Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
today i was talking with my attending about my application, and he warned me against specific programs (including where he did fellowship) for residency because, though they have outstanding reputations, they are not good for residents because the focus is either too much on the fellow or on research. has anyone else received this type of feedback?
I have heard this from several people... mainly residents who did NOT go to one of those 'big name' programs, but interviewed there and decided against. It seems like big name places are great for fellowship and if you are really into the academic pathway, but you may not get the 'independent decision making experience' there that you get in 'resident-run' programs.
One of my attendings told me the same thing and gave me some advice on specific programs I was thinking of applying to. University of Chicago, Vanderbilt, and University of Washington are all very basic science research oriented and this takes away from the clinical teaching. Stanford is pretty fellow-run. Northwestern has tons of fellows but supposedly you still have independence. It would be nice to hear from some current residents though to verify this information.