How would you rank the following programs in terms of reputation of AP/CP resident training?
UCLA, Stanford, UCSF, UCSD, University of Washington
UCLA, Stanford, UCSF, UCSD, University of Washington
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
How would you rank the following programs in terms of reputation of AP/CP resident training?
UCLA, Stanford, UCSF, UCSD, University of Washington
</TD><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #cccccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: #cccccc 1px solid" class=alt1 align=right><!-- controls -->
<!-- SDNCODE: REPLY ALL --><!-- /SDNCODE: REPLY ALL --><!-- SDNCODE: MULTIQUOTE MOD -->
<!-- /SDNCODE: MULTIQUOTE MOD -->
<!-- / controls --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>I like how LA's list doesn't include anything about "actually learn some pathology" - yet I know he's right about those being the most important things to attaining success in private practice pathology. And before people chime in, I will argue that passing the boards and actually learning some pathology are two entirely separate things.
So keeping a low profile, passing boards and profiting are how you succeed in private practice? You make it sound like a mindless job
I like how LA's list doesn't include anything about "actually learn some pathology" - yet I know he's right about those being the most important things to attaining success in private practice pathology. And before people chime in, I will argue that passing the boards and actually learning some pathology are two entirely separate things.
Sorry, I misspoke a bit. I meant to imply that doing those things in residency are what helps most in getting a first job in private practice pathology. I actually have no idea what it takes to do well after getting that first job.
Do you think it matters more where you do your residency if you plan on staying in academics? Some people have told me that "pedigree" matters more in academics vs. private practice. Or perhaps would that only matter if you train at one of a few very select programs, otherwise it doesn't matter much? Thanks!
The one concern I have about Stanford is that they currently do not have a GI fellowship, which is what I think I want to pursue, although who knows, circumstances can change (I came into med school thinking I would go into neurology for example).
UCSF doesnt really have a GI fellowship as its a vast majority of consult medical liver.
I would definitely not call that a GI fellowship in the sense UCLA used to have one (famous GI guy whose name Im blanking on...) or Haggitt's former UW program.
I dont know of many good GI programs, probably UMich is the best still I would imagine. Maybe JHU, BWH.
I would also be interested to hear more opinions on the OP's original question.
I interviewed at Stanford and UCSF. I was really impressed by both programs, although personally I think I liked Stanford a little bit more. I connected better with the residents there and they seemed more effusive about their program than the UCSF residents that I met, although those residents also had great things to say. The one concern I have about Stanford is that they currently do not have a GI fellowship, which is what I think I want to pursue, although who knows, circumstances can change (I came into med school thinking I would go into neurology for example). Both of these programs clearly have outstanding reputations and would provide excellent training. Ultimately, it is difficult to make an informed decision after interviewing at each program for just one day and only meeting a small representation of the residents/faculty.
Does anyone else on this forum, especially residents at either program, have any further information about the relative merits of training at either one of these programs? Have there been any recent changes at either of these places that may affect new trainees (e.g. anyone retiring or leaving?). Any input would be greatly appreciated.
This is a great vid on the university conspiracy and why Im very disillusioned with education in America (education at all levels from preschool to medical fellowship):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VpZtX32sKVE
UCSF doesnt really have a GI fellowship as its a vast majority of consult medical liver.
I would definitely not call that a GI fellowship in the sense UCLA used to have one (famous GI guy whose name Im blanking on...) or Haggitt's former UW program.
I dont know of many good GI programs, probably UMich is the best still I would imagine. Maybe JHU, BWH.
Our mission is to provide students with free, unbiased information, resources, and advising for careers in the health professions. We believe every student deserves access to trustworthy guidance, regardless of background or ability to pay.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.