I recently got accepted to this program and I wanted a new thread for questions for new students.
When will there be a Facebook group for the 2014 school year?
When will there be a Facebook group for the 2014 school year?
Last edited:
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
UQ-Ochsner 2014
Started by pre med 2014
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
If I choose to go I won't be able to see if I get into US MD, what do you guys recommend? Just go for it and forget usa md/do?
Tough situation. UQ Oschner seems to be pretty solid. Only concerns are obviously matching in the future. But UQ is a first class school, which could theoretically help you out in residency interviews. I'd suggest for you to send a few emails out to American schools you applied to stating that you are really interested in their programs and give them small updates with your current healthcare-related activities.
Also, I have a question. Was it ever discovered if UQ-Oschner graduates can actually practice in all 50 states? Their website is vague about this, which scares me. You should really find this out before you make a decision.
Congrats on your acceptance!
Also, I have a question. Was it ever discovered if UQ-Oschner graduates can actually practice in all 50 states? Their website is vague about this, which scares me. You should really find this out before you make a decision.
Congrats on your acceptance!
The short answer is yes, it was never a real issue.
The long answer can be researched here, particularly nybgrus' posts:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=881074
Last edited:
Do people end up paying twice in rent when you have to go back to Australia for 8 weeks at the end of year 4? Or can you plan it out so your lease in New Orleans ends before you go back?
Thanks. Yea I think there was an issue about New York and Cali but in the end the conclusion was that you can practice in those states.
Would you say I should interview at Flinders if I already have this acceptance? The tuition is $53000 vs $56000 but its not in Brisbane and with doing the rotations at Ochsner New Orleans I imagine it helps with getting LORs for American residencies
I would just go to UQ-Ochsner and not go to interview at Flinders.
That's good to hear!
Ok. And then should I not send any DO secondaries? Just a few MD secondaries and if I don't get in american MD by early December go UQ?
I got in with underdog stats by the way: 3.2/27 but with strong ECs so I feel like if I did get in american MD it would be late in a cycle
Send in the DO secondaries, its up to you for DO vs UQ, if you really don't want DO then don't send them in. If you prefer DO to UQ then send them in. Otherwise, if you don't get in US MD go UQ.
I'll assume you mean not in by December of this cycle rather than waiting a full cycle and going in 2015 if I fail?
Is this really what you're thinking about this early?
I'm just a little excited, lol
Not true. Recognition by the Medical Board of California is an ongoing process. Here is a publishing from earlier this month: http://www.mbc.ca.gov/board/meetings/materials_2013_07-18_brd-item18.pdf
I would recommend going to one of the traditional Australian programs, before Ochsner, at this point. Flinders, USyd, traditional UQ, etc.
While I think UQ Ochsner will get California recognition, it doesn't have it yet. And it's best not to bet on something happening when it comes to your career, unless you have no other choice. Normal UQ students are still allowed to do clinical rotations at Ochsner but I believe they are limited to 3 months.
Good and interesting find. That is rather concerning to say the least. Don't some other states follow California's regulations as well?
Something like 10-13 states use California's list as well. I'm not sure on the exact number because it is constantly changing. Some states follow California's lead on some schools but not others. It's all a bit confusing.
While I think Ochsner is a great program, I think the MBC has valid concerns. Particularly concerning Ochsner's ability to handle 240 students in clinical rotations each year. I genuinely do feel a lot of thought and effort was put into this start-up and I remain confident the school will get California approval. Worst case scenario would be probably mean downsizing the program, and maybe adding an interview.
There are a lot of great places to practice outside of California.
The problem doesn't lie only in California. As previously stated about 10 other states use the California list.
California has the most rigorous standards, yes. But New York, Florida, and Texas all require special approval for students coming from programs, such as Ochsner, to complete residency there.
If you take all of those options off the table you've likely taken 50% of the country's residency programs of the table, which is significant.
The reason California recognition is so important is 1. if a school can get California approval they can get approval anywhere in America and 2. if the school doesn't get California recognition then graduates can NEVER practice in California, which isn't the case with NY, FL, and TX. If you complete a residency in, for example, Michigan you can later gain a license in New York, but not in California.
I don't care about California, but New York and Florida are desirable states for me so this new information kinda sucks. I'd be done with residency in about 8-9 years so if it gets approved it would probably be within a decade but its a gamble.
But why would you gain license in New York if you can't in California? If New York uses the same list as Cali?
But why would you gain license in New York if you can't in California? If New York uses the same list as Cali?
New York does not use California's list. Nor does Texas or Florida. But they have their own evaluation systems which are rigorous, though not as rigorous as California's. But like I said, basically if a school can get approved in California it can get approved anywhere.
New York, Florida, California, and Texas all have rigorous standards when it comes to international medical graduates completing residency in those states, and getting licensed in those states.
Without getting too far in depth I believe that the boards regulating medical licensure in NY, FL, and CA require site visits prior to granting approval. To the best of my knowledge they have not visited UQ Ochsner. But CA has the intention of visiting soon.
Even if UQ-Ochsner gets recognized by the MBC, UQ-Ochsner will still have to apply to NY & FL, and host site visits, so that their graduates can practice there.
This is the first time I have heard anything about Texas and Florida. I always thought it was only Ny and Cali.
This is so hard, its so much money then again its a couple of states. I still got Arizona, the Midwest, and all the other states. Maybe it's worth the gamble, why wouldn't it get approval if UQ is approved, its the same quality of education as UQ which is already approved in cali except the rotations are in New Orleans.
This is so hard, its so much money then again its a couple of states. I still got Arizona, the Midwest, and all the other states. Maybe it's worth the gamble, why wouldn't it get approval if UQ is approved, its the same quality of education as UQ which is already approved in cali except the rotations are in New Orleans.
Last edited:
Is it a good idea to go and just pretend in my mind that the problem isn't real?
The reasons UQ-Ochsner requires separate approval is because the program does not allow Australians to participate in the program, and the clinical school is located outside of Australia, and outside of the Medical Board of Australia's jurisdiction.
Hello all,
Pitman alerted me to the questions in this thread as I am in a rather unique position to answer them. (This will be a somewhat long post)
First off, my name is Andrey Pavlov and I am currently the President of the Ochsner Medical Student Association (OMSA) which is the officially recognized student advocacy group for the Ochsner cohort of UQ students. Last year and the year before I was the Academic Officer of OMSA and I am currently in my final year of the program.
Both UQ and Ochsner recognize and liaise with us about Ochsner cohort specific issues, we are under the umbrella of Ochsner's 501(c)3 non-profit status, and have legal rights to use the Ochsner name and brand. As such we take our role very seriously and endeavor to make every effort to disseminate accurate information. Our website is currently up (http://omsauq.org) but is still very much in development. As you can imagine, being a medical student makes extra curricular stuff like web editing and updating tough, but hopefully starting next week we will have more editorial access and control and much of the information and updates that are pertinent to these threads will be put up there. Our goal is transparency and clarity with what is actually going on and what that actually means for students.
Now to address the issues raised so far in this thread.
Firstly, there is a Facebook group for the class of 2017. It can be found here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/488136277926647/
(I go by the handle of Docta Drey on FB)
Next, about recognition by CA and NY (and the rest).
This is a slightly complex issue that I will try and distill down to the fundamentals. First off one must realize where exactly the issue stems from. These are completely distinct between CA and NY.
CA: The CA Medical Board (MBC) views offshore degree granting institutions in two separate ways, each under section 1314 of the MBC rules and regulations. A 1314(a) school is one that is a foreign school that generates primarily foreign graduates. Flinders would be an example of a school that is unequivocally a 1314(a) school. A 1314(b) school is one that is created for the express purpose of generating medical graduates that will not be training or practicing in the country which the school is located. The Caribbean schools are prime example of 1314(b) schools.
The way MBC recognition works is based on the FAIMER /IMED list and a judgement as to whether a school is 1314(a) or (b). For (a) schools, the recognition becomes automatic with no further review necessary (as long as the school remains on the FAIMER/IMED list). A (b) school requires additional review that involves a submission of a Self Assessment Report (SAR) based upon which the MBC can decide upon 3 actions: approve, reject, or site visit. Once approval is made, then recognition is granted in the same manner as an (a) school with all graduates being fully recognized as long as the program is on the FAIMER/IMED list. This approval is instant and retroactive to the beginning of the school/program.
Now, here is where the MBC gets tricky and why this issue may not apply to other states that use CA's regs for approval. By all legal and technical standards, UQ and the Ochsner program is a 1314(a) program. The way in which accreditation for the program (necessary to maintain UQ on the FAIMER list at all) was done requires that we are eligible for Australian internship (which is why we have an extra 4 weeks tacked on to our Year 1 elective and have to return for a rotation in Year 4) and that Ochsner is a full clinical school of UQ. What this means is that, technically speaking, doing our clinical years at Ochsner is NOT doing them "outside of the country of our school" because, by all legal standards UQ now exists as a school in the US (like having a US embassy in a foreign country - technically that embassy is on US soil).
However, the MBC reserves the right to ignore the letter of the law and make a subjective judgement call on any program they wish. Which, honestly, is reasonable as long as they are intellectually honest about it and in this case is correct, regardless of the fact that we are technically a 1314(a) school. As such, the MBC has decided that we are more like a (b) school than an (a) school and thus required us to be reviewed. This is why I am unsure of what other states who follow the CA regs will do, because in most cases they either follow only parts of it or just the entirety of the regs and make their own assessments on individual schools (i.e. they don't approve or disapprove of schools based on the list generated by MBC but use the MBC regs to then make their own judgement calls on schools and programs). Furthermore, the reality is that when you apply to a program your degree comes from UQ and is no different than any Aussie student graduating so unless the program/state is told ahead of time that we are different they would have no reason to treat us any differently. So in a nutshell I would argue that most other states wouldn't be an issue since they don't even know to have it be an issue and because they use the same standards as CA but the issue with CA is not that we don't meet the standards but that they decided to exercise judgement BEYOND the standards to require a review of our program. (Hopefully that makes sense). I should add clearly that how other states that use some or all of CA regs/standards will view us is something I am speculating on and have not done the in depth research to be certain. However, when it comes to CA and NY specifically, I have indeed done the very in depth research and have been involved in the conversations about it at the highest levels at both Ochsner and UQ so I can speak confidently.
So, with all that, where do we stand? The reality is that this is (as was mentioned above) largely a non-issue. There is absolutely zero concern that MBC would approve the program. The only reason is hasn't happened yet is because CA is broke, they have been severely understaffed, and simply haven't actually done the review yet. That said, they did in fact do a preliminary review earlier this year and asked for more information. That was provided. Then in May, Dr. Bill Pinsky (the CAO and head of Ochsner Clinical School) went to Sacramento and explained to them in person more about the program. At that time they promised him that we would be reviewed at the next MBC meeting (which takes place starting today, July 18). Dr. Pinsky will be in attendance at the meeting to do whatever he can to have approval without a site visit, if possible. A site visit, should it occur, will be done and paid for by UQ/Ochsner and we once again have no doubt we will meet approval after that. It will merely be another delay in the process. Another point that Dr. Pinsky will directly raise to the MBC will be to ask if a graduate of the program can gain individual approval for residency/practice in CA prior to blanket approval of the program. As it stands, we believe that there is a means to do this, but the point is not clear and should be clarified by next week.
Someone above commented about concern for Ochsner being able to accommodate 240 students in the program. This is not a concern at all. They have been accommodating numbers like that for many years with LSU, Tulane, and other visiting students. As the program is ramping up the number of outside students will be decreasing to ensure the quality of our clinical education.
TL;DR: I am looking at a CA residency and am not worried about approval. It is a purely bureaucratic hangup that has delayed it thus far, and more answers will be known after the currently ongoing MBC meeting is completed. It seems possible for individual exemptions, though that will be clarified, and certainly none of this should be a concern for anyone just beginning the program. People in my year are the only ones that should have even an inkling of concern and even then, I am not.
Now, as for NY:
NY has a different schema for approval of offshore schools. This came about ENTIRELY because of the Caribbean school model with so many of them doing their clinical training at NY hospitals (NB that this is doing your clinicals in a "hospital outside your school's country" because the Carib school only CONTRACT with hospitals, which is fundamentally different than Ochsner as "belonging" to UQ in a legal sense). NY complained that their own home grown grads were getting shoehorned out by the Carib students and so it was deemed that no schools who did their training offshore would be approved and must go on a special "list" in order to be considered for licensure. This was purely to dissuade hospitals from granting clinical spots to offshore schools for money and encourage more opportunities for the homegrown med students.
That said, we once again technically fall under that umbrella. There is already an application for review to get on that "list" with NY for our program. However, the process is one that is even longer than CA and was actually not started until after CA so it is further away from approval at the moment (realistically looking at 2ish years, possibly sooner). That said, individual allowances for residency/licensure in NY are indeed currently possible despite not have blanket approval yet. Yes, it does mean that the process is a bit more onerous, but Ochsner is geared up and ready to help in any way possible in the interim, including phone calls to individual programs as necessary.
Once again, this is something that is of some concern to current Year 3 and 4 (and possibly 2) students, but should not be a concern for anyone starting the program next year or currently in first year.
TL;DR: While nothing can be 100% certain, it is quite reasonably safe to say that for anyone currently in Australia and certainly anyone looking to start the program next year there should be absolutely minimal concern about licensure in all 50 states.
More specifically JohnSnow's comment:
"The reasons UQ-Ochsner requires separate approval is because the program does not allow Australians to participate in the program, and the clinical school is located outside of Australia, and outside of the Medical Board of Australia's jurisdiction."
Is actually quite incorrect. The clinical school is in every sense a part of UQ and the Australian Medical Council (AMC - the accrediting body for all Aussie med schools) DOES have jurisdiction over Ochsner and has indeed reviewed it, done a site visit, and deemed it acceptable *as a part of UQ*.
Traditional students (which is what we call those not in the UQ-O program) can do up to 2 rotation or 4 months at Ochsner, in Years 3 or 4.
=============
Now for some other points that were raised:
"Do people end up paying twice in rent when you have to go back to Australia for 8 weeks at the end of year 4? Or can you plan it out so your lease in New Orleans ends before you go back?"
That is entirely your kettle of fish. The SoM has nothing to do with how you make your arrangements. In certain cases, depending on what you do and where you go back in Australia you *MAY* be able to get free or subsidized housing in Oz. You can potentially sublet your place in NoLa to a traditional student coming back here for a rotation (something that OMSA helps facilitate and will be part of the forum currently being built for our website). You could couch surf with friends you made in Years 1 and 2 (which is what I did when I went back). But ultimately it is entirely up to you and in the worst case should expect to pay double rent.
"Ok. And then should I not send any DO secondaries? Just a few MD secondaries and if I don't get in american MD by early December go UQ?"
As was commented on this is also an entirely personal decision. I personally abjured going to a DO school because of my own pride and ego. In retrospect I am genuinely glad that I made the decision I did, but must admit I did it for largely the wrong reasons. Especially now that the AOA and ACGME are merging into a single unified GME accrediting structure I would argue that DO is increasingly an attractive option. There is still a tiny bit of the old quackery of osteopathy left in DO programs but, unlike chiropractics which is still fundamentally based in quackery, it is truly historical and minimal and continuing to diminish. Once that is gone DO and MD will be truly a meaningless distinction. Currently is a practically meaningless distinction despite some historical stigma that lingers.
Hopefully that answers any questions people had and clears up some very reasonable concerns. Once I learn more about the results of the current MBC meeting I will post them up here. In the meantime please feel free to PM me any questions. Also PM me sometime at the end of next week if I haven't posted anything up by then. I may lapse on checking this thread since I am starting a new rotation on Monday and have no idea how busy I will be.
Pitman alerted me to the questions in this thread as I am in a rather unique position to answer them. (This will be a somewhat long post)
First off, my name is Andrey Pavlov and I am currently the President of the Ochsner Medical Student Association (OMSA) which is the officially recognized student advocacy group for the Ochsner cohort of UQ students. Last year and the year before I was the Academic Officer of OMSA and I am currently in my final year of the program.
Both UQ and Ochsner recognize and liaise with us about Ochsner cohort specific issues, we are under the umbrella of Ochsner's 501(c)3 non-profit status, and have legal rights to use the Ochsner name and brand. As such we take our role very seriously and endeavor to make every effort to disseminate accurate information. Our website is currently up (http://omsauq.org) but is still very much in development. As you can imagine, being a medical student makes extra curricular stuff like web editing and updating tough, but hopefully starting next week we will have more editorial access and control and much of the information and updates that are pertinent to these threads will be put up there. Our goal is transparency and clarity with what is actually going on and what that actually means for students.
Now to address the issues raised so far in this thread.
Firstly, there is a Facebook group for the class of 2017. It can be found here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/488136277926647/
(I go by the handle of Docta Drey on FB)
Next, about recognition by CA and NY (and the rest).
This is a slightly complex issue that I will try and distill down to the fundamentals. First off one must realize where exactly the issue stems from. These are completely distinct between CA and NY.
CA: The CA Medical Board (MBC) views offshore degree granting institutions in two separate ways, each under section 1314 of the MBC rules and regulations. A 1314(a) school is one that is a foreign school that generates primarily foreign graduates. Flinders would be an example of a school that is unequivocally a 1314(a) school. A 1314(b) school is one that is created for the express purpose of generating medical graduates that will not be training or practicing in the country which the school is located. The Caribbean schools are prime example of 1314(b) schools.
The way MBC recognition works is based on the FAIMER /IMED list and a judgement as to whether a school is 1314(a) or (b). For (a) schools, the recognition becomes automatic with no further review necessary (as long as the school remains on the FAIMER/IMED list). A (b) school requires additional review that involves a submission of a Self Assessment Report (SAR) based upon which the MBC can decide upon 3 actions: approve, reject, or site visit. Once approval is made, then recognition is granted in the same manner as an (a) school with all graduates being fully recognized as long as the program is on the FAIMER/IMED list. This approval is instant and retroactive to the beginning of the school/program.
Now, here is where the MBC gets tricky and why this issue may not apply to other states that use CA's regs for approval. By all legal and technical standards, UQ and the Ochsner program is a 1314(a) program. The way in which accreditation for the program (necessary to maintain UQ on the FAIMER list at all) was done requires that we are eligible for Australian internship (which is why we have an extra 4 weeks tacked on to our Year 1 elective and have to return for a rotation in Year 4) and that Ochsner is a full clinical school of UQ. What this means is that, technically speaking, doing our clinical years at Ochsner is NOT doing them "outside of the country of our school" because, by all legal standards UQ now exists as a school in the US (like having a US embassy in a foreign country - technically that embassy is on US soil).
However, the MBC reserves the right to ignore the letter of the law and make a subjective judgement call on any program they wish. Which, honestly, is reasonable as long as they are intellectually honest about it and in this case is correct, regardless of the fact that we are technically a 1314(a) school. As such, the MBC has decided that we are more like a (b) school than an (a) school and thus required us to be reviewed. This is why I am unsure of what other states who follow the CA regs will do, because in most cases they either follow only parts of it or just the entirety of the regs and make their own assessments on individual schools (i.e. they don't approve or disapprove of schools based on the list generated by MBC but use the MBC regs to then make their own judgement calls on schools and programs). Furthermore, the reality is that when you apply to a program your degree comes from UQ and is no different than any Aussie student graduating so unless the program/state is told ahead of time that we are different they would have no reason to treat us any differently. So in a nutshell I would argue that most other states wouldn't be an issue since they don't even know to have it be an issue and because they use the same standards as CA but the issue with CA is not that we don't meet the standards but that they decided to exercise judgement BEYOND the standards to require a review of our program. (Hopefully that makes sense). I should add clearly that how other states that use some or all of CA regs/standards will view us is something I am speculating on and have not done the in depth research to be certain. However, when it comes to CA and NY specifically, I have indeed done the very in depth research and have been involved in the conversations about it at the highest levels at both Ochsner and UQ so I can speak confidently.
So, with all that, where do we stand? The reality is that this is (as was mentioned above) largely a non-issue. There is absolutely zero concern that MBC would approve the program. The only reason is hasn't happened yet is because CA is broke, they have been severely understaffed, and simply haven't actually done the review yet. That said, they did in fact do a preliminary review earlier this year and asked for more information. That was provided. Then in May, Dr. Bill Pinsky (the CAO and head of Ochsner Clinical School) went to Sacramento and explained to them in person more about the program. At that time they promised him that we would be reviewed at the next MBC meeting (which takes place starting today, July 18). Dr. Pinsky will be in attendance at the meeting to do whatever he can to have approval without a site visit, if possible. A site visit, should it occur, will be done and paid for by UQ/Ochsner and we once again have no doubt we will meet approval after that. It will merely be another delay in the process. Another point that Dr. Pinsky will directly raise to the MBC will be to ask if a graduate of the program can gain individual approval for residency/practice in CA prior to blanket approval of the program. As it stands, we believe that there is a means to do this, but the point is not clear and should be clarified by next week.
Someone above commented about concern for Ochsner being able to accommodate 240 students in the program. This is not a concern at all. They have been accommodating numbers like that for many years with LSU, Tulane, and other visiting students. As the program is ramping up the number of outside students will be decreasing to ensure the quality of our clinical education.
TL;DR: I am looking at a CA residency and am not worried about approval. It is a purely bureaucratic hangup that has delayed it thus far, and more answers will be known after the currently ongoing MBC meeting is completed. It seems possible for individual exemptions, though that will be clarified, and certainly none of this should be a concern for anyone just beginning the program. People in my year are the only ones that should have even an inkling of concern and even then, I am not.
Now, as for NY:
NY has a different schema for approval of offshore schools. This came about ENTIRELY because of the Caribbean school model with so many of them doing their clinical training at NY hospitals (NB that this is doing your clinicals in a "hospital outside your school's country" because the Carib school only CONTRACT with hospitals, which is fundamentally different than Ochsner as "belonging" to UQ in a legal sense). NY complained that their own home grown grads were getting shoehorned out by the Carib students and so it was deemed that no schools who did their training offshore would be approved and must go on a special "list" in order to be considered for licensure. This was purely to dissuade hospitals from granting clinical spots to offshore schools for money and encourage more opportunities for the homegrown med students.
That said, we once again technically fall under that umbrella. There is already an application for review to get on that "list" with NY for our program. However, the process is one that is even longer than CA and was actually not started until after CA so it is further away from approval at the moment (realistically looking at 2ish years, possibly sooner). That said, individual allowances for residency/licensure in NY are indeed currently possible despite not have blanket approval yet. Yes, it does mean that the process is a bit more onerous, but Ochsner is geared up and ready to help in any way possible in the interim, including phone calls to individual programs as necessary.
Once again, this is something that is of some concern to current Year 3 and 4 (and possibly 2) students, but should not be a concern for anyone starting the program next year or currently in first year.
TL;DR: While nothing can be 100% certain, it is quite reasonably safe to say that for anyone currently in Australia and certainly anyone looking to start the program next year there should be absolutely minimal concern about licensure in all 50 states.
More specifically JohnSnow's comment:
"The reasons UQ-Ochsner requires separate approval is because the program does not allow Australians to participate in the program, and the clinical school is located outside of Australia, and outside of the Medical Board of Australia's jurisdiction."
Is actually quite incorrect. The clinical school is in every sense a part of UQ and the Australian Medical Council (AMC - the accrediting body for all Aussie med schools) DOES have jurisdiction over Ochsner and has indeed reviewed it, done a site visit, and deemed it acceptable *as a part of UQ*.
Traditional students (which is what we call those not in the UQ-O program) can do up to 2 rotation or 4 months at Ochsner, in Years 3 or 4.
=============
Now for some other points that were raised:
"Do people end up paying twice in rent when you have to go back to Australia for 8 weeks at the end of year 4? Or can you plan it out so your lease in New Orleans ends before you go back?"
That is entirely your kettle of fish. The SoM has nothing to do with how you make your arrangements. In certain cases, depending on what you do and where you go back in Australia you *MAY* be able to get free or subsidized housing in Oz. You can potentially sublet your place in NoLa to a traditional student coming back here for a rotation (something that OMSA helps facilitate and will be part of the forum currently being built for our website). You could couch surf with friends you made in Years 1 and 2 (which is what I did when I went back). But ultimately it is entirely up to you and in the worst case should expect to pay double rent.
"Ok. And then should I not send any DO secondaries? Just a few MD secondaries and if I don't get in american MD by early December go UQ?"
As was commented on this is also an entirely personal decision. I personally abjured going to a DO school because of my own pride and ego. In retrospect I am genuinely glad that I made the decision I did, but must admit I did it for largely the wrong reasons. Especially now that the AOA and ACGME are merging into a single unified GME accrediting structure I would argue that DO is increasingly an attractive option. There is still a tiny bit of the old quackery of osteopathy left in DO programs but, unlike chiropractics which is still fundamentally based in quackery, it is truly historical and minimal and continuing to diminish. Once that is gone DO and MD will be truly a meaningless distinction. Currently is a practically meaningless distinction despite some historical stigma that lingers.
Hopefully that answers any questions people had and clears up some very reasonable concerns. Once I learn more about the results of the current MBC meeting I will post them up here. In the meantime please feel free to PM me any questions. Also PM me sometime at the end of next week if I haven't posted anything up by then. I may lapse on checking this thread since I am starting a new rotation on Monday and have no idea how busy I will be.
I have a few general questions about UQ-O:
1) I will be relying upon loans for the entirety of my education, including living expenses, travel and all that. How do I determine COA? I found seemingly good data from this site but that seems to imply a 34 week school year. This document seems to imply a 38-41 week school year (excluding vacations and elective periods).
2) It is past the FAFSA deadline of June 31 for this year and I did not fill it out since I assumed I would not be starting school until 2014. Can I still apply for US financial aid for the January 2014 term? Thea Volpe seemed to think that it wouldn't be a big deal but I am still unclear on the specifics.
3) Could I bring my cat?
Thanks for your help!
1) I will be relying upon loans for the entirety of my education, including living expenses, travel and all that. How do I determine COA? I found seemingly good data from this site but that seems to imply a 34 week school year. This document seems to imply a 38-41 week school year (excluding vacations and elective periods).
2) It is past the FAFSA deadline of June 31 for this year and I did not fill it out since I assumed I would not be starting school until 2014. Can I still apply for US financial aid for the January 2014 term? Thea Volpe seemed to think that it wouldn't be a big deal but I am still unclear on the specifics.
3) Could I bring my cat?
Thanks for your help!
1) Yes, your loans will cover your total COA. That is calculated for you and is sufficient as long as you live somewhat frugally (you likely wont be able to live by yourself, for example)
2) I am not certain. I would verify directly with FAFSA and the DOE by sending them an email. It has been known in the past for MEP to give out incorrect information regarding these matters as they are complex and often individually variable. This one is, unfortunately, entirely up to you to verify.
3) No. Oz is very strict about organic and living items brought into the country. I believe there is some way to import pets but it is extremely onerous and expensive and not guaranteed. I would not count on bringing your cat. You can go to Lone Pine and pet a koala if that will make you feel better. ;-)
Excellent post. Thanks for the insight. Would be great if you kept us updated who are interested in the UQ-O program if there is any additional upcoming news!
The MBC has met and has released some documents from the meeting.
As indicated by the documents, a site visit will be required by the MBC prior to approval.
At this time I do not know any further details, including a few answers to key questions the MBC has raised in their memorandum of review. Those should have been answered at the meeting, but the MBC has not yet released the video of the meeting on YouTube (btw, if you ever need a cure for insomnia, watch medical board meetings on YouTube). Historically those have been released anywhere from 3-10 days after the meeting. I have also sent an email to Dr. Pinsky for his input on the outcome of the meeting.
That said, assuming the answers to the key questions were satisfactory (and I have little doubt that they were) a site visit will go ahead. The program will pay the costs up front, which sucks for the school but is great for us because the biggest hangup with any bureaucracy (but especially a broke one like CA) is money, so things should move along expeditiously.
At this point our best case scenario is a site visit before the next quarterly meeting (scheduled for Oct 24-25) at which point the MBC will then be in a position (most likely at least) to finally decide yea or nay. If not, then it will be at the following quarterly meeting which is not yet scheduled but has historically taken place at the end of January each year.
For those wondering what the "key questions" are:
The admissions process - they wish to confirm that admission are sufficiently in line with US/Canadian medical school criteria. In the official documentation they list everything - including the lack of interview - as a "concern." However, the lack of interview and essentially everything is identical to the criteria for any Australian student gaining admission to UQ with the exception that we use MCAT scores and they use GAMSAT scores (the Aussie equivalent of the MCAT). As such, and considering that UQ is still currently approved by the MBC, it is unlikely that those will be issues of contention regarding the admissions process. In reading the documentation the impression I get is that the biggest concern is the criminal background check. US/Canadian schools all do one as part of the admissions process. UQ does not, because it is done by proxy. In order to get a student Visa to be part of the program the Aussie government requires a background check. If you fail that check you obviously can't be in the program so it does serve to weed out in a similar manner to an school-based background check. The question from the MBC is whether that student Visa background check is sufficient in their view and that is primarily what will need to be addressed for this aspect of the approval. This will be done *prior* to the site visit since it can be done electronically and a dissatisfactory answer will obviate the need for a site visit. I really don't know exactly what the criteria in play would be (i.e. what the MBC wants, what US med schools actually do, and what the Aussie govt does) so I can't speculate except to say that the Aussies are pretty strict about that stuff in general so I am not terribly worried that it wouldn't meet their requirements. I'd imagine that the worst case scenario here is that it doesn't meet the requirements and the school has to institute a separate background check for Ochsner cohort students which could prove problematic for myself, but still unlikely to affect incoming students for next year (except that y'all will have to do that extra background check). I think this is unlikely, but cannot say for certain.
The MBC mentions that the school is very large and has intrinsic issues with communication due to the nature of having sites across the world. In the document the MBC erroneously thinks that the total class size will increase by 480 (120x4 years for the Ochsner cohort). However, the total class size will remain relatively stable - it is merely our cohort that will grow in size at the expense of the remaining international student cohort. As for the communication, that is a valid concern, but one I am personally certain will be met with aplomb. UQ and Ochsner admin and faculty communicate very regularly and have dedicated offices and staff for that purpose. I am not personally concerned about this issue.
The rest of the concerns raised by the MBC have already been noted as met including the duration of our education, both pre-clinical and clinical, the attendance requirements and enforcement policies, transcript policies, and even specifically pain management and end of life education requirements. (MBC has a minimum 4,000 hours of instruction and UQO has 5,740 and a minimum 72 weeks clinical instruction and we do 82). They also specifically comment that our stated curriculum meets all their educational requirements, though the site visit will be in part to confirm that as well as the rest of everything mentioned.
TL;DR:
Admissions questions re: no interview, selection criteria and background check must be answered prior to approval for site visit. No interview and selection criteria should be non-issues considering same exists for "traditional" UQ students and they are currently approved by MBC. Background check for student Visa will be verified to see if it meets MBC standards.
Communications issue with global school and large class size: site visit will confirm if MBC is satisfied. I personally feel there will be no issue here since I have seen the infrastructure in place for this and it is robust.
Site visit to confirm that remainder of MBC concerns are indeed met (essentially that the school isn't lying about what the curriculum actually is). No concerns here.
Once again, I'll update this when I get more info via YouTube and/or Dr. Pinsky. At least some of these questions (and others) should have been answered at the meeting.
=======
Correction: I incorrectly listed the subsection of the CA Codes and Regulations as 1314(a) and 1314(b) - it is actually 1314(a)1 and 1314(a)2 otherwise everything else is correct to the best of my knowledge.
As indicated by the documents, a site visit will be required by the MBC prior to approval.
At this time I do not know any further details, including a few answers to key questions the MBC has raised in their memorandum of review. Those should have been answered at the meeting, but the MBC has not yet released the video of the meeting on YouTube (btw, if you ever need a cure for insomnia, watch medical board meetings on YouTube). Historically those have been released anywhere from 3-10 days after the meeting. I have also sent an email to Dr. Pinsky for his input on the outcome of the meeting.
That said, assuming the answers to the key questions were satisfactory (and I have little doubt that they were) a site visit will go ahead. The program will pay the costs up front, which sucks for the school but is great for us because the biggest hangup with any bureaucracy (but especially a broke one like CA) is money, so things should move along expeditiously.
At this point our best case scenario is a site visit before the next quarterly meeting (scheduled for Oct 24-25) at which point the MBC will then be in a position (most likely at least) to finally decide yea or nay. If not, then it will be at the following quarterly meeting which is not yet scheduled but has historically taken place at the end of January each year.
For those wondering what the "key questions" are:
The admissions process - they wish to confirm that admission are sufficiently in line with US/Canadian medical school criteria. In the official documentation they list everything - including the lack of interview - as a "concern." However, the lack of interview and essentially everything is identical to the criteria for any Australian student gaining admission to UQ with the exception that we use MCAT scores and they use GAMSAT scores (the Aussie equivalent of the MCAT). As such, and considering that UQ is still currently approved by the MBC, it is unlikely that those will be issues of contention regarding the admissions process. In reading the documentation the impression I get is that the biggest concern is the criminal background check. US/Canadian schools all do one as part of the admissions process. UQ does not, because it is done by proxy. In order to get a student Visa to be part of the program the Aussie government requires a background check. If you fail that check you obviously can't be in the program so it does serve to weed out in a similar manner to an school-based background check. The question from the MBC is whether that student Visa background check is sufficient in their view and that is primarily what will need to be addressed for this aspect of the approval. This will be done *prior* to the site visit since it can be done electronically and a dissatisfactory answer will obviate the need for a site visit. I really don't know exactly what the criteria in play would be (i.e. what the MBC wants, what US med schools actually do, and what the Aussie govt does) so I can't speculate except to say that the Aussies are pretty strict about that stuff in general so I am not terribly worried that it wouldn't meet their requirements. I'd imagine that the worst case scenario here is that it doesn't meet the requirements and the school has to institute a separate background check for Ochsner cohort students which could prove problematic for myself, but still unlikely to affect incoming students for next year (except that y'all will have to do that extra background check). I think this is unlikely, but cannot say for certain.
The MBC mentions that the school is very large and has intrinsic issues with communication due to the nature of having sites across the world. In the document the MBC erroneously thinks that the total class size will increase by 480 (120x4 years for the Ochsner cohort). However, the total class size will remain relatively stable - it is merely our cohort that will grow in size at the expense of the remaining international student cohort. As for the communication, that is a valid concern, but one I am personally certain will be met with aplomb. UQ and Ochsner admin and faculty communicate very regularly and have dedicated offices and staff for that purpose. I am not personally concerned about this issue.
The rest of the concerns raised by the MBC have already been noted as met including the duration of our education, both pre-clinical and clinical, the attendance requirements and enforcement policies, transcript policies, and even specifically pain management and end of life education requirements. (MBC has a minimum 4,000 hours of instruction and UQO has 5,740 and a minimum 72 weeks clinical instruction and we do 82). They also specifically comment that our stated curriculum meets all their educational requirements, though the site visit will be in part to confirm that as well as the rest of everything mentioned.
TL;DR:
Admissions questions re: no interview, selection criteria and background check must be answered prior to approval for site visit. No interview and selection criteria should be non-issues considering same exists for "traditional" UQ students and they are currently approved by MBC. Background check for student Visa will be verified to see if it meets MBC standards.
Communications issue with global school and large class size: site visit will confirm if MBC is satisfied. I personally feel there will be no issue here since I have seen the infrastructure in place for this and it is robust.
Site visit to confirm that remainder of MBC concerns are indeed met (essentially that the school isn't lying about what the curriculum actually is). No concerns here.
Once again, I'll update this when I get more info via YouTube and/or Dr. Pinsky. At least some of these questions (and others) should have been answered at the meeting.
=======
Correction: I incorrectly listed the subsection of the CA Codes and Regulations as 1314(a) and 1314(b) - it is actually 1314(a)1 and 1314(a)2 otherwise everything else is correct to the best of my knowledge.
As a testament to the dedication that Ochsner has to its students I can say that I was able to have a personal meeting with Dr. Pinsky this afternoon to discuss the MBC meeting.
Overall it was a positive and fruitful meeting. Dr. Pinsky was on hand to directly and immediately address all concerns raised.
The pertinent take away points are that the admissions criteria concern raised in the document were addressed at the meeting and deemed a non-issue. No other real concerns I mentioned in my last post were raised and the board has decided to go ahead with a site visit. However, they will visit Ochsner with the intent of potentially being satisfied and not requiring a visit to UQ in Brisbane. The timeframe of exactly when this will happen has not been ascertained, though Dr. Pinsky informed me he will be personally following up to determine said time frame and see if there is any means by which to ensure it is expeditiously done.
It is also worth noting that one of the board members had commented to the effect that she felt this was a truly innovative and worthwhile program that should be approved (the exact wording of her statement will become a matter of record on YouTube once the video of the meeting is released). But, needless to say, that is a heartening statement.
It seems at this point the board is essentially satisfied and on board but has been on track for a site visit so that will be completed as expeditiously as possible. There seem to be (fingers crossed!) no further hurdles in full recognition of the program.
I'll post up a time-stamped link to the video when it gets up on YouTube.
Overall it was a positive and fruitful meeting. Dr. Pinsky was on hand to directly and immediately address all concerns raised.
The pertinent take away points are that the admissions criteria concern raised in the document were addressed at the meeting and deemed a non-issue. No other real concerns I mentioned in my last post were raised and the board has decided to go ahead with a site visit. However, they will visit Ochsner with the intent of potentially being satisfied and not requiring a visit to UQ in Brisbane. The timeframe of exactly when this will happen has not been ascertained, though Dr. Pinsky informed me he will be personally following up to determine said time frame and see if there is any means by which to ensure it is expeditiously done.
It is also worth noting that one of the board members had commented to the effect that she felt this was a truly innovative and worthwhile program that should be approved (the exact wording of her statement will become a matter of record on YouTube once the video of the meeting is released). But, needless to say, that is a heartening statement.
It seems at this point the board is essentially satisfied and on board but has been on track for a site visit so that will be completed as expeditiously as possible. There seem to be (fingers crossed!) no further hurdles in full recognition of the program.
I'll post up a time-stamped link to the video when it gets up on YouTube.
This is great news! It sounds like everything is on track for approval.
Good news. Thanks for the update.
It is - just a question of getting it done ASAP. Bureaucracies (especially fiscally broke ones) move like mud.
I should also clarify that when I stated the background check concern might become an issue for me I meant to say "for my class" not me personally, if it ended up creating further delays and paperwork. However, that is a completely moot point at this time.
I should also clarify that when I stated the background check concern might become an issue for me I meant to say "for my class" not me personally, if it ended up creating further delays and paperwork. However, that is a completely moot point at this time.
You should be able to apply for financial aid for 2014 even very late this year (I forgot to apply for 2013 aid until late-December 2012 because I was distracted with USMLE prep, but everything was fine).
And given the fauna here, your cat likely wouldn't survive unless you keep it indoors.
Would UQ-Ochsner consider someone who makes a 7/8/8 or something like 6/10/10 on the mcat or are they strict about nothing below an 8 on each section of the mcat? Im taking the mcat this friday, and want to prepare for the worst case scenario.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
You can have a 7 on one section but must have a 24 minimum total score. No 6 in any section. So 10/7/7 won't work nor would 10/8/6
Ok thank you!
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Unless they changed things there are no LoR's as part of the application.
I emailed the mededpath office about letters of recommendation when I was applying. The response was that letters are only sent to Oschner just before year three.
That being said let me answer your question. I didn't send any letters and still received an acceptance.
What letters for year 3?
Letters of recommendation sent with your application are only read by the people at Oschner and they only read them when you do clinical rotations in the third and fourth years.
Ohh but are they required?
Thanks for the info! I feel like not have any letters of recommendation is a little sketchy, but perhaps they believe the application essays speak well enough about the applicant's character.
Any thoughts?
Nope! My experience is only for the initial acceptance, but they didn't require letters.
That is how I feel too. Also, I can't tell if no interview devalues the worth of the interview (anyone can rehearse some cookie cutter answers) or if the lack of interview devalues the program.
Bottom line though is that their minimum MCAT of 24 is the median at a lot of DOs
And their median is 28.6 is top tier DO/low tier MD so the caliber of students can't be horrible
I have never heard of this "letters of rec for year 3 only read by Ochsner" thing. That is very strange to me. I have our monthly meeting with the dean of students at Ochsner tomorrow and have added it to the agenda to ask what that is all about.
As for interviews - it is well documented that interviews do not have a significant impact on the quality of candidates a program selects. In other words, the data show that the interview does not have much value added to an admission based solely on numbers and personal statement. It is for this reason that many programs in the US have moved to the "multiple mini interview" or MMI process... though there is not much evidence that this is much better. It is the opinion of the UQ SoM that the interview adds too little to the admissions process to be worth the time and effort. So that was simply removed for *all* students about 6 or 7 years ago. So the program has remained the same - just without an interview.
As for the lack of LoR, this is also a facet of the program as a whole, though I cannot speak to the evidence or rationale for that. I can speak to the fact that LoR's are indeed not the most ideal way to gauge a candidate because anyone with half a brain will know to only get glowing letters. In other words, it is a very self selected sample and can be just as misleading as someone putting on a good show for an interview. I think the metric changes a bit when one is applying for residency because at that point you are looking for letters that highlight very specific attributes working within the environment and field in which you are seeking residency. Going from undergrad to med is fundamentally a different experience so those LoR's probably wouldn't speak as well to anything specific for a SoM to look at. At least, that is my speculation on it.
Regarding MCAT scores - once again, those predict academic success in medical school and USMLE but not how good a doctor you will be and is acknowledged to be a rather limited and often arbitrary metric used to cull legions of applicants. That said, the median has been going up every year as the program gains notoriety and traction and there are indeed many *very* talented people in this program specifically and UQ at large. In all honesty I wouldn't overly concern myself with that aspect of gauging a program since once again, that is a pretty arbitrary cutoff that is influenced by *many* factors outside of how "good" an institution is.
(and all of this holds true for residency as well, with the Dartmouth report demonstrating that many traditionally prestigious programs based on academics and selection criteria average fail spectacularly on more important metrics like patient safety, practice of evidence based medicine, over treatment, efficiency, how often their doctors get sued, etc)
Thanks, your assistance to those of us interested in this program is highly appreciated. Do you have any updates on the Cali licensing issue?
My pleasure.
As for Cali... nothing yet. I know for a fact that Dr. Pinsky and Ochsner are doing everything in their power to expedite the site visit proces, but the ball is currently in the MBC's court.
Honestly it really isn't a matter of "if" but merely "when."
Hello all. The video of the California medical board meeting has come out. The section where they talk about us is actually rather long - around 45 minutes or so.
They begin talking about us at the 21:44 minute mark. Dr. Pinsky comes in at the 31:45 minute mark. Additionally the commentary from Dr. Salomonson (sp?)about how great the program is comes in at the 51:45 minute mark.
In my opinion Dr. Nuovo seemed rather under prepared for the meeting not being able to answer salient questions to which he should have known the answers (such as whether this is a proprietary [for profit] school). It was a good thing that Dr. Pinsky was there to clarify issues and misconceptions. The only thing I noted that he was not able to get to was the fact that the Ochsner cohort is not adding to the total class size, as Dr. Nuovo seemed to think it is, but is merely replacing a portion of the other international students and keeping the overall class size the same. That seems to be a minor point that was clarified by Dr. Pinsky later the next week in phone conversations.
As you can see, it seems that the board is very much interested in and in favor of our program. It is purely a logistical/bureaucratic issue in terms of checking boxes and getting through red tape. The site visit is on, with the idea that a visit to New Orleans could well obviate the need for one to Brisbane. The exact timing, logistics, etc are still being worked out.
But, once again, there is absolutely no reason to think approval wouldn't go through and that is even more bolstered by the reactions and attitude of the board at large as you can see in the video. So for those thinking about joining the program I really wouldn't be worrying about CA or any other licensure at all.
They begin talking about us at the 21:44 minute mark. Dr. Pinsky comes in at the 31:45 minute mark. Additionally the commentary from Dr. Salomonson (sp?)about how great the program is comes in at the 51:45 minute mark.
In my opinion Dr. Nuovo seemed rather under prepared for the meeting not being able to answer salient questions to which he should have known the answers (such as whether this is a proprietary [for profit] school). It was a good thing that Dr. Pinsky was there to clarify issues and misconceptions. The only thing I noted that he was not able to get to was the fact that the Ochsner cohort is not adding to the total class size, as Dr. Nuovo seemed to think it is, but is merely replacing a portion of the other international students and keeping the overall class size the same. That seems to be a minor point that was clarified by Dr. Pinsky later the next week in phone conversations.
As you can see, it seems that the board is very much interested in and in favor of our program. It is purely a logistical/bureaucratic issue in terms of checking boxes and getting through red tape. The site visit is on, with the idea that a visit to New Orleans could well obviate the need for one to Brisbane. The exact timing, logistics, etc are still being worked out.
But, once again, there is absolutely no reason to think approval wouldn't go through and that is even more bolstered by the reactions and attitude of the board at large as you can see in the video. So for those thinking about joining the program I really wouldn't be worrying about CA or any other licensure at all.
