when we spend many minutes going up and down each floor of the hospital checking the charts to see if different specialists have written recs on their patients... oh, they haven't? Welp, I'll chart check again later today. I understand it used to NEED to be this way, but it absolutely doesn't anymore. So that's why I said, a comprehensive EMR is on my list of essentials.

The worst thing I could do is leave an institution I love because of this major major major major shortcoming and end up at an institution I might not love with the same major major major major shortcoming...

But yeah, you were right. I understand your point.

Yeah, I get it. I've been in and around doctors for greater than 25 years.

And yes, there are some old farts around and that sometimes without mandates, things don't get done.

But to use that as a barometer of a good residency program should probably be near the bottom of your list, IMHO. And the people deciding about EMRs are *not* the physicians and the people you will be working with on a daily basis. So what does it matter if your attendings are old farts who would prefer paper and pencil charts? They aren't designing the EMR or making the decisions about when the hospital gets one. You are assuming that medical staff makes "policy" decisions about these things. They do not. The choice of/lack thereof EMR is not a "surrogate marker" for a forward thinking medical staff. These are the decisions of hospital administration who are overwhelmingly NOT physicians.

Frankly, I almost choked on my soda reading your implication that decisions about EMRs have any significant input from medical staff. Its a well recognized phenomenon that while hospitals may survey medical staff on what they want, the final decision will be up to the "suits".

I don't want to pull out the old " you don't know what you need/want as a medical student" card but I'm going to: until you use multiple EMRs and use them consistently as a physician, its hard to say what will be useful and what won't. I used to be impressed by the EMRs with "all the bells and whistles" until I realized that the fanciest hospital system here in town has the most basic bare bones EMR and ya know what? It works. Its easy. Somehow the patient gets admitted, gets their meds and everything turns out alright.
 
Last edited:
How the call schedule is handled- is there a night float system? How is call for each year? This can be amazingly hard to find.

Salary and benefit information- updated. Again, it's amazing how many programs have not updated this for years. Is this going to be the first thing I look at? No. But when I'm narrowing down a first pass list to a reasonable number, it is one of many factors.


And just to be clear, I don't necessarily care about the site looking "sexy". I just want it to be easy to find the links for all this stuff.
 
Top