Medscape physician compensation 2017 is out....

[gbwillner]

More fuel to the pathology career discussion....

The new 2017 report is out (4/28) and gave a nice perspective to compare to the $$ numbers thrown around a few weeks ago re:average reimbursement from other sites.

The mean salary for pathologists who answered the survey was $293K. This was about average for the physician specialties, but definitely not among all physicians, since there is not an even distribution of physicians across specialties. Although not broken down this way, I would interpret this as we do better than most docs out there. For example, the most common specialties- Peds, FP, and IM, are all at the bottom of this list and make substantially less ($202, $209, and $225K, respectively).

Also resonating with past discussions is breaking down the earnings by employee-vs-self employed status. Self-employed pathologists earn ~50% more ($384K vs $259K). So for the poster last week saying they were earning low to mid $200's as an employee- you can see you are about average (this does not break down academia vs. PP).

Also interesting: of pathologists surveyed, if given the choice to do it all over again, 76% would do medicine, and 85% would pick pathology again. (this is about in the middle of the pack).

About the study: >19K participants, 3% were pathologists (~580 total surveyed). This is a much bigger sample than some of the other studies out there. Age was fairly widely represented, with a little skew to older/more established pathologists (only 25% were under age 40). It would have been interesting to track salaries vs. age.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[pathslides]

More fuel to the pathology career discussion....

The new 2017 report is out (4/28) and gave a nice perspective to compare to the $$ numbers thrown around a few weeks ago re:average reimbursement from other sites.

The mean salary for pathologists who answered the survey was $293K. This was about average for the physician specialties, but definitely not among all physicians, since there is not an even distribution of physicians across specialties. Although not broken down this way, I would interpret this as we do better than most docs out there. For example, the most common specialties- Peds, FP, and IM, are all at the bottom of this list and make substantially less ($202, $209, and $225K, respectively).

Also resonating with past discussions is breaking down the earnings by employee-vs-self employed status. Self-employed pathologists earn ~50% more ($384K vs $259K). So for the poster last week saying they were earning low to mid $200's as an employee- you can see you are about average (this does not break down academia vs. PP).

Also interesting: of pathologists surveyed, if given the choice to do it all over again, 76% would do medicine, and 85% would pick pathology again. (this is about in the middle of the pack).

About the study: >19K participants, 3% were pathologists (~580 total surveyed). This is a much bigger sample than some of the other studies out there. Age was fairly widely represented, with a little skew to older/more established pathologists (only 25% were under age 40). It would have been interesting to track salaries vs. age.

Thanks for the data. I agree. I would choose pathology again as well and I do feel we get compensated better than other docs. There will always be peeps who are being taken advantage of by big academia/large labs and will always be bitter. But overall, pathology is a great field with wonderful work life balance and overall great pay.

 

[deleted314957]

Perhaps I am just a cynic but in my experience (which ended 3.5 years ago) with many pathologists in many different type of employment situations over many years, these surveys are nonsense or, at best, inaccurate generalities.

 

[LADoc00]

These studies are always useless IMO. All privately owned medical corporations would never willing divulge their income to anyone aside from required IRS returns.

Of course there are pathologists who make 200-300K in salary, they are probably the bulk of the workforce but there are many of us in a whole different world in terms of compensation. I just had a fellow pathologist go to jail for hiding some 10+ million from the IRS over just 5-6 years. Those numbers are literally in the professional athlete range.

 

[AZpath]

Much worse is the 2017 young physician survey. Medscape: Medscape Access

Check out pages 13, 24, 25. Young pathologists are the most dissatisfied of any specialty.

There is big difference in response between young and old paths.
Young pathologist are least likely to say " I would choose medicine again or choose pathology again"

Is the master slave paradigm is getting worse ?

 

[AZpath]

Note 25% of respondents were under 40. Of course we don't know the % of pathologist under 40 that actually responded.

It is possible it only represents 130- 160 pathologists in this age range. Certainly not a big sample.

 

[AZpath]

These studies are always useless IMO. All privately owned medical corporations would never willing divulge their income to anyone aside from required IRS returns.

Of course there are pathologists who make 200-300K in salary, they are probably the bulk of the workforce but there are many of us in a whole different world in terms of compensation. I just had a fellow pathologist go to jail for hiding some 10+ million from the IRS over just 5-6 years. Those numbers are literally in the professional athlete range.

You La guys have all the fun.

 

[LADoc00]

Much worse is the 2017 young physician survey. Medscape: Medscape Access

Check out pages 13, 24, 25. Young pathologists are the most dissatisfied of any specialty.

There is big difference in response between young and old paths.
Young pathologist are least likely to say " I would choose medicine again or choose pathology again"

Is the master slave paradigm is getting worse ?

The Pathology Minion paradigm has always been a thing since the late 70s. I dont think its is worse or better now. Either you are a minion or you are Felonius Gru. You dont need someone to tell you what you are, you know it. And of course the lil yellow minions will be the prime group filling out such surveys, hence the response.

 

[unknown1254]

For those in academics or any recent fellowship graduates, what would you say is the average salary for a new assistant professor? Still around $200k? I know this data is available from other sources, but you have to pay a fee.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Sulfinator]

I would say $160k - $200k.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[pathslides]

I agree. Prob 150-200k depending on region. Academics suck, you will be underpaid and have to waste your time doing worthless "research" to move up the ladder to reach points where you will still be underpaid.

 

[LADoc00]

200K is actually below the range many N.P.'s are making (I just had our CNO walk me through how they are making 160,000 base+50-60 in OT/incentive pay) so if academics is paying that, then academic medicine in general is more useless as a career than I ever imagined.

There has to be alot of step ups from that 200. Alot.

 

[octopusprime]

200K is actually below the range many N.P.'s are making (I just had our CNO walk me through how they are making 160,000 base+50-60 in OT/incentive pay) so if academics is paying that, then academic medicine in general is more useless as a career than I ever imagined.

There has to be alot of step ups from that 200. Alot.

a la 'The emperor's new clothes.'

 

[unknown1254]

Well that is depressing. I would have thought that range a few years ago. In my area folks got around 200k two years ago, must be in a great location.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[jupiterianvibe]

Academics appears to be for people who like being robbed.

 

[pathslides]

The biggest scam is the whole "junior associate" position academics offer. What a worthless waste of time and income potential. Anyone who takes these types of positions are knowingly being robbed. Their disguise of "learning to sign out with confidence on your own" is complete bs. After training for five years you don't need a training wheels year. Don't be a fool and take a position like this. You will be taken advantage of. Just another way academics likes to rob people.

 

[bronx43]

200K is actually below the range many N.P.'s are making (I just had our CNO walk me through how they are making 160,000 base+50-60 in OT/incentive pay) so if academics is paying that, then academic medicine in general is more useless as a career than I ever imagined.

There has to be alot of step ups from that 200. Alot.

Lol, yes. Academia is the biggest scam in all of medicine. It just feeds off the unaware chumps that come out of residency/fellow. They're brainwashed after a decade in a system where it tells them that academia is the epitome of professional and human existence. So they think, "yeah, let's definitely sign up to make less than an NP, and be a b**** to the higher ups in the department. Oh, and we also have to use our time off to work on BS research that have negative to zero impact on medicine." I'm in an outpatient IM subspecialty and our attendings are started off at $170k. F***ing laughable.

 

[pathslides]

Academics is for chumps, they take advantage of new graduates/first time hires. Also what sucks about Academics is you can't usually send cases out. Nice part of community practice is if you get a crazy complex case or very hard case you can just send it out and not worry about the headache or implications of being wrong. Not so in most academic centers.

 

[tensoranalysis]

in theory, you should be trading compensation for flexibility and time to work on a research project. Ideally, the academic setting would also enable you to work collaboratively with others. If this is not something you value, then you are probably not going to feel like you are getting a good deal in an academic setting.
Most people on this forum are concerned with maximizing $$ so I can see why there is so much disdain for academic positions.

 

[jupiterianvibe]

in theory, you should be trading compensation for flexibility and time to work on a research project. Ideally, the academic setting would also enable you to work collaboratively with others. If this is not something you value, then you are probably not going to feel like you are getting a good deal in an academic setting.
Most people on this forum are concerned with maximizing $$ so I can see why there is so much disdain for academic positions.

in an ideal world yes but the reality is that academics does not provide pathologists with that flexibility and time. instead you will get a full case load and be expected to publish mostly low impact studies because anything of true scientific value would take too much time and effort that you cant spend since youre doing so many cases. for all your efforts you will be paid less than a nurse practitioner.

 

[tiredguy]

in an ideal world yes but the reality is that academics does not provide pathologists with that flexibility and time. instead you will get a full case load and be expected to publish mostly low impact studies because anything of true scientific value would take too much time and effort that you cant spend since youre doing so many cases. for all your efforts you will be paid less than a nurse practitioner.

and your pets will all develop cavities and your house will be struck by meteorites and your rich NP colleagues will laugh at you in the hallways

 

[AZpath]

"your rich NP colleagues will laugh at you in the hallways"

Ha ha, they are ready do.