How many New spots will the be available to MD students due to the Combined Match?

[NontradCA]

The medicine department at my hospital just hired a sub specialist DO. He may be the first DO in the department (maybe they have one stashed in the hospitalist group or in outpatient primary care that I don't know of, but he's definitely the first in that prestigious subspecialty division). I can tell you he has gotten a lot of side-eye from both within his own department and without, even from residents. And he trained at good ACGME programs for both residency and fellowship.

I'm talking ridiculous stuff like when attendings find out he's on for consults, they either wait a week until the next person comes on, or they email one of their buddies to "double check" his recs.

Yes, but like I said, after a while they will start to judge him by merit and not his letters. You don't agree?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mad Jack]

Yea and I'm still not buying what you're saying. Because in Academia, reputation supersedes letters. In these environments publishing power and grant means everything. I don't see how "management" is going to judge based on someone being a DO and not their funding. And if a DO is in academia, that often means that they've worked hard, despite their degree because like competitive fields, it's an uphill battle. It's widely accepted that biases tend to go away after GME and appointment.

See

I've seen multiple incidences of EM docs and Intensivists critique and double check radiology reads by the two DO rads in the group when they never did the others. And no, there was nothing inherently bad about them and both actually trained at ACGME residencies.

I've been around for consults and other things being questioned because a person is a DO. And if you believe there isn't a ceiling for DOs in certain academic medical centers, you're delusional. Finally, I don't mean specifically DOs that are on academic faculty- I mean DOs that work in academic facilities. There's so many physicians at some places that you often don't know who the guy you are working with is, he's just "Sumdood, DO." And you're not going to spend the minutes looking up his credentials before trying to decide whether you're trusting his read or consult, you're making a biased judgment the second you see "DO" because that's how the human brain works. Bias is a shortcut inherent in human thinking, that's just the way it is.

Now, if the guy you're sending a consult knows you and your work, that clearly isn't the case. But in the sorts of places I'm looking to work, chances are 7 out of 10 people won't know who the **** I am. So that inherent bias matters to me, and I'd rather there were less of it if at all possible.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Yes, but like I said, after a while they will start to judge him by merit and not his letters. You don't agree?

Will have to see. It's certainly hurt him thus far, but he obviously got the job in the first place.

 

[scoKraz4]

I've seen multiple incidences of EM docs and Intensivists critique and double check radiology reads by the two DO rads in the group when they never did the others. And no, there was nothing inherently bad about them and both actually trained at ACGME residencies.

If they were double checking me I honestly wouldn't care. If they want to make more work for themselves then all good for them. I did my part.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[NontradCA]

Will have to see. It's certainly hurt him thus far, but he obviously got the job in the first place.

And do you think the merger will have any effect on their perception of a DO at all?

 

[QualityProcess]

The medicine department at my hospital just hired a sub specialist DO.

50 lurking OMS1s just texted their friends that the glass ceiling is breaking

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

And do you think the merger will have any effect on their perception of a DO at all?

No, I think barring complete turnover at the leadership level of the internal medicine department they won't ever even review DO apps.

 

[Mad Jack]

The medicine department at my hospital just hired a sub specialist DO. He may be the first DO in the department (maybe they have one stashed in the hospitalist group or in outpatient primary care that I don't know of, but he's definitely the first in that prestigious subspecialty division). I can tell you he has gotten a lot of side-eye from both within his own department and without, even from residents. And he trained at good ACGME programs for both residency and fellowship.

I'm talking ridiculous stuff like when attendings find out he's on for consults, they either wait a week until the next person comes on, or they email one of their buddies to "double check" his recs.

God forbid someone speaks the truth around here, you just get a bunch of "the bias isn't real!" "DOs are equal!" Etc.

In some areas of practice, this won't matter. But if you're working in a big hospital, be ready to deal with the bias lads and ladies, because it's still out there and it's still very real.

 

[NontradCA]

No, I think barring complete turnover at the leadership level of the internal medicine department they won't ever even review DO apps.

I meant perception of faculty not prospective residents.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

I meant perception of faculty not prospective residents.

I don't think I know nearly enough about the inner workings to comment

 

[deleted564680]

Sad thing is that when a read or consult says MD it may be an MBBS or carib grad or anything but people don't have that trigger bias. A DO is 100% US trained 100% of the time. The AOA should tout that more.

 

[NontradCA]

God forbid someone speaks the truth around here, you just get a bunch of "the bias isn't real!" "DOs are equal!" Etc.

In some areas of practice, this won't matter. But if you're working in a big hospital, be ready to deal with the bias lads and ladies, because it's still out there and it's still very real.

Lol is that how you interpreted my response. I honestly don't give a **** about "bias" or the osteopathic profession in general. I was saying that the things you are saying generally don't exist and anecdotes and the rare DO appointment at elite institutions not withstanding, they don't.

 

[NontradCA]

I don't think I know nearly enough about the inner workings to comment

Ok well thanks for the anecdote from ivory surgical tower then.

 

[deleted731525]

Sad thing is that when a read or consult says MD it may be an MBBS or carib grad or anything but people don't have that trigger bias. A DO is 100% US trained 100% of the time. The AOA should tout that more.

I dont think anyone these posters are referencing cares about medical school. They care about residency training. IMG/FMG have to do ACGME residencies, so the assumption will be that they are competent. When they see a DO they assume they did an AOA residency and then assume that there is the possibility that they arent as competent.

 

[Psai]

The trouble is, a lot of the time people would assume DO=AOA residency unless they were someone you worked with regularly. You could have gone to Cleveland Clinic but it won't matter if no one bothers looking it up because they'll assume that, by virtue of your degree, you probably trained at someplace substandard.

Now they'll know that at least anyone from here on out was at a program that meet ACGME standards. It raises the four of expectations, and this raises the floor of opinion across the board moving forward.

It was unintentional but it's funny that you mention Cleveland clinic. Obviously the name impresses you but there's a reason why it takes so many dos and imgs for residency.

I don't believe that to be the case for PM&R since Radiation Oncology is an extremely competitive field, yet there are quite a few students who go without really knowing its existence.

I definitely believe that PM&R is actually a DO friendly field. For instance, lets compare the field to radiology.


http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf

On chart 3, page 5 - They show that PM&R has an 89% match rate for U.S. seniors and 53% for independent applicants versus radiology which is 99% of U.S. seniors and 70% of independent applicants. So overall PM&R is more competitive to get into than Radiology.


http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/PD-Survey-Report-2014.pdf

On page 95 of the 2014 NRMP Director's Survey, it shows that 97% of programs interview/rank DO students for PM&R, but on page 121 for Radiology 64% of programs interview/rank DO students. This is one of the few ACGME fields where DOs are interviewed and ranks in almost all programs. In 2015, 3 total were left unfilled in PM&R, but 150 were left unfilled in Radiology.

With that all said, DOs have hit top tier places in PM&R such as Spaulding hospital and Mayo Clinic (Rochester). However, the same can't be said for Radiology. Based on the data it is definitely a DO friendly field.

Did your school not teach you how to read numbers? Rad onc and radiology are two very different things. Most people know about rad onc and have some understanding of it. I'm about to graduate and I don't even know what pmr docs do.

The average step 1 for Radiology was 241. Pmr was 220. It's not more competitive lol. There are many explanations for why the percentage is lower. Maybe the applicants aren't as good. Maybe they double applied and chose a different field. You can't take the percentage of matched people and figure out the competitiveness of a field. Pmr is below average in competitiveness.

The number of open spots just shows that there is a difference between how many people wanted a field and how many spots there are. There's a big difference in desirability between maimonides and Stanford. Every field has reputable programs that are incredibly tough to get into. But saying to tier pmr is like saying to tier family medicine. Not only does it not mean anything, no one is impressed

I'm talking about colleagues, not patients. The guy in ENT that's rolling his eyes at your consult because you're just some DO so he's going to have to double-check all of your work. The guy in management who is reluctant to promote you because he doesn't know his ass from his elbow but he's heard AOA training is inferior to ACGME training and you must've some AOA because you're a DO. Nonsense like that. Your colleagues' opinion of you matters, because it makes consults, admits, and much more easier when you're dealing with a person you don't know personally and all they see is "NTC, DO" and they're left to draw the conclusions of how seriously they should take your opinion based on the reputation those last two letters carries.

How much clinical experience do you have? It sounds like you're making assumptions, not describing things you've seen in real life

 

[Mad Jack]

It was unintentional but it's funny that you mention Cleveland clinic. Obviously the name impresses you but there's a reason why it takes so many dos and imgs for residency.



Did your school not teach you how to read numbers? Rad onc and radiology are two very different things. Most people know about rad onc and have some understanding of it. I'm about to graduate and I don't even know what pmr docs do.

The average step 1 for Radiology was 241. Pmr was 220. It's not more competitive lol. There are many explanations for why the percentage is lower. Maybe the applicants aren't as good. Maybe they double applied and chose a different field. You can't take the percentage of matched people and figure out the competitiveness of a field. Pmr is below average in competitiveness.

The number of open spots just shows that there is a difference between how many people wanted a field and how many spots there are. There's a big difference in desirability between maimonides and Stanford. Every field has reputable programs that are incredibly tough to get into. But saying to tier pmr is like saying to tier family medicine. Not only does it not mean anything, no one is impressed



How much clinical experience do you have? It sounds like you're making assumptions, not describing things you've seen in real life

I was trying to throw a name out there that was realistic, not top-notch lol. They're not a bad place to train, just not a great one. No one would be like, "ugh, Cleveland Clinic? You probably can't prescribe a Z-pak without ****ing it up." I wasn't going to say something unrealistic like MGH, because that literally just doesn't happen. Hell, not even the good programs at Mayo (IM, for instance) are keen to take DOs, and it's in the middle of **** nowhere, so I can't even use that as a realistic example.

 

[deleted564680]

Cleveland clinic taking DOs and IMGs is more to do with the city of Cleveland than the hospital. Those DOs and IMGs are usually the top of the top also. CC is one of the few places that takes all comers.

 

[Mad Jack]

It was unintentional but it's funny that you mention Cleveland clinic. Obviously the name impresses you but there's a reason why it takes so many dos and imgs for residency.



Did your school not teach you how to read numbers? Rad onc and radiology are two very different things. Most people know about rad onc and have some understanding of it. I'm about to graduate and I don't even know what pmr docs do.

The average step 1 for Radiology was 241. Pmr was 220. It's not more competitive lol. There are many explanations for why the percentage is lower. Maybe the applicants aren't as good. Maybe they double applied and chose a different field. You can't take the percentage of matched people and figure out the competitiveness of a field. Pmr is below average in competitiveness.

The number of open spots just shows that there is a difference between how many people wanted a field and how many spots there are. There's a big difference in desirability between maimonides and Stanford. Every field has reputable programs that are incredibly tough to get into. But saying to tier pmr is like saying to tier family medicine. Not only does it not mean anything, no one is impressed



How much clinical experience do you have? It sounds like you're making assumptions, not describing things you've seen in real life

I worked at a large, fairly big-name US medical center for over 6 years, working alongside MDs, DOs, IMGs, you name it. Agonized over whether I should even apply DO because of some of the things I saw, but ultimately decided I'd save a year of my life if I got in, so why not.

 

[deleted731525]

I worked at a large, fairly big-name US medical center for over 6 years, working alongside MDs, DOs, IMGs, you name it. Agonized over whether I should even apply DO because of some of the things I saw, but ultimately decided I'd save a year of my life if I got in, so why not.

This is the dilemma that many of us non-traditional applicants face.

 

[TheBoneDoctah]

At the end of the day, M.D. or D.O., it's a job. You are doing it so that you can make a living. Wherever you work, do your job and go home and enjoy your life and stop worrying about if your male anatomy is larger than someone else's male anatomy. If an M.D. doesn't trust you and wants to question your reads for rads, let them. It's their time they are wasting, not yours and it shows how ignorant they may be. You, as a D.O., still get paid the same and can do what you love. Why do you care what some M.D. says about you? Chances are your scores were probably higher than theirs in the first place to land that residency with the "all-mighty M.D" since your a lowly D.O. in "M.D. territory."


I feel as though MOST D.O.'s don't really care about prestige and MOST just want to get into their specialty of choice and do that job. That's why I find it kinda comical that people sit here saying, "there aren't any D.O.s at MGH in specialty X"...who cares? Most D.O.s realize going into D.O. school that they most likely won't match into neurosurgery at MGH or JH and 99% of them don't care.

SDN is a community of people who literally thrive on making people believe that if you're not at a top 10 program, then it's not worth doing and you might as well become a tech. How about having a community of people who work together and try and bring other people up instead of others down. Wouldn't that be a novel idea?

 

[IslandStyle808]

It was unintentional but it's funny that you mention Cleveland clinic. Obviously the name impresses you but there's a reason why it takes so many dos and imgs for residency.



Did your school not teach you how to read numbers? Rad onc and radiology are two very different things. Most people know about rad onc and have some understanding of it. I'm about to graduate and I don't even know what pmr docs do.

The average step 1 for Radiology was 241. Pmr was 220. It's not more competitive lol. There are many explanations for why the percentage is lower. Maybe the applicants aren't as good. Maybe they double applied and chose a different field. You can't take the percentage of matched people and figure out the competitiveness of a field. Pmr is below average in competitiveness.

The number of open spots just shows that there is a difference between how many people wanted a field and how many spots there are. There's a big difference in desirability between maimonides and Stanford. Every field has reputable programs that are incredibly tough to get into. But saying to tier pmr is like saying to tier family medicine. Not only does it not mean anything, no one is impressed



How much clinical experience do you have? It sounds like you're making assumptions, not describing things you've seen in real life

I know the difference between radiation oncology and diagnostic radiology. Radiation oncology is not very well known (had friends in medical school who haven't even head about it until 2-3rd year, but didn't care to know since they were applying to other fields). A totally separate point.

I made the comparison to Radiology since they have a lot of open spots while PM&R doesn't. Yet, board scores average 241 while PM&R are at 220 (as you have described). The percentages should show more than enough proof to show competitiveness (showing the percentages of who matched). What you described with boards scores is selectiveness. Residents of PM&R have stated it is more about fit in the field versus scores/research. So one has to be careful about using board scores also when describing competitiveness. There could be other factors, as you have mentioned.

And you mentioned top-tier PM&R is no different than top-tier Family medicine. I disagree here. For instance, there are competitive fellowships such as pain, where going to a good PM&R and anesthesia program does matter (of course pain is dominated by anesthesia programs, but there are also some PM&R pain programs). The tiers in PM&R is still a valid point.

 

[Mad Jack]

At the end of the day, M.D. or D.O., it's a job. You are doing it so that you can make a living. Wherever you work, do your job and go home and enjoy your life and stop worrying about if your male anatomy is larger than someone else's male anatomy. If an M.D. doesn't trust you and wants to question your reads for rads, let them. It's their time they are wasting, not yours and it shows how ignorant they may be. You, as a D.O., still get paid the same and can do what you love. Why do you care what some M.D. says about you? Chances are your scores were probably higher than theirs in the first place to land that residency with the "all-mighty M.D" since your a lowly D.O. in "M.D. territory."

Because some of us want to work at the places that provide us with the best opportunities down the line, and if someone at one of these places doesn't respect your opinion in regard to your patients, it can delay treatment for your patient or make your life generally more difficult. I don't want to be a proctodermatological neurosurgen, but I do want to work in critical care, and preferably in one of the larger hospitals in my state, where I'll have a hell of a lot of consults to deal with. I'd prefer that the opinion of DO training is improved, care of better standards, so that I've got less headaches when I'm asking for **** to get done for my patients.

 

[Mad Jack]

I know the difference between radiation oncology and diagnostic radiology. Radiation oncology is not very well known (had friends in medical school who haven't even head about it until 2-3rd year, but didn't care to know since they were applying to other fields). A totally separate point.

I made the comparison to Radiology since they have a lot of open spots while PM&R doesn't. Yet, board scores average 241 while PM&R are at 220 (as you have described). The percentages should show more than enough proof to show competitiveness (showing the percentages of who matched). What you described with boards scores is selectiveness. Residents of PM&R have stated it is more about fit in the field versus scores/research. So one has to be careful about using board scores also when describing competitiveness. There could be other factors, as you have mentioned.

And you mentioned top-tier PM&R is no different than top-tier Family medicine. I disagree here. For instance, there are competitive fellowships such as pain, where going to a good PM&R and anesthesia program does matter (of course pain is dominated by anesthesia programs, but there are also some PM&R pain programs). The tiers in PM&R is still a valid point.

Yeah, you're much more likely to go Columbia PM&R>pain fellowship than to go from Backwoods McSticks Community Partners>pain fellowship.

 

[TheBoneDoctah]

Because some of us want to work at the places that provide us with the best opportunities down the line, and if someone at one of these places doesn't respect your opinion in regard to your patients, it can delay treatment for your patient or make your life generally more difficult. I don't want to be a proctodermatological neurosurgen, but I do want to work in critical care, and preferably in one of the larger hospitals in my state, where I'll have a hell of a lot of consults to deal with. I'd prefer that the opinion of DO training is improved, care of better standards, so that I've got less headaches when I'm asking for **** to get done for my patients.

Right. I agree with this is well, but I am sure this is not the case most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Mad Jack]

Right. I agree with this is well, but I am sure this is not the case most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

It should be the case none of the time. And that's why I'm positively thrilled that the ACGME is taking over accreditation of GME. It's a big step in the right direction for the recognition of the profession.

 

[Greenberg702]

Here's an example to illustrate what I'm saying....This person (a DO) posted their rank list on the Rads forum.

USMLE: 256/268
Class Rank: 1/162
Research: 5 "experiences", 3 posters, 1 abstract, 0 pubs
Clinical Grades: all Honors

Rank List:
1. CCF
2. UPMC
3. Dartmouth
4. Penn State
5. Yale
6. UF-Gainesville
7. USF
8. Beaumont
9. Nebraska
10. UF-Jacksonville

Rejections: MIR, Mayo, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, MCW, Wisconsin, Case-UH, UAB, MGH, BWH, NW, Loyola, Rush


Now, if this person was an MD, he/she would be in the running to match at any program outside the top 5 and certainly would not be rejected by all of those programs.

This issue affects lower tier MD students and not just DO students. People are way too fixated on high board scores. Nowadays, a high board score gets your foot in the door but in no way guarantees you a good match. The issue has to do with clinical training and performance on the wards relative to your classmates. That's why a 245 UCLA student with mostly Hs will always get the spot over the 260 lower tier MD with all Hs. This person has a good step I score, mediocre/poor research, and good clinical grades (which are hard to weigh and mean a lot less because of the DO factor). My friend at a top 40 MD school with a 250+, no pubs, and pretty good clinical grades (mostly Hs and HPs) got similar interview invites to your DO example. Research, AOA, and school rank matter a lot more than people let on. Differences in step I scores matter very little after 250.

 

[weasel23]

read through some of this thread but don't feel like sifting through all of it. did anyone actually answer OP's question?

also, when does this merger go into effect?

TIA

 

[Mad Jack]

read through some of this thread but don't feel like sifting through all of it. did anyone actually answer OP's question?

also, when does this merger go into effect?

TIA

All programs that intend to enter the match have to at least be pre-accredited by 2017.

There will be approximately 2,000 new spots available for US MDs. Some of these will be in competitive specialties, though not all competitive DO programs will survive the merger. Most are in the middle of ****ing nowhere or at small hospitals and in primary care, however.

 

[Psai]

.

 

[Stagg737]

It's more that md students don't know much about pmr so they don't even apply. I don't see many pmr on rank lists posted here. Many people haven't even heard of it but that's changing.

In 2014 Ortho 648 us seniors, 44 independents which includes amgs who didn't match the year before.
Ent 277/16
Integrated plastics 126/10

So ortho is about the same level as the others, not sure what you are talking about

The bolded really isn't all that different on the DO side. I didn't know what PM&R was until I got to med school and I've talked to more than a few 3rd/4th years that never heard of it or just didn't know anything about it.

Though I'd guess that's probably how DO's got their foot in the door of the field in the first place. I've talked to friends that know PMR guys that prefer hiring DO's or (or MD's with OMM experience) because of their background with MSK, and I'd guess it was that initial lack of selectiveness/competitiveness that has led to a field where the letters after the name legitimately have little meaning.

 

[ortnakas]

All programs that intend to enter the match have to at least be pre-accredited by 2017.

There will be approximately 2,000 new spots available for US MDs. Some of these will be in competitive specialties, though not all competitive DO programs will survive the merger. Most are in the middle of ****ing nowhere or at small hospitals and in primary care, however.

When they're "pre-accredited," will they be in the ACGME match or the AOA match? (Honestly just asking-- I haven't figured that out, and it'll matter for deciding which match to ultimately pick in Class of 2018).

 

[psychMDhopefully]

All programs that intend to enter the match have to at least be pre-accredited by 2017.

There will be approximately 2,000 new spots available for US MDs. Some of these will be in competitive specialties, though not all competitive DO programs will survive the merger. Most are in the middle of ****ing nowhere or at small hospitals and in primary care, however.

When they're "pre-accredited," will they be in the ACGME match or the AOA match? (Honestly just asking-- I haven't figured that out, and it'll matter for deciding which match to ultimately pick in Class of 2018).

I think the pre accredited ones will be available to both DOs and MDs. The state I'm in will gain a few primary care programs, I guess that's a plus for people who want to stay in state, we previously only had 1 IM program here now we will have 4. The ones being added are all community programs but if one wants to work in primary care and not do a fellowship seems like something positive.

 

[psychMDhopefully]

.

 

[NontradCA]

But will the MDs be able to apply to the NMM residencies?

 

[Mad Jack]

But will the MDs be able to apply to the NMM residencies?

They already could. We had a MD NMM fellow last year.

 

[NontradCA]

They already could. We had a MD NMM fellow last year.

Now my prospective degree has become useless.

 

[IslandStyle808]

Now my prospective degree has become useless.

You can't say DO = MD + OMM any more LOL. Well technically.

 

[Jinxapotato]

The amount of ignorance on DO

LOL, gave me a good laugh. Nobody is forcing DO to take 2 exams (until this merger) and the COMLEX is a joke compared to the USMLE. Ask any DO student who took both exams and they'll say that if you prepare well for the USMLE, it will also prepare you more than enough for COMLEX. And for every DO who score in the 250 there is another MD student who score just as much or higher who receives good clinical training, has good research, connections, LOR from well known physicians, etc. Your post is misguided at best. To say that DO who scores high should be respected more is ridiculous...

Now, I am sure that there are brilliant MD students out there that scores high. The problem is NOT that DO students loose spots when competing to those students. The problem is that DO students with 250 loosing to some random MD with 220. In fact, that old-white-dude-PD is a living proof of such bias. And please, keep your premed ignorance to yourself...Most if not all the medical student/resident/or PD I talked to, both in Canada or US, told me they couldn't care less if you are MD/DO, as long as you got the skill and score, you're in.

 

[Dr. Death]

Agree. Now is there any way we could persuade them to overthrow COCA, standardize DO clinical curriculum and stop the reckless proliferation of DO schools? If so we'd really be in business.

It should be the case none of the time. And that's why I'm positively thrilled that the ACGME is taking over accreditation of GME. It's a big step in the right direction for the recognition of the profession.

 

[37Base]

The amount of ignorance on DO

Now, I am sure that there are brilliant MD students out there that scores high. The problem is NOT that DO students loose spots when competing to those students. The problem is that DO students with 250 loosing to some random MD with 220. In fact, that old-white-dude-PD is a living proof of such bias. And please, keep your premed ignorance to yourself...Most if not all the medical student/resident/or PD I talked to, both in Canada or US, told me they couldn't care less if you are MD/DO, as long as you got the skill and score, you're in.

Lose and losing only have 1 'o' otherwise I agree 109%. I've talked to numerous MDs about DO before deciding, many of them older white guys, and they all said the stigma is dying. /endthread


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[NontradCA]

The stigma will stay there for a while. So long as there's no evidence behind OMM (don't care what the JAOA says with its Mad Magazine impact factor). As it stands there's literally no reason for a two system education system other than money grabbing from COCA and AOA powers. The funny thing is that the ACGME and LCME side of things pretty much subsidize the AOA by providing education to DO students.

There's a reason for the bias outside of clinical education. 90% of DOs not doing OMM says a lot. It means you bought into a system while not believing in one of its core values. Honestly, our MD counterparts have worked harder in undergrad and premed prep to get where they are, so there's no reason to complain about less study time and them getting preference for degree letters.

If you want to be respected at elite institutions, start from within the DO profession to change their mentality. Your DO school does not give a **** about how high your board score is. Why should an ACGME program director? DOs have been decidedly different. Well, what can they bring to the table to benefit residencies? It's certainly not OMM.

 

[justreachforthesky]

This is because the clinical education is inconsistent, not because they want to give boosts to people who come and schmooz them.

Could you clarify this? I'm still in limbo about applying to medical school in the first place, but I was under the impression that the clinical education is the same, and the USMLE, LORs that indicate competence + likeableness and how you conduct yourself in your interviews as being equalizers. I can imagine it is a factor to a director but is it THAT much of a deal breaker?

 

[NontradCA]

Could you clarify this? I'm still in limbo about applying to medical school in the first place, but I was under the impression that the clinical education is the same, and the USMLE, LORs that indicate competence + likeableness and how you conduct yourself in your interviews as being equalizers. I can imagine it is a factor to a director but is it THAT much of a deal breaker?

Rotations in DO schools are widely variable based on things like luck and individual preceptor due to the fact that there are no dedicated teaching hospitals, or established hospital clerkships with educational emphasis. For instance, one might have more or less a shadowing experience. There's a school that would have students assigned a nurse preceptor for their surgical rotations.

If a DO application is not screened out and looked at, this can create a problem for program directors. Some programs, specialties, etc put emphasis on clinical grades and since the difference between DO and MD candidates vary during this time, it makes it difficult to compare the two groups. It's all going to depend on which they value most. On the DO side, one way in which this variability is mitigated is to have something called "audition" rotations where the student does rotations at programs they are hoping to match. This gives the faculty and residents an idea of the students competence, as well as their work dedication and personality.

I personally don't think it is something to lose sleep over, as most places will have DOs who have worked hard and proved to be valuable assets to hospitals, making it easier for newcomers. You also can't blame people for biases. When it all comes down to it, it's their reputation and career that's on the line when they take a resident in. So it's definitely something to think about if you're going to be applying to both MD and DO schools. But I wouldn't let it stop you from applying altogether. You'll be a physician either way, and the vast majority of patients don't care, and that's who matters. That's $.

 

[Psai]

The amount of ignorance on DO

Now, I am sure that there are brilliant MD students out there that scores high. The problem is NOT that DO students loose spots when competing to those students. The problem is that DO students with 250 loosing to some random MD with 220. In fact, that old-white-dude-PD is a living proof of such bias. And please, keep your premed ignorance to yourself...Most if not all the medical student/resident/or PD I talked to, both in Canada or US, told me they couldn't care less if you are MD/DO, as long as you got the skill and score, you're in.

Proof?

None of this ego assuaging has even the slightest bit to do with the topic

 

[MrChance2]

There's a school that would have students assigned a nurse preceptor for their surgical rotations.

.

I've never had to spend more than 5% of a rotation shadowing an NP and it's generally if the doc is just busy charting or something. Do schools actually have medical students shadow nurses as rotations? I'd be pretty surprised if that's true.

 

[ortnakas]

I've never had to spend more than 5% of a rotation shadowing an NP and it's generally if the doc is just busy charting or something. Do schools actually have medical students shadow nurses as rotations? I'd be pretty surprised if that's true.

It's not at all common. As far as I know, it's only happened to one person over in the Osteo forums and it's since become SDN lore. Not that it didn't suck for that individual, and not to say it's okay that it happened, but it often gets thrown around as an example of how our clinical education must be terrible, and I really don't think it's representative of most students' experiences.

 

[Dave89]

That's really not fair. I hate how a single person ( the PD) has the finally say with the rank list. PDs aren't a young diverse group ( they should be or at least reflect the medical workforce), instead 95% old prejudice white dudes control the gateway to American medicine. If we have a residency merger now, DO or MD shouldn't matter if scores are equal.

Throwing aside the professional victim persona you project, you have no idea what you're talking about. Many, many PDs are not White.

 

[Mad Jack]

Throwing aside the professional victim persona you project, you have no idea what you're talking about. Many, many PDs are not White.

Dave stops in to say ONE thing lol...

 

[Dave89]

I suppose you guys are not medical students. If you were, you would know that an MD candidate is someone IN MD SCHOOL.

Just so you know, "MD candidate" is a particularly pretentious term - in fact, it's essentially a misnomer. As an MD student, you're not being "considered" for an MD; you're going to get the degree unless you happen to fail out (a very rare occurrence). PhD students are more aptly called "candidates."

 

[justreachforthesky]

Rotations in DO schools are widely variable based on things like luck and individual preceptor due to the fact that there are no dedicated teaching hospitals, or established hospital clerkships with educational emphasis. For instance, one might have more or less a shadowing experience. There's a school that would have students assigned a nurse preceptor for their surgical rotations.

If a DO application is not screened out and looked at, this can create a problem for program directors. Some programs, specialties, etc put emphasis on clinical grades and since the difference between DO and MD candidates vary during this time, it makes it difficult to compare the two groups. It's all going to depend on which they value most. On the DO side, one way in which this variability is mitigated is to have something called "audition" rotations where the student does rotations at programs they are hoping to match. This gives the faculty and residents an idea of the students competence, as well as their work dedication and personality.

I personally don't think it is something to lose sleep over, as most places will have DOs who have worked hard and proved to be valuable assets to hospitals, making it easier for newcomers. You also can't blame people for biases. When it all comes down to it, it's their reputation and career that's on the line when they take a resident in. So it's definitely something to think about if you're going to be applying to both MD and DO schools. But I wouldn't let it stop you from applying altogether. You'll be a physician either way, and the vast majority of patients don't care, and that's who matters. That's $.

That was helpful, thank you!