Average board scores at the top 10 PMnR programs?

[Saladin MD]

I know that the average for PMnR is 209 or so...What are the average board scores for PMnR at the top 10 programs? Just a ballpark figure?

And what about programs with big names (i.e. Stanford?) but that are not that high up in the PMnR rankings? (I've heard this is the case for Stanford, but if I am wrong, please don't shoot me, as I mean no offense and would kill to go to a place like Stanford.)

Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[topwise]

It's PM&R, dude. Not PMnR. The first step in matching is knowing what the field is called.

 

[Saladin MD]

It's PM&R, dude. Not PMnR. The first step in matching is knowing what the field is called.

I don't know where that is on the keyboard. Hence, the usage of 'n'

 

[Saladin MD]

A-ha! Here it is: &

 

[topwise]

I don't know where that is on the keyboard. Hence, the usage of 'n'

I have no words....

Is this a joke?

 

[Saladin MD]

I have no words....

Is this a joke?

Screw off, turd.

I just saw some guy's screen-name which said "PMnRjunkie" and hence I just typed it, since I haven't memorized where the & is on the keyboard. Big deal. Why on earth are you making such a big deal about it? Like I said before: screw off.

 

[Saladin MD]

It's PM&R, dude. Not PMnR. The first step in matching is knowing what the field is called.

The first step in giving useless put-downs is to first make damn sure that you know what you are talking about to begin with:

PMnR: Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/PMnR

"n" and & mean the same thing: they are short for "and".

 

[ihaveaquestion]

I know that the average for PMnR is 209 or so...What are the average board scores for PMnR at the top 10 programs? Just a ballpark figure?

And what about programs with big names (i.e. Stanford?) but that are not that high up in the PMnR rankings? (I've heard this is the case for Stanford, but if I am wrong, please don't shoot me, as I mean no offense and would kill to go to a place like Stanford.)

Thanks.

If you would kill to go to a place like Stanford, you should probably refrain from calling Stanford senior residents "turds."

 

[topwise]

If you would kill to go to a place like Stanford, you should probably refrain from calling Stanford senior residents "turds."

Thanks

I should also add that a med student wrote to a PD inquiring about the program and was immediately taken out of consideration for calling the field PMnR. 100% true story.

(Also, I apologize to SaladinMD... I'm usually nice to newbies, but you can't misspell my field and insult my program in the same breath and expect me not to get pissed off. And I thought for sure you were messing with us when you said you couldn't find the ampersand...)

 

[ampaphb]

While Stanford is a well-respected program, I am not sure it is seen as amongst the best of the best training programs within our field.

Many other "big names" in medicine either don't have PM&R programs at all (Duke, UCSF), or have programs, but are not thought of amongst the elite (Hopkins, Columbia/Cornell)

fyi, the ones typically mentioned are:

Northwestern/RIC
Baylor/TIRR
Mayo
Harvard/Spaulding
UW
UMDNJ/Kessler

others people will argue deserve similar status include

Ohio State
Michigan
Temple
Jefferson

Of course, that's just my opinion

 

[topwise]

Yeah, even though I defend my program, I know we're not considered one of the absolute best. Although we've made some changes and some new hires of incredible attendings that I suspect/hope will elevate us considerably within the next few years. I would love to be starting at my program right now, because things are really good now. (That says something about residency if I wouldn't mind doing it over )

I should add that it'll always be a competitive program though due to the awesome bay area location.

 

[Saladin MD]

Thanks

I should also add that a med student wrote to our PD inquiring about the program and was immediately taken out of consideration for calling the field PMnR. 100% true story.

I plan on doing an elective in PM&R to see if I like it, so I'm sure I'd learn the basics, like what the appropriate acronym is.

(Also, I apologize to SaladinMD... I'm usually nice to newbies, but you can't misspell my field and insult my program in the same breath and expect me not to get pissed off.

Like I told you before, I meant no insult to Stanford. I just thought that if I said "like Stanford" people would jump on me saying how Stanford isn't top tier or whatever...just based on what I read in other threads. Otherwise, I want to go to Stanford. Like you said, awesome location, and it's right next to where I live. Plus, some people I trust who know about the PM&R program at Stanford say it's a great program and the residents love it. Because of those reasons, I'd choose Stanford over other programs.

And thanks for apologizing. I also apologize if it sounded like I was demeaning your program, which was not at all my intention, considering the fact that it is number 1 on my list, which is why I included it in the question.

 

[brimcmike]

Do your homework.

Be willing to learn and be curious.

Be respectful as a guest or novice.

Don't be so quick to defend a mistake with an angry retort and an obscure and near-solitary reference found with a search engine on the internet, it may reflect poorly on your character.

Assume you are interacting with anyone and everyone on a near-anonymous, username forum.

With respect to the ampersand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampersand

 

[Ludicolo]

I know that the average for PMnR is 209 or so...What are the average board scores for PMnR at the top 10 programs? Just a ballpark figure?

And what about programs with big names (i.e. Stanford?) but that are not that high up in the PMnR rankings? (I've heard this is the case for Stanford, but if I am wrong, please don't shoot me, as I mean no offense and would kill to go to a place like Stanford.)

Thanks.

The “n” vs. “&” is a minor quibble, a rookie mistake. As topwise points out it is convention within our specialty to use the “&”, and some old-school physiatrists may get offended. Lesson learned. Move on.

To the OP - try not to get caught up in board scores or program reputation or prestige. They’re important, but what matters more is how well you fit in with a certain program, and how well a program satisfies your wants and needs. You want to maximize your chances at matching at Stanford? Do an away rotation there. Exceed expectations. Demonstrate a sincere interest in PM&R without laying it on too thick. Read about your patients. Show up early and be prepared. Be an active learner. Be professional. Don’t be socially awkward. Outside of that, do the best you can on your boards and other clinical rotations. But also check out other programs. See what’s out there. You may be pleasantly surprised and fall in love with a program other than Stanford.

As for the eternal debate concerning what are the “top programs”, perhaps we could start using metrics other than just reputation?

 

[GrtWhtNrth]

I think this thread is pretty ridiculous. Who cares that he used a n instead of an &...of course Saladin was quick to try and defend himself when you guys submitted rude responses right away.

PM&R is supposed to be a nice field with nice people. Conversations like this make the field look petty and unwelcoming. Try a bit of civility guys.

 

[PMR2008]

The responses were not rude. It was the OP who used the words "turd" and "screw you".
If you are going to judge the whole field by looking at 2 comments than maybe you should step of your throne. It is important to call it PM&R when you are writing a post in the PM&R section of SDN. But regardless that's a rookie mistake the issue was the explanation that followed. I hope we can end this conversation and move on.

 

[topwise]

I agree, this is kind of silly. I apologized, the OP apologized. *shrug*

Seriously though, I do think it's important if you're applying to a field to know what it's called. If someone calls it PMnR, I automatically think they know nothing about the field (which is fine if they're asking to learn more about the field, but not so much if they're asking about scores). As for the ampersand comment, come on, I'm only human... how could I NOT respond to that?

Regarding the question of which programs are "top programs", I'd guess that most have their strengths and weaknesses. A program that might be great for, say, EMGs might not be as good if you're interested in inpatient rehab. You have to figure out what your specific interests are. To the OP: if you are truly interested in Stanford, you should plan to do an elective there.

 

[Saladin MD]

Do your homework.

Ummm...I am doing exactly that. I have a step 1 score and I just wanted to know if I could get into Stanford, since it's next to my house. I have strong reasons to want to be there. But obviously, if I decide to do PM&R, then I'd be willing to go anywhere...just wanted to know if I'd stand a chance at Stanford.

Be willing to learn and be curious.

Which I am.

Be respectful as a guest or novice.

I'm respectful. Notice that after Topwise's first post, how did I respond? It was only after the second post that I was like, you know what: screw him.

Don't be so quick to defend a mistake with an angry retort and an obscure and near-solitary reference found with a search engine on the internet, it may reflect poorly on your character.

With respect to the ampersand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampersand

It's amazing how you guys jump to such conclusions about someone's character.

In any case, it wasn't the fact that he corrected me. He could simply have said nicely: "Yeah, actually we say PM&R not PMnR--just a head's up!" And I would have thanked him and moved on with life.

But instead, he was snide about it.

However, he apologized, and we're squared away now.

The "n" vs. "&" is a minor quibble, a rookie mistake. As topwise points out it is convention within our specialty to use the "&", and some old-school physiatrists may get offended. Lesson learned. Move on.

Thanks. I don't mind learning the lesson, and I think I would've learned it from the away elective as well. It's not like I'm going to blindly apply to the field without knowing anything about it.

To the OP - try not to get caught up in board scores or program reputation or prestige. They're important, but what matters more is how well you fit in with a certain program, and how well a program satisfies your wants and needs.

Cool. I agree. It's just that it's next to my house, as well as the fact that I hear it's easier to get into the fellowship I'm interested in if you go to a name school. But I agree with you, and really I was just asking out of curiousity...a passing thought.

You want to maximize your chances at matching at Stanford? Do an away rotation there. Exceed expectations. Demonstrate a sincere interest in PM&R without laying it on too thick. Read about your patients. Show up early and be prepared. Be an active learner. Be professional. Don't be socially awkward. Outside of that, do the best you can on your boards and other clinical rotations. But also check out other programs. See what's out there. You may be pleasantly surprised and fall in love with a program other than Stanford.

Thanks for your advice.

As for the eternal debate concerning what are the "top programs", perhaps we could start using metrics other than just reputation?

I really didn't mean to dredge that debate up. Apologies for that. I just figured that since Stanford was not in the top 10 (but might well be in the top 15, who knows), that maybe it was a bit easier to get into Stanford, which would be good for me, so I could stay close to home.

The responses were not rude.

How in the world could you think that the responses were not rude? Seriously.

It was the OP who used the words "turd" and "screw you".

Yes, I only used those after he was snide. It was in response; I certainly didn't start it.

If you are going to judge the whole field by looking at 2 comments than maybe you should step of your throne.

Who on earth said I'm going to judge the whole field by two comments!?

It is important to call it PM&R when you are writing a post in the PM&R section of SDN.

Look: I saw a guy whose SN was PMnRJunkie, so I thought it was an ok variant. I was wrong. Sorry. Sue me.

I agree, this is kind of silly. I apologized, the OP apologized. *shrug*

Thanks. I can see how you thought it was a slight to your program, and that was not my intention. If a program is simply not in the top 10, it might be in the top 15 or so...I was just trying to avoid getting crapped on for saying that Stanford was amongst the top programs...since I've seen people get in arguments over this on other threads. But alas, it seems that no matter how a person posts here, someone will attack.

Seriously though, I do think it's important if you're applying to a field to know what it's called.

I understand this, but I am not applying today or tomorrow. Like I told you, I am planning on doing an away elective in it so I know if it's right for me or not.

If someone calls it PMnR, I automatically think they know nothing about the field (which is fine if they're asking to learn more about the field, but not so much if they're asking about scores).

Why must you guys be so judgmental? It was a passing thought, so I asked. I have a Step 1 score, so I wanted to know if I stand a chance at Stanford PM&R, and if I did, then I'll do my away rotation there. If not, I might do it at some other place.

As for the ampersand comment, come on, I'm only human... how could I NOT respond to that?

I was using a multi-language keyboard, which has like 3-4 different symbols on each key. Hence, it's a bit hard to find stuff, and I've never really used the "&" symbol.

Anyways, I just think you guys really hyper-analyzed my post.

 

[Taus]

Have a beer....it's St. Pattys Day....

 

[oreosandsake]

Have a beer....it's St. Pattys Day....

cheers!



and to the OP... I've heard that the "average step 1" at some of the big name programs are around 230-240, with a range from 200 - 260+.

it is a field that can attract some great test takers, and obviously very bright people all around ( ) but like everyone will tell you, Physical Medicine And/&/ampersand Rehabilitation is not as caught up in the numbers game.

now, the downside to stanford is that this thing would be your mascot
http://www.enquirer.com/bearcats/img/photos/2001/03/032001tree.jpg



good luck to you.

 

[topwise]

Yes, our mascot is a freaking tree. What of it?

Actually, I think this particular board is relatively drama-free, especially for SDN, which is reputed to be high on drama. I find this whole thread to be pretty hilarious, to be perfectly honest.

 

[axm397]

i think students get too caught up on board scores and numbers. if you have a high number, congrats, but you still have to do well on your rotation for them to rank you. We've met too many students along the way from a "top" medical school with off the chart board scores, AOA status, etc. with absolutely no social skills and a great deal of arrogance - who do not do well during the match process in PM&R.

PM&R is a small specialty and much of our field is team based - so board scores do matter - to a point - but it is not the ultimate decision maker.

to the OP - here are the components of a successful application to residency:

1. good letters of recs - something personal not generic - from people the PD may know or at least have heard of. The advantage of doing an away rotation is to get these LORs - and possible face time with the PD. The disadvantage is if they don't like you. Don't assume you will know if they don't like you - there have been many good students who only ranked a few programs thinking they were almost guaranteed a spot only to not match and have to scramble.

2. good dean's letters - meaning good evaluations on rotations in other fields - things PDs look for - hard working, interested, cares about patients, gets along well with staff and residents, fast learner, etc.

3. board scores, pre-clinical grades, AOA status, awards, honors, etc.

4. extra credit - interesting personal story (as evidenced in the personal statement), research experience/publications/presentations, etc.

The above factors + your performance on your interview day will determine how you do on match day.

Red flags:
1. Not knowing the field - if you only know one aspect of PM&R - so you think it's just SCI, or pain, or MSK, or outpatient, etc. - Also, if it's clear that you are not truly interested in PM&R - maybe it's your second choice after derm/rads/ortho/whatever, or you just hear it's a great lifestyle but don't really enjoy the topic/patients/etc.

2. laziness - leaving early, not following through on tasks, showing up late, not volunteering for work

3. fakeness - only nice to attendings, kissing butt to a point of nausea of people surrounding you, making yourself look good by putting others down, being sneaky about sharing information. Also, faking your credentials - exagerating your credentials (beyond a little inflating).

4. arrogance - treating team members (secretaries, nurses, therapists, social workers, etc.) with no respect, raising your voice, being condescending, upstaging residents, contradicting residents and attendings in front of patients, taking control of a lecture (this happened at my residency - a student felt the attending didn't know what he was talking about and proceeded to interrupt and give a speech about the topic)

5. instability - moody, disorganized, sleepy all the time (not just occasionally), inconsistent, etc.

Hope this helps.

 

[Saladin MD]

Thanks for the post, Axm397. I appreciate it.

I realize there are many things that matter, along with and more so than board scores. But nonetheless the reality is that most competitive programs do tend to have general cut-offs for board scores.

and to the OP... I've heard that the "average step 1" at some of the big name programs are around 230-240, with a range from 200 - 260+.

Thanks! That's all I was looking for. haha

I just wish people wouldn't psycho-analyze everything.

Actually, I think this particular board is relatively drama-free, especially for SDN, which is reputed to be high on drama.

From what I've heard (and experienced), there do seem to be a lot of jerks on the board. It seems like every other thread someone is trashing someone else. My personal opinion is that people should not judge the intention of others.

Take care.

 

[PMRRules]

Thanks for the post, Axm397. I appreciate it.

I realize there are many things that matter, along with and more so than board scores. But nonetheless the reality is that most competitive programs do tend to have general cut-offs for board scores.



Thanks! That's all I was looking for. haha

I just wish people wouldn't psycho-analyze everything.



From what I've heard (and experienced), there do seem to be a lot of jerks on the board. It seems like every other thread someone is trashing someone else. My personal opinion is that people should not judge the intention of others.

Take care.

Words of advice (although my own).... I think it's best to always be nice to people you may be working with in the future (even if you are agitated). PM&R is a relatively small field. Also, if you are agitated with such quibbles, then you may even be more agitated by the type of patients physiatrists have to deal with on a daily basis...or medicaid/medicare for that matter. On another note, as you can see on the nrmp website, only 8 people scored between a 241 and 250 and 19 between 231-240 on Step 1 for those matching in 2007. Assuming those 27 people will go to one of the top 10 "popular" schools, that leaves a lot of spots still open for the "avg" board score taker. Also, FYI, although Stanford is a good program and has made significant improvements in their curriculum, there is another program close to the bay area considered to be good as well.

 

[Saladin MD]

Words of advice (although my own).... I think it's best to always be nice to people you may be working with in the future (even if you are agitated). PM&R is a relatively small field. Also, if you are agitated with such quibbles, then you may even be more agitated by the type of patients physiatrists have to deal with on a daily basis...or medicaid/medicare for that matter. On another note, as you can see on the nrmp website, only 8 people scored between a 241 and 250 and 19 between 231-240 on Step 1 for those matching in 2007. Assuming those 27 people will go to one of the top 10 "popular" schools, that leaves a lot of spots still open for the "avg" board score taker. Also, FYI, although Stanford is a good program and has made significant improvements in their curriculum, there is another program close to the bay area considered to be good as well.

Thank you. A very informative post. That's great to hear about the scores. Can you link to that chart? (I can search for it myself too, but if you have it handy, that would be great.)

Anyways, I'm not one to hold a grudge, and I apologize to those on the board I offended. I'll be more cautious next time when I post.

 

[topwise]

There's a proportion of jerks in the population, so you're going to run into them anywhere. I'm not one of them. This is the first drama I've experienced on this board, but then again, I tend not to post much in general unless my program is mentioned. I thought my apology in spite of being called a turd would be the end of it (and I tried to give some helpful info), but bafflingly, it continues.

I think a lot of med students on this board can attest that I've been extremely nice in giving them tips for getting into my program or offering helpful info, but unfortunately, this whole thread has kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[MSKalltheway]

On another note, as you can see on the nrmp website, only 8 people scored between a 241 and 250 and 19 between 231-240 on Step 1 for those matching in 2007. Assuming those 27 people will go to one of the top 10 "popular" schools, that leaves a lot of spots still open for the "avg" board score taker. Also, FYI, although Stanford is a good program and has made significant improvements in their curriculum, there is another program close to the bay area considered to be good as well.

First, I'm a numbers kind of guy, but I agree with everyone here that they really shouldn't be a concern. PM&R thankfully is a place where they select for things, that I think, are actually important to medicine.

But since you want to know, PMRRules brings up some great points. By the numbers, all 27 US seniors matched with a score >230. 34 total matched with a score >230 (includes "independent" applicants), while 2 did not. (Many of the "independent" applicants have unknown scores, so who knows where they fall...)

If you take all the "top" programs ampa talked about, youre looking at somewhere between 40-50 spots. As not everyone goes to those programs for various reasons (family, fit, location, etc.), you'd be making a big and likely incorrect assumption that only 230+ applicants go to those programs. For example, some applicants want to go to places that are popular locations such as Cali and NYC. From that alone you've already made a good cut into the number of these applicants at those "top" programs.

I think by looking at those numbers, what everyone is saying should hold true. There are many great places to train and "average Step 1 scores" dont mean you cant potentially be a great physiatrist. Your Step 1 score should not be a concern and the focus should be on being hardworking, easy-to-get-along-with, and making residents/attendings/patients like you.

(*In this post my intent is not to express opinion or bias against a place or program, just stating the facts)

 

[Saladin MD]

There's a proportion of jerks in the population, so you're going to run into them anywhere. I'm not one of them. This is the first drama I've experienced on this board, but then again, I tend not to post much in general unless my program is mentioned. I thought my apology in spite of being called a turd would be the end of it (and I tried to give some helpful info), but bafflingly, it continues.

I think a lot of med students on this board can attest that I've been extremely nice in giving them tips for getting into my program or offering helpful info, but unfortunately, this whole thread has kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. I'm done with this conversation.

I didn't call you a jerk. You apologized and so for me, it's squashed. No hard feelings here. I understand that you thought I was taking a jab at your program, and I can see why you thought that. But it wasn't my intention. From what I've heard from reliable people that I trust, your program is excellent.

 

[Saladin MD]

First, I'm a numbers kind of guy, but I agree with everyone here that they really shouldn't be a concern. PM&R thankfully is a place where they select for things, that I think, are actually important to medicine.

But since you want to know, PMRRules brings up some great points. By the numbers, all 27 US seniors matched with a score >230. 34 total matched with a score >230 (includes "independent" applicants), while 2 did not. (Many of the "independent" applicants have unknown scores, so who knows where they fall...)

If you take all the "top" programs ampa talked about, youre looking at somewhere between 40-50 spots. As not everyone goes to those programs for various reasons (family, fit, location, etc.), you'd be making a big and likely incorrect assumption that only 230+ applicants go to those programs. For example, some applicants want to go to places that are popular locations such as Cali and NYC. From that alone you've already made a good cut into the number of these applicants at those "top" programs.

I think by looking at those numbers, what everyone is saying should hold true. There are many great places to train and "average Step 1 scores" dont mean you cant potentially be a great physiatrist. Your Step 1 score should not be a concern and the focus should be on being hardworking, easy-to-get-along-with, and making residents/attendings/patients like you.

(*In this post my intent is not to express opinion or bias against a place or program, just stating the facts)

Thanks for your post.

 

[Shalom77]

Physical Medicine And/&/ampersand Rehabilitation is not as caught up in the numbers game.

Perhaps not, but using "n" instead of "&" can be a fatal mistake.

Axm397 was kind enough to include a slide about it in her presentation to interested medical students at the AAPMR meeting- so I was well warned ahead of time of this idiosyncrasy/pet peeve of PM & R.

 

[dc2md]

I, for one, will side with Saladin MD. I think making a big deal about semantics of PM&R vs PMnR is ridiculous. We all know what he means. It's like getting pissed off for the two pronunciations of "physiatry" (fə-ˈzī-ə-trē vs fiz-ē-ˈa-tr&#275. Kind of silly in my book. I don't think we should be throwing stones at a medical student that is interested in PMR (the way i normally spell it...b/c i'm lazy) b/c of this.

 

[Shalom77]

Personally, I think it's silly too - but when in Rome do as the Romans.

 

[rehab_sports_dr]

Throwing in my 2 cents on the great ampersand controversy- it's stupid. We all know what you mean when you say PMnR. I don't believe that a program director (at least a competent one) would ever take a quality candidate off their list because of inappropriate use of an ampersand- I could see them not liking the candidate and using the spelling as an excuse to move on without further deliberation, however.

As for the top programs- I'd say the recent consensus over the past 10 years has been that the "Big 5" have been (in no particular order):

RIC
Kessler
Mayo
Baylor (Houston, not the Dallas program, which is a separate program)
U of Washington

In my opinion, the other programs that can make strong cases to be expanding the big 5 include:
- U of Pittsburgh- I'm biased because I am on the faculty there, but I think objectively we pretty easily belong (#1 NIH funding, wins best paper at the AAP essentially every year, strong program with lots of breadth, etc). A case could be made that Pitt is the strongest program in the country- I don't know that I believe that, but it is not an unreasonable statement
- U of Michigan- a broad program that is strong across the board
- Ohio State- ditto. Strong tradition
- Harvard (Spaulding)
- U of Virginia- I definitely would have included them while Casey Kerrigan was chair. I would contingently include depending on who her successor is
- UT Southwestern- this is my quirky pick- it has come along very fast in the past few years. It may be too soon to call it a top 5 type program, but they are clearly accelerating in that direction

One thing is that is worth noting is that things change relatively rapidly. 10 years ago, for example, I don't think Pitt or Harvard were on anyone's top 10 program lists. Now both are probably on everyone's top 10 list.

 

[njdevil]

In my opinion, the other programs that can make strong cases to be expanding the big 5 include:
- U of Pittsburgh- I'm biased because I am on the faculty there, but I think objectively we pretty easily belong (#1 NIH funding, wins best paper at the AAP essentially every year, strong program with lots of breadth, etc). A case could be made that Pitt is the strongest program in the country- I don't know that I believe that, but it is not an unreasonable statement
- U of Michigan- a broad program that is strong across the board
- Ohio State- ditto. Strong tradition
- Harvard (Spaulding)
- U of Virginia- I definitely would have included them while Casey Kerrigan was chair. I would contingently include depending on who her successor is
- UT Southwestern- this is my quirky pick- it has come along very fast in the past few years. It may be too soon to call it a top 5 type program, but they are clearly accelerating in that direction.

I agree with UMichigan & Upitt. The other impressive wellrounded programs in my humble opinion are Jefferson, Temple, and MCV.

 

[rehab_sports_dr]

I agree with UMichigan & Upitt. The other impressive wellrounded programs in my humble opinion are Jefferson, Temple, and MCV.

I certainly don't object to including Jeff, Temple, or MCV. All terrific programs

To me, it's a bit like NCAA basketball teams

I am not sure what the consensus "big 5" NCAA basketball programs are over the past 20 years are, but a reasonable list might include:

Duke
North Carolina
Michigan State
Connecticut
Kansas

But, if you ask who the best teams are NOW (which is the more relevant question for a high school prospect), you would have to include teams like Pitt, Louisville, UCLA, etc.

I think it's similar with residency programs

U of Washington (to arbitrarily take one of the big 5) may be analogous to Duke- you can't really have a discussion of the best programs in the country and not include U of Washington, and they have a ridiculously strong pedigree.

Does that mean that they are a better residency program right now than, say, Medical College of Virginia? Not necessarily, but their pedigree does mean something.

That is why I might be guarded in calling a residency program like Pitt the best in the country yet- they are probably analogous to Pitt the college basketball team- they got very good under one leader who put them on the national radar who has since moved onto another great program (Ross Zafonte, who is now at Harvard, similar to how Ben Howland built up the basketball team and then left for UCLA), but left with a perfect transitional plan in place and grown even stronger with the new chair (Mike Boninger for the residency program, Jamie Dixon for the basketball team).

If I was a basketball player, I would seriously consider choosing Pitt over UConn, but that doesn't take away from the fact that UConn has had the better overall basketball team for the past 15 years. Even if Pitt did sweep them this year (of course, I am posting this minutes after Pitt lost to Villnova).

Anyway, this is a long-winded analogy to point out that things change, but that tradition still matters.

 

[ampaphb]

I am not even sure you can say Pitt is the best program in PA, no less in amongst the best in the country.

To an extent, it is depends on what your measuring criteria is - the one that wins the NCAA? Or the one that sends the most players to the pros? The one with the best record in the past 10 years? or the most final four appearances? Afterall, what do you do with a Memphis, and how do you asses them when they are playing in Conference USA? Was last year an aberration? or was this year?

Rehab_sports_dr is an academic with a focus on sports; ergo his criteria are things related to academic accomplishment , with a bias to their sports program. Truth be told, how much of a resident's experience has anything to do with NIH funding or best AAP paper? A program's longstading reputation is what private practice employers base hiring decisions on, and Pitt has yet to crack the final four in that regard. They are a well kept secret. They frequently are invited to the tournament, get to the Sweet 16, occasionally crack the Elite Eight, are clearly well-respected, but are not yet headed to the Motor City, IMHO.

Oh and UVA and UT Southwestern? Mid-majors, at least for now.

Don't forget, rehab-sports-dr is a fan at the end of the day, as are we all. Last year, he might well have told you Arkansas was a school that deserved an invitation to the big dance as an up and coming program (think Kentucky two years ago when they hired Billy Gillespie). This year? Not so much.

 

[topwise]

That basketball thing went over my head...

For the girls on the message board, do you think you could come up with an analogy that involves shoes?

 

[Ludicolo]

It’s not a matter of which programs are “the best”, although it's always fun to debate. It is a matter of what program is best “for you”. For a student choosing a residency program, reputation is but one factor. Location, training – general vs. specific subspecialties (SCI, EMG, pain), balance of didactics/bedside teaching/scut, personality/fit, fellowship and job placements, alumni base and connections, research opportunities, program size, external factors such as family responsibilities, etc. What is the ideal environment in which you are going to thrive?

And while no one will deny that the overall training is great at places like RIC or Mayo – some people honestly don’t belong there. Some might do better being a bigger fish in a smaller pond. You want to ride the pine at Duke all four years, or do you want to start for Gonzaga? Because it’s your skills and your work ethic that’ll land you in the NBA – and keep you there, not the name of your program. Nothing necessarily wrong with playing for a mid-major. Unless we're talking college football and the BCS, but that's different issue...

BTW – I had Pitt winning it all in my bracket.

topwise - don't bring up shoes when guys are talking sports...

 

[njdevil]

this discussion is ridiculously fun...

 

[topwise]

Good point, Ludicolo. It's such a broad field, I think every person has a different "best program" to suit their specific needs and interests (both academic and personal).

topwise - don't bring up shoes when guys are talking sports...

Okay, well can you at least explain it in terms of purses, then?

 

[axm397]

I chose my bracket based on the mascotts. I liked the fierce red bird so went with Louisville. Thought the U Conn dog looked too nice

BTW - I am 7th out of 25 right now so there goes all your philosophizing about which team/coach/player is better

 

[Dr Manhattan]

Good point, Ludicolo. It's such a broad field, I think every person has a different "best program" to suit their specific needs and interests (both academic and personal).

Agree 100%. When I set up my rank list, I based it 100% off of future opportunities. For me, I want to eventually add a board-certified pain fellowship to my repertoire. So the programs I ranked highest were ones with heavy procedure/MS exposure, an in house PM&R-based pain fellowship, & an academic setting for research opportunities. With these 3 components, I feel like I am in a setting to ultimately maximize my future potential. I ended up matching at a great program with an in-house PM&R pain fellowship and an Anesthesia-based pain fellowship that traditionally reserves one spot per year for a PM&R guy from the same hospital.

 

[Disciple]

Uhhh,

I love being a Physiatrist and all,

but this whole discussion is like arguing about which FP programs are most prestegious.


Does anybody really care?

 

[Ludicolo]

Uhhh,

I love being a Physiatrist and all,

but this whole discussion is like arguing about which FP programs are most prestegious.


Does anybody really care?

In all honesty, when you get to our level, not really.

But recall, this thread was initiated by a med student. They do care, whether they should or not. It's all too easy to get hung up on board scores and program prestige. Remnants from being pre-allo/osteo, I guess. The more experienced members on this forum are just trying to provide a little perspective.

And, we’re just having a little fun here. It's enjoyable watching intelligent people riff on a theme. What other thread connects board scores, “n” vs. “&”, insults and apologies, top 10 programs, NCAA sports, college mascots, shoes/purses, and axm’s bracketology skills? Not every thread has to be purely political or clinical.

But yeah, the fact that we all found pleasure posting on an anonymous internet forum on a Saturday night is a wee bit concerning…

 

[topwise]

Yeah, aren't you all glad I was such an ass to that med student?

But yeah, the fact that we all found pleasure posting on an anonymous internet forum on a Saturday night is a wee bit concerning…

No way, I am pretty sure all the cool people are on SDN on Saturday night. Or facebook.

 

[Disciple]

In all honesty, when you get to our level, not really.

But recall, this thread was initiated by a med student. They do care, whether they should or not. It's all too easy to get hung up on board scores and program prestige. Remnants from being pre-allo/osteo, I guess. The more experienced members on this forum are just trying to provide a little perspective.

Choosing the right residency program is definitely important, but to put things in perspective,


When I pull up the online provider network for my healh plan, am I looking for Harvard, Mayo, Duke, UCSF?


Probably.


If I need an organ transplant.


If I need someone to check my cholesterol and prescribe a prednisone taper for bronchitis.


Not really.


Alot of the people hiring Physiatrists don't even know what one is.

 

[rehab_sports_dr]

I'm glad (except for the purse and shoes types) that the college basketball analogy was appreciated

While I appreciate the comments about how residency choice doesn't matter that much, it still matters. I've been around consensus top 5 programs and consensus lower tier programs, and there is a big difference. You can be a star in both places, but it is a lot easier in a good program. The benefits of a good program are legitimate and palpable.

One thing that really matters is the quality of your fellow residents. I learned far more from my co-residents than I did from anyone else. When I have a difficult challenge now, they are still some of the first people I contact. And because my former co-residents are some of my closest friends, that means I tend to learn things on my down time, since when we catch up, we do tend to talk a little shop

I remember having a similar experience when I was a high school swimmer. My team was a good local team, so we tended to think highly of ourself when he compared ourselves to other people on the team or other teams in our county. But every year we would swim against a local private school that was ranked #1 in the country, and we realized that our high school peer group was not the real measuring stick.

If you are a resident in a program that doesn't tend to attract other top tier residents and doesn't have a tradition of excellence, then you have no real benchmark.

I think this is especially important in a field like PM&R that doesn't have the rich tradition of some other specialties. Because what REALLY matters is being able to hold your own with colleagues from other disciplines. PM&R tends to get walked over by other specialties because many physiatrists in their hearts do not feel like the equals of other specialties. The ability to hold your own against other physicians starts by testing yourself daily against other strong physicians. And that is far more easily done in a strong residency program.

 

[PMR 4 MSK]

I'm glad (except for the purse and shoes types) that the college basketball analogy was appreciated

While I appreciate the comments about how residency choice doesn't matter that much, it still matters. I've been around consensus top 5 programs and consensus lower tier programs, and there is a big difference. You can be a star in both places, but it is a lot easier in a good program. The benefits of a good program are legitimate and palpable.

One thing that really matters is the quality of your fellow residents. I learned far more from my co-residents than I did from anyone else. When I have a difficult challenge now, they are still some of the first people I contact. And because my former co-residents are some of my closest friends, that means I tend to learn things on my down time, since when we catch up, we do tend to talk a little shop

I remember having a similar experience when I was a high school swimmer. My team was a good local team, so we tended to think highly of ourself when he compared ourselves to other people on the team or other teams in our county. But every year we would swim against a local private school that was ranked #1 in the country, and we realized that our high school peer group was not the real measuring stick.

If you are a resident in a program that doesn't tend to attract other top tier residents and doesn't have a tradition of excellence, then you have no real benchmark.

I think this is especially important in a field like PM&R that doesn't have the rich tradition of some other specialties. Because what REALLY matters is being able to hold your own with colleagues from other disciplines. PM&R tends to get walked over by other specialties because many physiatrists in their hearts do not feel like the equals of other specialties. The ability to hold your own against other physicians starts by testing yourself daily against other strong physicians. And that is far more easily done in a strong residency program.

Very well worded!

I've always wondered how the "top-tier" programs are thought of that way - is there any true measurement, or is it more of a popularity contest?

 

[rehab_sports_dr]

Very well worded!

I've always wondered how the "top-tier" programs are thought of that way - is there any true measurement, or is it more of a popularity contest?

There is no true measuring stick, but I think there is a pretty strong consensus that the Big 5 are Mayo, UW-Seattle, Kessler, RIC, and Baylor

Some of the measures (none are perfect)-

- Ranking in US News and World Report- really ranks the affiliated inpatient rehab facility. And what it really ranks is the opinions of people surveyed, so there is some lag time. Still, the programs that rank well are usually pretty good residency programs

- NIH funding. Even though this is not the primary factor that affects most residents education, it is a decent secondary measure. It is impossible to get significant amounts of NIH funding out of a poorly run organization, so it is a useful screening tool for a well run department. It also means that at least some of the knowledge that is driving the field is being generated amongst your faculty, which matters. It's just not the same thing to be taught by someone who is practicing based on what they were taught in residency, as opposed to faculty who are leaders in their field.

- Fellowship training amongst the faculty. This is an imperfect measure, since many leaders in the field pre-date the popularity of fellowship training (e.g., many fellowship directors are not themselves fellowship trained, but they have trained fellows). I think this matters more for the younger faculty.

- Board pass rate. Again, this mostly screens out bad programs

- % of residents pursuing fellowship. As with all of these indicators, not perfect. It is still probably true, though, that the better programs will have over half of their residents pursuing fellowship after graduation

- presence of in-house fellowships. Shows that a program has its act together enough to train at a higher level

- publications amongst residents. Even if you don't want to pursue a research career, it shows that the department is invested enough in the success of their residents that they provide resources for their residents to succeed.

- residents in national leadership positions and awards- strong programs tend to have residents present in national leadership positions, such as the ORR, AAMC, AAPMR resident's council, AAP resident's and fellows council, Elkins Award (top board score), AAP best paper award, RMSTP, etc. Shows that programs that are backing their residents

- residents presenting at national meetings

None of these measures, in of themselves, are proof of quality. However, if you stratify programs, you will find that better programs tend to do well on this list and poor programs do poorly. If you take the traditional Big 5 programs, they all would do very well on this list. This is why I would argue that programs like Pitt, MCV, and Ohio State are peers- they also do very well on this list.

 

[ampaphb]

1) I think consensus would indicate that any list of top programs that leaves off Spaulding is incomplete.

2) Thinking back to my residency training, the people who were my best teachers were not necessarily the best researchers. People who put time and effort into teaching are a different breed. They remember what it was like when they were residents. They are not looking to establish a national reputation for themselves. They were, instead, the kinds of docs you would want to treat your mom - kind, caring, patient, and yet challenging, with a wealth of knowledge to impart. Many of the best teachers I have had were the least impressed with themselves, and had to ultimately be recognized by those around them for what they had accomplished over the years.

3) Programs with in house fellowships is a plus/minus IMHO. While good fellows are also good teachers, they tend to limit the resident opportunities to gain as much hands on exposure.

4) % of residents pursuing post-residency fellowships can also be an indicator of what is lacking in the residency.

I am incredibly impressed by people like Rehab_Sports_Dr who lecture nationally, are well-published, and are able to obtain grant money for their departments. I would contend, however, that what makes him such a terrific colleague is none of those things, but rather that he really loves to teach, and I just don't think there is an adequate metric to quantify that kind of passion.