USNWR Best Med Schools 2022

[deleted1065184]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Schools like Harvard only ask for sticker price from families who can provide it, so I wouldn't lose a ton of sleep over that. I think being at HMS is the single biggest advantage you could have for matching Harvard residencies, and being at Harvard residencies is the single biggest advantage you could have to matching Harvard fellowships. The degree of advantage is diminished but still substantial for applying out to similar institutions, and you'd have to mess up pretty badly as an MGH resident to not get interviews in your fellowship area at large. At some point we have to accept that certain topics are strictly qualitative. I have no data to tell you a residency full of DO and IMG graduates is less competitive than a residency full of "top" MD alums, and same concept for residencies into fellowships, but I'd be pretty shocked if you truly disbelieved that.

Again, your end goal is prestige. If your goal is to be in the most prestigious fellowships, yes it helps a bit to be at the most prestigious residency and medical school. I already discussed this. I feel like the convo is becoming kinda circular. And you're really comparing apples to oranges with your next example, but I still think it's worth saying....who cares how competitive it is if you will still be able to become a physician and practice in your desired field? If my goal is to practice medicine as a rheumatologist (just a random example), I can accomplish that goal easily coming from any US MD/DO school as long as I don't screw up during medical school. For this goal, it doesn't matter at all if I train at MGH or some place in the middle of nowhere.

 

[efle]

Again, your end goal is prestige. If your goal is to be in the most prestigious fellowships, yes it helps a bit to be at the most prestigious residency and medical school. I already discussed this. I feel like the convo is becoming kinda circular. And you're really comparing apples to oranges with your next example, but I still think it's worth saying....who cares how competitive it is if you will still be able to become a physician and practice in your desired field? If my goal is to practice medicine as a rheumatologist (just a random example), I can accomplish that goal easily coming from any USMD/DO school as long as I don't screw up during medical school. For this goal, it doesn't matter at all if I train at MGH or some place in the middle of nowhere.

No no, I'm saying your ability to get cards interviews in general is better as an MGH alum, and especially so if you dream of training cards at a place like MGH.

Ask yourself where prestige comes from. I might not care at all whether my grandma has heard of my hospital - suppose I just want to train with the best and brightest classmates, be taught by leading experts, see the zebra cases that flew in from other states or countries, see cutting edge trial treatments first hand.

The prestige comes from the rest of it, not from US News declaring so. But yes, if you just want to pass boards and train at any program in any location to be a rheumatologist, going wherever is cheapest makes sense to me.

 

[deleted1065184]

No no, I'm saying your ability to get cards interviews in general is better as an MGH alum, and especially so if you dream of training cards at MGH.

Ask yourself where prestige comes from. I might not care at all whether my grandma has heard of my hospital - suppose I just want to train with the best and brightest classmates, be taught by leading experts, see the zebra cases that flew in from other states or countries, see cutting edge trial treatments first hand.

The prestige comes from the rest of it, not from US News declaring so. But yes, if you just want to pass boards and train at any program in any location to be a rheumatologist, going wherever is cheapest makes sense to me.

We are going to have to disagree because I will never agree that the "best and brightest classmates" are concentrated at a handful of schools. MCAT/GPA are the two biggest factors for getting into the most prestigious schools, and I do not believe those have much at all to do with brightness. But your response is really pretty tangential to my main point, which was that you do not need to go to a big name school to practice medicine in your field of choice and that it is invalid to compare this to law schools, where school name holds much more weight (in particular, for getting law jobs *at all*) due to saturation in the field.

 

[efle]

We are going to have to disagree because I will never agree that the "best and brightest classmates" are concentrated at a handful of schools. MCAT/GPA are the two biggest factors for getting into the most prestigious schools, and I do not believe those have much at all to do with brightness. But your response is really pretty tangential to my main point, which was that you do not need to go to a big name school to practice medicine in your field of choice and that it is invalid to compare this to law schools, where school name holds much more weight (in particular, for getting law jobs *at all*) due to saturation in the field.

Agreed. It's only if you want to do something competitive - like find a job after law school or match a competitive area in medicine - that your pedigree matters. And while you put forth a fantastic argument that Harvard students aren't exceptional, you must be aware you're in the minority holding that view!

 

[7summers]

We are going to have to disagree because I will never agree that the "best and brightest classmates" are concentrated at a handful of schools. MCAT/GPA are the two biggest factors for getting into the most prestigious schools, and I do not believe those have much at all to do with brightness. But your response is really pretty tangential to my main point, which was that you do not need to go to a big name school to practice medicine in your field of choice and that it is invalid to compare this to law schools, where school name holds much more weight (in particular, for getting law jobs *at all*) due to saturation in the field.

just curious why we are to believe the medical field is immune from becoming like law or business... We have already seen saturation in EM and we can only expect this trend to continue. When that point comes, prestige will matter just like it does in Law and business. In the old days you could make a living just off a high school diploma, then you needed a bachelors, then a bachelors from a school with "good networking" and name recognition, today most people are looking to grad degrees to make a comfortable living, and in some fields (law and business) big name grad schools. History shows that we can expect to head in that direction as well. So as much as we hate the game we gotta learn how to play it, prestige is gonna matter more in medicine with each passing year.

 

[pierty]

just curious why we are to believe the medical field is immune from becoming like law or business... We have already seen saturation in EM and we can only expect this trend to continue. When that point comes, prestige will matter just like it does in Law and business. In the old days you could make a living just off a high school diploma, then you needed a bachelors, then a bachelors from a school with "good networking" and name recognition, today most people are looking to grad degrees to make a comfortable living, and in some fields (law and business) big name grad schools. History shows that we can expect to head in that direction as well. So as much as we hate the game we gotta learn how to play it, prestige is gonna matter more in medicine with each passing year.

This is impossible to predict, but I sincerely do not think so based on everything we know. You are thinking very narrowly about competition between different specialties, which constantly changes (rad onc was the fad several years ago, now EM is creeping up, next it might be psych or anesthesiology or something else).

But the profession as a whole is quite stable. There might be more applicants to med school every year - and a corresponding shortage of primary care physicians in the US that could be filled by them - but the actual number of student slots has only slowly crept-up over time (and this gap is getting worse). This is to say that the bottleneck exists into medical school, not out.

Prestige may play a small role in having multiple residency interviews at competitive programs (and competitive fellowships after that), but word-of-mouth between people on this site overplays the effect constantly. You can also see the effect rather ubiquitously across the top 40 funded institutions (do some match on average slightly better in this group at the most competitive programs? Yes, but does 5-10% difference in class matching averages really matter to your success? No.)

Regardless, my inclination is that people worry more about these factors because they are told to worry (and acquire nerves from other people who are nervous). Just find what you actually want to do in the field, focus on it, and work hard. You will be successful (and, more importantly, happy).

 

[7summers]

This is impossible to predict, but I sincerely do not think so based on everything we know. You are thinking very narrowly about competition between different specialties, which constantly changes (rad onc was the fad several years ago, now EM is creeping up, next it might be psych or anesthesiology or something else).

But the profession as a whole is quite stable. There might be more applicants to med school every year - and a corresponding shortage of primary care physicians in the US that could be filled by them - but the actual number of student slots has only slowly crept-up over time (and this gap is getting worse). This is to say that the bottleneck exists into medical school, not out.

Prestige may play a small role in having multiple residency interviews at competitive programs (and competitive fellowships after that), but word-of-mouth between people on this site overplays the effect constantly. You can also see the effect rather ubiquitously across the top 40 funded institutions (do some match on average slightly better in this group at the most competitive programs? Yes, but does 5-10% difference in class matching averages really matter to your success? No.)

Regardless, my inclination is that people worry more about these factors because they are told to worry (and acquire nerves from other people who are nervous). Just find what you actually want to do in the field, focus on it, and work hard. You will be successful (and, more importantly, happy).

I agree trends are important to follow and there are a lot of people on the internet with a pessimistic outlook. But we know that EM job market isn't the way it is because of some trend of graduates pursuing it but also because of the economics pushing the market itself. Then when you consider mid-level creep, it's hard to overlook the future security of medicine simply because doctors have never had to worry about it in the past. Lawyers and business men alike used to share the same sentiment.

 

[efle]

This is impossible to predict, but I sincerely do not think so based on everything we know. You are thinking very narrowly about competition between different specialties, which constantly changes (rad onc was the fad several years ago, now EM is creeping up, next it might be psych or anesthesiology or something else).

But the profession as a whole is quite stable. There might be more applicants to med school every year - and a corresponding shortage of primary care physicians in the US that could be filled by them - but the actual number of student slots has only slowly crept-up over time (and this gap is getting worse). This is to say that the bottleneck exists into medical school, not out.

Prestige may play a small role in having multiple residency interviews at competitive programs (and competitive fellowships after that), but word-of-mouth between people on this site overplays the effect constantly. You can also see the effect rather ubiquitously across the top 40 funded institutions (do some match on average slightly better in this group at the most competitive programs? Yes, but does 5-10% difference in class matching averages really matter to your success? No.)

Regardless, my inclination is that people worry more about these factors because they are told to worry (and acquire nerves from other people who are nervous). Just find what you actually want to do in the field, focus on it, and work hard. You will be successful (and, more importantly, happy).

Have you ever noticed that the naysaying about brand being unimportant, student caliber being no different, and individual effort alone being what determines outcomes...is never being espoused by the people who actually experienced these programs? There's a lot of "top tier" med students on here. There's not a lot of posts about how it was the wrong move and they should've gone to State.

 

[pierty]

Have you ever noticed that the naysaying about brand being unimportant, student caliber being no different, and individual effort alone being what determines outcomes...is never being espoused by the people who actually experienced these programs? There's a lot of "top tier" med students on here. There's not a lot of posts about how it was the wrong move and they should've gone to State.

That is a logical fallacy (ad populum) wrapped in a bad appeal to ethos.

Voices tend to amplify each other, especially regarding major life decisions. We have no idea what would have happened if we chose a different school - and so we are biased to think that our current choice was the right one, especially if something substantial was given up in the latter (I.e., full tuition to a state school near our friends and family vs 80k at a “reputable” institution). This allows us to avoid cognitive dissonance on decisions that have been made. That’s why you don’t see people saying they would choose differently despite sometimes admitting that they “had a horrible time at [their] school”. It’s rationalizing, and it happens with most people when they face a life choice that they weren’t confident in.

In other words - you will not be convinced by any objective measures against an ingrained belief you have because you can’t be. It’s a situation that sticks close to home, and deviating from it is like finding out your religion was wrong.

I’ve met a lot of incredible people, in a lot of different places. Some of the less-incredible ones were those that tied their value to their institution. My $0.02.

 

[efle]

That is a logical fallacy (ad populum) wrapped in a bad appeal to ethos.

Voices tend to amplify each other, especially regarding major life decisions. We have no idea what would have happened if we chose a different school - and so we are biased to think that our current choice was the right one, especially if something substantial was given up in the latter (I.e., full tuition to a state school near our friends and family vs 80k at a “reputable” institution). This allows us to avoid cognitive dissonance on decisions that have been made. That’s why you don’t see people saying they would choose differently despite sometimes admitting that they “had a horrible time at [their] school”. It’s rationalizing, and it happens with most people when they face a life choice that they weren’t confident in.

In other words - you will not be convinced by any objective measures against an ingrained belief you have because you can’t be. It’s a situation that sticks close to home, and deviating from it is like finding out your religion was wrong.

I’ve met a lot of incredible people, in a lot of different places. Some of the less-incredible ones were those that tied their value to their institution. My $0.02.

On the flip side, it could be that the experience really does engrain the belief. The student bodies at these institutions are knock-your-socks-off humbling. There are more than enough high-stats applicants to fill these seats; academic ability is necessary but not sufficient. I can sit here saying Rhodes scholars are just lucky until I'm blue in the face, and tell anyone that disagrees that they've bought into prestige-mongering nonsense, that it doesn't add any heft to a C.V., and tell Rhodes scholars themselves that they're just reinforcing their misguided beliefs if they talk highly of the experience and the doors it opened.

But that would make me look pretty silly.

 

[Ms Procrastinator]

Well, as a person choosing to attend Duke over Harvard, maybe my African parents will finally accept it because it's a top 5 school now. lol.

Nahhhhhhh, why top 5 instead of number 1?

 

[pierty]

On the flip side, it could be that the experience really does engrain the belief. The student bodies at these institutions are knock-your-socks-off humbling. There are more than enough high-stats applicants to fill these seats; academic ability is necessary but not sufficient. I can sit here saying Rhodes scholars are just lucky until I'm blue in the face, and tell anyone that disagrees that they've bought into prestige-mongering nonsense, that it doesn't add any heft to a C.V., and tell Rhodes scholars themselves that they're just reinforcing their misguided beliefs if they talk highly of the experience.

But that would make me look pretty silly.

I think you are missing the point. You may have heard others denigrating students in “prestigious” positions/scholarships -from what it sounds, out of jealousy - but it’s just a straw-man here.

I’ve met incredible students and faculty at places that are considered prestigious, but also those that are not as well-recognized. Do the prestigious places tend to have a few more of these incredible people? Sure, but that is mainly because they attract more of them there that want to use the resources they have for a bigger vision - not because they want to be defined by the institution’s branding. Of course, a side-effect is that these places also attract a lot of not-so-impressive people (I.e., those who are driven, but for the appearance of status and recognition, rather than anything substantial).

If you choose to seek prestige and recognition - sure, go for it. I am aiming for such places myself in my career, though in my case, it is to have a better chance to fuel my research passions.

My impression has been that if you’re constantly fixated on prestige for the namesake, and the potential things you can do with it second, it’s easier to end up consistently humbled by those impressive people you revere, rather than becoming like them.

 

[deleted1065184]

just curious why we are to believe the medical field is immune from becoming like law or business... We have already seen saturation in EM and we can only expect this trend to continue. When that point comes, prestige will matter just like it does in Law and business. In the old days you could make a living just off a high school diploma, then you needed a bachelors, then a bachelors from a school with "good networking" and name recognition, today most people are looking to grad degrees to make a comfortable living, and in some fields (law and business) big name grad schools. History shows that we can expect to head in that direction as well. So as much as we hate the game we gotta learn how to play it, prestige is gonna matter more in medicine with each passing year.

I didn't say it was immune from becoming that way, just that it's not that way now.

 

[7summers]

I didn't say it was immune from becoming that way, just that it's not that way now.

I didn't really see you specify that but either way I guess then we can agree that prestige of your institution will matter for more than just securing academic positions or more prestigious fellowship opportunities whether it's now or in 4 years.

 

[efle]

I think you are missing the point. You may have heard others denigrating students in “prestigious” positions/scholarships -from what it sounds, out of jealousy - but it’s just a straw-man here.

I’ve met incredible students and faculty at places that are considered prestigious, but also those that are not as well-recognized. Do the prestigious places tend to have a few more of these incredible people? Sure, but that is mainly because they attract more of them there that want to use the resources they have for a bigger vision - not because they want to be defined by the institution’s branding. Of course, a side-effect is that these places also attract a lot of not-so-impressive people (I.e., those who are driven, but for the appearance of status and recognition, rather than anything substantial).

If you choose to seek prestige and recognition - sure, go for it. I am aiming for such places myself in my career, though in my case, it is to have a better chance to fuel my research passions.

My impression has been that if you’re constantly fixated on prestige for the namesake, and the potential things you can do with it second, it’s easier to end up consistently humbled by those impressive people you revere, rather than becoming like them.

I keep waiting to meet these unimpressive duds who snuck their way in for the wrong reasons but haven't yet. Maybe during residency I'll discover where they've all been hiding. By the by what made you pick your current MSTP program over research-ranking favorites like Harvard, Stanford etc? Wouldn't they have facilitated your righteous quest better?

I didn't really see you specify that but either way I guess then we can agree that prestige of your institution will matter for more than just securing academic positions or more prestigious fellowship opportunities whether it's now or in 4 years.

I already wouldn't go into radonc unless it was at a good program. I think you're right about EM and the folks at the new residencies sprouting up all over will feel the hurt sooner and harsher than the guys at USC and Harbor

 

[deleted1065184]

I didn't really see you specify that but either way I guess then we can agree that prestige of your institution will matter for more than just securing academic positions or more prestigious fellowship opportunities whether it's now or in 4 years.

No, we definitely don't agree on this lol

 

[pierty]

I keep waiting to meet these unimpressive duds who snuck their way in for the wrong reasons but haven't yet.

“In the eye of the beholder.” If you’re after prestige as priority 1, it’ll be easy to be impressed by similar people who’ve made it their lives to try and impress others. I’ve talked to many of them. I try not to, anymore.

By the by what made you pick your current MSTP program over research-ranking favorites like Harvard, Stanford etc? Wouldn't they have facilitated your righteous quest better?

Interesting that you make assumptions about my background from my general points regarding “prestige” for namesake. I’ve actually said before that, specifically for MD-PhD, those institutions with the greatest funding/student outcomes are likely helpful for carving an academic niche. 98% of currently enrolled MD students are not in MD-PhD programs, though.

I chose my program based on three factors (that I later heard referred to as) ”the 3 F’s”: Faculty, form, and fit.

MD-PhD programs are weird; they are 8+ years long, and filled with a barrage of obstacles throughout your journey. Finding a place that has the mentors you want to work with; an administration that supports you at every step and helps you get out of rough spots to finish in a reasonable time frame; and a culture you identify with/location that makes you happy enough to push through the slog of the dual degree training, is critical.

Funding helps with the first of those three, if the well-funded department actually has the PI’s you want to work with. But most MSTP’s are very, very well funded, with many PI’s that are fantastic.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I keep waiting to meet these unimpressive duds who snuck their way in for the wrong reasons but haven't yet. Maybe during residency I'll discover where they've all been hiding. By the by what made you pick your current MSTP program over research-ranking favorites like Harvard, Stanford etc? Wouldn't they have facilitated your righteous quest better?

I am also curious, since I also keep hearing about them in various forums 🙂

 

[efle]

“In the eye of the beholder.” If you’re after prestige as priority 1, it’ll be easy to be impressed by similar people who’ve made it their lives to try and impress others. I’ve talked to many of them. I try not to, anymore.



Interesting that you make assumptions about my background from my general points regarding “prestige” for namesake. I’ve actually said before that, specifically for MD-PhD, those institutions with the greatest funding/student outcomes are likely helpful for carving an academic niche. 98% of currently enrolled MD students are not in MD-PhD programs, though.

I chose my program based on three factors (that I later heard referred to as) ”the 3 F’s”: Faculty, form, and fit.

MD-PhD programs are weird; they are 8+ years long, and filled with a barrage of obstacles throughout your journey. Finding a place that has the mentors you want to work with; an administration that supports you at every step and helps you get out of rough spots to finish in a reasonable time frame; and a culture you identify with/location that makes you happy enough to push through the slog of the dual degree training, is critical.

Funding helps with the first of those three, if the well-funded department actually has the PI’s you want to work with. But most MSTP’s are very, very well funded, with many PI’s that are fantastic.

Glad you found a good fit elsewhere. You might want to reconsider trying to match those kinds of places, though. You'd have very few people to talk to if pride bothers you that much.

 

[deleted1065184]

By the by what made you pick your current MSTP program over research-ranking favorites like Harvard, Stanford etc? Wouldn't they have facilitated your righteous quest better?

I think it's also worth noting that for PhD training, it's all about field of interest. I think I've mentioned it before, but strength of research in a given field is not at all reflected in USNWR rankings. Ex: If I were choosing to do a PhD on genetics/genomics, I'd choose Baylor over almost any "T20" school. The PhD already makes you extremely competitive for residencies, so most MD-PhD students choose their school largely based on the strength of a particular area of research (and ofc program culture/support/location since you'll be there forever).

 

[efle]

I think it's also worth noting that for PhD training, it's all about field of interest. I think I've mentioned it before, but strength of research in a given field is not at all reflected in USNWR rankings. Ex: If I were choosing to do a PhD on genetics/genomics, I'd choose Baylor over almost any "T20" school. The PhD already makes you extremely competitive for residencies, so most MD-PhD students choose their school largely based on the strength of a particular area of research (and ofc program culture/support/location since you'll be there forever).

Very good point, especially if your area of interest isn't purely medical. Great hospitals aren't always attached to strong departments in physics, chemistry etc.

 

[deleted1065184]

Glad you found a good fit elsewhere. You might want to reconsider trying to match those kinds of places, though. You'd have very few people to talk to if pride bothers you that much.

Def agree that virtually nobody at these schools is a dud. It's a super competitive process and those who get in deserve to be there. I also think this is a good point to pivot back to what I was saying yesterday about "best and brightest" lol.

We know that, to some degree, getting into these schools is a bit of a crapshoot. There are highly qualified students who are just as impressive as the people at these schools who either don't get in or do get in and choose to go elsewhere due to finances or other factors.

 

[deleted1065184]

Very good point, especially if your area of interest isn't purely medical. Great hospitals aren't always attached to strong departments in physics, chemistry etc.

Right, although I will concede that if you wanna look more broadly and esp. as a starting point, USNWR can be a bit more useful here since they factor in funding.

Also wanna point out that USNWR actually does global research rankings where they do take into account publications, citations, research collaborations, etc. Unfortunately they do still factor in "reputation", but overall those rankings are actually okay and compare decently well to what I've personally seen wrt research.

Here's an example for neuroscience: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/neuroscience-behavior

 

[Hzreio]

We are going to have to disagree because I will never agree that the "best and brightest classmates" are concentrated at a handful of schools. MCAT/GPA are the two biggest factors for getting into the most prestigious schools, and I do not believe those have much at all to do with brightness. But your response is really pretty tangential to my main point, which was that you do not need to go to a big name school to practice medicine in your field of choice and that it is invalid to compare this to law schools, where school name holds much more weight (in particular, for getting law jobs *at all*) due to saturation in the field.

It’s really about options, imo prestige gives you opens more doors. Just by attending Harvard you will have more doors open to you. Doesn’t mean the guy attending the t100 will have no doors open

 

[efle]

I also have to wonder how often y'all think someone choosing between Harvard and U of Mass (at the same cost) would actually choose the latter. SDN talks a big game about fit, location, family/support, and HMS only being a boost for future academicians, and warn against chasing prestige...but I feel like in reality this would approach 100% choosing HMS.

 

[Orims]

I also have to wonder how often y'all think someone choosing between Harvard and U of Mass (at the same cost) would actually choose the latter. SDN talks a big game about fit, location, family/support, and HMS only being a boost for future academicians, and warn against chasing prestige...but I feel like in reality this would approach 100% choosing HMS.

Probably someone who got a full ride or near full ride at U of Mass. HMS is infamous for having worse financial aid compared to its fellow T5,10 and 20 institutions.

 

[wondervisions]

Oversupply in medicine could NEVER happen. Just look at pharmacy. What we need is MORE diploma mill DO schools in the middle of nowhere and for-profit MD schools. That will surely solve the allocation problem.

We also need to EXPAND the scope and number of midlevel providers and at the same time advertise the HECK out of how amazing medicine is and how it is a perfect, altruistic career path.

We need our organizational leaders to be on board with increasing NUMBERS, because the number of trainees is the most important metric of a healthy professional career path.

Once we have these three things- more schools/residencies, expanded midlevel scope, and a top-down push to increase recruitment, we will be IMMUNE to oversupply and underemployment. The best thing for us to do right now is to pretend it could never happen. Don't you know there is a physician shortage???

 

[efle]

Probably someone who got a full ride or near full ride at U of Mass. HMS is infamous for having worse financial aid compared to its fellow T5,10 and 20 institutions.

Is it? I thought HMS, Stanford and Hopkins all had need-only policies but with guarantee of meeting all demonstrated need. I think peers like Penn and WashU have robust merit recruitment schollys too, but also meet need. They're not out here charging sticker price to EFC 0 kids at least. I only pay like 10% of my tuition.

 

[Banco]

Is it? I thought HMS, Stanford and Hopkins all had need-only policies but with guarantee of meeting all demonstrated need. I think peers like Penn and WashU have robust merit recruitment schollys too, but also meet need. They're not out here charging sticker price to EFC 0 kids at least. I only pay like 10% of my tuition.

Just completely anecdotally from the school x vs. y threads, Harvard seems to be pretty ass at giving aid compared to its peer institutions.

 

[OfMiceAndWomen]

Is it? I thought HMS, Stanford and Hopkins all had need-only policies but with guarantee of meeting all demonstrated need. I think peers like Penn and WashU have robust merit recruitment schollys too, but also meet need. They're not out here charging sticker price to EFC 0 kids at least. I only pay like 10% of my tuition.

I think HMS likely has one of the worst need-based fin aid (and ofc no merit aid) of the T10s, because they only give aid up to tuition and fees. Their fin aid doesn't cover living expenses, unless you get an additional scholarship like REACH. Most other T10s will cover living expenses if your EFC is 0. HMS knows people will pay the extra cost just to go to Harvard lol

 

[efle]

Good points. Another kink in the system is that some of them use only FAFSA and others include the CSS profile which can drastically change how wealthy your family appears to their aid department. Big part of why I picked one of the schools I mentioned over another, they both state they meet all need but they calculate need very differently.

 

[deleted1065184]

It’s really about options, imo prestige gives you opens more doors. Just by attending Harvard you will have more doors open to you. Doesn’t mean the guy attending the t100 will have no doors open

I always hear talk about options and doors opening, but I think there really needs to be more nuance. I don't like how vague it all is. What options? What doors? This is important for people deciding.

If you want to go into private practice in the South, Harvard won't give you any benefit over Duke, Vanderbilt, Emory, Baylor, UTSW, UAB, etc. If you want to lead a global public health-based organization or something, Harvard will definitely give you an edge because the name will be useful for global partnerships. If you're doing MD-PhD, choose the school that has the most robust research in your area of interest and good physician-scientist mentorship...that may or may not be Harvard, depending on what you want to do. If you want to do residency or fellowship at MGH, BWH, or BI, Harvard will give you a huge leg up.

Tl;dr I'm not a fan at all of vague phrases like that.

 

[deleted1065184]

I also have to wonder how often y'all think someone choosing between Harvard and U of Mass (at the same cost) would actually choose the latter. SDN talks a big game about fit, location, family/support, and HMS only being a boost for future academicians, and warn against chasing prestige...but I feel like in reality this would approach 100% choosing HMS.

When does SDN tell people to choose UMass over Harvard if aid is equivalent? Lol. I feel like you're making up something that just doesn't happen. If they absolutely hate Harvard for whatever reason, then yeah I'd tell them to go to UMass.

But all things equal, nobody is gonna say turn down Harvard in this instance. But I don't think this is the best example because Harvard and UMass are close enough that things like support system usually aren't a big deal. Let's use a similarly ranked school in a different location. If a person were from Miami and choosing between Harvard and Miami, and big factors for them were location and support system, then yeah I'd say go ahead and choose Miami unless they were dead set on doing residency in the Northeast.

 

[efle]

I always hear talk about options and doors opening, but I think there really needs to be more nuance. I don't like how vague it all is. What options? What doors? This is important for people deciding.

If you want to go into private practice in the South, Harvard won't give you any benefit over Duke, Vanderbilt, Emory, Baylor, UTSW, UAB, etc. If you want to lead a global public health-based organization or something, Harvard will definitely give you an edge because the name will be useful for global partnerships. If you're doing MD-PhD, choose the school that has the most robust research in your area of interest and good physician-scientist mentorship...that may or may not be Harvard, depending on what you want to do. If you want to do residency or fellowship at MGH, BWH, or BI, Harvard will give you a huge leg up.

Tl;dr I'm not a fan at all of vague phrases like that.

I'm curious where you draw the line. If I just want to be a rheumatologist in a community in the South, should I take a scholarship to a brand new MD program over Duke? One of the new schools in Michigan did this and offered big scholarships to attract their first class. What about a DO school?

We frequently hear about it being harder to match with those kinds of conditions, but only in vague qualitative terms. No data that I know of can tell me whether I'm more or less likely to end up in rheumatology.

 

[OfMiceAndWomen]

I always hear talk about options and doors opening, but I think there really needs to be more nuance. I don't like how vague it all is. What options? What doors? This is important for people deciding.

If you want to go into private practice in the South, Harvard won't give you any benefit over Duke, Vanderbilt, Emory, Baylor, UTSW, UAB, etc. If you want to lead a global public health-based organization or something, Harvard will definitely give you an edge because the name will be useful for global partnerships. If you're doing MD-PhD, choose the school that has the most robust research in your area of interest and good physician-scientist mentorship...that may or may not be Harvard, depending on what you want to do. If you want to do residency or fellowship at MGH, BWH, or BI, Harvard will give you a huge leg up.

Tl;dr I'm not a fan at all of vague phrases like that.

I think the really attractive thing about Harvard (and why you see so many people struggle with turning it down) is that it's one of the few institutions that will open any and all doors. If you don't know what you want to do or where you want to end up, Harvard will give you the assurance that you can do anything you want.

Of course if you know what you want to do and there are more reasonable paths, you should take the more reasonable option. But there are also a lot of people who don't know exactly what they want to do, and they see Harvard as the most unfettered way to go.

 

[Orims]

Is it? I thought HMS, Stanford and Hopkins all had need-only policies but with guarantee of meeting all demonstrated need. I think peers like Penn and WashU have robust merit recruitment schollys too, but also meet need. They're not out here charging sticker price to EFC 0 kids at least. I only pay like 10% of my tuition.

Yup, just take a look at HMS vs X school threads or the HMS school specific thread. Some people were blindsided by their financial aid package.

 

[efle]

When does SDN tell people to choose UMass over Harvard if aid is equivalent? Lol. I feel like you're making up something that just doesn't happen. If they absolutely hate Harvard for whatever reason, then yeah I'd tell them to go to UMass.

But all things equal, nobody is gonna say turn down Harvard in this instance. But I don't think this is the best example because Harvard and UMass are close enough that things like support system usually aren't a big deal. Let's use a similarly ranked school in a different location. If a person were from Miami and choosing between Harvard and Miami, and big factors for them were location and support system, then yeah I'd say go ahead and choose Miami unless they were dead set on doing residency in the Northeast.

Sorry you're right I just grabbed the nearest state school. Re-run it with U of Florida and suppose family is on the west coast. Shouldn't we see cases of people feeling the fit was just so much better at Florida? Or that they just like Florida better than Boston? Instead we only see people asking for help when someone is throwing scholarships at them or they're deciding between schools that are all high on US News

 

[deleted1065184]

I think the really attractive thing about Harvard (and why you see so many people struggle with turning it down) is that it's one of the few institutions that will open any and all doors. If you don't know what you want to do or where you want to end up, Harvard will give you the assurance that you can do anything you want.

Of course if you know what you want to do and there are more reasonable paths, you should take the more reasonable option. But there are also a lot of people who don't know exactly what they want to do, and they see Harvard as the most unfettered way to go.

This is fair, although I think the #1 most attractive thing about Harvard is the name, irrespective of opportunities lol

 

[deleted1065184]

I'm curious where you draw the line. If I just want to be a rheumatologist in a community in the South, should I take a scholarship to a brand new MD program over Duke? One of the new schools in Michigan did this and offered big scholarships to attract their first class. What about a DO school?

We frequently hear about it being harder to match with those kinds of conditions, but only in vague qualitative terms. No data that I know of can tell me whether I'm more or less likely to end up in rheumatology.

Good question. I think this is another thing that just requires a lot of nuance...which is another reason I don't like super broad answers/suggestions if they can be avoided.

I don't think the comparison you're giving wrt new MD program over Duke is an entirely fair one, given what we've been discussing. One has documented success of getting people where they need to be whereas the other one does not (i.e we *do* have data for Duke but none for the other school). And we will not know how well it does that for some time. That's a risk. If a person knows that risk exists but still wants to avoid debt, then I certainly understand if they choose the new school. I'd probably take Duke in this scenario just because of the unknowns.

I can't speak as well for DO schools because I'm not quite as familiar with their matching (super heavy research person, so I didn't apply DO), but I think a much larger percentage of DO physicians go into primary care as opposed to MD physicians. Can't really say how much of that is due to choice vs. lingering biases (which we do know exist against DO programs to some degree).

But I just feel like the likelihood of a person having only two offers, one from Duke (or a peer school) and another from a DO school *and* that DO school offering more money than Duke/peer (correct me if I'm wrong, but DO schools on average give much less scholarship money than MD schools) is so miniscule that it really isn't worth the thought exercise lol

 

[deleted1065184]

Sorry you're right I just grabbed the nearest state school. Re-run it with U of Florida and suppose family is on the west coast. Shouldn't we see cases of people feeling the fit was just so much better at Florida? Or that they just like Florida better than Boston? Instead we only see people asking for help when someone is throwing scholarships at them or they're deciding between schools that are all high on US News

I think the flaw in this logic is that the absence of a question doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Also, the likelihood of somebody from the West Coast choosing between another state's state school (unless it's maybe Michigan) and Harvard isn't too common lol

Anecdotally, I know somebody who chose their state schools (which is T30) over several other T10 schools because of money and fit. And I've seen numerous people choose money and fit/location over prestige.

 

[Hzreio]

I always hear talk about options and doors opening, but I think there really needs to be more nuance. I don't like how vague it all is. What options? What doors? This is important for people deciding.

If you want to go into private practice in the South, Harvard won't give you any benefit over Duke, Vanderbilt, Emory, Baylor, UTSW, UAB, etc. If you want to lead a global public health-based organization or something, Harvard will definitely give you an edge because the name will be useful for global partnerships. If you're doing MD-PhD, choose the school that has the most robust research in your area of interest and good physician-scientist mentorship...that may or may not be Harvard, depending on what you want to do. If you want to do residency or fellowship at MGH, BWH, or BI, Harvard will give you a huge leg up.

Tl;dr I'm not a fan at all of vague phrases like that.

Most ppl going to med school don't know exactly what they want. In a few of your specific non "vague" examples, you mentioned name brands will give you a leg up so it supports my idea that name brands give you more options.

Does going to Harvard give you a benefit if you're going into private practice in the south? Maybe, maybe not, it's hard to say without corroborating evidence. But there's no doubt that can't hurt.

No one is saying you have to go to the most prestigious medical schools to do what you want. But it's also safe to say that going to a better school can only help in your future career.

 

[deleted1065184]

Most ppl going to med school don't know exactly what they want. In a few of your specific non "vague" examples, you mentioned name brands will give you a leg up so it supports my idea that name brands give you more options.

Does going to Harvard give you a benefit if you're going into private practice in the south? Maybe, maybe not, it's hard to say without corroborating evidence. But there's no doubt that can't hurt.

No one is saying you have to go to the most prestigious medical schools to do what you want. But it's also safe to say that going to a better school can only help in your future career.

I didn't say it'd hurt, but I think everything is context dependent...which is what I've been stressing. I think part of the issue is that there's just not any good way to objectively determine better schools, and I believe "better" just really differs for different people.

Since we're discussing rankings, we could mention the primary care rankings and how those schools aren't how we typically denote the top schools even though far more people will go into primary care with little research than people who will have a research-heavy career.

A person academically gifted enough to get into a "top" research school is probably gonna be fine no matter where they go (aside from the Caribbean, ofc lol)...don't ya think?

 

[Hzreio]

I didn't say it'd hurt, but I think everything is context dependent...which is what I've been stressing. I think part of the issue is that there's just not any good way to objectively determine better schools, and I believe "better" just really differs for different people.

Since we're discussing rankings, we could mention the primary care rankings and how those schools aren't how we typically denote the top schools even though far more people will go into primary care with little research than people who will have a research-heavy career.

A person academically gifted enough to get into a "top" research school is probably gonna be fine no matter where they go (aside from the Caribbean, ofc lol)...don't ya think?

I don’t really know what your point is then. Make the choice that’s best for you. Ofc that’s different for everyone. All I’m saying is that no matter what you want to do, name brands can only help in your career (easier to match competitive specialties, etc.). If you feel that umass is better for you than Harvard for one reason or another, then go to umass. No one will fault you for that, but understanding the implications/differences between going to two differently tiered schools is an important consideration for any student.

 

[efle]

I'll throw out another couple of spicy takes too.

1) Passing boards and being able to practice is a minimum. I think training in EM at a giant center in a rough city is different than training at a new community program in a sleepy town. We sort of already covered disagreement about whether it matters where you train for fellowships - I'd add we probably disagree about whether you come out with differing comfort and capability. (Edit: Don't mean to make it sound like one is outright better. Different kinds of training with pros and cons at each depending what you want to do afterwards. "Keeping doors open" so you can have your preference is the idea I'm going after.)
2) If you might be interested in a private practice group, not all groups are equally accessible. Leading programs try to sell you pretty hard on the networking they plug you into. As an example Mallinckrodt is a tippy-top rads program with a massive alumni network and (this is vague word of mouth, no data) they get unbeatable training and are in high demand even for the most desirable groups.

Just some other reasons besides academia that it can matter what interviews your school can help you get.

 

[deleted1065184]

I don't think we're gonna agree on these topics so I digress lol, but I appreciate the discussion y'all

 

[proudofmykids]

I also have to wonder how often y'all think someone choosing between Harvard and U of Mass (at the same cost) would actually choose the latter. SDN talks a big game about fit, location, family/support, and HMS only being a boost for future academicians, and warn against chasing prestige...but I feel like in reality this would approach 100% choosing HMS.

99% of the time, I think people have only argued against HMS for financial savings elsewhere, or negligible status difference (ie: Stanford, Penn, Hopkins) or specific specialty opportunity program difference.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

so what exactly is fit when comes to medical school especially for a young person? I am not sure how much location and support system needs to be factors? Younger people should be able to adopt to any city and do they really need close by support system?

 

[deleted1065184]

so what exactly is fit when comes to medical school especially for a young person? I am not sure how much location and support system needs to be factors? Younger people should be able to adopt to any city and do they really need close by support system?

I hope you're kidding. Location and support system are very important factors for most students. And please don't try to project what *you* believe young people should be able to do.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I hope you're kidding. Location and support system are very important factors for most students. And please don't try to project what *you* believe young people should be able to do.

Not projecting anything. It's a genuine question. I came as an young immigrant to attend graduate school and for me cost was the only factor.

 

[deleted1065184]

Not projecting anything. It's a genuine question. I came as an young immigrant to attend graduate school and for me cost was the only factor.

That's totally fine, but your factors will not be the same factors for others. For me, cost was the #1 factor, but the #2 factor was proximity to my support system (esp. my spouse), and the 3rd factor was location (as a Black person, I do not feel comfortable living in cities with very small Black populations). This is a pretty common factor for most people of color from my experience (emphasis on most, because there will absolutely be exceptions). I believe my factors are as valid as yours. And others will have their own factors that are as valid for them as ours are for us.