Top 25 radiology program list from auntminnie.com

[DrFraud]

THREE REASONS MOST RADIOLOGY RESIDENTS DO FELLOWSHIPS.

1. Amount of information that you have to master is insane. 4 years is not enough to be a very good radiologist. Sure you can set your goals to become an average radiologist BUT average radiologists get sued all of the time. By going into a fellowship, you decide to master the information in one discrete specialty.

2. Marketing. Fellowships brand you as an expert in a subspecialty. Private practice jobs preferentially hire subspecialists these days. Plus, it is near impossible to be an academic radiologist without a fellowship.

3. Mammography. No one wants to do these highly litigenous reads. You can have the eyes of the best mammographer in the world and you will still miss breast cancer because of the limitation of contrast. So you are literally hoping not to get sued.


Medical students see radiology as a easy lifestyle field. In reality, next to radiation oncology it is the most mentally taxing specialty of them all. THERE IS A REASON RADIOLOGY RESIDENCY IS 4 YEARS AND 80% OF residents do fellowships. YOU HAVE TO KNOW A LOT!!

Sometimes I laugh at the ER residents. They don't know crap. All they do is order a CT Head, CT Abdomen, and/or CT chest to bail them out. Plus, you can read very little as a ER resident and learn on the job by pattern recognition. If you don't read in radiology you will NOT survive.

This is something that I have to agree with P53 as an MS IV. Many residents by their 3-4 year who I have met and who originally shunned doing a fellowship ended up reversing their position because of these and many other reasons.

Radiology is anything but easy.....after spending a 8 hours concentrating in a reading room I go home totally exhausted. I do think reading outside of any area whether it is primary care or radiology is important but it is absolutely essential in Rads, and the Residents that I observed read and read extensively when they were not in a hospital.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[synapse lapse]

This is something that I have to agree with P53 as an MS IV. Many residents by their 3-4 year who I have met and who originally shunned doing a fellowship ended up reversing their position because of these and many other reasons.

Radiology is anything but easy.....after spending a 8 hours concentrating in a reading room I go home totally exhausted. I do think reading outside of any area whether it is primary care or radiology is important but it is absolutely essential in Rads, and the Residents that I observed read and read extensively when they were not in a hospital.

Sure, but that isn't what the debate began on. It was about the legitimacy of p53 list, the opportunity for "competitive" fellowships coming from "average" rads programs, and the possible career limitations by not training at one of these super duper programs. In the end, the only thing we can be sure about is that p53 is a douche because he feels the need to put others down and YELL IN HIS POSTS instead of backing his arguments with hard evidence or having a cogent debate.

 

[Labslave]

Either you're trolling and hoping people don't read the article you linked (which I've read before) or you're unable to understand conclusions. The latter worries me more, as clearly you're in a prestigious radiology residency.

Also surprising was the absence of a relationship between graduates' ability and salary. Even if residency program quality is only an imperfect proxy for graduates' ability, as is almost certainly true, one would expect a general positive relationship between the two. Instead, we found a general lack of a relationship. Moreover, the one statistically significant relationship that we found is very puzzling, that graduates of the poorest programs have, other things being equal, higher incomes than graduates of the best rated programs. This finding is not explicable by the hypothesis that graduates of the poorest rated programs enter private practice, where salaries are higher than in academia. Because we used multiple regression analysis, effects of all other variables considered in our studies, including private practice versus an academic job, were controlled for. In other words, the puzzling finding constitutes the difference in salary after controlling for what type of job the graduate has taken (and for all other factors we studied).

Anyway, I'm not arguing against your assertion that the top radiology programs may help you. As someone who is interested in academics, I'm hoping to get into a reputable program. But it's not the end-all, be-all and I'm a firm believer that you can get anywhere from anywhere.

p53: You quoted an article that argues against what you're saying and then ignored the fact that this was pointed out. Strong work. I hope you're a little more observant than this while on the job. I'm re-posting Burns' excellent comment above to emphasize how much of an effing idiot you are.

And the idea that people who are arguing against you have no shot at "top programs" and are somehow jealous of you is ridiculous. Period.

If the ideas you express and the way you express them on this thread are any indication of your true personality, you won't have to worry about getting a good fellowship despite your residency position - nobody except the bimbos in your pic would even be remotely impressed by your idiocy.

 

[Pewl]

Hey p53,

We just got email confirmation from ASTRO That the paycuts in rad onc have been reduced from ~19% to ~1% starting Jan 2010. It looks like ASTRO's advocacy group was successful!!

 

[Cliff Huxtable]

Is there any website where I can find out what the stats are of the applicants? FREIDA doen't show this information. I would like to see of all the programs in the country, which ones are more competitive than the others.

For example there are a lot of programs I haven't heard of, but that doesn't mean they aren't good or "easy" to match into.

I would like to spend my money wisely when applying.

 

[synapse lapse]

Is there any website where I can find out what the stats are of the applicants? FREIDA doen't show this information. I would like to see of all the programs in the country, which ones are more competitive than the others.

For example there are a lot of programs I haven't heard of, but that doesn't mean they aren't good or "easy" to match into.

I would like to spend my money wisely when applying.

You can see in NRMP charting outcomes overall applicant statistics. Obviously programs are not going to release their individual numbers. There is no objective way to evaluate a programs competitiveness but some rough estimates can be made to place programs into gross tiers.

 

[Man In White]

You can try matchapplicants.com for rads. It's likely a horrible representation of the applicant pool in general, but it's pretty much the only organized data there is for what you're asking.

 

[ShadowSleuth]

We can all make blanket generalizations to fulfill our reason for not matching at a top radiology program. Whatever you need to rationalize to make sure you feel better.

Bottomline, it doesn't hurt you to match at a top program (and can only help you). Wouldn't your want to keep your options open and maximize your chances of future success. So why would you want to settle for less?

In medicine, the key is to keep your options as open as long as you can. If you go to one of the top 25 programs you will meet attendings along the way that can help you match at a top fellowship.

There are people that go to a middle of the road radiology program that did or did not have a choice to match at a higher caliber place (most people that have a choice choose to go to the best program on their ranklist BTW) that will refute my arguments. Good for them. One might need this mental crutch to feel better about one self.

I stand by my assertion. Furthermore, I have an article from AJR ( a very prestigious academic publication in radiology) that shows that there is a positive correlation of a person's radiology program reputation and starting salary after residency. http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content/full/178/5/1067

Lastly, it is a fact that residents at the top programs have higher physics pass rate and oral exam pass rates.

Sure you can be brilliant at a middle tier program but we constantly need competition and/or academic leaders to push us.

It is like LeBron/Jordan playing basketball in a minor league basketball league. He would still be great but would not achieve his potential.

A lot of radiology learning occurs at the workstation during the workday.

Would you rather staff/learn/dictate studies with Richard Webb (that published the CT book that you have to know cold) or an abdominal imager that covers Chest because the program does not have true subspecialty radiologists?
The choice is yours. Just don't BS people on here and say it DOESN'T make a difference where you go for residency. This is a cry by people that go to middle of the road programs that give advice to justify their choice.

One more note, most of the top radiology programs have top fellowships. These top fellowships go inhouse (i.e. residents currently in the program). Once you move for residency, the last thing you would want to do is move somewhere for one year to complete a fellowship after 4 years of residency.

WHERE YOU GO MAKES A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IT KEEPS THE MOST DOORS OPEN. ANYONE THAT ARGUES THIS ARGUMENT BY SAYING THAT JOE SCHMOE FROM SOUTH ALABAMA GOT INTO DUKE IS A COMPLETE IDIOT. GOING TO THE TOP PROGRAMS MAKES IT MUCH EASIER TO MATCH AT A TOP FELLOWSHIP. THAT IS A FACT.

p53, don't know if you're still around and listening. But as an alum of South Alabama radiology, who's residency classmate turned down MIR for Hopkins, I have seen multiple of our residents go to MGH, Hopkins, MIR, UAB and Duke as well as Emory, Vanderbilt, UF-Gainesville, and a host of other great fellowships that you didn't put on your list. Furthermore, last fall South Alabama hired one of their alum, who had just completed his IR fellowship at Brigham and Women's. If you need confirmation, go to http://www.usahealthsystem.com/body.cfm?id=3294&action=detail&ref=1. South Alabama has been very successful at getting their residents into their fellowship of choice. So, the next time you choose a program to illustrate your point, you may want to be more knowledgeable about your selection.

 

[ShadowSleuth]

Oh, and I forgot to mention...the program director at UAB is a graduate of South Alabama.

 

[MossPoh]

Necromancy ftw!

 

[deleted103644]

Necromancy ftw!

That is not dead which can eternal lie.

 

[MossPoh]

I'm going to hold my first thought of a response to that, because it is dangerous territory.

Seriously though, anyone that looks at the list and comments as some definitive end all be all of rankings has issues. It is a nice skeleton of what stronger programs are considered for people who have no clue. It doesn't mean all others are weak.

 

[PokerDoc]

The list is from 2009. Even if it were 100% accurate.. things change.

 

[Gfunk6]

That is not dead which can eternal lie.

And with strange eons even threads may die.

 

[DrBowtie]

I matched at a "Top 25" program

 

[deleted103644]

I only matched at an honorable mention. :'(

Would anyone be interested in an attempt to make an objective list? What information should be in there if you are?

 

[cowme]

I stand by my assertion. Furthermore, I have an article from AJR ( a very prestigious academic publication in radiology) that shows that there is a positive correlation of a person's radiology program reputation and starting salary after residency. http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content/full/178/5/1067

easily the best part of this post. Directly from the article:

"Moreover, the one statistically significant relationship that we found is very puzzling, that graduates of the poorest programs have, other things being equal, higher incomes than graduates of the best rated programs. This finding is not explicable by the hypothesis that graduates of the poorest rated programs enter private practice, where salaries are higher than in academia. Because we used multiple regression analysis, effects of all other variables considered in our studies, including private practice versus an academic job, were controlled for. In other words, the puzzling finding constitutes the difference in salary after controlling for what type of job the graduate has taken (and for all other factors we studied)."

 

[deleted103644]

.

 

[ShadowSleuth]

The mole on top of the hill always dreamed of living on a mountain.

 

[MossPoh]

We drown moles where I come from....or set little spiked traps. Perhaps it is wise the mile aspires for higher ground to avoid the wrath of the hose.

 

[deleted103644]

We drown moles where I come from....or set little spiked traps. Perhaps it is wise the mile aspires for higher ground to avoid the wrath of the hose.

Suddenly picturing you as Bill Murray in Caddyshack.

(Yes, I know those are gophers, but still...)

 

[MossPoh]

No worries. I had the same mental image as I was typing it.

 

[NipponMD]

Over 10 years ago this thread was started. How well has this thread aged, and was p53 right?

Doximity is now the leader in radiology residency rankings (Doximity Residency Navigator). I'll mark those in the top 10 on doximity with a *, with the ranking to the right.

*1. MGH #3
*1. UCSF #1
*1. PENN #9
*1. MIR #2
*5. Johns Hopkins #6
*6. Duke #5
*6. Michigan #8
*6. BWH #10
*9. Stanford #7
*10. NYU #4
100% of top 10 are in his list, with small tweaks to the order (amazing). Either p53 was perfect in the ranking at the time or this list became so influential that people believed it and the rankings fell in line.

p53 also had a lot of ideas about automated reading, and AI has come to fruition and is changing radiology... Radiologists still have jobs for now.

Well done, Sir!

 

[Dave1980]

Over 10 years ago this thread was started. How well has this thread aged, and was p53 right?

Doximity is now the leader in radiology residency rankings (Doximity Residency Navigator). I'll mark those in the top 10 on doximity with a *, with the ranking to the right.

*1. MGH #3
*1. UCSF #1
*1. PENN #9
*1. MIR #2
*5. Johns Hopkins #6
*6. Duke #5
*6. Michigan #8
*6. BWH #10
*9. Stanford #7
*10. NYU #4
100% of top 10 are in his list, with small tweaks to the order (amazing). Either p53 was perfect in the ranking at the time or this list became so influential that people believed it and the rankings fell in line.

p53 also had a lot of ideas about automated reading, and AI has come to fruition and is changing radiology... Radiologists still have jobs for now.

Well done, Sir!

ranking of radiology residency like this is really stupid. this isn't a horserace.

 

[.Asterion]

ranking of radiology residency like this is really stupid. this isn't a horserace.

Helpful for trying to narrow down where to apply.

 

[clutch21]

Helpful for trying to narrow down where to apply.

I’d argue it’s not all that helpful. Maybe a very rough guide at best. Most people are familiar with the few big names at the top (i.e. top 5-10 range), but after that it’s all just blowing smoke.

Prestige/research output, which is the main factor in these rankings, does not equal quality of clinical training. In some programs, these can run in opposition to each other. There are several programs ranked below the “top 25”, that offer training that is equivalent, if not superior to several of these higher ranked programs.

Name can matter, but not all that much. Especially not when talking about programs outside the top 5 range. I think applicants should really prioritize fit/feel, rather than a ranking system using factors that aren’t relevant to clinical training. For the vast majority of applicants, clinical training should trump all else.

 

[CannedPineapple]

I’d argue it’s not all that helpful. Maybe a very rough guide at best. Most people are familiar with the few big names at the top (i.e. top 5-10 range), but after that it’s all just blowing smoke.

Prestige/research output, which is the main factor in these rankings, does not equal quality of clinical training. In some programs, these can run in opposition to each other. There are several programs ranked below the “top 25”, that offer training that is equivalent, if not superior to several of these higher ranked programs.

Name can matter, but not all that much. Especially not when talking about programs outside the top 5 range. I think applicants should really prioritize fit/feel, rather than a ranking system using factors that aren’t relevant to clinical training. For the vast majority of applicants, clinical training should trump all else.

I agree, I think it’d be much more helpful to have a list highlighting programs that are known to give the best clinical training (since that should be the primary goal of residency anyway). I’ve actually been asking faculty at my school this very question, and would love to hear what others have heard too.

Within the “top 10,” the ones that seem to bubble up when I’ve asked this question are MIR, UCSF, and Duke. Outside the “top 10“ (which is still underrepresented overall in my convo’s), I’ve heard MUSC and Jefferson a few times.

 

[Cognovi]

I agree, I think it’d be much more helpful to have a list highlighting programs that are known to give the best clinical training (since that should be the primary goal of residency anyway). I’ve actually been asking faculty at my school this very question, and would love to hear what others have heard too.

Within the “top 10,” the ones that seem to bubble up when I’ve asked this question are MIR, UCSF, and Duke. Outside the “top 10“ (which is still underrepresented overall in my convo’s), I’ve heard MUSC and Jefferson a few times.

News alert: this is what the Doximity survey is, but on a local scale. Doximity asks people to give the top 5 best clinical training programs in their specialty. The exact wording is "Please nominate up to 5 [SPECIALTY] residency programs that offer the best clinical training. Do not consider geography. All nominations will receive the same weight, regardless of the order in which you list them."

There will be biases in any survey. Your survey of the faculty at your school is limited by the small sample size and whatever geographic/training/personal biases come with their pedigrees. The Doximity survey is biased by whoever decided to sign up for Doximity (eg, programs that send out an email telling alumni to answer the survey, people who are more connected to the Silicon Valley types where Doximity is based). Because you know your faculty rather than a sample of board-certified radiologists across the country, and you can ask probing/clarifying follow-up questions, you may choose to trust your own survey more.

I’d argue it’s not all that helpful. Maybe a very rough guide at best. Most people are familiar with the few big names at the top (i.e. top 5-10 range), but after that it’s all just blowing smoke.

This is an important point: the Doximity survey asks for the top 5. Because outside of 15 programs or so, the number of nominations to most programs is very small, it is blowing smoke to try to infer that a #20 program is better than a #30 program. The Doximity ranking is mostly useful for identifying the tip-top tier, ie top 10 +/- 5 programs.

ranking of radiology residency like this is really stupid. this isn't a horserace.

It's not a horserace because the number of radiology positions is so large and the vast majority of residents will not train at a top 10 program. The Doximity ranking is like watching the Kentucky derby, but what most people are interested in is just learning to ride any horse around the track. We can't all get Secretariat.

============
One final point about Doximity rankings: if you have followed them over the years, and also compared them to p53's list, you'll notice that they are relatively stagnant over time. In comparison, the USNWR rankings of medical schools changes a lot over time. What's the difference? The Doximity rankings are based on reputation surveys, and reputations last a long time, far beyond when a person last had experience with a person who was related to the program. The USNWR rankings are a mismash of factors like NIH funding, admissions stats, reputation surveys of deans and residency programs, faculty numbers; and the magazine tweaks the weightings of these factors year after year arbitrarily so the rankings change and people are interested in the changes.

Even if UCSF got cited by the ACGME next year for something egregious, it won't be reflected in Doximity's ranking of the program for many years because most people won't know about it.

 

[Dave1980]

As long as it is a decent program go by fit/feel and location. As mentioned above the rankings take into account research output and research funding. That sounds good but it actually means that the most famous Radiologists will be more focused on research than on teaching and will have multiple days off a week to be in the lab or whatever they do.

 

[Butters Stotch]

As long as it is a decent program go by fit/feel and location. As mentioned above the rankings take into account research output and research funding. That sounds good but it actually means that the most famous Radiologists will be more focused on research than on teaching and will have multiple days off a week to be in the lab or whatever they do.

When you say “fit” what does that exactly mean?

 

[clutch21]

When you say “fit” what does that exactly mean?

Do you see yourself fitting into a program’s culture for 4+ years? This includes both the program itself, as well as the city. It’s very much a gut feeing which is based mainly on your interview day. Also another very important question to ask is- do the residents seem genuinely happy?

Unfortunately with virtual interviews this upcoming cycle, it’ll be very difficult, if not impossible to get a sense of this. I’d advise applicants seek out email or other communication with residents from a given programs if your interested. 4-5 years in the prime of your life is too important to wind up somewhere where you'll be unhappy.

 

[jake2]

For some historical context, p53 used to be a well known troll on the auntminnie forums who was banned multiple times (his avatar is a clue). Wouldn't take his ranking list overly seriously when making your own residency decisions.

 

[Dr. USMLE]

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-medical-schools/radiology-rankings

 

[Cognovi]

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-medical-schools/radiology-rankings

The USNWR specialty rankings never had much face validity because 1) the survey respondents are deans and other such administrative faculty at the medical school, and 2) the rankings are for medical schools rather than programs. You're not sure whether these faculty know about the specialty programs at other institutions because they are likely not in the same field. You get a bias for what academics care about, as private practice people are not surveyed. You get a ranking for Harvard but you're not sure whether that reflects the medical student curriculum in radiology or the residency and fellowship programs at Mass General, Brigham, Beth Israel, and/or Mt Auburn. Whoever designed the ranking did not have in mind residency training, which is based at hospitals, not medical schools.

 

[NDcienporciento100]

Here is the highly acclaimed top 25 radiology program list by academic radiologists that was posted on Auntminnie.com.

Here is the list I compiled based on conversations at RSNA and ARRS with over 20 university radiologists. Radiology residency rankings do not correlate with medical school reputation. You may give this list to any senior radiology attending and they will agree with this assessment with possible minor adjustments.

1. MGH
1. UCSF
1. PENN
1. MIR
5. Johns Hopkins
6. Duke
6. Michigan
6. BWH
9. Stanford
10. NYU
11. Mayo Clinic-Rochester
11. Wake Forest
13. UCLA
13. Univ. Washington
13. Univ. Virginia
13. Univ. Pittsburgh
13. BID
18. UCSD
18. Thomas Jefferson
20. Indiana
20. North Carolina
20. UTSW
23. Wisconsin
23. UAB
23. Cleveland Clinic

Honorable Mention: Northwestern, Cornell, Iowa, Florida-Gainesville, Vanderbilt, Cornell, Emory, South Carolina, Oregon Health, Maryland, Baylor-Houston, Utah, Arkansas, Baylor-Dallas, UT-Houston, William Beaumont, Henry Ford, Medical College of Wisconsin, Albert Einstein, Santa Clara Valley, New Mexico, Virginia Mason, Scott and White, Brown

Do they make an IR List?

 

[SeisK]

The USNWR specialty rankings never had much face validity because 1) the survey respondents are deans and other such administrative faculty at the medical school, and 2) the rankings are for medical schools rather than programs. You're not sure whether these faculty know about the specialty programs at other institutions because they are likely not in the same field. You get a bias for what academics care about, as private practice people are not surveyed. You get a ranking for Harvard but you're not sure whether that reflects the medical student curriculum in radiology or the residency and fellowship programs at Mass General, Brigham, Beth Israel, and/or Mt Auburn. Whoever designed the ranking did not have in mind residency training, which is based at hospitals, not medical schools.

The face validity is high if your goal is an academic/research career in radiology with tendrils that extend outside of the simple department of radiology. If you’re an MD PhD and want to do multidisciplinary academic work, USNWR is the ideal list I think.

For most everyone though this does not apply.

 

[Radgy]

AuntMinnie Best Radiology Training Program Semifinalists, 2020:

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
Brown University, Providence, RI
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Duke University, Durham, NC
Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. Louis, MO
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
New York University, New York, NY
NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Radiology, New York, NY
Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
Stanford University, Stanford, CA
Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA
University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA
University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
University of Washington, Seattle, WA
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC
Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
Yale University, New Haven, CT

 

[NDcienporciento100]

AuntMinnie Best Radiology Training Program Semifinalists, 2020:

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
Brown University, Providence, RI
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Duke University, Durham, NC
Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. Louis, MO
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
New York University, New York, NY
NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Radiology, New York, NY
Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
Stanford University, Stanford, CA
Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA
University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA
University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
University of Washington, Seattle, WA
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC
Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
Yale University, New Haven, CT

Interesting, can definitely tell that IR quality plays no role into Development of this list.

 

[Radgy]

AuntMinnie Best Radiology Training Program Semifinalists, 2021:

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
Brown University, Providence, RI
Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health, Lebanon, NH
Duke University, Durham, NC
Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, St. Louis, MO
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ
Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
New York University, New York, NY
NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Radiology, New York, NY
Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
Stanford University, Stanford, CA
Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA
University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA
University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
University of Washington, Seattle, WA
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC
Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
Yale University, New Haven, CT

 

[RageQuitter34]

Any reason why mt sinai doesn't make this list even though they're ranked pretty high on doximity

 

[SeisK]

Any reason why mt sinai doesn't make this list even though they're ranked pretty high on doximity

It’s all subjective.