What was the UCLA PD like?

[Jamezuva]

The PD was absent the day I interviewed at UCLA...anyone have any comments on Jodi Friedman's personality, level of commitment to the house staff and program, etc?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dadof2]

The PD was absent the day I interviewed at UCLA...anyone have any comments on Jodi Friedman's personality, level of commitment to the house staff and program, etc?

I would like to know as well. She was absent on the day that I interviewed as well, hope that it was the same day as jamezuva. (hope that she is involved)

 

[med1234]

I would like to know as well. She was absent on the day that I interviewed as well, hope that it was the same day as jamezuva. (hope that she is involved)

hmm... absent on my day too.

 

[kermee]

Me too. Strange coincidence.

 

[Jamezuva]

ok..what days were u guys there?...i was there jan 24th

 

[dadof2]

ok..what days were u guys there?...i was there jan 24th

On the off chance that soemone reads this It was on a different day.

 

[med1234]

On the off chance that soemone reads this It was on a different day.

i was different day too.

 

[Jamezuva]

sheesh guys...are u really that paranoid?

how are we supposed to figure it out if everyone puts "different day" relative to the one i put?

 

[stu pedaso]

I was there in early January and the PD gave the general spiel. My only concern was how she emphasized that at this time of year, the moral of the interns was at its lowest.

 

[bighair]

not the most enthusiastic person in the world. if you are interested in research, don't make it apparent.

 

[CaySau2000]

not the most enthusiastic person in the world. if you are interested in research, don't make it apparent.

I completely agree with this post. She's new at the job so maybe she hasn't found her way yet. She's not big on people interested in research, which is both surprising, because UCLA is such a respected research institution, and un-visionary (for lack of a better word). I received some misleading information about short-tracking in the residency program (which I found out later) and for that and other reasons I decided to unrank it.

 

[Doctor&Geek]

So you mean that even this program:

http://www.star.med.ucla.edu/

isn't given support by the PD anymore?

 

[CaySau2000]

So you mean that even this program:

http://www.star.med.ucla.edu/

isn't given support by the PD anymore?

As I found out, almost all people in STAR did not short track. There were only 1 to 2 that did as far as they could remember (and I think that happened before this PD got on board). People in the residency and STAR told me different things. My understanding is that that you apply for short-tracking in STAR only after you ave gotten approval from the PD at the end of your internship. That means you will apply early in your PGY2 (the same time as everybody else). But since all fellowship programs process application for starting dates 1.5-2 years later, I don't see how you could short-track at the end of PGY2. Their explanation wasn't very clear. Their history just tells me that short-tracking isn't very big here.

 

[scrub monkey]

i'm surprised that the pd is discouraging applicants with research backgrounds. ucla is such a large poweful research institution. i thought this pd was supposed to be more applicant friendly, as the prior pd was supposedly even less friendly and part of the reason ucla didn't fill 2 years ago.

 

[AJM]

i'm surprised that the pd is discouraging applicants with research backgrounds. ucla is such a large poweful research institution. i thought this pd was supposed to be more applicant friendly, as the prior pd was supposedly even less friendly and part of the reason ucla didn't fill 2 years ago.

However bad the new UCLA PD may be, she is still a huge improvement from the prior PD. I remember when I was applying a few years ago, I received many warnings from multiple sources about him (including warnings from the Deans at my med school, and from some of the alums from my school who did their residencies at UCLA). Because of that, I decided not to rank the program.

If the only problem with the new PD is that she is not encouraging residents who want to do research, than this is leaps and bounds better than her predecessor, IMO.

 

[CaySau2000]

However bad the new UCLA PD may be, she is still a huge improvement from the prior PD. I remember when I was applying a few years ago, I received many warnings from multiple sources about him (including warnings from the Deans at my med school, and from some of the alums from my school who did their residencies at UCLA). Because of that, I decided not to rank the program.

If the only problem with the new PD is that she is not encouraging residents who want to do research, than this is leaps and bounds better than her predecessor, IMO.

The problem is that the previous (not so friendly) PD is now the chair of the department. So double whammy, I'll say.

 

[AJM]

The problem is that the previous (not so friendly) PD is now the chair of the department. So double whammy, I'll say.

Whoops - I didn't know that. Well, never mind my previous comments...

 

[Fermi]

So you mean that even this program:

http://www.star.med.ucla.edu/

isn't given support by the PD anymore?

That program website looks like someting out of the late 1990s. The "News and Events" section has not been updated since 2002. While quality of website is not necessarily a sensitive or specific indicator, this might be supporting evidence for your suspicions.

 

[tum]

.

 

[EspiritDeCorps]

Regarding Jodi Friedman's personality, level of commitment to the house staff and program, etc

I thought she was great. Some had thought she just bragged about the program/hospital. HOwever, I thought she was selling the program same as everyone else does. She was there for my interview. She had been gone for a medical reason for quite a while I know.

The housestaff I talked to described her as very committed. They also said they were happy, which is different than I had previously heard. I think that UCLA was heavily affected by the work hour rules and this could be responsible for the change of heart.

Program...more to come.

 

[mcindoe]

what bothered me about her "bragging" was the tinge of arrogance that came along with it....for instance, she made some comment about how because of the complexity of the patients you treat at ucla, when residents go to do their rotations at olive view and elsewhere they then realize how much smarter and better they are because of this....and this was like a week before my interview for ucla olive view's program. made me wonder if the residents hear this sort of thing and then think they're better than the residents they have to work with elsewhere and if they act arrogant or are perceived that way by the others that work with them. after all, the PD plays a big role in setting the tone (and setting an example) for the residents in the program, and in the limited time i heard her speak i didn't get the best vibe, though i could be completely wrong. she was pretty vague about what the plans are going to be when they move into the new hospital (which has fewer beds and thus can't accommodate all the residents), so it's unclear to me other than her tentative plan for having the ucla residents do more rotations at santa monica what she intends to do about the upcoming changes. i feel a little uneasy about the program because there's no solid plan for how the changes are going to be made and what the changes are going to be exactly. i'm worried about a "bait and switch" happening if i were to match there, and if i want to do residency at ucla, then i want to be at ucla...not at santa monica hospital or wherever else they're planning on shuffling the residents around as they adjust to the newer and smaller hospital. because she's been gone for a while (she was on medical leave--she was pregnant), i feel like she's not as up to speed on the program's status as i'd hope a PD would be. anyone else get that feeling?

 

[tum]

i believe she was pregnant so she was out for awhile. from what i hear she's nice

 

[lotp129ivdu]

I don't have any direct experience with the UCLA IM program. I have heard some bad things from friends and colleagues who've worked there. There are rumors about almost every program out there (some are based in truth and some are totally inaccurate) so take it with a grain of salt.

-people in the program say the interns don't really hang out with each other and there's a competitive vibe to the place, compared to other programs
-there are services where the residents have to follow orders from multiple attendings with little autonomy
-some arrogant attendings (like anywhere)
-the program leadership is in flux. the former PD was noted to be a real a--hole. he's now the vice chair.
-true stories about residents not being there to back up their interns in tough situations
-true stories about patients encountering extremely malignant residents as their caretakers

still, the program seems to be much better than it was a few years ago before they switched to the q6 call schedule. there are some people i know who are happy in the program. graduates match well in fellowships, but ucla fellowships tend to be very research heavy and they might not favor you if you're not into that.

 

[Joe Joe on da Radio]

i was encouraged by my interviewer that if were to come here for training to pursue the STAR program. i definitely did not feel that research was looked down up by the administration. the PD just emphasized the the priority of an internal medicine residency program is to produce outstanding clinicians first and foremost, which should be the case.

i got the sense that you have to be self-reliant and a self-directed learner at ucla (not altogether different than my undergrad experience there). that fits for some personalities and not so much for others.

it's a front-loaded program, which makes for a very tough intern year. its not surprising then that the housestaff are going to appear tired. i did not meet anyone who regretted there decision to come to ucla.