Which med schools are ‘improving the fastest?’

Med School Insiders
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Gorpu

Gorpu

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
38
Reaction score
60
Members do not see this ad.
Are any med schools improving particularly quickly relative to the average? If so, which one(s)? (Be it by Step1, Match lists, or ‘subjective ranking’)
 
Goro said:
This is impossible to answer because the criteria that might be important to you might not be to someone else.

If SLU suddenly got a major P01 research award, would you necessarily care?

And rankings???? Only pre-meds and med school Deans care about those.
Click to expand...

Well I think he's asking if anyone has information on any of those criteria. I don't think he's asking for an absolute end-all be-all list. And sure, maybe only some people care about rankings, but I don't see any harm in asking for the information or giving that information out if someone asks for it.
 
OxenFoxen said:
What schools do this? I only know of 2 off the top of my head (Baylor and Iowa)
Click to expand...
Harvard, Washington State University, University of Michigan were three of the ones I interviewed at that all had it...I actually didn’t know it was a thing until I interviewed and honestly it makes fantastic sense (particularly for the 12 month preclinical - that is a game changer)
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
Harvard, Washington State University, University of Michigan were three of the ones I interviewed at that all had it...I actually didn’t know it was a thing until I interviewed and honestly it makes fantastic sense (particularly for the 12 month preclinical - that is a game changer)
Click to expand...

Harvard and Mich saw those huge bumps in step 1????
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
Harvard, Washington State University, University of Michigan were three of the ones I interviewed at that all had it...I actually didn’t know it was a thing until I interviewed and honestly it makes fantastic sense (particularly for the 12 month preclinical - that is a game changer)
Click to expand...
IMHO this is an excellent idea.
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
Harvard, Washington State University, University of Michigan were three of the ones I interviewed at that all had it...I actually didn’t know it was a thing until I interviewed and honestly it makes fantastic sense (particularly for the 12 month preclinical - that is a game changer)
Click to expand...
I was recently told by M4 that the cost of this is less preparation for medicine rotation, if that is proximal. However, Step >> Rotation
 
Neuronom said:
I was recently told by M4 that the cost of this is less preparation for medicine rotation, if that is proximal. However, Step >> Rotation
Click to expand...
That is true, but when everyone goes in with less preparation, the field remains even. 😉

Given some of the clinical minutiae on Step I, there are some advantages to taking it after exposure to the wards. Though this should never decide where someone matriculates. Just my thoughts.
 
Neuronom said:
I was recently told by M4 that the cost of this is less preparation for medicine rotation, if that is proximal. However, Step >> Rotation
Click to expand...

I don’t intend to single you out with this quote @Neuronom. Reading the bolded just made me understand how bad Step Fever really is. I am all of a sudden sympathetic to the Pro-Pass/Fail crowd.

Moko said:
Though this should never decide where someone matriculates.
Click to expand...

I could legitimately imagine myself/others basing our decisions on this. Or at least giving it a lot of weight.
 
Kardio said:
I could legitimately imagine myself/others basing our decisions on this. Or at least giving it a lot of weight
Click to expand...
I know the 12 month preclinical is factoring very strongly into my ideal decision making. Not for the step aspects, but because it gives you all of M3 to figure out what you want to do and pursue those efforts as opposed to the July through October just if of M4...It make the education a lot more customizable
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
I know the 12 month preclinical is factoring very strongly into my ideal decision making. Not for the step aspects, but because it gives you all of M3 to figure out what you want to do and pursue those efforts as opposed to the July through October just if of M4...It make the education a lot more customizable
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'm understanding this correctly. How does taking Step 1 after M3 change what you would do?
 
Gorpu said:
Are any med schools improving particularly quickly relative to the average? If so, which one(s)? (Be it by Step1, Match lists, or ‘subjective ranking’)
Click to expand...

Eventually you are going to be the doctor. It does not matter which med school you go to... and your success really depends on you. "improving" is really hard to quantify... "best" is hard to quantify... when you eventually go into residency match, no one will care if your school's accomplishments, they care about yours.
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
Harvard, Washington State University, University of Michigan were three of the ones I interviewed at that all had it...I actually didn’t know it was a thing until I interviewed and honestly it makes fantastic sense (particularly for the 12 month preclinical - that is a game changer)
Click to expand...
OxenFoxen said:
What schools do this? I only know of 2 off the top of my head (Baylor and Iowa)
Click to expand...
Also Duke and Vanderbilt.
 
Kardio said:
I could legitimately imagine myself/others basing our decisions on this. Or at least giving it a lot of weight.
Click to expand...
Applicants place too much emphasis on certain things that should be non-factors when deciding between schools. Of course, schools want to differentiate themselves, hence all the emphasis on meaningless "curricular innovations" and other gimmicks.

I'm more of a proponent of looking at match lists, as ultimately that's what matters: can a school get you to where you want to go? This will incorporate differences on Step scores from timing of Step I etc. Match lists should be viewed as just another data point though, and not the end-all-be-all, as it tells you nothing about individual preferences (those who opted to stay due to family, etc)
 
Last edited:
Moko said:
Applicants place too much emphasis on certain things that should be non-factors when deciding between schools. Of course, schools want to differentiate themselves, hence all the emphasis on meaningless "curricular innovations" and other gimmicks.

I'm more of a proponent of looking at match lists, as ultimately that's what matters: can a school get you to where you want to go? This will incorporate differences on Step scores from timing of Step I etc. Match lists should be viewed as just another data point though, and not the end-all-be-all, as it tells you nothing about individual preferences (those who opted to stay due to family, etc)
Click to expand...
This might be ignorant to ask, but is there really much difference between match lists at various top medical schools? My main considerations for choosing a medical school (assuming I get multiple acceptances to top schools) are cost and location.
 
EmbryonalCarcinoma said:
This might be ignorant to ask, but is there really much difference between match lists at various top medical schools? My main considerations for choosing a medical school (assuming I get multiple acceptances to top schools) are cost and location.
Click to expand...
For most purposes, there is no significant difference between similarly ranked schools. However, if an applicant is dead-set on being in Boston for residency due to family (and their ego would only allow them to apply to MGH or BWH), then being a medical student at HMS would likely be more advantageous than being a student at Hopkins, Penn, or Stanford. Cost and location are factors that should be considered when deciding between schools.
 
Mr. Dr. Prof. Patrick said:
I am saying doing clinical during M2 year that way M3 and M4 is all elective/your choice rotations as opposed to just M4
Click to expand...

the way these curricula tend to be is that the "extra" year you get from a condensed preclinical / core clerkship curriculum can be used for research / personal projects / earning a masters degree, etc. The advantage is that you spend less time on classes, and you can pick a research project / mentor / masters degree after doing the core clerkships; i.e. when you have a better idea of what you may want to match into. I'm not sure many ppl at these programs are filling up an entire year with extra elective rotations
 
Lucca said:
the way these curricula tend to be is that the "extra" year you get from a condensed preclinical / core clerkship curriculum can be used for research / personal projects / earning a masters degree, etc. The advantage is that you spend less time on classes, and you can pick a research project / mentor / masters degree after doing the core clerkships; i.e. when you have a better idea of what you may want to match into. I'm not sure many ppl at these programs are filling up an entire year with extra elective rotations
Click to expand...
Yah, this is mostly what I mean lol Spending an entire year doing urology rotations would not be productive. But basically you don’t have to stress as much about doing research alongside the preclinical years or taking a 5th year for a masters etc.
 
Moko said:
For most purposes, there is no significant difference between similarly ranked schools. However, if an applicant is dead-set on being in Boston for residency due to family (and their ego would only allow them to apply to MGH or BWH), then being a medical student at HMS would likely be more advantageous than being a student at Hopkins, Penn, or Stanford. Cost and location are factors that should be considered when deciding between schools.
Click to expand...

How much of an advantage are we talking about? How about dead set on NYC, how much advantage does Columbia or Cornell give say over Hopkins, Mayo, Stanford and Yale?
 
notsobabydoc said:
How much of an advantage are we talking about? How about dead set on NYC, how much advantage does Columbia or Cornell give say over Hopkins, Mayo, Stanford and Yale?
Click to expand...
Not as significant for NYC as Columbia and Cornell are not as competitive for most specialties. In my humble opinion, MGH and BWH are in a league of their own, at least for internal medicine, which allows them to be much more selective. Even an average middle-of-the-road HMS student can match in internal medicine at MGH or BWH; whereas above average students from similarly prestigious schools might not even be invited for interview. Almost all residency programs show a strong preference for their own, usually for good reason (fewer unknowns).
 
Moko said:
Not as significant for NYC as Columbia and Cornell are not as competitive for most specialties. In my humble opinion, MGH and BWH are in a league of their own, at least for internal medicine, which allows them to be much more selective. Even an average HMS student can match in internal medicine at MGH or BWH; whereas above average students from similarly prestigious schools will not even be invited for interview. Almost all residency programs show a strong preference for their own, usually for good reason (fewer unknowns).
Click to expand...

Along this vein (pun intended ofc), I am posting this question here vs a thread to avoid controversy and side-eye glances haha..

Why is there a discrepancy bw Top 20 med school vs T20 hospital lists? One would think that they correlate closely but obviously med school rankings seem to be a different ball game.
 
Engrailed said:
Why is there a discrepancy bw Top 20 med school vs T20 hospital lists? One would think that they correlate closely but obviously med school rankings seem to be a different ball game.
Click to expand...
Those lists focus on different metrics.

As an aside, rankings (for medical school, residency, fellowship, etc) should not be mistaken for quality of training.
 
Moko said:
Not as significant for NYC as Columbia and Cornell are not as competitive for most specialties. In my humble opinion, MGH and BWH are in a league of their own, at least for internal medicine, which allows them to be much more selective. Even an average middle-of-the-road HMS student can match in internal medicine at MGH or BWH; whereas above average students from similarly prestigious schools might not even be invited for interview. Almost all residency programs show a strong preference for their own, usually for good reason (fewer unknowns).
Click to expand...

I am a bit confused by the semantics. Do you mean the advantage is not that significant by going to Columbia or Cornell over the other ones if one is dead set on NYC for residency in IM?
 
University of Central Florida and the Lake Nona area are making bigggggg moves, especially for being so young!
 
imbesrs said:
Not rly, he basically indicates that he values match list as a stronger data point than other measurable outcomes. #teammoko on this one
Click to expand...

You've just restated what he said. Doesn't change the fact that match lists are a terrible way to compare medical schools.

Match lists are almost never helpful to pre-meds, because (just as Moko said), they show you "can a school get you to where you want to go?". How do you as a pre-med have any idea where every person in that class wants to go? Despite what some may believe, most students do not want to do Internal Medicine in Boston. Besides, pre-meds are especially ill-equipped to understand what a "strong" match may be--they likely just go by the reputation of the parent university.

If you're trying to use match lists to decide between schools of different caliber (Hopkins vs. State School A), you have added an unnecessary step to your calculation.

If you're trying to use match lists to decide between schools of similar caliber (UCSF vs. Harvard, or State School A vs. State School B), then you may miss going to the school that was better suited to you because you got lulled into a false sense of being informed. There are way more important things to take into account.

I know this is all counter-intuitive because match lists have a lot of data points (and more data is always good, right?). But this is data without an incredible amount of context, which really makes it noise for most pre-meds.
 
enalli said:
Match lists are almost never helpful to pre-meds, because (just as Moko said), they show you "can a school get you to where you want to go?". How do you as a pre-med have any idea where every person in that class wants to go? Despite what some may believe, most students do not want to do Internal Medicine in Boston. Besides, pre-meds are especially ill-equipped to understand what a "strong" match may be--they likely just go by the reputation of the parent university. If you're trying to use match lists to decide between schools of different caliber (Hopkins vs. State School A), you have added an unnecessary step to your calculation. If you're trying to use match lists to decide between schools of similar caliber (UCSF vs. Harvard, or State School A vs. State School B), then you may miss going to the school that was better suited to you because you got lulled into a false sense of being informed. There are way more important things to take into account. I know this is all counter-intuitive because match lists have a lot of data points (and more data is always good, right?). But this is data without an incredible amount of context, which really makes it noise for most pre-meds.
Click to expand...
I agree with your points that match lists need to be interpreted with caution (see below for the last sentence of the post you quoted), though I disagree that "match lists are almost never helpful to premeds". Match lists are a tool like any other, and can certainly be misused and misinterpreted; but they are one of the few semi-objective ways to assess a school's results (with caveats). Context can be gained from doing some due diligence (talking with current students, practicing physicians, etc). Of course, there are many other more important factors to consider when choosing between schools.
Moko said:
Match lists should be viewed as just another data point though, and not the end-all-be-all, as it tells you nothing about individual preferences (those who opted to stay due to family, etc)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Moko said:
they are one of the few semi-objective ways to assess a school's results
Click to expand...

Other than telling you overall match rates (100% students match vs. 80%), there is very little that is helpful to an applicant. Say you want to measure a school's success by "how good" their match is. What makes a good match? It isn't ending up at a particular well-regarded hospital or specialty, but rather ending up where the you wanted. What maximizes your chances of ending up where you wanted? Good scores, good grades, good letters, good research, and a good school reputation (not in that order). Of those things, what can one school provide that another can't? The school reputation and research opportunities. So go look at the school reputation and the research opportunities! Don't bother looking at a match list that is affected by a myriad of confounders.
 
enalli said:
Other than telling you overall match rates (100% students match vs. 80%), there is very little that is helpful to an applicant. Say you want to measure a school's success by "how good" their match is. What makes a good match? It isn't ending up at a particular well-regarded hospital or specialty, but rather ending up where the you wanted. What maximizes your chances of ending up where you wanted? Good scores, good grades, good letters, good research, and a good school reputation (not in that order). Of those things, what can one school provide that another can't? The school reputation and research opportunities. So go look at the school reputation and the research opportunities! Don't bother looking at a match list that is affected by a myriad of confounders.
Click to expand...
We are mostly in agreement, though it would be difficult for most applicants to parse out a school's reputation (as determined by program directors) without some inference from the match list.

While graduating seniors regularly "match down" (a highly competitive student matching into a non-competitive specialty or non-competitive program due to personal preferences), students rarely "match upwards". So when I see a lesser known program have year-after-year of strong matches relative to what I see as their peer institutions, that may suggest that others are appreciating things that I have yet to notice.

If a student's goal is to match into a competitive subspecialty in a competitive program and major city (no judgment), then some further research may be warranted before matriculating at a school that rarely matches anyone into the types of programs they are interested in. This may be due to graduating seniors "matching down", but it may also hint that the school lacks particular subspecialty-specific resources, or that there are other issues at play. Talking with current students and others in-the-know can help clarify these points.

As I said before, match lists should not be the end-all-be-all, nor should they be the most important factor to consider. But, they can provide some useful information once the noise and potential confounders are accounted for. Obviously these are just my own views.
 
Moko said:
We are mostly in agreement, though it would be difficult for most applicants to parse out a school's reputation (as determined by program directors) without some inference from the match list.

While graduating seniors regularly "match down" (a highly competitive student matching into a non-competitive specialty or non-competitive program due to personal preferences), students rarely "match upwards". So when I see a lesser known program have year-after-year of strong matches relative to what I see as their peer institutions, that may suggest that others are appreciating things that I have yet to notice.

If a student's goal is to match into a competitive subspecialty in a competitive program and major city (no judgment), then some further research may be warranted before matriculating at a school that rarely matches anyone into the types of programs they are interested in. This may be due to graduating seniors "matching down", but it may also hint that the school lacks particular subspecialty-specific resources, or that there are other issues at play. Talking with current students and others in-the-know can help clarify these points.

As I said before, match lists should not be the end-all-be-all, nor should they be the most important factor to consider. But, they can provide some useful information once the noise and potential confounders are accounted for. Obviously these are just my own views.
Click to expand...

Isn't it safe to say that if you are in at several schools in the same tier, you should pick one that has better perceived reputation? It's so nebulous to apply this. Reputation is inherently subjective. So what's the real rule of thumb? Applicant's personal perception of reputation or what the applicant thinks what others think of the school??
 
notsobabydoc said:
Isn't it safe to say that if you are in at several schools in the same tier, you should pick one that has better perceived reputation? It's so nebulous to apply this. Reputation is inherently subjective. So what's the real rule of thumb? Applicant's personal perception of reputation or what the applicant thinks what others think of the school??
Click to expand...
If they’re in the same “tier” differences in reputation are negligible.
 
notsobabydoc said:
Isn't it safe to say that if you are in at several schools in the same tier, you should pick one that has better perceived reputation? It's so nebulous to apply this. Reputation is inherently subjective. So what's the real rule of thumb? Applicant's personal perception of reputation or what the applicant thinks what others think of the school??
Click to expand...
For matching purposes, it's the program directors' perception that matters. For programs in the same tier (as judged by program directors), any differences are negligible. No one should be picking a program based solely on reputation/prestige.
 
Netter/ Quinnipiac has a great match list with only 2 classes graduating so far
 
Moko said:
I agree with your points that match lists need to be interpreted with caution (see below for the last sentence of the post you quoted), though I disagree that "match lists are almost never helpful to premeds". Match lists are a tool like any other, and can certainly be misused and misinterpreted; but they are one of the few semi-objective ways to assess a school's results (with caveats). Context can be gained from doing some due diligence (talking with current students, practicing physicians, etc). Of course, there are many other more important factors to consider when choosing between schools.
Click to expand...

This may be a stupid question but I've been thinking about it more and more ever since getting rejected from UCSF.

My family lives in the part of California where the closest med schools are UCSF/Stanford. Preferably, I want to do my residency and eventually work near home and family as a physician. Hypothetically speaking and board scores equal, if I have the privilege of choosing between medical schools, which school would offer a better opportunity to go back home for residency? 1) UCD/UCI/UCSD with match lists that are very CA heavy or 2) a T20 in the midwest whose match list seems stronger but also very heavy in the midwest, especially their home program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

X0001234
Which medical schools produce the most academic physicians?
Replies
2
Views
1K
LizzyM
LizzyM
tinyhandsbob
What are the procedural skills that are formally assessed for medical school graduation?
Replies
1
Views
546
Goro
Goro
U
Are Admissions to Top Undergrad or Top Med School Harder?
Replies
3
Views
921
eigen
eigen
Mayajae
  • Locked
Why are schools not accepting urm's in the 2024 msar data?
Replies
24
Views
2K
wysdoc
wysdoc
Liam K
Hey everyone, which medical schools are known to be friendly toward applicants with reinvention or non-traditional backgrounds?
Replies
3
Views
871
LunaOri
LunaOri
Top