For as many times as this debate is brought up, I'm surprised there isn't a standard response to the topic. The question is moot, as the premise is meaningless. "If the same applicant was applying from school X, Y, or Z, which would be more likely to get in?" In the real world, this doesn't happen. Applicants are all different, so this scenario would never occur. That fact can't simply be dismissed for the purposes of discussion, because program directors care significantly more about individual qualities than they care about the name of the school.
This question is often just a thinly veiled way of asking, "which of these schools is better, because I'm basing my decision on which school to go to based on which is 'better?'" Whatever "better" means. Picking a school should be done based upon where an applicant feels the most comfortable, and where they're most likely to succeed and thrive. Those factors have a huge impact on grades and professional relationships, and those are the things that really matter. (I know the OP is a current medical student, and this paragraph wasn't directed at him/her, just stating it for other people who might find the thread.)
Does the name of the school matter? A bit. I don't think anybody would say that a student coming from a Carribbean school vs. someone from Harvard would be considered on equal footing, all other things being equal. But that's an extreme example, and the importance of school reputation is nowhere near as great as things like clinical grades, Step 1 and 2 scores, elective grades, and so forth.
And I'll back that up with evidence:
http://www.siumed.edu/dme/academy/jc_articles/Distlehorst_0509.pdf
You'll note that reputation doesn't appear on the list until number 9. This study was much discussed when published, and is the result of a survey of 1,201 program directors. Some interesting points in the discussion relate the very high value placed across the board on indicators of "excellence in clinical performance." Which refers to things like LORs, clinical grades, and audition electives.
The name of a school matters a lot less than people tend to think, and is a horrible reason to choose one school over another. Individual views on "reputation" are dependent upon what factors one person considers to be desirable, and thus reputation is an entirely subjective topic. Heck, we could have a debate on the US News criteria and whether or not they're a valid metric.
Also, comparing entire schools to each other isn't a reasonable comparison. Individual programs/departments are likely to be stronger or weaker than other programs in the same school. One particular school might have a fantastic neurology department but be lacking in cardiology, whereas the inverse could be true somewhere else. So which of those school is "better" when it comes to residency? Ask different people and you'll surely get different answers. One can't consider differences between schools without considering strengths of different programs as they relate to a specific situation.
There are so many variables involved in this process, and so many of those variables are so much more important than the name of the school. And even though I just wrote way too much on why school name doesn't really matter, I would tend to agree with JackShephard MD when he said, "US News top 10 or so >>> UVA = MCW = Drexel = VCU." While going to a top tier school might give ever so slight an edge when it comes to the school reputation component of an applicant, I would tend to think that even that portion of the application is either "top ten or everything else." And little weight beyond that is given. I would be very surprised if program directors saw any difference between the listed schools.
