To those who think they cannot get into a competitive specialty with a DO

[Ho0v-man]

It really sucks when US MDs look down their noses at DOs and talk about how they're second rate doctors, their lower undergrad grades, their crappy clinical education, or their weak match lists. So why are "pre-DOs" looking down on IMG physicians? Is it really that important for you guys to have someone to snub?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

It's definitely not a stupid stat and it certainly does mean alot. Don't over reach friend

.

But it is stupid and doesn't mean anything. You should have used match and attrition rates, both of which which still blow the Carib schools out of the water. Those are much more important statistics.

 

[Dustbowl12]

Agreed it isnt best number. Noone looking down on IMGs, just protecting premeds from thinking IMG is a good choice over DO

 

[cliquesh]

It really sucks when US MDs look down their noses at DOs and talk about how they're second rate doctors, their lower undergrad grades, their crappy clinical education, or their weak match lists. So why are "pre-DOs" looking down on IMG physicians? Is it really that important for you guys to have someone to snub?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

This is a big part of medicine. Medicine is filled with terrible people.

 

[IslandStyle808]

It really sucks when US MDs look down their noses at DOs and talk about how they're second rate doctors, their lower undergrad grades, their crappy clinical education, or their weak match lists. So why are "pre-DOs" looking down on IMG physicians? Is it really that important for you guys to have someone to snub?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You can definitely see that attitude on the allo forums.

 

[Ho0v-man]

This is a big part of medicine. Medicine is filled with terrible people.

I know. I'm a nontrad career changer from an allied health field. Everyone wants to be superior to somebody else. It just screams underlying inferiority complex and it's kind of embarrassing.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Right up to about now. Sure, with the exception of Derm and Rads onc, there existed a safety net of AOA residencies in ultra competitive fields. Your chances of matching ACGME Surgical subspecialties are almost non-existent by a whole host of issues. Likewise your chances of matching above a mid ranked university program in a host of more open specialties are non-existent.

Post-Merger: Your chances for competitive specialties probably will probably fall incrementally till a plateau point.

In short, it depends on what you consider a competitive specialty, how well you did in medical school/published/know ppl, and other factors. So yes, you can match many competitive specialties. Just be prepared for work for them.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I know. I'm a nontrad career changer from an allied health field. Everyone wants to be superior to somebody else. It just screams underlying inferiority complex and it's kind of embarrassing.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I have nothing against IMGs and I definitely wasn't "snubbing" them. It really irritated me how Argus came in to try and put all of us in our place and superioritively make sure we knew DOs were second class citizens in the match all while being an IMG who is in the exact same position. We all know that it will be more difficult for us compared to USMDs. It was like a guy without a leg superioritively telling a guy without an arm that he will have a hard time.

If it came across as snubbing then I'm sorry because that wasn't my intent at all. Anyone who survives the Carib roulette has my deepest respect because of the effort it takes.

 

[Ho0v-man]

I have nothing against IMGs and I definitely wasn't "snubbing" them. It really irritated me how Argus came in to try and put all of us in our place and superioritively make sure we knew DOs were second class citizens in the match all while being an IMG who is in the exact same position. We all know that it will be more difficult for us compared to USMDs. It was like a guy without a leg superioritively telling a guy without an arm that he will have a hard time.

If it came across as snubbing then I'm sorry because that wasn't my intent at all. Anyone who survives the Carib roulette has my deepest respect because of the effort it takes.

It's very beneficial for all of us, and especially the premeds applying now or in the future to realize the harsh realities of matching a competitive specialty as a DO, especially post merger when we're all in essentially the same boat as IMGs more or less at a lot of places. I've seen posts on SDN before from some super pro-DOs who think the difference between MD vs.DO only matters for "top 20" programs and it's just not true.

We're all very lucky to have expert advice on the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Dustbowl12]

It's very beneficial for all of us, and especially the premeds applying now or in the future to realize the harsh realities of matching a competitive specialty as a DO, especially post merger when we're all in essentially the same boat as IMGs more or less at a lot of places. I've seen posts on SDN before from some super pro-DOs who think the difference between MD vs.DO only matters for "top 20" programs and it's just not true.

We're all very lucky to have expert advice on the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Biggest perpetuators of DO bias are DOs and DO students imo

its hard for MD and DO to match into super competitive specialities, with it being easier of course for MDs relatively, yet still difficult

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Biggest perpetuators of DO bias are DOs and DO students imo

its hard for MD and DO to match into super competitive specialities, with it being easier of course for MDs relatively, yet still difficult

Except it's not. An average MD with pretty mediocre stats can match almost every specialty with around ~90% or higher. Ex. How many DOs are matching mid tier university IM with 210s on the USMLE? How many MD? The majority of applicants.

As a DO you need to come to terms with the reality that your prospects in the match are significantly poorer than your USMD counterparts. You will need to do significantly more work than your MD counterparts if you want to get what they can get with significantly more ease. Hence it's imperative to not only come to terms with this so you can start actually working your ass off if you want to go anywhere in life as a DO, but it's also good to factually accept the world as it is.

I think SDN has done a lot of good things, but it's also made a lot of pre-DO students with some wacky high aspirations think they're going to be reaching for the stars. There is a ceiling, there's bias against you, and generally yes, as a whole there are applicants who have the pedigree that you don't have, because for what it is worth attending XCOM which produces 0 research or has no major academic center does not compete with XSOM which has the former. And the Argus knows this, as an IMG he likely had a hell of a time matching whatever he match, he got an even shorter end of the stick here than us DOs.

Now is this the end of the world? Hardly. Accepting that there's a real uphill battle either means you need to settle if you cannot preform, which is frankly hardly settling since you're a doctor doing doctor stuff or you preform and you do significantly better than your USMD counterparts and match well.

 

[Ho0v-man]

Biggest perpetuators of DO bias are DOs and DO students imo

its hard for MD and DO to match into super competitive specialities, with it being easier of course for MDs relatively, yet still difficult

At worst, I'm a defensive pessimist. At best, you've got your head in the sand.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Espressso]

Except it's not. An average MD with pretty mediocre stats can match almost every specialty with around ~90% or higher. Ex. How many DOs are matching mid tier university IM with 210s on the USMLE? How many MD? The majority of applicants.

As a DO you need to come to terms with the reality that your prospects in the match are significantly poorer than your USMD counterparts. You will need to do significantly more work than your MD counterparts if you want to get what they can get with significantly more ease. Hence it's imperative to not only come to terms with this so you can start actually working your ass off if you want to go anywhere in life as a DO, but it's also good to factually accept the world as it is.

I think SDN has done a lot of good things, but it's also made a lot of pre-DO students with some wacky high aspirations think they're going to be reaching for the stars. There is a ceiling, there's bias against you, and generally yes, as a whole there are applicants who have the pedigree that you don't have, because for what it is worth attending XCOM which produces 0 research or has no major academic center does not compete with XSOM which has the former. And the Argus knows this, as an IMG he likely had a hell of a time matching whatever he match, he got an even shorter end of the stick here than us DOs.

Now is this the end of the world? Hardly. Accepting that there's a real uphill battle either means you need to settle if you cannot preform, which is frankly hardly settling since you're a doctor doing doctor stuff or you preform and you do significantly better than your USMD counterparts and match well.

this is a good post.

 

[DetectiveAlonzo]

For an IM resident... with their 80-100 hour workweeks..

Argus sure is active on these boards.

And also.. Argus... you actually really aren't that open about your past and you do go out of your way to shut down any DO threads and topics and try to make it seem it is as bad as going the Caribbean route.

Your insecurities are pretty obvious while reading through your previous posts.

We get it. You made it out. Congrats to you man. But...Pre-meds... you guys CAN do whatever you want... you will have to work much harder for it as a DO.

DO is one the FASTEST growing medical degrees and professions out there right now. Whether that is good or bad.. only time will tell.

For now... focus on attending a school in the United States.

Plus, your aspirations will change shall you guys get in.

Private practice will be dead, we will all be employees, and it is what it is.

I think a sweet route for all of y'all looking in would be the PA route, or CRNA, or NP.

No call. Make ALMOST as much as a doc, and no/minimal liability?

sheesh.

 

[the argus]

For an IM resident... with their 80-100 hour workweeks..

Argus sure is active on these boards.

And also.. Argus... you actually really aren't that open about your past and you do go out of your way to shut down any DO threads and topics and try to make it seem it is as bad as going the Caribbean route.

Your insecurities are pretty obvious while reading through your previous posts.

We get it. You made it out. Congrats to you man. But...Pre-meds... you guys CAN do whatever you want... you will have to work much harder for it as a DO.

DO is one the FASTEST growing medical degrees and professions out there right now. Whether that is good or bad.. only time will tell.

For now... focus on attending a school in the United States.

Plus, your aspirations will change shall you guys get in.

Private practice will be dead, we will all be employees, and it is what it is.

I think a sweet route for all of y'all looking in would be the PA route, or CRNA, or NP.

No call. Make ALMOST as much as a doc, and no/minimal liability?

sheesh.

I've posted my medical school, year of graduation, reason for going to said medical school, board scores, number of residency programs applied to, number of interview invites, number of interviews attended, and match outcome. What more would you like? Name, address, and social security number?

You need some new hobbies man, seeing as 2 of your favorites seem to be posting false and nonsensical "advice" on an anonymous message board, and following me around on that message board throwing hate because I have called you out for your drivel in the past.

 

[DetectiveAlonzo]

I've posted my medical school, year of graduation, reason for going to said medical school, board scores, number of residency programs applied to, number of interview invites, number of interviews attended, and match outcome. What more would you like? Name, address, and social security number?

You need some new hobbies man, seeing as 2 of your favorites seem to be posting false and nonsensical "advice" on an anonymous message board, and following me around on that message board throwing hate because I have called you out for your drivel in the past.

You're right man.

It's just that..

I like you Argus.

I like you a lot.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Play nice guys. There's no need to be petulant asses this early in the morning.

 

[DetectiveAlonzo]

Play nice guys. There's no need to be petulant asses this early in the morning.

Nah Argus and I just have that relationship. I would take him/her out for a beer if given the chance to nitpick his mind.

I personally don't give a damn what school you come from... but let's also be realistic here too. He made it out but sometimes his jadedness shows.

I like people like Argus but he's been roughed up quite a bit.

 

[235009]

Except it's not. An average MD with pretty mediocre stats can match almost every specialty with around ~90% or higher. Ex. How many DOs are matching mid tier university IM with 210s on the USMLE? How many MD? The majority of applicants.

As a DO you need to come to terms with the reality that your prospects in the match are significantly poorer than your USMD counterparts. You will need to do significantly more work than your MD counterparts if you want to get what they can get with significantly more ease. Hence it's imperative to not only come to terms with this so you can start actually working your ass off if you want to go anywhere in life as a DO, but it's also good to factually accept the world as it is.

I think SDN has done a lot of good things, but it's also made a lot of pre-DO students with some wacky high aspirations think they're going to be reaching for the stars. There is a ceiling, there's bias against you, and generally yes, as a whole there are applicants who have the pedigree that you don't have, because for what it is worth attending XCOM which produces 0 research or has no major academic center does not compete with XSOM which has the former. And the Argus knows this, as an IMG he likely had a hell of a time matching whatever he match, he got an even shorter end of the stick here than us DOs.

Now is this the end of the world? Hardly. Accepting that there's a real uphill battle either means you need to settle if you cannot preform, which is frankly hardly settling since you're a doctor doing doctor stuff or you preform and you do significantly better than your USMD counterparts and match well.

I want to print this out and frame it.

I will probably be quoting this in response to those who try to make a false equivalence argument by saying "it's difficult for everyone".

following me around on that message board throwing hate because I have called you out for your drivel in the past.

It's called "throwing shade". Get with the modern lingo!


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

will probably be quoting this in response to those who try to make a false equivalence argument by saying "it's difficult for everyone".

I agree for the most part. But it is good to note, to quote my earlier post, there are some specialties where you had better have the app for it, regardless of MD or DO. I will again use ortho because it is a good example, the MDs who match ortho have stellar apps. It is a rare occurrence when someone matches ortho with a less than stellar application. It just drives me nuts when I hear "if I would have gone MD I could have gotten ENT" when they were an average DO student.

I think with fields like IM, OB/Gyn, GS, even Peds is where the two letter difference matter the most. An MD can get a good mid-tier program in those fields by simply being average. When a DO matches mid-tier programs in those fields they tend to be fantastic students that as an MD could have gone to a top program

 

[IslandStyle808]

I agree for the most part. But it is good to note, to quote my earlier post, there are some specialties where you had better have the app for it, regardless of MD or DO. I will again use ortho because it is a good example, the MDs who match ortho have stellar apps. It is a rare occurrence when someone matches ortho with a less than stellar application. It just drives me nuts when I hear "if I would have gone MD I could have gotten ENT" when they were an average DO student.

I think with fields like IM, OB/Gyn, GS, even Peds is where the two letter difference matter the most. An MD can get a good mid-tier program in those fields by simply being average. When a DO matches mid-tier programs in those fields they tend to be fantastic students that as an MD could have gone to a top program

Its a real gradient of bias amongst the fields. In fact, there was a Peds match at Hopkin's this past year. This is extremely hard place to match in even for an MD student. However, this person bridged the gap by making connections in the field and I think she had research (from what I have read from Hallowmann). The hard part of this whole thing is figuring out what the bias is for each field. If this is because of clinical rotations and not having a home department, then one cannot do anything. If this is because of lack of research or lack of connections, then this is something one can do. I think for peds the bias is largely more due to the later than the former.

However, for things like neurosurgery, I think this is in part because of the large amount of MD students who want to enter the field. So they have enough applicants they don't consider DOs for the most part. This again is something that one cannot do anything about.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Its a real gradient of bias amongst the fields. In fact, there was a Peds match at Hopkin's this past year. This is extremely hard place to match in even for an MD student. However, this person bridged the gap by making connections in the field and I think she had research (from what I have read from Hallowmann). The hard part of this whole thing is figuring out what the bias is for each field. If this is because of clinical rotations and not having a home department, then one cannot do anything. If this is because of lack of research or lack of connections, then this is something one can do. I think for peds the bias is largely more due to the later than the former.

However, for things like neurosurgery, I think this is in part because of the large amount of MD students who want to enter the field. So they have enough applicants they don't consider DOs for the most part. This again is something that one cannot do anything about.

No, it's because there's nearly no way that a DO can even begin to match what the MD applicants are bringing to the table. We're talking PhDs from high tier schools, multiple publishings, etc. Rad Oncs and Neurosurgery are the frontiers that DOs have almost no chance in because of the fact that their competitiveness is beyond board scores, it's in concrete qualities that even the best DOs cannot reach, ex. a DO/PhD at MSU is one of the exceptions though it's not an Ivy PhD by any means.

 

[IslandStyle808]

No, it's because there's nearly no way that a DO can even begin to match what the MD applicants are bringing to the table. We're talking PhDs from high tier schools, multiple publishings, etc. Rad Oncs and Neurosurgery are the frontiers that DOs have almost no chance in because of the fact that their competitiveness is beyond board scores, it's in concrete qualities that even the best DOs cannot reach, ex. a DO/PhD at MSU is one of the exceptions though it's not an Ivy PhD by any means.

Correct, but that difference is more due to having a home program, as mentioned in my former post (I have also stated "in part" for my competitive statement in neurosurgery). This is radical difference that you are seeing. Having a home program means multiple things. 1) Having a place to do specialty specific research 2) Having connections in the field 3) Having a PD that acts as a mentor 4) Having a PD recommend you to other programs. This right here is what DOs lack in neurosurgery and many other fields. However, combine this with the shear competitive nature of neurosurgery, you have a field that is nearly impossible for DOs to enter.

Rac Onc is another example where having a home department plays a huge role in the availability of opportunities, for the same reasons mentioned above. The board scores is actually less of an issue than people mention on here. Look at the charting outcomes report of 2014 and the NRMP report of 2014. Overlay the DOs on the USLME step I graph. You will see that there is at least 1 DO that matched with a 230, when the average was 240 at the time (overlay the DOs at the end of the graph and there might be 1 more with a 230). This is not to say the research and connections eliminates the bias. It just makes it less profound, but I acknowledge there will still be programs that screen you applications. These people who make it into Rad Onc are extremely clever on how they apply, its not so much being a stellar DO far above all MDs.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Just stop.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

We're talking PhDs from high tier schools, multiple publishings,

what on earth are you talking about? Few MDs have these kinds of credentials, hell even in neurosurgery only the minority have these kinds of credentials... We know neurosurgery is almost impossible as a DO but let's not lose our heads here.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

what on earth are you talking about? Few MDs have these kinds of credentials, hell even in neurosurgery only the minority have these kinds of credentials... We know neurosurgery is almost impossible as a DO but let's not lose our heads here.

Neurosurgery and Rads Oncs have the highest percentage of candidates with PhDs. Almost half of ppl in Rads Onco have a PhD.


There are also plenty of MD/PhDs. Far more than all the Rad Onc and Neurosurgery residencies in the country.

 

[IslandStyle808]

This is who I am a person who see the shades of grey and tries to truly understand the DO bias in every facet. I even stated data given by the NRMP. I don't know what else to say. Here is an example of an ophthalmology match that happen in 2016 with lower than average USMLE scores, this is what I mean by applying smart (another applicant was even smarter and email all programs who looked at DOs with his USMLE in the 230s), with this I bow out.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/2016-match-stats.1178675/

--Board Scores: 235 Step 1, 243 Step II (667 Comlex I, 643 Comlex II)
--AOA and class rank: Top 25%, SSP (DO honors – but probably means nothing for ACGME)
--Reputation of medical school: DO School– “lower than lower tier” lol
--Research: 1 Case Report, 1 ophthalmology research experience, 3 non-ophtho research experience
--Honors in clerkships:
Honors – Medicine, Cardio, Peds, Psych, ID, Ophtho
High Honors – Surgery, OB/GYN, Family Med
--# and where you did away rotations: 6 (5 DO, 1 MD) - For DO ophtho auditions are required
--# of programs you applied to: 80MD, 8 DO
--Where invited for interviews (both offers and the ones you actually attended):
2 MD –Bronx Leb, Geisinger ;
6 DO – PCOM, Doctor’s, Grandview, St. John NY, St. John Detroit, Larkin/BMI
--Where matched: #1 MD Program (out of 2)! Where I did my away

--Anything that helped your app: (ie: a phone call from your advisor to another program, big-wig letter of recs, MD/PhD, other degree, SDN Forum, etc)

Things that helped: Unite for Sight experience
Things that helped in general: Rotating with programs, Getting info from other DO’s who have matched ACGME, Close mentorship with attending ophthalmologist

This is a tough process. I ended up doing an elective rotation at one of the top institutions in the country for fun in 12/2015 where I chatted with the medical education director there – he said I had a “solid application” however without a connection to a program it would be unlikely for me to get an interview. So if I can offer any advice to DO’s in the future it would be to:
1. Score as high as possible on Steps – as you can see I am below average on my scores but was able to pull it off. Not sure if without the rotation it would have happened.
2. Rotate, research, do something to get a connection to a program so that when your application comes through – someone can vouch for you. Keep in touch with that connection during the process. I had only 1 true random invite.

SF Match: All documents are sent in through the mail. Be prepared as early as possible – collecting your LOR in sealed envelopes and all documents to send in 1 big envelope. Do your research about SF Match - start around June to be prepared. Also - Before you apply to a mass # of programs on SF Match, do some research to read the little information provided under each program. I didn’t look very closely and applied to one program which stated on the SF Match website “they commonly take applicants that score in the top 2% USMLE and top of their medical school class” – I obviously don’t fit this criteria

LOR: I did not have any big wig letters. I had 2 ophtho from ophthalmologists that knew me well. I would however recommend trying to get at least 1 Big Wig Letter. Again that might be the connection you need in order to get an interview position. I was close to a top institution in the country and did not take advantage of that the way I should have.

Expressing interest to programs: I tried everything I could to express interest to programs. I e-mailed my interest including attachments that detailed my experience and interest in the field before interview invites went out (checking last year’s interview thread). I called programs expressing interest without success. I had 1 of my letter writers call programs that he had a connection with on my behalf. That resulted in 1 phone interview that I felt was a courtesy and didn’t realistically count as an interview. I guess my point here is, without being a stellar applicant, you need a true connection to a program. Otherwise just expressing interest got me nowhere coming from DO.

Letter of Intent: I did send out a letter of intent to my #1. I’m not sure how much this helped. Send out relatively soon after your interview if you can to try and influence rank list if possible.

Good luck everyone! Work hard and it will pay off. You must dedicate t0 lots of hard work, time away from family, and hours studying to make this happen.

--Comments on specific programs:
Bronx-Lebanon: DO friendly. Strong small program taking 2 residents in New York setting (diverse pathology). Had a senior resident who matched ASOPRS (very impressive!). If you love the city life I think this would be a great place to train. Having rotated in NY with another program, there is so much pathology in this city and many patients needing care. Surgery #’s were solid, Faculty were supportive, and facilities were fine (nothing over the top). Department chair stated that his residents become somewhat like “his children.” That is a great thing to hear with regards to support during residency. Speaking Spanish is advantageous for this program.

Geisinger: DO friendly. Great Program opening new facilities in near future featuring 50 exam lanes, LASIK suite, large resident area, new wet lab. Small program with 2 residents per year. Faculty are great! Neuro-ophthalmologist from Will’s comes down 2x per month. 2 months of pathology at Wills eye. Lots of Strabismus surgery. Rest of surgery #’s solid. Unique setting – central PA. Patient’s may travel up to 3 hours for an appointment because of rural setting. Interesting pathology stated to come in through daily walk-in clinic. No fellows.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

This is who I am a person who see the shades of grey and tries to truly understand the DO bias in every facet. I even stated data given by the NRMP. I don't know what else to say. Here is an example of an ophthalmology match that happen in 2016 with lower than average USMLE scores, this is what I mean by applying smart, with this I bow out.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/2016-match-stats.1178675/

I see it as the decline in overall competitiveness of Opthalmology. And yes, just because the average is a 240 doesn't mean someone with below that is locked out, ex. the average for FM is probably a 220, yet the match rate difference between someone who has a 189 and a 250 is likely within 5%.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Neurosurgery and Rads Oncs have the highest percentage of candidates with PhDs. Almost half of ppl in Rads Onco have a PhD, those that don't have plenty of research either way.

Well yeah and no one is denying you need a lot of good research for those fields but to claim that the MDs all have Ivy League Ph.Ds and Cell type pubs is a flat out lie. And almost half still means the majority do not. I think Island and I definitely agree with you in general but the the DO bias is more nuanced than what you are discussing, such as the examples that Island has cited. Honestly I forget what we were discussing and what the point was haha

 

[IslandStyle808]

I see it as the decline in overall competitiveness of Opthalmology. And yes, just because the average is a 240 doesn't mean someone with below that is locked out, ex. the average for FM is probably a 220, yet the match rate difference between someone who has a 189 and a 250 is likely within 5%.

Yes this is the point I am making, you don't have to be a baller DO with a USMLE of 270 (there are exceptions such as the 230 with extensive research). The ones who score above average can match into a competitive field with a smart application (some are just more impossible than others, I wouldn't tell a DO to go into neurosurgery no matter their USMLE score). There is a gradient to this all. For instance, nearly all top programs in PM&R have DOs yet only a few top programs in psych have DOs. They both have extremely similar USMLE (220s). The DO bias has shades of gray in all fields.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Well yeah and no one is denying you need a lot of good research for those fields but to claim that the MDs all have Ivy League Ph.Ds and Cell type pubs is a flat out lie. And almost half still means the majority do not. I think Island and I definitely agree with you in general but the the DO bias is more nuanced than what you are discussing, such as the examples that Island has cited. Honestly I forget what we were discussing and what the point was haha

I'm going to repeat, it's practically impossible for a DO to be competitive for Rads Onco. ACGME neurosurgery is borderline impossible for DOs to be competitive for. This is simply due to the fact that DO are easily displaced by far bettter candidates

W



Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

And it's not nuances, it's concrete facts. You need to accept that there's actual concrete and real deficits at DO schools in terms of opportunities and training.


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

And it's not nuances, it's concrete facts. You need to accept that there's actual concrete and real deficits at DO schools in terms of opportunities and training.


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

That's our point, we know that. All I'm doing is arguing your post that literally said that the reason that DOs can't get those fields is because the MDs all have "Ph.Ds from high tier places" and tons of top pubs which just flat out isn't true. Yes the biggest differences between MD and DO apps to this fields are the things that DO schools lack, we know that. But to claim that all the MDs have these impeccable CVs is just not true.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

They do in neuro and rads onco.




Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

 

[NoTownPreMed]

I'm going to repeat, it's practically impossible for a DO to be competitive for Rads Onco. ACGME neurosurgery is borderline impossible for DOs to be competitive for. This is simply due to the fact that DO are easily displaced by far bettter candidates

W



Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile

There's a DO (but listed MD) PGY-5 at OSU for Rad Onc.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

There's a DO (but listed MD) PGY-5 at OSU for Rad Onc.

Want to bring up his CV? I'm going to tell you that i'll probably need to undergo mitosis and have a clone doing work for me to have a CV that is close to his likely.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

The charting outcomes says your wrong... The majority of MDs match these specialties without the things you are talking about. Do they have a good number of research abstracts, posters, and pubs? Yes. Are they all NEJM, Cell type of projects? Not even close. I'm done with this argument.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Self-selection.

 

[IslandStyle808]

There are two tracks of rad onc residencies. The first is the more academic track and these are the ones you will see plenty of PhD. The second are the more clinical tracks which is where you will see the high stat people with more clinical type research (no nearly as many pubs). Again there are differences, you don't need to have a PhD or 5 th year to match as an MD. Starting early is enough for them. For DOs, its just get above average scores, having speciality specific research and knowing which programs take DOs and which don't is "all that one needs to do" and "all that one can do" (too much fallacies make it out to be DOs with 260 USMLE scores and took 5th year with 10+ research pubs). I'm not saying its practical, but I am not saying its impossible either.

And ophthalmology is not getting less competitive but more so or should I say more selective, the USMLE scores in 10 years have went from a 230 average to 244....

https://www.sfmatch.org/SpecialtyInsideAll.aspx?id=6&typ=2&name=Ophthalmology#

 

[healingwave]

This thread makes me sad lol. I'm applying to DO schools and want to get into orthopedics.

 

[Ho0v-man]

This thread makes me sad lol. I'm applying to DO schools and want to get into orthopedics.

Of course you do...


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[healingwave]

Of course you do...


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

???

 

[Ho0v-man]

???

Everyone wants to be an ortho surgeon for some reason. It's not feasible for the vast majority of med students even on the MD side. Just have something else you'd be happy to do. Most people aren't cut out for it.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[healingwave]

Everyone wants to be an ortho surgeon for some reason. It's not feasible for the vast majority of med students even on the MD side. Just have something else you'd be happy to do. Most people aren't cut out for it.



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

My orthopedic surgeon that I work for who is a DO must be a special case.

 

[parpar2222]

>

 

[Ho0v-man]

My orthopedic surgeon that I work for who is a DO must be a special case.

Yes and no. He probably went to an AOA residency, which is still very competitive. But those won't exist by the time you're matching and acgme is even harder for DOs. No matter what you have to be a rockstar though and it's kind of naive to go into med school thinking you'll be the best of the best IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[healingwave]

Yes and no. He probably went to an AOA residency, which is still very competitive. But those won't exist by the time you're matching and acgme is even harder for DOs. No matter what you have to be a rockstar though and it's kind of naive to go into med school thinking you'll be the best of the best IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Idon't think I will be the best of the best but I will definitely work hard to try to get a residency position.

 

[Ho0v-man]

Idon't think I will be the best of the best but I will definitely work hard to try to get a residency position.

Well hey best of luck. Didn't mean to come off as a tool or anything. Just keep in mind that literally half the folks there are gunning for it too but >5% actually end up accomplishing it (although I'm sure some just change their minds).




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

There are two tracks of rad onc residencies. The first is the more academic track and these are the ones you will see plenty of PhD. The second are the more clinical tracks which is where you will see the high stat people with more clinical type research (no nearly as many pubs). Again there are differences, you don't need to have a PhD or 5 th year to match as an MD. Starting early is enough for them. For DOs, its just get above average scores, having speciality specific research and knowing which programs take DOs and which don't is "all that one needs to do" and "all that one can do" (too much fallacies make it out to be DOs with 260 USMLE scores and took 5th year with 10+ research pubs). I'm not saying its practical, but I am not saying its impossible either.

And ophthalmology is not getting less competitive but more so or should I say more selective, the USMLE scores in 10 years have went from a 230 average to 244....

https://www.sfmatch.org/SpecialtyInsideAll.aspx?id=6&typ=2&name=Ophthalmology#

The problem is what you've described is a relatively rare flower in the DO world. Maybe proceeding the unified match we will see more top tier applicants with better resumes who were applying AOA going for ACGME, but generally my point still stands. It's very very difficult to the point that what we have is mainly anecdotal.

Right, USMLE scores kinda have also been going up as prep organizations have become a major thing. But generally the word on Opthalmology is that it plateau'd competitiveness and somewhat become less competitive. Most likely because the pay is likely falling. But I could be wrong, I read this a while ago on the Opt subfourm here.

 

[IslandStyle808]

The problem is what you've described is a relatively rare flower in the DO world. Maybe proceeding the unified match we will see more top tier applicants with better resumes who were applying AOA going for ACGME, but generally my point still stands. It's very very difficult to the point that what we have is mainly anecdotal.

Right, USMLE scores kinda have also been going up as prep organizations have become a major thing. But generally the word on Opthalmology is that it plateau'd competitiveness and somewhat become less competitive. Most likely because the pay is likely falling. But I could be wrong, I read this a while ago on the Opt subfourm here.

This is true, all the evidence is anecdotal (because not enough DOs try to being with and the whole number of DOs are low). I had the same views as yourself 1-2 years ago. However, looking at the stories and the evidence from the NRMP reports I am starting to realize there are some who made it without being insanely stellar. There are programs that filter out DOs in Rad Onc for instance, so no matter how hard they try they won't get it. However, the ones that do consider DOs probably don't take a US MD USMLE = US DO USMLE +10 policy. There is another part in this where DOs are not capable of getting the scores that US MD do. Looking at 2007-2011, there were 6 DOs that matched into Rad Onc and then in 2012-2016 this doubled to 12. This in part maybe due to the quality of students that are in DO schools now a days. I am not denying your overall point, but I disagree details of your point. People match into these fields because they understand what leg work they need to match and have a true understanding of the DO bias. There will be people who still apply regardless of the realty of DO matching. I agree knowing that it isn't practical to match into these fields as a DO is still important, but to those who still try know what to do is even more so important.

As for optho, the numbers have plateau due to competitiveness. However, DOs have still matched optho even in the height of its competitiveness. At the same time, selectivity is still rising. So DOs that matched now still has to work just as hard as the DOs that match in the past. It is still extremely hard to match into the field even with the slight decline in numbers.