yaah's fellowship

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

106174

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
so, i was wondering... did we ever get the final answer on what fellowship yaah is doing? the thread has been closed. just curious...

since the academic year is almost over, the PGY-3's (and PGY-4's) must have already secured fellowships. would you guys care to share what fellowships you chose and got or failed to get and any tips you might have for us applying next year?
 
GU

As I said, my rants previously about fellowships may not necessarily apply to me. I am doing what I want to do in a great place. But the fact remains is that the fellowship application process is a piece of **** unless you are lucky enough to have the right timing or other circumstances, or have you have a grant to study something directly related to the field of study. If you are the only person in your institution applying for the fellowship at your institution things will likely work out fine, provided you actually do have an interest in the field and have demonstrated it. But very often this is not the case, and many people try to do fellowships elsewhere or at the same time as someone else.

The lesson, in the current pathetic system we have, is to apply early, show interest in the area via projects, meeting attendance, good performance on the rotation, away electives if you like, etc. Unfortunately that often means you have to think about it before you are ready or know enough about the field you are applying in. Try to get early exposure in areas you are interested in, if your program allows it, even if it means doing extra work or sitting in on another rotation during a light period.

What it also means is that you are likely to be confronted with having to decide on a fellowship before another program you are interested in has decided. While again, sometimes this works out, many times it doesn't. Since everyone is on a different timeline, it can easily happen.

Bear in mind, if you plan to do private practice, you will have to compete for fellowships with people who want to do academics (or at least say they do), and they will have a leg up at many programs. If you decide to do academics, things are more straightforward but there are a lot of people who overrepresent their own interest in academics for the purposes of landing a fellowship (a sad but true reality, in which people feel they can't be honest). Part of this though is a consequence of having to apply to early - if the fellowship is still two years away, are you really sure about the exact course you want your career to take? I wasn't, although I am more certain now.

I think perhaps, a lot of people do extra fellowships who don't need them. If you train at a good residency program and want to go into private practice, one fellowship is almost always enough to get a good job. I have heard many attendings say that these days it seems like people are doing more fellowships, but that they don't know why because it doesn't really make them a better candidate.
 
Ahh damn. I called it! What do I win?

Anyways, I guess it doesn't hurt to reveal what I'm doing. I'm only a PGY-2 but I have secured fellowships in Gyn and then Cyto. I plan to stay in academics. But I'm AP only and hence see no need to do CP. If I were AP/CP, I would probably choose one or the other because, in agreement with yaah, for many people, one fellowship is enough.
 
Ahh damn. I called it! What do I win?

Anyways, I guess it doesn't hurt to reveal what I'm doing. I'm only a PGY-2 but I have secured fellowships in Gyn and then Cyto. I plan to stay in academics. But I'm AP only and hence see no need to do CP. If I were AP/CP, I would probably choose one or the other because, in agreement with yaah, for many people, one fellowship is enough.

Is your gyn fellowship your third year of Ap residency? I think Gyn-cytopath is a good combination, lots of overlap. They complement each other very well.

One day we shall have a peace meeting at the place where the urethra begins.
 
Ahh damn. I called it! What do I win?


Hey! I Win! I Win! I Win Too! 😍

What do I get? Plz tell me! What's my prize? :luck:

Do I ---have-- to share it with Bierstiefel, or can I keep it all? :scared:

If your way comes past NYC, look up Victor Reuter at MSKCC. He's my personal GUgod.
 
Ahh damn. I called it! What do I win?

Anyways, I guess it doesn't hurt to reveal what I'm doing. I'm only a PGY-2 but I have secured fellowships in Gyn and then Cyto. I plan to stay in academics. But I'm AP only and hence see no need to do CP. If I were AP/CP, I would probably choose one or the other because, in agreement with yaah, for many people, one fellowship is enough.

Hmm....for all those years, you were hard core postdoc/research/etc, and now you're doing some actual path fellowships. I give you about another year before you declare your intention to go work for a huge path mill 😀
 
If your way comes past NYC, look up Victor Reuter at MSKCC. He's my personal GUgod.

Soslow at MSKCC for GYN is also pretty amazing in terms of knowledge and teaching, plus he's a super nice guy. I really enjoyed my month there.
 
Is your gyn fellowship your third year of Ap residency? I think Gyn-cytopath is a good combination, lots of overlap. They complement each other very well.
Yeah...starts this July. Cyto is the year afterwards.
PathOne said:
Do I ---have-- to share it with Bierstiefel, or can I keep it all?
You will share the prize with me if I choose to share it with you 😛
CameronFrye said:
Hmm....for all those years, you were hard core postdoc/research/etc, and now you're doing some actual path fellowships. I give you about another year before you declare your intention to go work for a huge path mill.
That's the beauty of having an MD and doing a residency instead of having only a PhD. The MD/residency path gives you options. 😀

I haven't ruled out doing a postdoc actually but I have gotten less hardcore about since I enjoy and appreciate the diagnostic work. Sure, I can do translational research but that's not why I did a basic science PhD. The application process for getting a good postdoc position isn't trivial. I feel a bit uneasy about going through an extravagant application process to obtain a position that doesn't guarantee me success but only guarantees that I will make less than $100K for many more years to come. I feel that next year will be crucial in the decision making process...and the dire NIH funding situation certainly doesn't help matters.
 
You will share the prize with me if I choose to share it with you 😛


Pleeeeeaaazzzzeeee... I WANT MY PRIZE!!! I guessedeth it betterer than youses.


If I don't gettet my prize, I will sulk! 😡 And nobody wants to be even on the same continent as me, when I sulketh. :scared: 😱
 
Pleeeeeaaazzzzeeee... I WANT MY PRIZE!!! I guessedeth it betterer than youses.


If I don't gettet my prize, I will sulk! 😡 And nobody wants to be even on the same continent as me, when I sulketh. :scared: 😱
Get a hold of yourself, man!
Someone give PathOne a hug.

Oh, and for the record, you guessedeth it after you flippedeth a coin. I used anectodal evidence to reach my conclusion.
 
Yeah...starts this July. Cyto is the year afterwards.

You will share the prize with me if I choose to share it with you 😛

That's the beauty of having an MD and doing a residency instead of having only a PhD. The MD/residency path gives you options. 😀

I haven't ruled out doing a postdoc actually but I have gotten less hardcore about since I enjoy and appreciate the diagnostic work. Sure, I can do translational research but that's not why I did a basic science PhD. The application process for getting a good postdoc position isn't trivial. I feel a bit uneasy about going through an extravagant application process to obtain a position that doesn't guarantee me success but only guarantees that I will make less than $100K for many more years to come. I feel that next year will be crucial in the decision making process...and the dire NIH funding situation certainly doesn't help matters.

Are undergrad transcripts considered when one applies for NIH funding/postdoc training? (i vaguely remember my past PI say something about this.) If this is the case, then i'll be 🙁
 
I feel that next year will be crucial in the decision making process...and the dire NIH funding situation certainly doesn't help matters.

Sometimes I wonder about the future of academic pathology, and whether this will have a huge impact on things. Are academic institutions going to have to hire more people who don't have grant money? Is it going to become a better place or a worse place for someone like me who is unlikely to ever do bench research but probably will have a significant component of translational and clinical research as a career? No one really has answers for me on that. Academics needs people who are good diagnosticians, good teachers, etc, but right now a lot of these people get marginalized.
 
Are undergrad transcripts considered when one applies for NIH funding/postdoc training? (i vaguely remember my past PI say something about this.) If this is the case, then i'll be 🙁
I don't think so.

Edit: The undergrad record does get listed under the biography section of your grant applications. However, I really doubt that they would ask for transcripts. How would it really hurt or help you? Ultimately, the fundability of the grant depends so much more on the quality of the proposal itself and the resources you have to get the project done (i.e., feasibility). Your undergrad background would have minimal impact.
 
I haven't ruled out doing a postdoc actually but I have gotten less hardcore about since I enjoy and appreciate the diagnostic work. Sure, I can do translational research but that's not why I did a basic science PhD. The application process for getting a good postdoc position isn't trivial. I feel a bit uneasy about going through an extravagant application process to obtain a position that doesn't guarantee me success but only guarantees that I will make less than $100K for many more years to come. I feel that next year will be crucial in the decision making process...and the dire NIH funding situation certainly doesn't help matters.

I feel exactly the same way.
 
Sometimes I wonder about the future of academic pathology, and whether this will have a huge impact on things. Are academic institutions going to have to hire more people who don't have grant money? Is it going to become a better place or a worse place for someone like me who is unlikely to ever do bench research but probably will have a significant component of translational and clinical research as a career? No one really has answers for me on that. Academics needs people who are good diagnosticians, good teachers, etc, but right now a lot of these people get marginalized.

Better or worse, in what way? I'm not clearly understanding your issue here.

The folks you mention may be marginalized because they're not bringing in overhead money for the department. I'm not well versed as to how financial operations in a path department work though so the significance of this is unclear.

That being said, if the percentile for obtaining NIH funding is significantly lower, then naturally that means less grants to go around and less people who get the grants. I think academic institutions are going to have to hire more people who don't have grant money.

However, this comes with a cost. Remember, let's say you were a basic science researcher hired in a department. You get grant money. A significant chunk of that money goes to the department...which leads to increased pressure on the investigator. This overhead does have an important function in the financial operations of an academic department. And department chairs have this in mind too when they hire people (remember, most chairmen are basic science researchers themselves). So the funding situation does have negative impacts on the financial operations ultimately.

Of course, the other implication of this is that the special few who do make it in science are gonna be really hot commodities for hiring.
 
Are undergrad transcripts considered when one applies for NIH funding/postdoc training? (i vaguely remember my past PI say something about this.) If this is the case, then i'll be 🙁
I'm currently working on a grant and no, undergard transcripts aren't required or else I'd be screwed too.

As for the dire NIH situation, you guys have certainly called it right. 🙁 The further along you get in your career (from predoc on), the "harder" it is to obtain a grant. This issue which will undoubtly exist for many more years AFTER we leave Iraq, not only has me reconsidering the PhD but also a career in academic pathology/translational research. These days, becoming an ME is looking like a serious consideration for me.
 
Ahh damn. I called it! What do I win?

Anyways, I guess it doesn't hurt to reveal what I'm doing. I'm only a PGY-2 but I have secured fellowships in Gyn and then Cyto. I plan to stay in academics. But I'm AP only and hence see no need to do CP. If I were AP/CP, I would probably choose one or the other because, in agreement with yaah, for many people, one fellowship is enough.

CONGRATULATIONS TO YAAH FOR LANDING ONE OF THE MOST ELUSIVE AND RARE POWERFELLOWSHIPS. IMO, GU is harder to get than dermpath.

Personally, I think if you are going to do academics, then one fellowship is enough (except maybe in the case of cyto-gyn). In private practice, it would definitely help to be an expert in multilpe areas like DERM:HEME or DERM:CYTO or DERM:GI as the groups are smaller (unlike a university where you might have 30-40 people who sign cases out at least part-time).
 
IMO, GU is harder to get than dermpath.
I disagree, GU is just like every other non-boarded subspecialty that doesn't require filling out multiple applications. Preference is probably given to in house candidates for the most part.

On the other hand, dermpath requires people to apply to multiple places and spend money to go to interviews. The application process is fair and preference is not likely to be given to in house candidates...so it's like going through the whole match process again.
 
I disagree, GU is just like every other non-boarded subspecialty that doesn't require filling out multiple applications. Preference is probably given to in house candidates for the most part.

On the other hand, dermpath requires people to apply to multiple places and spend money to go to interviews. The application process is fair and preference is not likely to be given to in house candidates...so it's like going through the whole match process again.
Maybe DPL was being sarcastic?
 
Technically, GU is harder because there are far fewer applications. However, most come from academic land and candidates sort of know they are doing it early on and most end up doing GU, whether it is through surg path/GU combined or straight GU. Straight GU fellowships are the rare ones. I don't really know if it is truly that competitive or not around the country, from what I hear it is though. Personally, I would consider derm harder just because of all the bull**** you have to go through and all the **** you have to wade through. That's my opinion of it though, I'm sure some people think it's like strolling through a dewy meadow.

Non boarded fellowships are different, as said above, because they aren't really regulated as heavily. And I only know of one GU fellowship that isn't heavily academic (there's a private lab in tennessee that has a fellowship).

I am not sure what fellowship directors are going to do with the proliferation of people who see GI (and GU to a lesser extent) as potential cash cows for their private practice career. I expect they will still want to train academics if they have a choice, but private-bound people will get them too if they want to primarily do that with their career.
 
Technically, GU is harder because there are far fewer applications.


That is not true. If it was you would make more money doing it. We all know that is the universal measure of importance.
 
CONGRATULATIONS TO YAAH FOR LANDING ONE OF THE MOST ELUSIVE AND RARE POWERFELLOWSHIPS. IMO, GU is harder to get than dermpath.

Personally, I think if you are going to do academics, then one fellowship is enough (except maybe in the case of cyto-gyn). In private practice, it would definitely help to be an expert in multilpe areas like DERM:HEME or DERM:CYTO or DERM:GI as the groups are smaller (unlike a university where you might have 30-40 people who sign cases out at least part-time).

It is AMAZING how backward your view is....
Lots of academic people are multifellowships. Few private practice people are. And when will DERM:CYTO make sense?
 
It is AMAZING how backward your view is....
Lots of academic people are multifellowships. Few private practice people are. And when will DERM:CYTO make sense?
When Clark's levels/Breslow depth are no longer deemed prognostically important and melanomas are diagnosed on FNA!!!!!

Oh yeah! Come get some!
 
It is AMAZING how backward your view is....
Lots of academic people are multifellowships. Few private practice people are. And when will DERM:CYTO make sense?

Yeah no kidding. I haven't seen any job ads looking for people with multiple subspecialties. Usually they mention one area where they particularly need people.

Lots of academic people have multiple fellowships, but as you probably know (but others may not), they are usually related (like doing cyto and heme because you are a lymph node FNA researcher).
 
Some people think a GI fellowship is needed to sign out TAs. These people need to get back into the real world where all is not subspecialty signout. Seriously.
 
Some people think a GI fellowship is needed to sign out TAs. These people need to get back into the real world where all is not subspecialty signout. Seriously.

GI fellowships are most useful if you are going into academics to do mostly GI in work and research. If you are private practice bound, you can do general surg path and focus on GI and that would probably be a better use of your time.
 
CONGRATULATIONS TO YAAH FOR LANDING ONE OF THE MOST ELUSIVE AND RARE POWERFELLOWSHIPS. IMO, GU is harder to get than dermpath.

Personally, I think if you are going to do academics, then one fellowship is enough (except maybe in the case of cyto-gyn). In private practice, it would definitely help to be an expert in multilpe areas like DERM:HEME or DERM:CYTO or DERM:GI as the groups are smaller (unlike a university where you might have 30-40 people who sign cases out at least part-time).

Sorry, those combinations make little sense in a practical world, not even academic. Molec path can be combined with most things, and Derm/soft tissue would make sense, but it's NOT going to give you a higher paycheck. When employers (private or academic) are looking for a subspec person, it's because they have sufficient volume in that area.
 
Some people think a GI fellowship is needed to sign out TAs. These people need to get back into the real world where all is not subspecialty signout. Seriously.

I have seen this too... Yes, ok you have lots of GI-scopies.. 95% of GI Scope BX is not Fellowship level training.

Is it advertising? Is it clinician request? Why the "GI fellowship required or strongly recommended"?

Can I just show you that I Signed Out with John Goldblum? I have his book too if that makes you feel better....:laugh:

Sorry, those combinations make little sense in a practical world, not even academic.

I'm pretty sure that we all agree that most of what DPL says "make little sense"
 
Some people think a GI fellowship is needed to sign out TAs. These people need to get back into the real world where all is not subspecialty signout. Seriously.

Unfortunately there are more than TAs in the general population. If it were that easy I could train my 14-year-old nephew to do hyerplastic polyps and TAs and I could take the summer off.
 
Unfortunately there are more than TAs in the general population. If it were that easy I could train my 14-year-old nephew to do hyerplastic polyps and TAs and I could take the summer off.

TA, HP, Intestinal Metaplasia, Acute Colitis, Chronic Colitis, A&C Colitis?
True you will have till wait till your nephew is 16 1/2.
 
Maybe if I wait until my nephew is 17 I can let him sign out dermpath as well:

1.) it's benign, completely excised, and I don't care.
2.) it's benign, incompletely excised, but who cares?!!
3.) it's malignant, completely out, again not caring...
4.) it's malignant, incompletely excised, so take a little more.
5.) melanoma

In fact, we can eliminate all those fancy dermpath diagnoses that really don't mean anything and boil the above five diagnosis in dermpath down to just three:

1.) who cares?
2.) malignant get a little more
3.) melanoma
 
I propose an additional diagnostic possibility:

4.) Melanoma cha-cha-cha
 
I have seen this too... Yes, ok you have lots of GI-scopies.. 95% of GI Scope BX is not Fellowship level training.

Is it advertising? Is it clinician request? Why the "GI fellowship required or strongly recommended"?

Can I just show you that I Signed Out with John Goldblum? I have his book too if that makes you feel better....:laugh:

I think it is perhaps marketing in the end, if you have someone who can have on their CV "Fellowship in GI pathology, 2006-7" then you can market that to clinicians or hospitals who will send their specimens to you, even if it doesn't mean your quality of diagnosis is changing at all. But if you have someone who trained at CC with Goldblum, for example, and did a couple of extra electives in GI, they will be an "expert" as well, won't they? Just won't be "official." One difference is that you now have an "expert" to show your Barrett's dysplasia and UC dysplasia cases to, because that is one recommendation that has been published. But the same publications show there is so little concordance even among experts that it begs the question of what an expert can bring to the table in those cases.

I've met many subspecialty pathologists who never got any significant formal training in that area, including dermpaths, cytopaths, hemepaths. They know more than many boarded individuals. I think some people mistake fellowship training for automatic credibility, but likely most people doing the hiring will not.
 
Maybe if I wait until my nephew is 17 I can let him sign out dermpath as well:
In fact, we can eliminate all those fancy dermpath diagnoses that really don't mean anything and boil the above five diagnosis in dermpath down to just three:

That would be true except dermatologist and people in general can see skin so they spend too much time paying attention to it...

Thus all the inflammatory and Nevi classifications.
 
GI fellowships are most useful if you are going into academics to do mostly GI in work and research. If you are private practice bound, you can do general surg path and focus on GI and that would probably be a better use of your time.


The best would be to do 4 years AP/CP, a year of surg path fellowship and a year of GI fellowship.

99% of academic and community GI bx are the same, so other than doing projets there isn't a difference between community GI and academic GI in terms of diagnostic skills.
 
It is AMAZING how backward your view is....
Lots of academic people are multifellowships. Few private practice people are. And when will DERM:CYTO make sense?


Most academics specialize in one area like renal or liver or GI or bone ST and don't sign anything else out. Many never did any fellowships, but just focused on that one area.

Since groups in private practice are smaller, it makes sense to have expertise in multiple areas.

Derm and Cyto make sense if you group has a lot of cyto and a lot of skin bx. You can be the come to guy on both.
 
Most academics specialize in one area like renal or liver or GI or bone ST and don't sign anything else out. Many never did any fellowships, but just focused on that one area.

Since groups in private practice are smaller, it makes sense to have expertise in multiple areas.

Derm and Cyto make sense if you group has a lot of cyto and a lot of skin bx. You can be the come to guy on both.

It's just plain WRONG on so many levels, I hardly know where to begin. There's just NO overlap between cyto and Derm. Zero. Nada. Zilch. What are you thinking? That somebody someday will do subcutaneous FNA's for melanoma? Please! 🙄

Add to that, that I have never met a person in my life, who was one, and would ever contemplate the other. Mentally and intellectually, they're as wide apart as clinically. It's like comparing a surgeon to a psychiatrist. Not saying that one is "better" than the other, but different? Yes, absolutely.

Additionally, please enlighten me as to how a cyto-derm person intends to stay on top of both fields. If a group isn't big enough to support a full-time Derm and a full-time Cyto, only sane thing would be to have an experienced general surgical pathologist look at the stuff. If somebody asked me to look at cyto today, I'd probably confuse it with cryogenic, and start looking for the lab freezer. Seriously, whatever cyto somebody tried to teach me in a far and distant past is just gone. :meanie:
 
You can be the go to guy in anything, you don't necessarily have to have a fellowship in it.

I don't understand why it is best to do surg path then GI. Why not just GI? What are you adding? It's extra education which is always good, but is it really necessary?

And as for whether smaller groups would rather have a derm+cyto person, why? If they are a small group their volume is going to be small, they would be better served by sending the occasional difficult case out for consult than they would to hire someone else to do both. You aren't going to replace anyone. I've done two months of cytology and I can handle most of it.
 
And as for whether smaller groups would rather have a derm+cyto person, why? If they are a small group their volume is going to be small, they would be better served by sending the occasional difficult case out for consult than they would to hire someone else to do both. You aren't going to replace anyone. I've done two months of cytology and I can handle most of it.

This sums it up perfectly.

If a group is small enough to need someone to do Cyto & Derm (or Derm and Heme 🙄 ) Then they do not have much of either. (or some of one and VERY little of the other)

and the result of that is:
You will not get paid more for having two board certifications.
The might hire you, (they might also wonder why you got two board certifications), but they will not pay you more.

I made that large, so maybe it might penetrate DPL's skull....

What's that red leader?
"Negative. It didn't go in. Just impacted on the surface."
181512289_3235bb0571.jpg

 
So it sounds as if doing a fellowship may or may not be worthwhile. What then is the rationale for doing any fellowship? Take GU for example; in private practice, how often are the <5% prostate cores going to come in? Is it more cost effective to realize that I should send every one of these cases out for consultation and not do a year of fellowship? In GI/liver; if I can handle 99% of luminal GI's, wouldn't it be wise of me to reflexively send all the livers out the door? If a specimen doesn't come in that often, why would anyone do a specialty fellowship? Any thoughts?
 
So it sounds as if doing a fellowship may or may not be worthwhile. What then is the rationale for doing any fellowship? Take GU for example; in private practice, how often are the <5% prostate cores going to come in? Is it more cost effective to realize that I should send every one of these cases out for consultation and not do a year of fellowship? In GI/liver; if I can handle 99% of luminal GI's, wouldn't it be wise of me to reflexively send all the livers out the door? If a specimen doesn't come in that often, why would anyone do a specialty fellowship? Any thoughts?

You don't do a fellowship for those jobs. You do a fellowship for the job that those livers go to.
 
You don't do a fellowship for those jobs. You do a fellowship for the job that those livers go to.

Indeed, and most of these used to be academic. Which means they don't pay that well, unless you are a major expert in the field (Epstein, Weiss, whoever) at which point you can perhaps make money off your consults. But you have to have a lot of experience before you're an expert. Specialty jobs are getting more common in the private world as private labs proliferate and experts like Bostwick start their own labs. If you get established enough in the field, you can start getting consults, but you have to be established in the field. You aren't going to get many consults if you go into private practice right out of fellowship.

If it is a big enough practice, having a go-to person for common difficult areas (like GU, GI, derm) is important, but they don't necessarily have to be fellowship trained.

I think doing a fellowship in something is worthwhile - you get extra training and you have an area of specialty to market yourself with. Doing more than one isn't going to add that much though, but some people want to do them anyway. And the fact remains is that if you do a fellowship in a currently hot area (derm, GI) you will be more marketable. Certainly for derm, but derm is different because there are lots of derm-only labs and the volume is so high that you can do just dermpath in a job.
 
And as for whether smaller groups would rather have a derm+cyto person, why? If they are a small group their volume is going to be small, they would be better served by sending the occasional difficult case out for consult than they would to hire someone else to do both. You aren't going to replace anyone. I've done two months of cytology and I can handle most of it.

Small group doesn't imply small volume. I met a guy in a 5 person group where they get 10,000 GI bxs a year, plus all the other surg path stuff for a 400 bed hospital.

My large academic center has 1/2 the number of GI bxs and 6 dedicated GI-only pathologists who don't sign-out anything else (except big GI also).

Even without fellowship training the guys in the private group will be greater experts after time as they see twice as many cases per person per year. However, they won't have time to publish and teach medical students.
 
Even without fellowship training....

Do you even realize that you just proved yourself wrong...

private practice =/= need (or want) Fellowship to SO. Thus not more money.

While I agree with Yaah in that you make yourself more marketable by doing one, it is not some additive (or other) improvement to have two fellowships, especially unrelated ones.
 
Top