US vs UK medical schools

[CoolRunnings]

Hello,

I've been doing a lot of research about this, as I have a big decision to make. I am about to graduate from university in the US with an undergraduate degree in finance. I am, however, a UK citizen and have lived in the US for 12 years. Now I must decide whether to go to medical school in the US or the UK. Both options:

US: My GPA is 3.5 (failed 2 classes my freshman year, strong upward trend), BCPM is 3.65 or so. I still have to take the MCAT and Bio 2 and Organic 2, which I would do as a postbacc. at a state school while studying for the MCAT. I would then apply and would matriculate (hopefully) in 2011. I would graduate in 2015 at the age of 29 as an MD.

UK: As most of you know, medicine in the UK is an undergraduate degree so I am definitely qualified for medical school in the UK. That said, I've missed the application deadline for matriculation this fall, but I would move to the UK anyway and complete an access to medicine course to keep the material fresh and bolster my resume even more (in addition to standardizing me with UK students). I would then apply for matriculation in 2010 (a year earlier than if I was in the US), but the courses are 4-6 years long (I would probably do a 5 year course). So I would graduate in 2015 with an MBBS or something similar at the same age I would graduate from a US school.

So here's my considerations:

1. School in the UK would be a lot cheaper for me as a national student. £3500 per year is insanely cheap compared to US schools.

2. Because I'm a mature student and have many more qualifications and much more experience than most UK 18 year olds I would be able to leverage that to get into a "better" school than any school I would get into in the US.

3. I'm not sure where I want to live afterwards. I suppose I could live in either if I went to school in either, so this isn't really a consideration either. I would just have to train where I wanted to practice.

My main question is, which schooling system would make me the better physician? Would I be considered too old, or behind in the UK, or is entering school at my age common?

Here's my line of thought: The assumption is that 2 doctors of the same age, 1 trained in the UK 1 trained in the US, are of the same skill level. However, school in the UK takes 5-6 years (and you start at 18), versus 4 years in the US. So on average, you become a doctor in the UK at 24, but in the US not until 26. Does this mean that the UK education is more diluted, and you are expected to learn more during your foundation years than a US resident? Basically, if you took someone straight out of medical school in the UK and compared them to someone straight out of medical school in the US, who would be more competent?

Obviously this doesn't matter in the long run if I choose to stay where I go to school, as I will be trained to the same standard, it may just take longer. However, I don't want to be at a disadvantage, in terms of knowledge and skill, coming back to the US (if I choose to) after I have gotten my medical degree in the UK.

Could anyone shed some light on my situation?

Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Scottish Chap]

Hello,

I've been doing a lot of research about this, as I have a big decision to make. I am about to graduate from university in the US with an undergraduate degree in finance. I am, however, a UK citizen and have lived in the US for 12 years. Now I must decide whether to go to medical school in the US or the UK. Both options:

US: My GPA is 3.5 (failed 2 classes my freshman year, strong upward trend), BCPM is 3.65 or so. I still have to take the MCAT and Bio 2 and Organic 2, which I would do as a postbacc. at a state school while studying for the MCAT. I would then apply and would matriculate (hopefully) in 2011. I would graduate in 2015 at the age of 29 as an MD.

UK: As most of you know, medicine in the UK is an undergraduate degree so I am definitely qualified for medical school in the UK. That said, I've missed the application deadline for matriculation this fall, but I would move to the UK anyway and complete an access to medicine course to keep the material fresh and bolster my resume even more (in addition to standardizing me with UK students). I would then apply for matriculation in 2010 (a year earlier than if I was in the US), but the courses are 4-6 years long (I would probably do a 5 year course). So I would graduate in 2015 with an MBBS or something similar at the same age I would graduate from a US school.

So here's my considerations:

1. School in the UK would be a lot cheaper for me as a national student. £3500 per year is insanely cheap compared to US schools.

2. Because I'm a mature student and have many more qualifications and much more experience than most UK 18 year olds I would be able to leverage that to get into a "better" school than any school I would get into in the US.

3. I'm not sure where I want to live afterwards. I suppose I could live in either if I went to school in either, so this isn't really a consideration either. I would just have to train where I wanted to practice.

My main question is, which schooling system would make me the better physician? Would I be considered too old, or behind in the UK, or is entering school at my age common?

Here's my line of thought: The assumption is that 2 doctors of the same age, 1 trained in the UK 1 trained in the US, are of the same skill level. However, school in the UK takes 5-6 years (and you start at 18), versus 4 years in the US. So on average, you become a doctor in the UK at 24, but in the US not until 26. Does this mean that the UK education is more diluted, and you are expected to learn more during your foundation years than a US resident? Basically, if you took someone straight out of medical school in the UK and compared them to someone straight out of medical school in the US, who would be more competent?

Obviously this doesn't matter in the long run if I choose to stay where I go to school, as I will be trained to the same standard, it may just take longer. However, I don't want to be at a disadvantage, in terms of knowledge and skill, coming back to the US (if I choose to) after I have gotten my medical degree in the UK.

Could anyone shed some light on my situation?

Thanks

The product of both systems at the end is essentially the same. A physician is a physician. The major question is: where do you want to practice? If the answer is the U.K., you should go there for medical school. If the answer is the U.S., you should exhaust all options here. Each system is training medical students to be physicians in THEIR system.

While the U.S. definitely makes you more accountable for more material in the basic sciences (thank the NBME for that; they write the USMLEs), the U.K. does a lot more of their medical training at the post-graduate level. This is one of several reasons why post-graduate medical education in the U.S. is faster - longer hours, and more compact.

With regard to your specific questions:

1. Be careful if you think you're going to be offered 'home tuition' in the U.K. secondary to your citizenship. To get this you ordinarily need to have resided in the country for around three years NOT for educational purposes. Check the fine print. They are careful who they qualify for this rate. Expect to pay the full international rate (around $30,000 U.S.). The cost if living there is WAY higher, too (I lived in the U.K. for 22 years).

2. Not really. Students who have completed A levels and Highers are actually pretty sophisticated and, since your major is not science in college, you'll find those that have A levels in maths, physics, chemistry, and biology will be more comfortable with the British medical curriculum. Also. the term "better school" does not really apply to the U.K. as all medical schools are very standardized. In terms of brand name if you want to come back to the U.S., most residency directors only recognize medical schools with names like "Oxford, Cambridge, and University College London"....those places are very hard to win an offer of admission from - even for local applicants.

3. Yes. Train where you want to practice. If you see yourself in the U.S., you are doing yourself a major disservice in trying to enter medical school outside of the U.S. You will be subject to all kinds of prejudice if you want to return to the U.S. for residency.

Again, neither system is better than the other - just different and intended to prepare you for practice in that country. Good luck....whatever you decide.

 

[bambi]

To get this you ordinarily need to have resided in the country for around three years NOT for educational purposes. Check the fine print.

I thought that was only for non-UK citizens? Not entirely sure so check but you might get lucky.

Entering med school at your age is less common in the UK than in the US but not that uncommon anymore really. If you did a 4 year course you would be towards the younger end. A lot of grads on the 5yrs are straight from their first degree so 21 but not all, in my year I think the oldest was 29 when we started. A lot of foundation docs are a lot older than you will be so you wouldn't be seen as that different really.

As you don't know where you want to work I think in your case you might be better off going to med school in the US. If you did want to work there but had studied in the UK it would be a lot more difficult for you. However, as you are a UK citizen if you studied in the US and then chose to work in the UK you would be considered equal to those with UK degrees anyway. So basically a US degree would allow you to work in either country but a UK one would make it more difficult if you later decided to work in the US.

 

[vicryl]

I agree with all of the above posts. Regardless of where you train, if you have the right ethos and attitude you will emerge as an excellent physician.

Being a UK graduate now attempting to enter the US system I can strongly advise you to train where you want to practice. Jumping systems takes time, money and a phenomenal amount of effort. The contacts you make during medical school (particularly in US system) are crucial for you to smoothly advance into your desired specialty!

In my experience very few ppl in UK know much about the US system and vice verca. I believe mentorship and guidance is important. Your main advocates will come from the deans and faculty of your school....and trust me- even going to what is considered one of the best medical schools in UK- very few of my faculty know anyone or anything about US doctors!! So I was pretty much on my own!

Hope this helps. PM me if you have any other questions.

 

[me1]

Hi Coolrunnings thanks for posting the question - i really wonder if I need to return to US for medical school - may I ask what you've decided?

I really need mature UK medical student or practitioner with a public health interest to advise here. I'm abandoning medical school in Prague because I cannot succeed here with the poor learning environment. Many reasons to start over with much learnt.

I'm faced with - pursuing MD/MPH in UK or Canada or US.

I need a picture of what life is like as a UK GP. I know I don't want to be a physician in US and work for insurance companies versus spending life really helping patients, although I know my like-minded, dedicated medical students with my same passion and vision to give back to society would be at institutions like Johns Hopkins. And Hopkins would have the resources to connect its alumni with worldwide opportunities.

What are UK medical schools like - Dundee, Leisceter, King's College, Oxford, Cambridge? I've ruled out Brighton and Southampton because the towns are not good fit for me - I need an academic climate. Not being haughty at all, just really learnt at my age (36) I need to settle down and be in this for the long haul.

What are the UK facilities like - US in general has state-of-the art technologies i think hence the price - how critical is that to be a good GP anyways (Here in Prague basically all 'practical' tools and university hospital condition are unhygienic and outdated. Filthy (eg. traumatology unit in First Faculty hospital where we take propaedeutics in surgery doesn't even have soap and toilet paper in bathrooms. Lest anything antibacterial.) How are facilities in UK medical schools?

The five-year courses - do they treat students like children requiring PE classes and teachers yelling at students to 'study intensively?'

Libraries - what publications are available (I was in UK the past ten days seeing schools, but couldn't get into the medical school libraries even when I asked. I need the insiders' views thank you - ) Prague had a 66m2 double decked room they called the library where I couldn't breath. And to have a view of any books the student needs to ask the librarian for specific titles, without any ability to browse. The public library didn't have any medical books/journal.

Reference source knowledge - do they share industry standard research tools with you eg. pubmed, New England Journal of Medicine - or what is British equivalent? I know about these publications from US. I would think academic advisor guidance on how to devise time to journals and how to research is very important. Something that isn't a part of my education here in Prague so far (3 years.)

In US graduate schools in general there are academic advisors whom you can mentor after while in school and for life - is such a resource practised in UK?

From my encounter at King's College in London it seems it is not very easy to gain access to the tutor - is that true?
Could we make any generalisations - Are students of good integrity, maturity and ability to self study then revise for oral exames in study groups/ qualified academic seniors have time to be able to mentor juniors? Most of us don't have any here and it doesn't work for me. I have no easy access to someone qualified to check my knowledge. Big problem.


***********
So those are some key determining factors going fwd US or UK or Canada.

If you're willing to read on and offer opinion I'd love it.

I want to really devote my life to ~60%clinical work and the rest being neurological/endocrine research. Infectious diseases also but I don't know how realistic all my interests. I've been training myself to be the one "man" (i'm a woman) rural doctor with my real love in neurology,emgcy surgery and infectious diseases.

I am ethnically Chinese and [German - citizenship,] but grew up in Asia and spent high school+University+10 years of professional life in US. Management and Computer Engineering discipline.
My mother lives in US and I can't cut off the possibility of working in US due to her ageing condition. Having said that, I am innately European and dread the US lifestyle of cars, individuality and preserved food availability in general.

I don't know enough about UK. I don't know anything about NHS politics and what it's like to be UK practitioner. It just seems to be the next best education route to my unrealistic dream living in an Italian coastal town as community GP and medical volunteer in West Afrique for surgery and hospital establishment knowledge transfer, and to be able to serve on UNICEF or Save the Children as technical advisor for traumatised children - protection and recovery. Community maternal and child health, infectious disease mitigation.

Given my nature of getting things done, realistically i can live with being UK/Canada/New England (in order of preference) home based as community hospital GP (MD/MPH) in a scientifically/medically/intellectually/culturally - interdisciplinarily inclined region that supporting me to be an excellent community GP with UN/WHO ties. I've made a huge mistake coming to Prague's Charles University thinking I could graduate faster by studying here because I haven't the formal premed and I didn't want to spend the time money frustration with MCAT and the US application system. Originally I thought I would go to Prague to get the first two preclinical years done while working on my German then transfer to Charite Medical School in Berlin, but I have been given feedback that German medical school teaching isn't much different from the medical school here where we have no learning support system at all.

Am I being realistic with the medical school wishlist?
Am I spoiled having been in continuing education with UCBerkeley and Stanford? Do I have hope of finding a school like this in UK?

I'm looking for a medical learning environment where the teachers and peers are professional, dedicated and humanitarian. Teachers have really good ability and willingness to share, knowledge transfer, being precise and skillful to express thoughts logically and effectively. Help students to practise what is learnt - problem solve in the real world.

Give some guidelines as to best book resources - teach us to learn how to research from updated, effective sources of information. Give us realistic guidance to meet expectations to excel exames in order to be real good doctors; be able to talk with the student to bring out the best of potentials (here the answer is to go to the textbook. Period.)

Have so many more questions, but the above are the most important. Hope to hear your answers ASAP. So thank you!

 

[bambi]

You know to be a UK gp isn't an instant thing after med school right? You would need 4-5yrs of med school, 2 foundation years then start your gp training but even in the first couple of years of gp training you do some hospital medicine. You want to be a rural gp, is that what you said? As in a single gp practice? That would be a long way off!

You ask if you could find places equal to Stanford? Are you kidding? UK medical schools are among the best in the world. If you are bothered by league tables, many of our schools are well above so called top US schools.

You mentioned something about tutors? This just isn't really done in UK schools, it's not necessary. We don't really do study groups either at any level of education. We have PBL groups but no extra, non-compulsory group work that we sort out ourselves.

You want journal access too? Anyone on the internet can obviously access pubmed etc, your uni will give you a username and password that will give you access to certain journals, exactly which will depend on your uni. You wont touch journals though apart from during special study modules. All med schools have libraries as do most if not all teaching hospitals, don't know quite what else you need to know.

Hospitals are hospitals, they wont be too different to the US, ours are more equal to each other though than they are in the US. As for cleanliness, they are very up on it over here to the point where it is annoying. Obviously we want clean wards but we aren't allowed to wear anything below the elbow- no watches etc.

UK medical courses vary. Some still spoonfeed which from the sounds of it you might actually prefer. Others are PBL based where you are pretty much left to get on with it. There are some lectures and a lot of other teaching during clinical years especially but core knowledge is learnt through PBL.

You say you have ruled out Southampton because you want an academic environment? Honestly not sure what you mean, Leicester is no more an academic place than Southampton.

 

[Scottish Chap]

Hospitals are hospitals, they wont be too different to the US, ours are more equal to each other though than they are in the US.

What does this mean?

 

[bambi]

I mean that I get the impression that your hospitals aren't equal in all respects. It matters where you do your residency right? Better hospitals have better applicants and they get better training? Here training is practically identical wherever you go because it's all NHS. Obviously we have a few private hospitals but they only have consultants and aren't hugely common.

 

[Scottish Chap]

I mean that I get the impression that your hospitals aren't equal in all respects.

Wrong. The Joint Commission keeps U.S. hospitals equally safe: http://cms.h2e-online.org/ee/regsandstandards/jcaho/ Also, I disagree that training is practically identical at all U.K. hospitals. Why do you think Edinburgh is so competitive for post-graduate medical education...?

 

[bambi]

Wrong. The Joint Commission keeps U.S. hospitals equally safe: http://cms.h2e-online.org/ee/regsandstandards/jcaho/ Also, I disagree that training is practically identical at all U.K. hospitals. Why do you think Edinburgh is so competitive for post-graduate medical education...?

I never said any weren't safe but there is a difference between meeting the minimum requirements and being great. Why bother doing loads of extra stuff to get a good residency if everywhere is equal? Genuine question, I really want to know. Edinburgh is a wonderful city! Most of the other major cities aren't as nice, plenty of people I know would choose it purely for that. If you could work in a good hospital and had to choose between 1 in a lovely city like Ed or in say Birmingham which would you go for? Also do you mean Foundation or ST? Scotland still only has 1 foundation school. In plenty of cases all you can specify is Scotland, someone I know turned down an runthrough because it ended up being in Aberdeen.

 

[leorl]

I think comments should be reserved unless you have first-hand knowledge of a certain system. Back to the OP, you ultimately should apply in the country where you intend to practice and attend medical school in that country. This is slightly hypocritical of me because I and a host of others did not do that, but the systems are completely different. Whether one system is better than the other is impossible to actually judge. The UK system works well for the NHS except for the more political aspect of current issues regarding open posts after foundation years. The US way of training works well for the way the US practices health care.

Both have strengths and weaknesses.

In the US, residencies are reviewed by the RRC among others, and each specialty has set criteria which must be met in order for a resident doctor to be deemed competent in that specialty. Ironically, some consider weaker programs to be the ones with a lot of FMGs, many of whom trained in the UK system. However, having observed myself and others who were UK trained but practice in the US, our training is equal although reached in a different way than those who were US-trained. It offers no particular advantage or disadvantage, being UK trained. What matters more is the type of individual you are and your personal ability to retain and use information / clinical skills.

 

[JanikeyDoc]

Hello,

I've been doing a lot of research about this, as I have a big decision to make. I am about to graduate from university in the US with an undergraduate degree in finance. I am, however, a UK citizen and have lived in the US for 12 years. Now I must decide whether to go to medical school in the US or the UK. Both options:

US: My GPA is 3.5 (failed 2 classes my freshman year, strong upward trend), BCPM is 3.65 or so. I still have to take the MCAT and Bio 2 and Organic 2, which I would do as a postbacc. at a state school while studying for the MCAT. I would then apply and would matriculate (hopefully) in 2011. I would graduate in 2015 at the age of 29 as an MD.

UK: As most of you know, medicine in the UK is an undergraduate degree so I am definitely qualified for medical school in the UK. That said, I've missed the application deadline for matriculation this fall, but I would move to the UK anyway and complete an access to medicine course to keep the material fresh and bolster my resume even more (in addition to standardizing me with UK students). I would then apply for matriculation in 2010 (a year earlier than if I was in the US), but the courses are 4-6 years long (I would probably do a 5 year course). So I would graduate in 2015 with an MBBS or something similar at the same age I would graduate from a US school.

So here's my considerations:

1. School in the UK would be a lot cheaper for me as a national student. £3500 per year is insanely cheap compared to US schools.

2. Because I'm a mature student and have many more qualifications and much more experience than most UK 18 year olds I would be able to leverage that to get into a "better" school than any school I would get into in the US.

3. I'm not sure where I want to live afterwards. I suppose I could live in either if I went to school in either, so this isn't really a consideration either. I would just have to train where I wanted to practice.

My main question is, which schooling system would make me the better physician? Would I be considered too old, or behind in the UK, or is entering school at my age common?

Here's my line of thought: The assumption is that 2 doctors of the same age, 1 trained in the UK 1 trained in the US, are of the same skill level. However, school in the UK takes 5-6 years (and you start at 18), versus 4 years in the US. So on average, you become a doctor in the UK at 24, but in the US not until 26. Does this mean that the UK education is more diluted, and you are expected to learn more during your foundation years than a US resident? Basically, if you took someone straight out of medical school in the UK and compared them to someone straight out of medical school in the US, who would be more competent?

Obviously this doesn't matter in the long run if I choose to stay where I go to school, as I will be trained to the same standard, it may just take longer. However, I don't want to be at a disadvantage, in terms of knowledge and skill, coming back to the US (if I choose to) after I have gotten my medical degree in the UK.

Could anyone shed some light on my situation?

Thanks

You forgot about the IMG thing as well, its going to be a lot harder to get a residency from a non US School than from one in the US. Ditto if you want to work in the UK then you are better off going to a UK school. A lot of people get this idea that if they go to a foreign medical school in another advanced country like the UK, Australia, Germany, Switzerland, etc, that they will be on a level field with US graduates, I will tell you its not so. My situation is a bit analagous to yours, I just got Australian permanent residency and am considering Australian medical schools but I realize my goals are to work in the US so I am in the process of applying to US medical schools.

 

[tracheatoedoc]

I spent 12 months at the second largest Hospital in London, and I can assure you that US training is superior. UK students are immature, absent, lazy, and will learn something later when needed.

I remember being concerned when I learned that 6 0r 8 students from St G's would be in surgery with me, however since they were only in the theatre 1 day and only showed up once a week for Mr Hurley's rounds, it was completely inconsequential. As were they.

My impression was medical educ was not taken seriously by them.

 

[bambi]

So you judge all of UK medical education based on 6 students? Ever think that they were timetabled to be somewhere else the rest of the time? Some students are lazy but you get that everywhere.

 

[tracheatoedoc]

I spent 1 year training in the UK at a large(900+) bed hospital.
For a variety of reasons UK students are unmotivated compared to US students.

I was told by a student from Bart's that it is difficult for a UK student to pass the USMLEs. She said the best student in her class barely passed them, just to show it could be done.

UK students face 13-15 years of lower level positions until they become consultants, so there is no urgency for them to really overcommit themselves to anything too strenuous. This is not merely my observation, it is the opinion of higher levels in the UK.

 

[jtlc2345]

I was told by a student from Bart's that it is difficult for a UK student to pass the USMLEs. She said the best student in her class barely passed them, just to show it could be done.

I would agree that it probably is harder for a UK student to pass the USMLEs compared to a US student but it's definately possible. I took Step 1 and 2CK this summer and passed (not sure what the general consensus regarding a good score is at the moment) and I'm by no means an exceptional student.

Jonathan

 

[bambi]

I spent 1 year training in the UK at a large(900+) bed hospital.
For a variety of reasons UK students are unmotivated compared to US students.

I was told by a student from Bart's that it is difficult for a UK student to pass the USMLEs. She said the best student in her class barely passed them, just to show it could be done.

UK students face 13-15 years of lower level positions until they become consultants, so there is no urgency for them to really overcommit themselves to anything too strenuous. This is not merely my observation, it is the opinion of higher levels in the UK.

Of course it is harder for UK students to pass the USMLE but I know plenty of very average students over here that have passed it very well.

 

[rezam71]

I can assure you that training in an average hospital in the U.S is far better than UK. I was resident (senior house officer) in the UK for 2 years and left in 2005. Then I came to Canada whose meical system is very close to the US and had an observership and personally witnessed difference between 2 system. I can assure you that a PGY1 in the Canada or US knows much more that a 3 year resident (2nd year SHO) in the UK. UK system has changed now to foundation year. But when I was there we didn't have training at all. First year residents just take blood and do paper work. In Canada even 4th year students see patients, write notes and decide about tx of patients and their discharge date. They have much more authority than UK residents and better formal and practical training.

 

[bambi]

I can assure you that training in an average hospital in the U.S is far better than UK. I was resident (senior house officer) in the UK for 2 years and left in 2005. Then I came to Canada whose meical system is very close to the US and had an observership and personally witnessed difference between 2 system. I can assure you that a PGY1 in the Canada or US knows much more that a 3 year resident (2nd year SHO) in the UK. UK system has changed now to foundation year. But when I was there we didn't have training at all. First year residents just take blood and do paper work. In Canada even 4th year students see patients, write notes and decide about tx of patients and their discharge date. They have much more authority than UK residents and better formal and practical training.

This has changed a bit since you left, there is more formal teaching etc but yes there is less than in the US. I agree that after a year or so of being a doctor a US doctor will be better in some ways, however as you specialise earlier UK doctors are better generalists at this stage. From what I have been told by doctors who have experienced both systems (though I admit I don't have 1st hand knowledge) UK doctors are responsible for more pts at a time so although our hours are less we do more in a particular shift, it varies by specialty and level though. It all evens out in the end though. Wasn't the thread about med school education rather than post-grad though?

 

[leorl]

It balances out. More "training" in the UK system is done in higher specialist schemes, analogous to US fellowships. However, the UK schemes are a lot longer than US fellowships, and when you add that to clinical exposure in junior/senior house officer positions, the amount of clinical exposure received before reaching consultancy / attending level is greater.

It's sort of like how UK high school students are exposed to things like intermediate-level physics and organic chemistry before starting university, whereas US students for the most part do not encounter those subjects until they start university.

The difference isn't really in the level of training, but the timing of the training in relationship to the position in "residency." Also, learning in the UK is self-motivated as well, but you are expected to know certain material as evidenced by questions appearing on the MRCP or MRCP-like exams.

 

[Blitz2006]

First year residents just take blood and do paper work. In Canada even 4th year students see patients, write notes and decide about tx of patients and their discharge date. They have much more authority than UK residents and better formal and practical training.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I've seen the system now in all 3 countries (Canada-U.S-UK).

I did my BScH at Queen's Univ (Kingston, Canada), and am now a 3rd year medical student at Univ. of Birmingham (UK). Last summer I did an observership with Neurosurgery and Orthopedics at Johns Hopkins, and this summer I spent 8 weeks at UPenn in Philly working with a Thoracic Surgeon and Neurologist. I also spent my 1st year summer working in a lab at Princess Margaret in Toronto, as well as observing med oncologists.

British medical education system is far superior in my opinion. As a current 3rd year student, I feel like I have similar responsibilities to the Neurology residents I worked with this past summer. I take blood on numerous occasions, take histories, clerk, present cases to the consultants/registrars, give a differential diagnosis, etc. Very similar to everything that the PGY-1s did in Neurology in Philly.

I'm studying now for the USMLE step 1, doing Kaplan Qbank and USMLE World questions. Sure, it is hard, and I'm not genius by any means. But the Step 1 exam seems to be just a crapload of memory work. I find my British exams to be much harder. I guess because in the UK 50% of our mark is short answer, the other 50% is negative marking MCQ (so you can't guess your way to a pass unlike in the american system). Oh, and the Brits are damn bright students. Even though I have a degree and a few years more 'mature', my felllow classmates who started at 18-19 are by no means lagging behind me. In fact, I'm definitly far from being one of the 'top students' in the class.

I'm not trying to bash the american system. But I don't agree that British doctors are 'inferior' by any means. The one thing I noticed is that American med students have a lot of superficial/random knowledge on uncommon disorders (ie. knowing what chromosome is affected by adult polycystic kidney disease), but when u ask an American med student to discuss in depth a common disorder, such as COPD, the Brit knows the stuff much better.

So yeh, obviosuly americans will perform better in the Boards, their system is geared to memorizing random facts. I saw this in my pre-med degree at Queen's. I only got half -decent marks in my undergrad because of recognition skills for MCQ.

Of course, I can only speak from Birmingham perspective, but the F1s and F2s do much more than 'take blood and paperwork'...

 

[leorl]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

British medical education system is far superior in my opinion. As a current 3rd year student, I feel like I have similar responsibilities to the Neurology residents I worked with this past summer. I take blood on numerous occasions, take histories, clerk, present cases to the consultants/registrars, give a differential diagnosis, etc. Very similar to everything that the PGY-1s did in Neurology in Philly.

Of course, I can only speak from Birmingham perspective, but the F1s and F2s do much more than 'take blood and paperwork'...

I wouldn't say that British med ed is far superior. But it goes back to what I originally said, which is you CANNOT COMPARE THE TWO. Take a US student and a Brit student, and both will know pretty much exactly the same things when they reach attending level, but the ways of reaching it are different. Therefore, at one point in time, there will be inequalities between those two students either clinically or in knowledge, but the end point is exactly the same.

"Training" in F1F2 is similar to internship in the US. Ok, in the US some institutions have lecture time. But internship is all about doing the scutwork and the paper pushing too, and being a glorified secretary. It's roughly the same. However, you're on call. And I found that clinically my knowledge increased exponentially when doing call in my junior years. In the UK/IRL, your paperpushing and scutwork actually achieves something (especially on surgical floors). In the US, it means nearly nothing - you're just the lackey "practicing" documentation and really no one gives two craps what you write, your job is just to beg for things to be done.

 

[Giovanotto]

1. Be careful if you think you're going to be offered 'home tuition' in the U.K. secondary to your citizenship. To get this you ordinarily need to have resided in the country for around three years NOT for educational purposes. Check the fine print. They are careful who they qualify for this rate. Expect to pay the full international rate (around $30,000 U.S.). The cost if living there is WAY higher, too (I lived in the U.K. for 22 years).

Is this true? Can someone help me fact-check this? This totally ruins my plans, sheesh. To clarify, three years, in your entire life, non-consecutively? Or three consecutive years around the time you are applying?

I am an EU citizen that lived in Rome for two years when I was younger, and have visited Italy almost every year for 2-3 months. I believe up until this fiscal year, my dad stopped paying taxes for me as he declared that I was no longer in the country. Would I be eligible?

 

[syma]

Is this true? Can someone help me fact-check this? This totally ruins my plans, sheesh. To clarify, three years, in your entire life, non-consecutively? Or three consecutive years around the time you are applying?

I am an EU citizen that lived in Rome for two years when I was younger, and have visited Italy almost every year for 2-3 months. I believe up until this fiscal year, my dad stopped paying taxes for me as he declared that I was no longer in the country. Would I be eligible?

Three consecutive years prior to the start of your course.

The UK legislation that defines who is eligible for 'home' fees sets out ten categories of people who qualify for 'home' fee status. Broadly speaking, eligibility for 'home' fee status depends on key things such as:

• your status in the UK (e.g. whether you are a UK national, EU national or what other type of permission you have to live in the UK)
• where you are living on the first day of the first academic year of your programme (this is not the actual 'first day' of the course. Usually it is the 1st September immediately before you begin your programme at QM)
• how long you have lived in the UK
• the type and purpose of your residence in the UK. There are special rules if you normally live in the UK but you have been living somewhere else temporarily e.g. because of your parent's temporary employment overseas

Many students think that length of residence in the UK is the only criterion, but there are other criteria that have to be met too.

In brief, the ten categories of students who may be eligible to pay the 'home' rate of tuition fees include:

• UK nationals and certain other people who have no restrictions on their stay in the UK, who have lived in the UK for at least the 3 year period immediately before (and including) the 1st September before the course starts
• EU nationals who have lived in the UK for at least the 3 year period immediately before (and including) the 1st September before the course starts
• EU nationals, and certain family members of EU nationals, who have lived in the European Economic Area for at least the 3 year period immediately before (and including) the 1st September before the course starts
• People who have been granted formal Refugee Status in the UK, and certain family members of people with Refugee Status
• People who have applied for asylum in the UK who have been refused Refugee Status but have been granted Humanitarian Protection (and certain family members)
• People who have previously been 'settled' in the UK (settled has a specific meaning), who have later moved to live elsewhere in the European Economic Area, for example to work, and are now returning to the UK
• People who have acquired a 'right of permanent residence' in the UK; this normally applies to certain EU nationals and their family members, who have been living in the UK for the required period
• European Economic Area and Swiss nationals (and family members) who are working in the UK
• Children of a Swiss national
• Children of Turkish nationals who are working in the UK

 

[Giovanotto]

• EU nationals, and certain family members of EU nationals, who have lived in the European Economic Area for at least the 3 year period immediately before (and including) the 1st September before the course starts

Phew, I fall under this. My permanent address is in Italy, so technically, I've been living there.

 

[Giovanotto]

Regarding the above statement, does that actually work? I mean I have not physically resided in EU or the UK for the last 4-5 years, but my permanent address is in in the EU. I'm not a permanent resident here in the U.S. so technically I have been living in the EU this whole time, no?