THI vs Big 5

[texdoc]

Hi

Does the card's residency at THI (texas heart institute) compare to a residency a one of the big 5 back east?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[CCMD2005]

What big 5 are you talking about? If your talking about the top 5 CV programs I would surmise many of them aren't "back east" i.e. (Cleveland Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Wash U, Stanford among others). Regardless, THI is a phenomenal clinical cardiology training program especially for interventional cardiology. Going to any top cards program is pretty good.
Good luck.
-CC

 

[grendelsdragon]

Hi

Does the card's residency at THI (texas heart institute) compare to a residency a one of the big 5 back east?

Not to pick on details, but cardiology is a fellowship and not a residency.

I will, however, pick on your word choice of "big" east programs, which I gather would be Johns Hopkins, Duke, Brigham, MGH , Columbia and UPenn. CCDMD2005 apparently believes that these programs do not merit a "top" designation, but that is a matter of opinion.

Bottom line for comparison of these training programs is by what criteria are you judging their merit? If you are primarily looking at a solid training environment for learning good clinical practice to treat cardiovascular diseases, most of the accredited programs will compare VERY favorably with each other. The next consideration should be geography, because most people try to train in programs in areas where they want to live. Another criteria is training environment (autonomy, support services, patient volume and diversity, call schedule, level of scut, etc.) and this is a very personal decision and training programs tend to change from year to year in many of these aspects.

So wherein lie the differences? Aside from the above mentioned issues, the principle remaining criteria are academic environment, mentorship and research. These factors are of primary interest to those interested in academics and are rather irrelevant to those who are planning to go into private practice.

Overall, my impression is that the Texas Heart Institute is an outstanding place to learn clinical cardiology. Its national reputation is lead by Denton Cooley (from the surgical side) and James T. Willerson (from the cardiology side). Its academic alliances are primarily with the UTMS of Houston and Baylor. From my limited knowledge, its highest profile research is primarily in the areas of ventricular assist devices and artificial hearts. If your interest lies in clinical trials, you might favor Brigham (TIMI) or Duke (DCRI). If you favor cardiac development or stem cells, you might favor UCSF, MGH, Brigham or UTSW. Irrespective, the primary component of successful research is finding the right mentor, which is again a very personal interaction.

Overall, is THI a solid and prestigious place to train? Absolutely. Does it compare favorably with other prestigious training programs? That entirely depends on your personal interests and identification with specific mentors that cannot adequately be assessed by anyone but yourself.

Good luck!

 

[CCMD2005]

Not to pick on details, but cardiology is a fellowship and not a residency.

I will, however, pick on your word choice of "big" east programs, which I gather would be Johns Hopkins, Duke, Brigham, MGH , Columbia and UPenn. CCDMD2005 apparently believes that these programs do not merit a "top" designation, but that is a matter of opinion.

Grendelsdragon, I believe you misunderstood my comment. I did not state that any of the programs you mentioned in the east did not deserve a "top" designation, but rather, that the top 5 programs versus the "big 5" back east are not necessarily the same, as it may miss many other programs in different geographic areas that may merit a "big/top 5" designation.

Although I do think that with so many great places to train and with the relative strengths and weaknesses of all programs, a top 5 designation is somewhat difficult to ascertain.

Suffice it to say, that being able to train at any of the institutions mentioned in this thread would certainly be a privilege.

 

[grendelsdragon]

I think we are trying to say much of the same thing. As I have stated on multiple occasions, program rankings (from various sources) are rather superfluous. Choice of programs for higher consideration is based upon personal preferences as stated above. For example, if someone had an interest in heart failure, I would recommend a program with an active transplant program (where the sickest patients are usually referred). If someone is interested in epidemiology or biostatistics, then I would lean towards a program affiliated with a premiere school of public health (such as Johns Hopkins and Harvard). Geographic location also weighs heavily on personal preference, which is why programs in the northeast and west coast tend to be more competitive because of geographic desirability. As we all know, competitiveness does not always translate into quality in terms of training programs. I don't think you need to worry about people considering geographic diversity when applying for cardiology. Given the stiff competition for these fellowships, most people will HAVE to apply broadly anyway.

 

[Myostatin]

The clinical training at THI is about as good as it gets. It is not really thought of as a major research institution, however. Echoing the above posters, whether it compares to a residency at the "top" cardiology programs depends primarily on your interests and career goals.