Top 20 programs for fellowship

Started by magician
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
M

magician

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
1. MGH, BWH, JHU, Stanford, UCSF
2. MSKCC, MDACC, Mayo, CCF, Duke
3. WashU, Yale, UPenn, Mich, UWash
4. UTSW, Emory, UPMC, Chicago, Vandy

Which programs should be or should not be among top 20 for fellowship training for academic pathologists (clinic track)?
 
What do you mean by "clinic track?" Do you mean clinical pathology as opposed to anatomic? Best is a relative term - there are no official rankings. It's all about what is best for you and your career goals.

You've listed good schools with good reputations. However, one program will not have "the best" fellowship in every specialty. You should search based on subspecialties (hematopathology, etc.). You can always go to a library and look at some pathology texts to see who writes the chapters and where they are located - these institutions are likely to have a good fellowship in that subspecialty.
 
thanks for reply. "clinic tracck"----means non- research track.

i know no offcial ranking. that's why i just group them (no specific order).

"one program will not have "the best" fellowship in every specialty." which one is it? CCF?
 
magician said:
1. MGH, BWH, JHU, Stanford, UCSF
2. MSKCC, MDACC, Mayo, CCF, Duke
3. WashU, Yale, UPenn, Mich, UWash
4. UTSW, Emory, UPMC, Chicago, Vandy

Which programs should be or should not be among top 20 for fellowship training for academic pathologists (clinic track)?
Click to expand...

I have no idea where you got these rankings or whether they are meant to be in any order, but I encourage people not to put much stock in them. Every fellowship is different, many good programs have excellent fellowships in some areas and so-so ones in others. Depends on lots of things. Programs also have different emphasis, most have an academic slant but some are more clinical or some are more research heavy.

I am also curious how you put a program like cleveland clinic so high on your rankings, because they don't even have a surg path fellowship (or anything else within surg path other than GI). And Duke has no fellowships in anything in surg path that I know of. Meanwhile, a place like UPMC has a fellowship in almost everything.

As I have posted many times, rankings are so meaningless as to be worthless. Anybody with half a brain and a decent amount of experience in the field will quickly find out which are good fellowships and places to be, and by no means is there any consensus on stratification.
 
yaah said:
I have no idea where you got these rankings or whether they are meant to be in any order, but I encourage people not to put much stock in them. Every fellowship is different, many good programs have excellent fellowships in some areas and so-so ones in others. Depends on lots of things. Programs also have different emphasis, most have an academic slant but some are more clinical or some are more research heavy.

I am also curious how you put a program like cleveland clinic so high on your rankings, because they don't even have a surg path fellowship (or anything else within surg path other than GI). And Duke has no fellowships in anything in surg path that I know of. Meanwhile, a place like UPMC has a fellowship in almost everything.

As I have posted many times, rankings are so meaningless as to be worthless. Anybody with half a brain and a decent amount of experience in the field will quickly find out which are good fellowships and places to be, and by no means is there any consensus on stratification.
Click to expand...
Well if you just look at the names, it's not surprising as to how a list like this can be thrown together. This might as well be an attempt to rank residencies and not just fellowships. Good point you raise regarding the possibility that a program listed may not even have fellowships.
 
Bierstiefel said:
Well if you just look at the names, it's not surprising as to how a list like this can be thrown together. This might as well be an attempt to rank residencies and not just fellowships. Good point you raise regarding the possibility that a program listed may not even have fellowships.
Click to expand...

To me it looks like a cut and paste of US News' "Top med schools" list, with those without path residencies removed, and those with multiple path residencies altered as such. And since Cleveland Clinic is such a famous hospital, why not throw it in there (behind Mayo, of course).
 
yaah said:
To me it looks like a cut and paste of US News' "Top med schools" list, with those without path residencies removed, and those with multiple path residencies altered as such. And since Cleveland Clinic is such a famous hospital, why not throw it in there (behind Mayo, of course).
Click to expand...
Well, what can you say...people will always look at names. Not to say that everyone is a name-***** but most everyone will take names into serious consideration and nothing anyone says will change that.

Maybe we can start a NWA (name-***** anonymous) group...I'll start:

My name is Bierstiefel and I'm a name-*****.
 
"To me it looks like a cut and paste of US News' "Top med schools" list, with those without path residencies removed, and those with multiple path residencies altered as such. "

yes. you are right.

so Duke and CCF should not be there. actually that's why i group them with three hospitals.
 
Bierstiefel said:
Well, what can you say...people will always look at names. Not to say that everyone is a name-***** but most everyone will take names into serious consideration and nothing anyone says will change that.

Maybe we can start a NWA (name-***** anonymous) group...I'll start:

My name is Bierstiefel and I'm a name-*****.
Click to expand...

NWA already taken. back in the day where pimpin' and whorin' music was banned. man, am i old.
 
As noted by Yaah and others, generalized Path. dept., and thus Fellowship, rankings are simply nonsensical. Among the varying reasons:

1. No path dept. can claim to be #1, 2 or even 3 in all Path subspec areas.
2. Top-notch Fellowship training is not infrequently based on the qualifications of a leading specialist in the area. If (s)he moves, so does the "ranking".
3. Realize, that you should be looking for quality training. Not a "brand name" on your cv. Honestly, few people would really care.

Personally, I have two fellowships from different institutions. Both "brand name" in their fields. However, I wouldn't want to complete both at the same institution, due to varying strengths, and I have no basis to claim that they're better than other institutions, for the simple reason that I haven't completed Fellowships at other institutions. However, I do feel that I received really good training.
Post-Fellowship, it's a bit surprising how few people actually cared where I trained, despite the "brand names". It's a bit like trying to flaunt your AmEx Platinum card. It says something about your background, and it's nice to have, and gives some nice perks. But most of the time, people really don't comment on it, care, or even notice.

That being said, there's certainly some places I'd try to get into, for specific training. E.g. I'd prefer Colby (Mayo AZ) for Pulmonary, Epstein (JHU) for GU, Ladanyi (MSKCC) for molec. path., Fletcher (BWH) for soft tissue, etc. etc.
However, do note that I'd be looking for specific people to train me, not insitutions which necessarily are very good at everything they do. Also, as for Residency, you have to take other things into consideration. Some programs are primarily research-oriented. Others have significant amounts of scut work. Others again are semi-malignant. Things you just can't average out and put into a spreadsheet and grade for general consumption.
 
Villin said:
NWA already taken. back in the day where pimpin' and whorin' music was banned. man, am i old.
Click to expand...

yeah yeah...NWA is also an airline company and was also associated with wrestlers in tights (although, they can't take any credit for Wrestlemania).

Trivia question: In Wrestlemania IV, Hulk Hogan defended his championship belt by squaring off against __________________? As a bonus, what was this opponent's actual real name?

PathOne, I think I need to buy you a cookie.
 
Bierstiefel said:
yeah yeah...NWA is also an airline company and was also associated with wrestlers in tights (although, they can't take any credit for Wrestlemania).

Trivia question: In Wrestlemania IV, Hulk Hogan defended his championship belt by squaring off against __________________? As a bonus, what was this opponent's actual real name?

PathOne, I think I need to buy you a cookie.
Click to expand...

IV? Big john stud, king kong bundy, andre the giant...😕 my guess would be andre the giant. i dunno his real name. 😳
 
Villin said:
IV? Big john stud, king kong bundy, andre the giant...😕 my guess would be andre the giant. i dunno his real name. 😳
Click to expand...

Andre the Giant is correct. King Kong Bundy was Wrestlemania III.

Andre's real name was Andre Rousimoff.
 
Bierstiefel: My acceptance of that kind cookie offer is dependent on you not bringing those overpumped testosterone-filled grease covered wrestlers with 'ya.
 
i'm pretty sure andre the giant was wrestlemania III and king kong bundy was wrestlemania II in the steel cage.
 
poutsara said:
i'm pretty sure andre the giant was wrestlemania III and king kong bundy was wrestlemania II in the steel cage.
Click to expand...

wow great thanks for bringing up a week old thread to deliver that nugget.😴
 
You must log in or register to reply here.