Would listing virtual shadowing on my app be viewed negatively?

[Bananako]

Some people say that it shows that you were being proactive, while some people say that it might look like you are trying to inflate your shadowing hours with something that is not really shadowing. I am leaning towards not listing them, but wanted to hear more people's thoughts on this!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gyngyn]

Don't list them.

 

[Moko]

Some people say that it shows that you were being proactive, while some people say that it might look like you are trying to inflate your shadowing hours with something that is not really shadowing. I am leaning towards not listing them, but wanted to hear more people's thoughts on this!

From what I've gathered, there are some schools that have explicitly come out as being accepting of virtual shadowing. For example:
i) Northwestern - "Yes, virtual shadowing is an acceptable approach to gaining clinical exposure given the ongoing pandemic"
ii) UWashington - "The UWSOM does not require shadowing. Virtual shadowing is acceptable clinical experience"
iii) Univ S Carolina - "While our preference is for actual in-person shadowing, we will accept virtual shadowing experience"
iv) UIC - "We will consider virtual activities and experiences"

Some other schools have at least explicitly acknowledged the impact of COVID on shadowing opportunities, and seem to at least downplay the absolute need for in-person shadowing. For example:
v) Case Western - "We are also aware that many activities such as... clinical shadowing... have been interrupted... [we] will be taking these disruptions into consideration"
vi) NYU - "We have changed our assessment process... as we realize there have been fewer shadowing experiences... We continue to thoroughly and holistically review each and every application"

UCLA, for example, has instructed applicants to "include all relevant experiences on the application, including virtual or in-person activities." Other schools like Michigan, Duke and Mt Sinai have at least acknowledged the impact of COVID on activities. I have not been able to find similar statements acknowledging the impact of COVID on activities from peer institutions such as Harvard, UCSF, Penn, Hopkins, Columbia, Stanford, Pritzker, Cornell, etc., though, I welcome any corrections.

Importantly, of these schools, only NW, UW, USC and UIC have explicitly stated their acceptance of virtual shadowing, though I think that it is reasonable to assume that there are at least some other schools in this camp as well (perhaps grudgingly). On the other end of the spectrum, there certainly may be schools where the lack of in-person shadowing is a hard pass, and/or the mere mention of virtual shadowing is viewed negatively. Unfortunately, as applicants, you will not know where a school falls on this spectrum unless you ask them directly or they choose to update their FAQs (for the sake of the admissions staff, hopefully the latter!)

Personally, my views on this have slowly evolved over the past few months. I continue to believe that applicants cannot make an informed decision about medicine from just virtual shadowing alone. However, I can be convinced that with sufficient in-person clinical experiences, that virtual shadowing may adequately supplement an application. There is going to be a diversity of opinions and biases on this topic between schools and within each adcom (even at schools that are accepting of virtual shadowing)..

So should you list virtual shadowing on your application? The short answer is "It depends". Some schools seem okay with it, while others may not be. Personally, I anticipate seeing virtual shadowing listed on many applications. And while I still have a fairly dim view of virtual shadowing, I personally would not penalize an applicant for listing this provided that it is done sensibly. I suspect that most schools will similarly not automatically penalize applicants for listing virtual shadowing, just out of practicality as that would exclude many otherwise qualified individuals. Of course, these are just my guesses at this time. To be safe though, I would recommend that you ask the schools directly for their official stance, and based on that, decide whether to include virtual volunteering on your application. Just my thoughts and best of luck.

tl;dr: Email schools directly for their stance on virtual shadowing (if their FAQ does not address this). Please share their responses here!

@Goro @LizzyM @gonnif @Catalystik @wysdoc - any additional thoughts or tips on what applicants should do re: virtual shadowing?

 

[Bananako]

From what I've gathered, there are some schools that have explicitly come out as being accepting of virtual shadowing. For example:
i) Northwestern - "Yes, virtual shadowing is an acceptable approach to gaining clinical exposure given the ongoing pandemic"
ii) UWashington - "The UWSOM does not require shadowing. Virtual shadowing is acceptable clinical experience"
iii) Univ S Carolina - "While our preference is for actual in-person shadowing, we will accept virtual shadowing experience"
iv) UIC - "We will consider virtual activities and experiences"

Some other schools have at least explicitly acknowledged the impact of COVID on shadowing opportunities, and seem to at least downplay the absolute need for in-person shadowing. For example:
v) Case Western - "With various stay-at-home orders... we are also aware that many activities such as... clinical shadowing... have been interrupted... Our application screening teams and Admissions Committee will be taking these disruptions into consideration as they review applications."
vi) NYU - "We have changed our assessment process... as we realize there have been fewer shadowing, clinical, and research experiences... We continue to thoroughly and holistically review each and every application"

UCLA, for example, has instructed applicants to "include all relevant experiences on the application, including virtual or in-person activities." Other schools like Michigan, Duke and Mt Sinai have at least acknowledged the impact of COVID on activities and offered some statements of reassurance, which reading the tea leaves, may hint towards a tepid concession on in-person shadowing. Of course, these are purely my conjectures as I have no insider knowledge at any of these schools (ಠ_ಠ). I have not been able to find similar statements from peer institutions such as Harvard, UCSF, Penn, Hopkins, Columbia, Stanford, Pritzker, Cornell, etc. that explicitly acknowledges the impact of COVID on activities, though certainly, I welcome any corrections.

Importantly, of these schools, only NW, UW, USC and UIC have explicitly stated their acceptance of virtual shadowing, though I think that it is reasonable to assume that there are at least some other schools in this camp as well (perhaps grudgingly). Other schools may not accept virtual shadowing at all, but may overlook the lack of in-person shadowing in an otherwise compelling and well thought-out application. On the other end of the spectrum, there certainly may be schools where the lack of in-person shadowing is a hard pass, and/or the mere mention of virtual shadowing is viewed negatively. Unfortunately, as applicants, you will have no way of knowing where a school falls on this spectrum unless you directly ask them or they choose to update their FAQs.

Personally, my views on this have slowly evolved over the past few months. There is simply no comparison between in-person shadowing and virtual "shadowing", which in essence is a glorified lecture/presentation. I continue to believe that applicants cannot make an informed decision about medicine from just virtual shadowing alone. However, I can be possibly convinced that with the right mix of other experiences, that virtual shadowing may be a potential supplement to their application. There is going to be a diversity of opinions and biases on this topic between schools and within each adcom (even at schools that are accepting of virtual shadowing). So this is unfortunately the hand that you and other applicants have been dealt. The rules of the game unfortunately remain in flux.

So should you list virtual shadowing on your application? The short answer is "It depends". Some schools are definitely okay with it, while others may not be. Personally, I am expecting to see many applicants list virtual shadowing on their applications. And while I have a fairly dim view of virtual shadowing, I personally would not penalize an applicant for listing this provided that it is done sensibly. I suspect that most schools will similarly not automatically penalize applicants for listing virtual shadowing, just out of practicality as that would exclude many otherwise qualified individuals. Of course, these are just my guesses at this time, though hopefully we will gain more clarity on this in the coming weeks. In the mean time, it would helpful if SDNers email schools and post the schools' responses here. Just my thoughts and best of luck.

View attachment 336638

I really appreciate your taking time to explain all of this! Although things are still unknown at this point as you mentioned, I feel less confused than before.

I also like your potatoes

 

[Doctor-S]

Here are my constructive comments about "virtual" shadowing (and these comments are intended to be friendly and not critical):

AMC Trauma Bay One at 0835 on Monday Morning:
Patient gushing arterial blood following motor vehicle accident on Interstate Highway. Multiple trauma. Multiple specialties summoned. Lots of red blood GUSHING and everything seems to be happening at the same time - lots of beeping medical equipment with flashing lights; residents, nurses, and techs scurrying around really fast; floor being flooded with slippery blood; attending doc barking medical orders that sound totally unintelligible to you; and patient is expiring right before your eyes.

Example 1: Student Shadowing Doc on Virtual Platform:
Uh-ooh ... I'm feeling squeamish. Ugh. Turns off virtual platform or closes their eyes even though they may be curious and want to see what happens next. At the moment, they're not actively experiencing the in-person life of a doc in the trauma bay. It just isn't the same experience as in-person. It reminds me of a Grey's Anatomy television show: it's easy to change the channel or turn off the television when the scene causes too much anxiety, or creates too much suspense, or looks too gruesome. Just saying.

Example 2: Student Shadowing in Real Time:
Uh-ooh ... I'm feeling squeamish. Ugh. I've never seen that much blood in person, and I feel like I'm gonna throw up. Ugh. Gags and then faints. This is active learning. This is a shadowing experience that the doc and the pre-med student can discuss with each other later because they've been through the experience together and "get what" it feels like.

However, with that being said ...

I know it has been extremely difficult for pre-med students to get in-person hours due to covid restrictions. We get it!

In the long run, it's all about "what you ultimately get" from the experience - whether it's in-person shadowing or virtual shadowing.

One way or the other ... make it work for you.

 

[Catalystik]

@Catalystik- any additional thoughts or tips on what applicants should do re: virtual shadowing?

When scoring an application, some schools will lump passive and active clinical experience together, without discriminating against virtual shadowing. They may not be transparent about their process (unlike those @Moko listed), so if all you've got is virtual shadowing, for some schools, it won't hurt to list it, and it could hurt not to. Unfortunately, you probably won't know which schools they are unless someone on a phone call is forthcoming.

Individual adcomms will likely still be deeply biased toward in-person shadowing, so get some and label it as such, if you can.

 

[Proudfather94]

Some people say that it shows that you were being proactive, while some people say that it might look like you are trying to inflate your shadowing hours with something that is not really shadowing. I am leaning towards not listing them, but wanted to hear more people's thoughts on this!

I would say as long as you separate virtual shadowing from actual shadowing in your activities, I could not think of a way that it could be taken as negative. What are they going to do? go "this person spent time listening to doctors talk about what they do and what their journey was through medical school, they'll make a horrible doctor for that!". As long as you're not being misleading about the hours the best case scenario is they'll accept it like actual shadowing, worst case scenario is they just don't care. I think most schools will count it as in between, and will count it more readily if you have clinical experience that involves interacting with doctors. Someone with clinical experience like a nurses aide or scribe can swing that virtual shadowing showed them most of what a doctors does that they don't see on the job better than someone who has no experience with doctors.

 

[Proudfather94]

So can I list watching youtube doctors 'day in the life' as shadowing?

Look up prehealthshadowing.com and virtualshadowing.com. they have alot of valuable content

 

[Moko]

So can I list watching youtube doctors 'day in the life' as shadowing?

I agree with your premise, which is partly why I do not see virtual shadowing as a substitute for in-person shadowing. Where do we draw the line? Lenox Hill? My Strange Addiction? Dr. Pimple Popper? What about fictional shows like The Resident, Grey's Anatomy, and Scrubs?

Applicants without traditional shadowing will need to convince schools that they have been adequately exposed to the profession. Screeners and adcom members will need to use their best judgment on whether an applicant has successfully accomplished this task, taking into consideration the impact of COVID as to not over-penalize those who happened to be born a year too late (or a few years too early).

We still prefer to see in-person shadowing, but I can be swayed that someone with only virtual shadowing is adequately informed if they have sufficient in-person clinical experience(s), i.e. face-to-face patient interactions. In contrast, I would have a very difficult time reaching the same conclusion for someone whose shadowing and clinical experiences were all virtual. Of course, this is just my perspective. There will be a diversity of opinions between and within each school.

I agree with @Catalystik. Applicants with any amount of in-person shadowing experience should specify the amount of in-person vs virtual hours. Just my thoughts.

 

[EducatedGuesser]

Former Director of Admissions. List them. Anyone on an Admissions Committee is living the same COVID experience you are and will understand this is likely a response to limited COVID-time choices. Be sure to explain it as your reaction to the COVID experience, perhaps even acknowledge it as less-than-ideal shadowing but still a learning opportunity and provided engagement in the field. It's all about how you write up the entry.

 

[proudofmykids]

Also, maybe focus more on primary care physicians that heavily rely on dialog with the patient for health history, ongoing treatment/maintenance, annual exams etc more so than procedural specialties.

 

[mdphd123j]

If you list it, just differentiate hours for in-person vs. virtual

Also: to my pre-med friends who can't shadow in person, I always recommend this documentary "Making Rounds" which follows two cardiologists at Sinai:


It's probably as close as you can get to seeing what happens in person with a patient and on rounds.

 

[Proudfather94]

Thank you for all of the very helpful information in this thread!

If there is only space for one AMCAS activity item dedicated to virtual shadowing, would it be seen negatively to include both in-person and virtual shadowing as part of the same activity item? I have 50 in-person shadowing hours and 25 virtual shadowing hours, and the respective hours would be made very clear in the body of the description. Although I am comfortable with my in-person shadowing hours, the virtual shadowing was something I did to gain exposure to a wider range of fields than I was able to see in person.

Would combining the in-person and virtual shadowing hours in the 'total hours' field of the activity would be interpreted as trying to inflate numbers? If so, could this be avoided by listing only the total in-person shadowing hours in the 'total hours' field and simply noting the 25 additional hours of virtual shadowing--or would it be better just to exclude the virtual shadowing entirely from my application if I already have in-person shadowing hours?

Thank you for any insight into how schools might prefer to see these types of shadowing represented (if at all) if they needed to occupy a single shadowing-specific activity item.

I would do 2 separate entries because they may look at it as you trying to trick them into counting virtual hours as in person shadowing.

 

[candbgirl]

You really only need 50 hours of shadowing. If you can’t list both, list the in person shadowing and be done with it.

 

[Proudfather94]

Unfortunately, I do not have an additional spare entry available for listing virtual shadowing. I take it you would recommend excluding the virtual shadowing entirely then?

Some schools will accept virtual shadowing but putting them together will make them think you're trying to trick them

 

[KnightDoc]

You really only need 50 hours of shadowing. If you can’t list both, list the in person shadowing and be done with it.

THIS^^^^^. Whatever else is going on with your application, do you honestly think 25 hours of virtual shadowing, in addition to 50 hours in person, is going to move the needle??????

 

[aceegreene]

Side question - are in-person shadowing opportunities even opening up now?

 

[KnightDoc]

Side question - are in-person shadowing opportunities even opening up now?

NBA playoff games and movies are opening up, why wouldn't shadowing?

 

[aceegreene]

NBA playoff games and movies are opening up, why wouldn't shadowing?

Lol good point. Know of any specific place? General sense I am getting is people are still struggling to find opportunities due to COVID.

 

[KnightDoc]

Lol good point. Know of any specific place? General sense I am getting is people are still struggling to find opportunities due to COVID.

No, since I am done with shadowing, but I am having zero problems getting back into clinics where I am actually providing a service rather than just taking up space, so, it's no longer a COVID thing. Everyone who wants a vaccine has access to one, and everything is opening up everywhere. The trick is finding a doctor willing to let you shadow. If they are saying they can't due to COVID, that's just a BS excuse in the US in June 2021.

 

[aceegreene]

No, since I am done with shadowing, but I am having zero problems getting back into clinics where I am actually providing a service rather than just taking up space, so, it's no longer a COVID thing. Everyone who wants a vaccine has access to one, and everything is opening up everywhere. The trick is finding a doctor willing to let you shadow. If they are saying they can't due to COVID, that's just a BS excuse in the US in June 2021.

Gotcha, yea I guess it’s still being used as an excuse to get out of allowing premeds to shadow them.

 

[Proudfather94]

Gotcha, yea I guess it’s still being used as an excuse to get out of allowing premeds to shadow them.

Yeah I've has docs say I can shadow them and then didn't contact me for a few weeks.

 

[deleted1084643]

A classmate of mine said UC Irvine will accept virtual shadowing if it involves the physician seeing patients, but not if it’s a lecture/case presentation with just the physician.