2011 rank these schools thread

[Visionary]

I was wondering if someone could comment on a criticism I heard about George Washington U having a resident-run attending clinic instead of a true resident-clinic. (In other words, I believe residents present to attendings, then attendings see the patient and may adjust the plan without necessarily informing or including the resident.)

Could someone clarify the actual workflow of the clinic at GWU and how it compares in terms of learning, continuity of care, etc. to the other programs (all else equal)?

I get the impression that this is an issue at many programs other than GWU, and I'm actually curious how much of an impact people feel it has or has had on their training.

Thanks!

To make a general point, the bolded phrase is a legal requirement for insurance reimbursement. If the patient is not actually seen by a licensed medical professional (e.g., attending), you cannot bill for services. If you do, it's fraud. Simple chart sign-offs do not count. In every ophthalmology program I know, a resident is considered in-training and does not have attending status. Fellows, on the other hand, can (and often do, as part of their training program) bill for services. The only legal resident run clinics, therefore, are free clinics for indigent patients. As far as the not informing or including the resident, that likely varies by attending, as well as clinic volume (e.g., there may not be time to involve the resident during clinic).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[rstonk]

To make a general point, the bolded phrase is a legal requirement for insurance reimbursement. If the patient is not actually seen by a licensed medical professional (e.g., attending), you cannot bill for services. If you do, it's fraud. Simple chart sign-offs do not count. In every ophthalmology program I know, a resident is considered in-training and does not have attending status. Fellows, on the other hand, can (and often do, as part of their training program) bill for services. The only legal resident run clinics, therefore, are free clinics for indigent patients. As far as the not informing or including the resident, that likely varies by attending, as well as clinic volume (e.g., there may not be time to involve the resident during clinic).

Thanks for your response. I didn't mean to suggest I would prefer a setup where attendings do not see the patient -- that seems irresponsible except perhaps in the charity care setting.

That said, I understand that there is some distinction between resident-run attending-staffed clinics and resident-staffed attending clinics (excuse the crude classification) with respect to continuity of care, feeding of resident surgical cases, and autonomy. Would anyone care to clarify the difference between these models, which you think is superior, and how big a factor this should play in ranking a program?

Also, if someone can comment on where GWU falls in this scheme it'd be much appreciated

 

[tm12]

That said, I understand that there is some distinction between resident-run attending-staffed clinics and resident-staffed attending clinics (excuse the crude classification) with respect to continuity of care, feeding of resident surgical cases, and autonomy. Would anyone care to clarify the difference between these models, which you think is superior, and how big a factor this should play in ranking a program?

Resident clinic: in general, much more autonomy, you're the patient's doctor, you usually become the primary surgeon for cases from these patients

Attending clinic: the attending is the patient's doctor and you're assisting the attending, the teaching could potentially be better, more likely to see complicated referral patients, patients are more likely to resemble the patients you will see in private practice, usually better support staff and equipment than resident clinics

These are generalities and not always true. There are programs that have both. What is superior is a matter of personal preference and thus should play a large factor in how you rank programs. Why go to a well regarded program that has only resident run clinics when you know you prefer attending clinics and vice versa?

 

[rstonk]

Resident clinic: in general, much more autonomy, you're the patient's doctor, you usually become the primary surgeon for cases from these patients

Attending clinic: the attending is the patient's doctor and you're assisting the attending, the teaching could potentially be better, more likely to see complicated referral patients, patients are more likely to resemble the patients you will see in private practice, usually better support staff and equipment than resident clinics

These are generalities and not always true. There are programs that have both. What is superior is a matter of personal preference and thus should play a large factor in how you rank programs. Why go to a well regarded program that has only resident run clinics when you know you prefer attending clinics and vice versa?

thanks!

 

[jasper0asb]

Anyone have any thoughts on University of Chicago or SUNY Stony Brook?

 

[golfman]

Any thoughts on Michigan vs. OHSU? Michigan seems to have a slightly better reputation but OHSU has better surgical numbers. Anybody else have an opinion on those?

 

[Visionary]

Any thoughts on Michigan vs. OHSU? Michigan seems to have a slightly better reputation but OHSU has better surgical numbers. Anybody else have an opinion on those?

Both great programs, though UM does have the edge. You really can't go wrong with either. Really, I'd base your decision on your general feel for the program (e.g., residents, attendings) and the area.

 

[medduck]

Both programs are great. I agree that Michigan has the edge, based on reputation, size of faculty, new facilities. I did 175 cataracts at Michigan. What is Casey touting these days?

 

[golfman]

Both programs are great. I agree that Michigan has the edge, based on reputation, size of faculty, new facilities. I did 175 cataracts at Michigan. What is Casey touting these days?

They were talkin around 200. Michigan was talkin around 140.

 

[midwesteye]

I'm having a tough time in deciding how to rank them. They all seem to be solid programs that prepare you to go into comprehensive. Do any of these programs stand out as having better training or open more doors if one decides to pursue a fellowship in retina or cornea?

 

[Eggsettera]

What do you all think for rankings based on merit (not location) between the following:

UMKC (U Missouri - Kansas City)
SLU
University of Chicago
Cook County (Chicago)
SUNY Buffalo
University of Kansas

 

[midwesteye]

"What do you all think for rankings based on merit (not location) between the following:

UMKC (U Missouri - Kansas City)
SLU
University of Chicago
Cook County (Chicago)
SUNY Buffalo
University of Kansas"

IMO:
UMKC (solid all around) > KU > Cook (high surgical volume) > UChicago (good fellowship matching)
(Don't know about SLU/SUNY)

 

[zenophto]

I'm having a hard time in deciding how to rank them. Case Western is on probation. MUSC has a new chair. LSU/Oschner is recovering after Katrina. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

 

[xanthomondo]

I don't really understand how this thread is useful. Wouldn't it be more helpful to post the pros/cons of each program and then decide for yourself what the best ranking would be?

Everyone has their own important criteria for residency programs, only you can make that call. Unless you're solely making your rank list based off of academic prestige.

 

[tm12]

What do you all think for rankings based on merit (not location) between the following:

UMKC (U Missouri - Kansas City)
SLU
University of Chicago
Cook County (Chicago)
SUNY Buffalo
University of Kansas

IMO:
UMKC > KU > Cook > UChicago
(Don't know about SLU/SUNY)

What about UMKC makes it so much greater than the other programs?

 

[midwesteye]

I don't really understand how this thread is useful. Wouldn't it be more helpful to post the pros/cons of each program and then decide for yourself what the best ranking would be?

Everyone has their own important criteria for residency programs, only you can make that call. Unless you're solely making your rank list based off of academic prestige.

I think we would all say that making a rank list is highly individual and that it's a very tough process. That said, I do think that you can pick up some useful information from this thread. I agree that subjective rankings without an explanation aren't very helpful. I've tried to send private messages along with them. I've gotten information about programs based on people's aways/interview day/from current residents. That has been really helpful in deciding between a few programs that I'm on the fence on.

 

[midwesteye]

What about UMKC makes it so much greater than the other programs?

I didn't mean to imply that UMKC was so much better than the others listed. What I said was IMO, I liked UMKC more than the others. I don't think any of the programs on that list stand out as obviously being better than any of the others. I apologize if it came across that way.

 

[Visionary]

What do you all think for rankings based on merit (not location) between the following:

UMKC (U Missouri - Kansas City)
SLU
University of Chicago
Cook County (Chicago)
SUNY Buffalo
University of Kansas

IMO:
UMKC > KU > Cook > UChicago
(Don't know about SLU/SUNY)

I'd probably put SLU above all of those. Strong, under-rated program, due to proximity to Wash U. Oscar Cruz is an energetic chairman. Cooke County and UC are on the lower tier of the Chicago programs. Don't know much about UMKC, KU, or SUNY Buffalo.

I'm having a hard time in deciding how to rank them. Case Western is on probation. MUSC has a new chair. LSU/Oschner is recovering after Katrina. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Del Priore is well-respected, and Storm Eye is a strong program. IMO, he will only improve it. I would avoid any program on probation. LSU/Ochsner has other problems than Katrina. The big knock on it has always been the travel between satellite locations.

 

[TheLesPaul]

.

 

[DrMassacre]

I'd probably put SLU above all of those. Strong, under-rated program, due to proximity to Wash U. Oscar Cruz is an energetic chairman.

agree

 

[trahikat]

Any thoughts on these programs, based just on their caliber and not location?

 

[golfman]

This is just what I've heard, so take it for what it's worth. I'd say UWash, UC Davis, GWU, then Arizona.

 

[Visionary]

Would generally agree with the above. Could flip UW and UC Davis, though. UC Davis is the more established program, but UW is definitely on the rise with Russ van Gelder at the helm and it being one of the nation's top medical centers. AZ is one of the few 2 residents per year programs. I generally recommend against programs that small. You just can't get the breadth of training that you can at the larger programs. If your goal is comprehensive, it should be adequate. If you're fellowship-bound, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

[UAmeddan]

AZ just matched all 4 of their residents (it's really a 4-resident program per year) in great fellowships, including NYEEI. In the year before, matched plastics at MEEI. I am not saying AZ is your golden shoe-in ticket to a fellowship, but I believe it's a well-regarded program and will get you into a fellowship if you put forth the effort. Just throwing that out there...but you also probably know all this, since you interviewed at AZ.

 

[Visionary]

AZ just matched all 4 of their residents (it's really a 4-resident program per year) in great fellowships, including NYEEI. In the year before, matched plastics at MEEI. I am not saying AZ is your golden shoe-in ticket to a fellowship, but I believe it's a well-regarded program and will get you into a fellowship if you put forth the effort. Just throwing that out there...but you also probably know all this, since you interviewed at AZ.

Don't think we're talking about the same program. The question was about UA/UPHK. Pretty sure that's a 2 per year program. Here's the link: http://www.uph.org/gme/Home/Programs/Ophthalmology/tabid/609/Default.aspx

 

[golfman]

Just to clarify on Arizona, there are 2 programs at Arizona, with 2 residents each. Those 4 residents all work together. I think when you interview there, you interview for both "programs", even though they are in reality pretty much the same program.

And I'm sure Arizona grads can get fine fellowships. I've just heard not so great things about them from A) my personal friends that have interviewed there this year, and B) current Ophthalmology residents at different schools that came from Arizona. I don't know first hand, but I heard enough to make me not want to interview there, because I had other options. Please don't PM me, I don't have much information. The people that told me this either matched or should match at top 20 programs, and they felt Arizona just wasn't close to that echelon of schools.

 

[Visionary]

Just to clarify on Arizona, there are 2 programs at Arizona, with 2 residents each. Those 4 residents all work together. I think when you interview there, you interview for both "programs", even though they are in reality pretty much the same program.

And I'm sure Arizona grads can get fine fellowships. I've just heard not so great things about them from A) my personal friends that have interviewed there this year, and B) current Ophthalmology residents at different schools that came from Arizona. I don't know first hand, but I heard enough to make me not want to interview there, because I had other options.

Thanks for the clarification, golfman. The website is misleading. Admittedly, I have no first-hand knowledge of the program. As a general rule, 2 per year programs are to be avoided. Since UA/UPHK is not one of those and I know of nothing second-hand good or bad, I defer to neutral on it. Sorry to the readers for any confusion I caused.

 

[RestoreSight]

UIC vs. Cleveland Clinic? Both are strong programs. Chicago is obviously a better city than Cleveland, but geography aside which is the stronger program, especially in regards to fellowship match?

 

[Dogas]

Just to clarify on Arizona, there are 2 programs at Arizona, with 2 residents each. Those 4 residents all work together. I think when you interview there, you interview for both "programs", even though they are in reality pretty much the same program.

And I'm sure Arizona grads can get fine fellowships. I've just heard not so great things about them from A) my personal friends that have interviewed there this year, and B) current Ophthalmology residents at different schools that came from Arizona. I don't know first hand, but I heard enough to make me not want to interview there, because I had other options.

Please tell me what you have heard. Feel free to pm me

 

[Visionary]

UIC vs. Cleveland Clinic? Both are strong programs. Chicago is obviously a better city than Cleveland, but geography aside which is the stronger program, especially in regards to fellowship match?

Both are good programs. Cole is the more academic of the two. Great research opportunities there. UIC seems to have the stronger clinical training. In terms of fellowship, I'd say Cole has more name recognition and faculty connections. Those are, right or wrong, key to securing a good fellowship. One thing to keep in mind is that the chair of UIC was recently appointed dean of the medical school, so they will be transitioning to a new chair. Joel Sugar is the interim. He's a good guy. Not sure if he'll take the helm for good or if they'll do a search for a new chair. May have little effect on the program, but you never know.

 

[junkemail86]

For what it's worth, I ranked UIC 11 spots higher than Cole. Both are good programs, but I felt that UIC definitely has the better clinical training currently. Maybe it was just the Cleveland Clinic residents that I met, but they all seemed disappointed in their training and that they were mainly observers while actually at Cole and got minimal hands-on experience there (leading to a weaker surgical experience). Cole probably has more funding available for research, but I wouldn't necessarily say that their research opportunities were better, it didn't seem like many of the residents were very involved in research at all at Cole. UIC is a bigger program. Excellent fellowships are possible out of either program. Cole probably has the more renowned retina department. Feel free to PM me with any questions.

 

[jasper0asb]

Anyone have thoughts on UIC vs Rush vs BU?

 

[LBJ]

Anyone have thoughts on UIC vs Rush vs BU?

Depends on what you want to do in your career.

Academics: definitely UIC
Clinical practice : Rush or BU. Do you like Boston or Chicago better? In a vacuum I'd probably pick Rush, but could see the argument both ways.
Unsure : probably UIC.

 

[jasper0asb]

Depends on what you want to do in your career.

Academics: definitely UIC
Clinical practice : Rush or BU. Do you like Boston or Chicago better? In a vacuum I'd probably pick Rush, but could see the argument both ways.
Unsure : probably UIC.

How about fellowship, then clinical practice? Why do you say Rush in a vacuum?

 

[Andrew_Doan]

If you're unhappy, you'll be a horrible resident.

Here is my recommendation.

1) Location, location, and location. If you enjoy where you live and work. Then you'll be a productive resident who stands out, no matter where you match. Teasing out some of these programs is like splitting hairs. Pick the location that will make you most content. For instance, if family is important then pick a location near your family. Being depressed at the #1 program in the world is not worth it.

2) You create your own reputation. It's who you know that matters in this field. Work hard, make connections, and it's who you know that will setup your fellowship position and future employment. Lesson: never burn bridges in this small community.

3) Put down your "dream position" first. In truth, the program has to want you so it really doesn't matter what you put first. Aim high and if you fall in the middle... bloom where you're planted.

Good luck and Merry Christmas!

 

[junkemail86]

I interviewed at UIC, Rush, and BU. PM me if you have any questions
I posted the recent UIC fellowship matches in this thread http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=791049

 

[LBJ]

How about fellowship, then clinical practice? Why do you say Rush in a vacuum?

UIC probably gives you the best potential for fellowship match all else being equal, because there is more potential to be academically involved. This really helps when applying to top tier fellowships. It can be relatively more difficult to do research at Rush and BU. I say Rush in a vacuum just based on my opinion. There's been some recent turnover at BU, but other than that I think the programs are reasonably comparable in terms of quality of finished product.

To echo Dr Doan, though - if you are a happy resident, you'll be productive. If you're productive you will do well.

 

[Visionary]

I'd also echo Andrew's comments. The truth is there are a handful of elite programs, there are some terrible programs, and the rest are all pretty close. Being happy with your location, particularly if you're dragging family along, is very important. When I applied, I was married with our first child on the way. The overall feel of the town, security, and cost of living were major factors. That ruled out places like NYC, Miami, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. When I interviewed, I tried to make sure I fit in with the current residents and faculty, as well. Three years is a long time when you (and/or your family) are miserable.

 

[kedisme]

I'd also echo Andrew's comments. The truth is there are a handful of elite programs, there are some terrible programs, and the rest are all pretty close. Being happy with your location, particularly if you're dragging family along, is very important. When I applied, I was married with our first child on the way. The overall feel of the town, security, and cost of living were major factors. That ruled out places like NYC, Miami, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. When I interviewed, I tried to make sure I fit in with the current residents and faculty, as well. Three years is a long time when you (and/or your family) are miserable.

Any thoughts on which programs are "terrible"?

 

[Visionary]

Any thoughts on which programs are "terrible"?

Not really appropriate. You don't have to look very hard, though. Such programs are surrounded by red flags.

 

[crystalgreen]

Hey guys, I really have no idea how to rank these programs, can someone please help?

Thanks!

UAB
MCW
LSU ochsner
Albany
KU

I heard lsu has problems other than katrina? can someone elaborate?

 

[Visionary]

Hey guys, I really have no idea how to rank these programs, can someone please help?

Thanks!

UAB
MCW
LSU ochsner
Albany
KU

I heard lsu has problems other than katrina? can someone elaborate?

I'd definitely have UAB, then MCW, as the top 2. The rest are on a lower tier. I don't think there's nothing wrong with the training at Ochsner. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the problem that consistently comes up is the travel. The have multiple satellites at quite a distance from each other. Makes for a nomadic experience. If you're single, that's likely not an issue. If you have a family, I'd avoid it. Don't know much about Albany or KU.

 

[tm12]

Hey guys, I really have no idea how to rank these programs, can someone please help?

Thanks!

UAB
MCW
LSU ochsner
Albany
KU

I heard lsu has problems other than katrina? can someone elaborate?

I would rank based on where YOU would like to live and how YOU fit in with the residents. UAB does indeed have a very strong academic reputation but that reputation does not extend to residents applying for fellowship per se. It is important to remember that you spend a lot of time away from New Orleans at Ochsner.

 

[crystalgreen]

hey guys, thank you for the replies! if LSU doesnt have the traveling problem, would it still be the last on the list?

thanks!

 

[Visionary]

hey guys, thank you for the replies! if LSU doesnt have the traveling problem, would it still be the last on the list?

thanks!

Never said last on the list. In my opinion, Ochsner, Albany, and KU are likely on equal ground, albeit on a lower tier than UAB and MCW. Doesn't mean they are bad programs, though. As tm12 and others (including myself) have stated, a significant factor in the decision needs to be how comfortable you feel with the program and the area. Does the idea of traveling to multiple locations bother you? You may want to put Ochsner low. Do you not like the idea of braving cold winters? MCW and Albany may both need to drop on your list. Remember, you have to live there and work with those people for 3 years. Make the right decision for you.

 

[tm12]

Never said last on the list. In my opinion, Ochsner, Albany, and KU are likely on equal ground, albeit on a lower tier than UAB and MCW. Doesn't mean they are bad programs, though. As tm12 and others (including myself) have stated, a significant factor in the decision needs to be how comfortable you feel with the program and the area. Does the idea of traveling to multiple locations bother you? You may want to put Ochsner low. Do you not like the idea of braving cold winters? MCW and Albany may both need to drop on your list. Remember, you have to live there and work with those people for 3 years. Make the right decision for you.

Among those 3 I think KU has the best academic reputation (their basic science in angiogenesis is very good as I'm sure you know). But like Alabama, that reputation doesn't necessarily rub onto you and you couldn't find enough time to do good research during residency.

A chairman once advised me a program in New Orleans was never good before the hurricane and is not good now...to my knowledge they're all equivalent down there...take it with a grain of salt...

 

[jasper0asb]

Any thoughts on Minnesota, cook county and ohio state?

 

[idoktor]

Among those 3 I think KU has the best academic reputation (their basic science in angiogenesis is very good as I'm sure you know). But like Alabama, that reputation doesn't necessarily rub onto you and you couldn't find enough time to do good research during residency.

A chairman once advised me a program in New Orleans was never good before the hurricane and is not good now...to my knowledge they're all equivalent down there...take it with a grain of salt...

i believe LSU new orleans was once more prominent than it is now with kauffman as the chair, as well as several prominent names in cornea and retina, maybe mid 90s but louisiana as a whole has been dealing with financial issues and most of what was left of the faculty left after katrina. the other big hit was losing charity hospital due to katrina. however, it seems like the program is on a rebound with strong leadership and is currently building a new VA and charity right next to the medical center. amount of time spent at other louisiana facilities has decreased over the last year and with completion of the VA and charity, most likely the bulk of the training will be done in new orleans, but that's probably going to take another year or two. Also, they just opened a new eye clinic since the new chair woman took over. the ochsner side seems to provide great clinical experience with a pretty decent sized faculty and a very good chair.

 

[Visionary]

In my opinion, Ohio State>Minnesota>---->Cook County.

 

[RestoreSight]

Can anyone comment on Scheie vs. Cole especially comparing fellowships and clinical exposure? My impression is Scheie has great research/academics, but is weaker clinically than other Philly programs. How does it compare to Cleveland Clinic/Cole Eye?