Rad onc rankings

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Gotta disagree with the below. Resident here finishing up. Job searching,etc

1) Downplaying location is absurd to me. In RadOnc, regardless of program, you will have a decent amount of free time to explore your environs. Living in a desirable city (read...not Houston) is a huge bonus. Tolerable weather, interesting folks outside medicine, great restaurants, walkable neighborhoods, progressive atmosphere. Those who poo-poo city quality as a determinant clearly haven't lived in SF, NYC, Seattle, Boston,etc. Also, if you're married or engaged or whatever, are you really going to drag your significant other to freaking Rochester or St Louis?!?! Where are they going to work? Chick Filet?

2) With regards to UCSF specifically. This kind of financial misinformation is spread by individuals who have spent no significant time here and simply don't understand hospital financing. UCSF receives only 5% of its operating budget from the state of California. The remainder, like every single academic hospital in this country, comes from grant monies and clinical services provided. If medicare/medicaid reimbursement tanks, all of us will be screwed. Not just UCSF.

3) Protons. Again, you have to ask yourself, in part, what makes you marketable as an job applicant. Sure, not every major program in the country is going to adopt protons in the next decade, but a helluva lot of them are paying lip service to doing it. If you have proton treatment training on your CV, you're going to be a more versatile applicant. Chairs will be able to envision you helping to start up a program/add to a currently existing program. Bottom line.

4) You will learn radbio and radphysics. Passing these exams, if you put in a bit of elbow grease in the end, will be easy. Are they fascinating? Well, if you consider pre-1970s studies on cell killing interesting, yeah. Going to a program where they give you good instruction in either of these is helpful, but should it be included in your rank list? Hell no.

5) Your co-residents are critical. Look at the current crop of residents. Bigger is better, here. And, believe me, I wish I went to a larger program. This goes unmentioned by the poster below.

6) The low hanging fruit has NOT been picked. There are whole areas of in radiation oncology that lack even decently run Phase II trials.

7) Social mission: This is something that we rarely, if ever, talk about in this field. I firmly believe that seeing a broad swath of patients, of various socio-economic statuses, is a critical component of training and crucial to who you become as a physician. Realizing that not all of the people you treat will be third-tier Saudi princes or T1N3 HPV+ tonsils with jobs in finance is a revelation for some after residency (looking at you MDACC and MSKCC). Seeing women with advanced cervical cancer because they've ignored vaginal bleeding for a year, or men with extensive supraglottic tumors because, yeah, they've had a bit of trouble swallowing for the past 2 years, but just figured it'd go away, is something that will shape your practice, strengthen your skills, and give you a keen understanding of the types of obstacles we face in improving cancer care. For the medsoncs, who do their IM residency in locations where they will be exposed to this regardless (because they work the VA, because of their hospitals catchment area, etc) doing fellowship at MSK or MDACC is less constraining. But for the radiation oncologists, for whom residency is the sole exposure to a lot of these types of patients, cloistering yourself at centers where the social mission is lacking is a tremendous problem.

My multiple cents...





penumbra2007 said:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Glad to see these lists are becoming more accurate. Finishing up at a top tier radonc program and spent a good amount of time on the interview trail a few years back visiting most of the big programs. Been through a lot of match cycles with med students coming through our place, and spent a decent amount of time in the lab attempting to understand why photons kill tumors.

What have I learned about how to rate a radonc residency program? It comes down to only a few criteria:

1. Program director(s) and Chairs who are committed to their residents' training.
2. Reasonable level of patient volume for exposure to cases.
3. Protection of time to read and learn radonc/physics/radbio (each one of these subjects is complicated but fascinating, and requires a substantial amount of effort to comprehend).
4. Strong research opportunities (basic or clinical research: make no mistake, the low hanging fruit in radonc research has been picked. It is now time to delve deeper, and thus solid research training is needed to survive in this field now; much like the medoncs do now).

Things that should be de-emphasized, and seem to have confused previous list posters (in my opinion):

1. Location (apart from family reasons, the top priority is getting good training, and you can make the best of most places in the US, with a few exceptions)
2. Historical relevance (this is great for the attendings/dinosaurs at these places, but it does little to help a resident learn and launch their career)
3. "Brand name" (while there often is a correlation between brand name and radonc program quality, it is not always true)
4. Technology (as long as a program treats with the standard of care, which nowadays includes IMRT for many sites; it really does not matter whether they also have protons, carbon or argon ions; you just need to really understand photons and electrons, and you can learn about charged particles later).

With that in mind, my top 10 programs are listed below using these criteria (with a few clarifications).

1. MDACC: Residents get ample time to study and learn, volume is sufficient, "making cancer history", not much more needs to be said; this place is hands down the best in my opinion.
2. MSKCC: Very large patient volume, resident runs most services (which is a good and bad thing from what I hear), Chair is really trying to develop a sorely needed research component to the program.
3. Harvard: Large program, great attendings, good volume (not much more needs to be said, it is a solid place). The undergrad is #1 in the country, but the brand name does not always apply to the whole campus as described earlier (nor does historical significance), thus it does not surpass #1 and #2.
4. Yale: Phenomenally committed and truly academic program director, along with a Chair who cares about the residents and prioritizes research. Yale basic science research is top notch (cancer research will grow with the new cancer center). Also, there are a number of recently recruited young attendings with academic momentum worth latching onto. It confuses me when people leave this out of the top 5.
5. Penn: Program director is awesome, and as with #4 they have recruited great young talent. Protons are good, but should not be in the match equation.
6. Michigan: There are basically a core group of hardcore researchers (clinical>basic) which make this place great for those interested in an academic career.
7)Wisconsin.
8)Wash U.
9)UCSF: Will California stay afloat financially, and thus can it continue to fund its public university system?
10) Stanford:Stanford did great things in the 20th century in terms of radiation, and thus should always be in the top ten.
Click to expand...
Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
*Location is obviously an important factor but it seems that there are certainly more attractive locations than Houston, but MDACC is at or very near top on everybody's list. It simply comes down to an individual choice. It matters more for some than others.

*Protons-great if you have some experience, but I would never consider that as a factor in a hiring decision. The great majority of academic places will never have them and private practices will have far less centers. What is of greatest importance is how well is somebody trained all around. I think the perceived value of "training in protons" is over emphasized.

*Bigger always better? Then we should just rank programs based on their size and call it a day. Granted, the larger programs are obviously high quality, but it does not mean a small one is bad or not as good. Each person should judge each program they visit with an open mind.

*To suggest that the quality of teaching of radbio and physics should not really be a factor does not make sense to me. If they are poorly taught, then that would strongly suggest a lack of oversight or concern for the quality of a training program by the leadership. Maybe every trainee can just study and figure it all out on their own, but if that is the case, they are wasting a lot of time in class. If I have to be in classes, I would prefer that they be higher quality. If the program does not have reasonably good quality radbio/physics, they probably don't care too much about the didactic teaching, clinical teaching quality, etc. etc. I don't think that it should be what makes somebody pick one program over another, but I think the attention to fundamental didactic course quality does say something about the philosophy behind a training program.

As for ranking, I don't have anything much to add....
 
This is a fantastic discussion and I'm glad we are having it as it gives applicants/residents many relevant points to mull over. I thought I would throw my personal experience into the mix for consideration:

1. Location - this has always been a touchy and controversial topic. I live in the San Francisco Bay area now, but never did prior to residency. Despite *always* poo-pooing the Bay Area growing up ("it's too expensive," "I prefer living in a place with seasons," "too liberal for me," etc.) after living here for > 4 years I LOVE it and could not imagine living elsewhere. In retrospect, I feel that even my consideration to move back to the East Coast for a job was crazy. I think the old adage of, "once you move to California, you never leave," is very true. Also, I would point out that I have next to no relatives in the Bay Area so that was not a complicating factor for me. Finally, as Dwight7298 pointed out above, I have a spouse with a high tech job and she could not have easily found a position elsewhere (and certainly not with the pay and hours she has now).

With that said, anx also has a good point in that location is in the eye of the beholder. A lot of folks I know are Midwesterns or Southerners born and raised and wouldn't trade their quality of living for anything and I respect that.

2. With regard to state funding at UCSF I fully concur with what Dwight7298 posted and also wanted to add that during the last state budget crisis UCSF residents actually got their scheduled 2-3% cost of living INCREASE without incident.

3. Protons: all things being equal (and they rarely are) I think it is to your advantage to go to a place with protons. I had one job which I was highly interested in but the deal breaker was they wanted someone with extensive proton experience during residency. Long-term, it is not clear to me what the future for protons will be. If CMS makes cuts to Rad Onc it is conceivable that protons will be the first gravy train that will be derailed. But overall I think protons will be a nice complement to your photon-based Rad Onc training.

4. Bigger programs: like protons, all things being equal, if a program has three or more residents that is a plus. Not only do you help each other learn and provide mutual support but larger programs also tend to have a large alumni network which can be crucial to your job search. This was very true for me.

5. Radbio/Physics teaching: I think penumbra, anx, and Dwight all make germane points here. To a certain extent didactics are important because they make learning a lot easier. Given how competitive Rad Onc applicants have become, I'm sure anyone can pass Radbio/Physics boards even with weak didactics but why make your life harder than it needs to be? However, I do agree that a lot of radbio that is taught is largely irrelevant to the practicing Radiation Oncologist.

6. Research: I've become quite cynical in this regard. My background is I have a PhD, have done basic/translational cancer research and completed the Holman Pathway so I'm no stranger to lab work. However, I feel that very few people in Rad Onc are really advancing the field in significant ways and/or are doing breakthrough basic science. Most of the time they are just "re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." When I was an applicant and a junior resident, the oft repeated saying was, "Physics has made a lot of advances in Rad Onc over the last decade or so and now with all the MD-PhDs coming into the field we should see the rise of Radiobiology." However, in my view, this has not yet been true overall. What does this mean to the applicant or current Rad Onc resident? I have no idea. However, I do know that research is still a prized asset and should not be ignored. Ultimately, you should find an area of great personal interest to you as it will make your research more pleasant and productive.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
A few thoughts from someone who just went through the match this year. I interviewed/rotated at/otherwise had contact with the programs I listed.

These are of course totally subjective impressions and should be taken with multiple grains of salt. By means of background, I'm an MD/PhD grad interested in Holman, but wanting to overall keep my options as open as possible for jobs down the line including setting (leaning academic basic > academic clinical but not r/o private practice) and geography (interested in competitive coastal areas). These rankings reflect the above as I understood it from the grapevine of those ahead of us, as well as perceived/reported resident happiness, and research opportunities. They did not necessarily correspond to my final rank list that also took into account my own "fit" with programs, family geography, etc..

So here goes:

1) Harvard - many positive things have been said about this program, but I will reinforce the amazing research opportunities both in the Harvard system and at MIT, multiple intense but friendly and welcoming attendings who are leaders in the field, the large size of the program, and effect of pedigree when it comes to job search. Many residents stay on as instructors/junior faculty in a semi-mentored setting to help get their academic careers going; the program leadership seemed very committed to this end. The didactic session I saw was well populated by attendings and was run in the presentation/socratic style with free-flowing discussion among the participants. The residents were driven internally and seemed very happy with their training; I got the sense of a strong camaraderie in this large group. One clearly cannot go wrong by matching and training here. Boston, while expensive and prone to blizzards, is clearly a desirable place to live for many on the trail.

The downsides were few - including shifting locations (i.e. hospitals) q6 months and not rotating with every leader of the field attending, each of whom seems to have a slightly different way of doing things. While alumni of this program populate many important academic and PP positions east of the Mississippi river, I only noticed one graduate from the past five years on the West Coast (Berkeley CA private practice). Lastly, I was told by multiple individuals in the know, without asking, that to stand a chance at matching here, an unequivocal communication of "I will rank you #1" was required. While we all do this anyway for our #1 choices, an unstated requirement for this bothered me on some level as not fully in the spirit of the match.

2) UCSF - I know this program has generated some controversy in this thread, but here are my two cents.

The location is awesome (but, yes, expensive). The job placement (PP and academic) on the West Coast mirrors that of Harvard on the East Coast. It really seems that to get a good shot at the West Coast jobs, this is the #1 place to be. The program director is by far the best that I have met on the trail in terms of personality, humanism, and commitment to student/resident mentorship (this was echoed by many of her colleagues/former mentees all over the country). There are plenty of research opportunities both within the department and in strong labs elsewhere within the university, and the Holman pathway is supported. The residents are welcoming and impressive in their accomplishments.

The downsides include a requirement for self-motivation for e.g. getting started on research projects, didactics that are steadily improving but are not on the level of other programs in this group, and less of a track record for post-graduation mentorship of basic science oriented alumni compared to say Harvard or UMich.

3) MSKCC - Top-notch clinical training given the very high volume you will see, including some very rare cases hard to come by elsewhere. There is a mentality of curative intent even in very dire cases, and readiness to use methods not adopted elsewhere in these settings, which would broaden your training. Top notch clinical research setting. The new chairman is placing a strong emphasis on basic science research, where this program has lacked in the past, and a lab/other research year has been incorporated into the curriculum. The program director is very personable and seems to be a strong resident advocate. Amazing job placement especially in urban East Coast settings. New York City for better or for worse, with subsidized housing in the swanky Upper East Side.

The potential downsides are also well known here, #1 being the clinical volume which is probably two standard deviations above the mean of other programs. I think most of us applying to programs of this caliber have no fear of hard work, but I wonder if the educational, vs. the getting work done purpose of routine 7am-9pm days described by the amazingly talented, cohesive but clearly tired residents, can be accomplished in a shorter time period. This "victory by sheer volume" approach seems to be an institutional mentality, and for some may be a huge plus, or a significant downside for others depending on one's family setting and personality type.

4) MDACC - What an amazing place to be a resident. Huge patient volume including very rare cancers that you will likely not see elsewhere, place runs like butter, residents actively protected from scut while being involved in patient care with reasonable work hours, and increasing emphasis on lab research options. Strong program and department leadership that welcomes trainees, although there is some flux at present time. Very happy and very well trained residents, but to echo Gfunk's previous post, job placements seem to parallel program geography and be more non-coastal for whatever reason.

Downsides? The lab environment is there at present, but is still in the up-and-coming stages of its evolution, and Houston may not be everyone's cup of tea, although cost of living for family (and other) types is excellent, and the January weather was unbeatable. Would be less excited about late July, though.

5) Yale - Some of the happiest residents I met on the trail in a program that is research paradise especially in terms of basic science. Program director gets my #2 vote for best resident advocate and all-around mentor. Curriculum features at least one dedicated academic day per week, work hours are light, and some residents have a staggering # of publications as a result. Brand new cancer center is a pleasant place to work, and the research powerhouse of Yale is around the corner/a few blocks away.

Downsides? Clinical volume is on the other end of the spectrum from MSKCC among top-10 programs, and as a result not everyone has been passing boards on the 1st try upon graduation. This was honestly discussed by the PD and I have no doubt that it will be quickly resolved in the future. New Haven has its rough edges and is no NYC/Boston/SF, but the residents are positive about the good cost of living, as well as access to both urban-type and family-friendly amenities.

6) UWisconsin - Again, high on my list because of stand-out resident happiness and excellent department/program leadership in Dr. Harari. The basic research opportunities and emphasis here, while clearly excellent, are seemingly not as strong as those at WashU, Stanford, Penn, and UMich, which round out my top 10. There have been recent well-known changes at the top as well for better or for worse. But this department really seems like a hidden gem for a happy four years and an excellent, supportive training environment during residency.

Some may consider Madison a downside, but I fell in love with it even in mid-winter. Fun college(?ex-government) town, with a progressive/artsy edge, festivals, college sports, lakes for sailing in the summer, etc. Somewhat unexpectedly expensive for a midwestern small city, though.

7) UMich - Academic powerhouse with very personable and supportive leaders in Drs. Lawrence and Ben-Josef. Very strong track record for training rad onc researchers, especially on the lab side of things. High patient volume in an excellent tertiary referral center. Excellent academic job placements, but with a few exceptions more limited wrt competitive locations.

Ann Arbor is a downside for many single folk, though, like Madison, is an excellent (if somewhat relatively overpriced) setting for a young family. I didn't get a strong vibe of happiness from the current pack of otherwise talented and very impressive residents. Hints of overwork/high scut? Also, there is a strong expectation of an academic career from the program leadership, which may be a suboptimal fit for those who know they want to do PP in the end.

8) Stanford - Another academic powerhouse in an amazing location. Several big names in the field, though the current chair is in the process of stepping down (but not leaving the department). I was very impressed with the former PD, Dr. Donaldson. There is an unparalleled spirit of innovation here, and of active meshing of radonc with new developments in imaging technology/engineering, clearly from the department's early days. All in all superb research opportunities. Residents were cohesive and welcoming but did not seem to mesh as well with the current leadership, and gave off a hint of unhappiness - precise reasons unclear to me. Strong placement for West Coast jobs, but #2 to UCSF in this regard.

Palo Alto, while gorgeous, is suburban and appears to be more expensive than San Francisco, although current residents appear to do ok with housing in nearby suburbs with reasonably short (<20-30 min) bike/car commutes.

9) Penn - Rapidly growing department with an exemplary, humanistic and devoted chairman. High patient volume, plenty of research opportunities both clinical and basic science in a well established department, and a cohesive, fun group of residents. While Philly gets a bad rep in some circles, the downtown core and areas around Penn are walkable and fairly safe, there are plenty of excellent cultural/food options, and housing is way more affordable than in nearby east coast cities.

Downsides - rapid recent growth of department while recruitment of faculty is still catching up, leaving the residents overworked - though this is apparently getting better in recent years. The required prelim med year is a bear and costs the program otherwise highly qualified and/or PGY-1 geographically restricted applicants. I wish it were at least somewhat tailored for rad onc with more relevant rotations (some choice of heme-onc, surg-onc, ent, path, rads, etc.) like many other programs have done (e.g. UWisc and MDA, though in both cases the included prelim year is optional).

10) WashU - With the recent arrival of Dr. Hallahan from Vanderbilt, this is turning into another research powerhouse for the basic science types, although this change in scope has apparently caused some friction within the department (though this has not affected resident training in a big way). High clinical volume, continued strength in brachytherapy especially GYN, mini-proton generator coming on line, and friendly + fun bunch of residents, almost all of whom hail from the surrounding states.

St. Louis is a downside for many although parts of the city are quite happening and fun, and the surrounding countryside has surprisingly plentiful outdoorsy&viticultural options save those involving mountains, snow, and ocean water. A recent alum has joined the faculty at Stanford as a GYN specialist; otherwise I'm a bit fuzzy on graduate job locations.

This concludes my list. Let the flamethrowing begin, and good luck to this year's applicants!
 
I am a Yale resident and feel the need to clarify a few things posted below. First off, I appreciate that many of the great things about our program are being recognized in these posts - it's a great place to train and I'm definitely happy to be a resident here. Regarding the post below, I want to address the issues of clinical volume and boards.

While we do have a reputation for a lighter workload, that is due to decreased scut, not decreased clinical volume. Our residents log at least 600 cases, with many logging over 800. Given that we have a full year of elective time (with many residents doing decidated lab work), that the max number of cases you are allowed by ACGME to see per year is 250, and that the ACGME requirement is only 450 cases, it's just not accurate to say our caseload is light.

As for boards, we haven't had anyone not pass their boards on the first try in over a decade. So I don't know what the original post is referring to.

Finally, for those of you third and fourth years planning to apply into this awesome field, please understand that these rankings are all nonsense (and this coming from someone in a typically highly ranked program). There are only two things that I think matter in terms of ranking programs: whether you'll like your time in residency (quality of life, quality of training) and whether or not you'll get the job that you want when you graduate. Because both of these things are highly individual (especially the job thing; type of job, location, etc.), making a generic rank list that applies to all is just not possible. So while these these lists are are fun to read, please don't make any life-changing decisions based on them.


nothingman said:
A few thoughts from someone who just went through the match this year. I interviewed/rotated at/otherwise had contact with the programs I listed.

5) Yale - Some of the happiest residents I met on the trail in a program that is research paradise especially in terms of basic science. Program director gets my #2 vote for best resident advocate and all-around mentor. Curriculum features at least one dedicated academic day per week, work hours are light, and some residents have a staggering # of publications as a result. Brand new cancer center is a pleasant place to work, and the research powerhouse of Yale is around the corner/a few blocks away.

Downsides? Clinical volume is on the other end of the spectrum from MSKCC among top-10 programs, and as a result not everyone has been passing boards on the 1st try upon graduation. This was honestly discussed by the PD and I have no doubt that it will be quickly resolved in the future. New Haven has its rough edges and is no NYC/Boston/SF, but the residents are positive about the good cost of living, as well as access to both urban-type and family-friendly amenities.
Click to expand...
 
I apologize if what I wrote re: Yale boards was not accurate. I distinctly remember the PD having a discussion with our interview group wrt something along those lines, but I must not have correctly remembered the content.
 
I can't pinpoint the reason why, but it seems like Johns Hopkins always gets the shaft on these rankings threads. I interviewed there last year and, if you're going to rank a program based on academic strength and whatever that entails (program support and enthusiasm [different things], research opportunities, academic job hunting), I can't think of many places better to train. It seemed like the Hopkins program bent over backwards willing to support any degree of clinical or basic science training: projects are literally handed out left and right and the basic science opportunities were in a league of their own, probably on par with Harvard's and Stanford's. I just can't see how the people who interviewed there (and interested in academia, of course) would overlook this fact come ranking time...And also overlook the fact that its Hopkins (I'm guessing tumor boards at Hopkins > tumor boards at most places in the country?). Does anyone who actually interviewed there this year disagree with that assessment? Do the like 6 people who ACTUALLY do the holman pathway (and not just talk about it like its the be-all end-all of residency programs) really get that turned off by their "non-holman" approach?

Maybe it's overkill to say this, and I don't want to turn into a Hopkins homer (ahem, there are more than enough Yale homers swirling around here to keep the place entertaining as it is...), but I did rank it higher than many (most?) of the "standard top 10." That list seems a little Midwest heavy, I think. There can only be so many programs on these stupid lists, but I guess what I'm getting at is that these things always seemed a little biased toward the "names of the past."

And finally the *real* :) list ladies and gentlemen, strictly based on academic opportunities and clinical training:

1) Harvard - duh.
2) MSKCC - that's right.
3) Michigan - seriously. don't get mad, you know it's true.
4) Hopkins - read above.
5) Stanford - yep.
6) MDACC - not joking.
7) UCSF - finally, right?
8) Yale - oldies.
9) Wash U - but.
10) Penn - goodies. and btw, you're cool with holmans, but give only three 3 month research blocks for the rest of us?
 
Last edited:
RadFly said:
I am a Yale resident and feel the need to clarify a few things posted below. First off, I appreciate that many of the great things about our program are being recognized in these posts - it's a great place to train and I'm definitely happy to be a resident here. Regarding the post below, I want to address the issues of clinical volume and boards.

While we do have a reputation for a lighter workload, that is due to decreased scut, not decreased clinical volume. Our residents log at least 600 cases, with many logging over 800. Given that we have a full year of elective time (with many residents doing decidated lab work), that the max number of cases you are allowed by ACGME to see per year is 250, and that the ACGME requirement is only 450 cases, it's just not accurate to say our caseload is light.

As for boards, we haven't had anyone not pass their boards on the first try in over a decade. So I don't know what the original post is referring to.

Finally, for those of you third and fourth years planning to apply into this awesome field, please understand that these rankings are all nonsense (and this coming from someone in a typically highly ranked program). There are only two things that I think matter in terms of ranking programs: whether you'll like your time in residency (quality of life, quality of training) and whether or not you'll get the job that you want when you graduate. Because both of these things are highly individual (especially the job thing; type of job, location, etc.), making a generic rank list that applies to all is just not possible. So while these these lists are are fun to read, please don't make any life-changing decisions based on them.
Click to expand...

Radfly makes an important point. And for those reading these posts to write up their match list, the best "lists" likely are to come from the senior residents and attendings, since they have been through the program and know clinical radiation oncology (while they may be biased to a particular program; really that will happen within 1-2 minutes after match day for all of these posters, and you just hope that objective opinions are being given).

Med students have been asking me about concerns regarding seeing enough cases at a given institution (e.g. Yale versus MSK or MDACC). As radfly mentions, the ACGME has a strict minimum and maximum; the minimum being what they consider necessary to be a radiation oncologist, and all residents across the country achieve this or they do not graduate. I know several residents at Yale, and believe me they are seeing enough cases, and they are getting phenomenal training (Yale treats the entire state of CT essentially; with multiple satellite locations). Often residents at programs like MSKCC have a lot more cases and like to exaggerate, but 30% of them are palliative whole brains and AP/PA spines (conventional RT). Be wary of people who tell you they had "500 cases last year", and just do the math ("really? you did ~10 sims every single week? really? you worked 90h last week? you realize that means you were in the clinic every weekday, since most centers don't have clinic on weekends, from 6 AM to midnight?"). Being at a "top three program" I can tell you many of my co-residents say this in my program.

Indeed, one must consider that some of the top programs are considered "busy" because the resident runs the service. Now that may sound cool at first, but it does not always mean that the resident acts like an attending. It means the resident is scutted out doing the sim alone (often inefficiently because no directions), getting the outside records, consenting patients, answering all the phone calls, emailing other services updates, and refilling rx's (and the attending will be at physics reviewing the plan, changing the volumes without you, and discussing treatment strategies with the medoncs).

Coming from a "top three program", I can tell you this can severely compromise your ability to learn clinical radiation oncology, and it is debatable whether this is any better than a program with a slightly lower volume but more interest in protecting its residents, so that they can learn radiation oncology (e.g. at Yale). This is not true for all busy programs I am sure, but med students should take this factor into consideration.

Places like MDACC and Yale should be considered strongly, because it is well known that the attendings are at the "frontline" taking care of their patients, and the residents are there to help, but mainly to learn. Sure anyone can argue with me about this point, but just ask the residents, in private/on the phone at these two places (and perhaps MSKCC or Boston), whether they have priorities placed on learning versus scutting, and I am sure you will see this wide variation.
 
Checked my notes and here is clarification on the Yale boards. In fact, I had the opposite impression about Yale board performance and I was impressed it was strong. Dr. Wilson presented board results since his tenure as PD which is like 8 years or so. Out a total of over 90 exams(3 written and 8 sections of oral) there had been 3 conditionals all of which were passed on the next attempt. Since a "conditional" does not count as a fail if passed on next attempt, it's accurate to say all passed but technically there were 3 exams that did not get passed on first try. I believe 2 of the 3 were the same person and that the conditional exams were oral and not written. Can't confirm that though. I think every program does not have a perfect 100 percent pass rate-even the top big 3. So I think the Yale presentation was done in the spirit of presenting data, that it's not perfect-but it's very strong. Some places would just say "we do fine on the boards or everybody passes". Obviously not true at every program. I think it would be very enlightening if such a detailed presentation was given by every program.

Metacurious-Hopkins is on my list above!! :)
 
Last edited:
I heard multiple people say that Stanford did some great things in the 20th century. What things did they do and what happened to them such that they aren't doing it anymore today.
 
Heisenbergg said:
I heard multiple people say that Stanford did some great things in the 20th century. What things did they do and what happened to them such that they aren't doing it anymore today.
Click to expand...

Obviously, I wasn't even born during the Rad Onc renaissance but I've heard stories from other attendings. In particular, I heard a very eloquent talk from Bob Timmerman earlier this year.

In the 1950s and 1960s Rad Onc was not its own separate field but was a branch of Diagnostic Radiology. Therefore, radiologists would use ionizing radiation both diagnostically and therapeutically. Given the vast difference between the two, one can appreciate that diagnostic radiologists did not want to be stuck treating cancer patients; so typically they wanted to complete treatment as quickly as possible. As we now know with modern radiobiology, hypofractionating large volumes of normal tissue is not a good idea (back then they used cobalt 60 machines based on surface anatomy and plain x-rays) due to high toxicity.

During this time period, we had many of the fathers of Rad Onc emerge and advocate for fractionated XRT based on lab/clinical investigations. Thus, the four R's of radiobiology were born and fractionation is still a central tenet of Rad Onc today. Two of the four "big boys" were from Stanford, Henry Kaplan & Malcolm Bagshaw. The others were Gilbert Fletcher (MDACC) & Juan Del Regato (USF).

Of course, in later years Stanford also pioneered advancements in the treatment of lymphoma for which Richard Hoppe (among others) is famous. The Cyberknife was also invented there by Neurosurgeon John Adler.
 
Recent applicant here. When looking at these rankings (although quite entertaining), it’s important to use your own method and decide what’s important to you when creating your rank list. Most of the top 10 look pretty similar and will give you many of the same opportunities down the line. Factors I used in these rankings (which are essentially those of my rad onc mentors) include (in no particular order): clinical volume, level of support from PD/Chair, commitment to education and time for learning (quality, not just quantity of clinical and didactic experiences), research opportunities (basic and clinical) and protected time to do so, NIH funding, job prospects, location, etc. Location is VERY subjective, and is completely dependent on the person. Quality of life as a resident can include standard of living for you and/or your significant other, and that can be in turn dependent on location. Getting the best training while enjoying your time there is key… Things I didn’t put as much weight into: the specific types of technology available.

As always, these are just opinions, and take them with a pound of salt! All of these and many, many more places are great programs to train at. About me: MD applicant, from one of the coasts, interested in academics, and interviewed/awayed/communicated with all of these programs:

1. MDACC – Best program in the country. 6 residents/yr, superb faculty, top notch clinical and physics training, immense research opps (translational and clinical at MDACC, basic at MDACC and Baylor), education-focused training, best faculty lineup in the country. Houston is huge and sprawling (hot in summers, beautiful in the winters), but standard of living unbeatable even on resident’s salary.

2. Harvard – Biggest program in the country (8/year). Even us non-laymen gush at the Harvard name. Superb faculty who care about education. Rotations through MGH, BWH, the Farber, etc – interesting to see the differing opinions on treatments. Research opps extend to MIT. Boston is cold and expensive, definitely not a great standard of living on your salary. Great job placements in the Northeast.

3. MSKCC – Next in size after Harvard and MDACC. Busy clinical services due to volume expected to be seen by residents – I say bring it on, but more scut than other programs. Increasingly should have more research time (also basic res opps) for residents in the future. NYC is a +/- depending on you, and can be expensive.

4. UCSF – 3 residents/year I believe (its all blending together). GFunk is awesome, and as funny as people say on this forum. Bay area has all around great weather and outdoor activities. Expensive standard of living on salary, though not as bad as Stanford. Good clinical and basic science opps in the dept and throughout the university. PD is extremely supportive and an advocate (would put Wilson from Yale as the #2 though!). Top job placements on West Coast.

5. Yale – 3 residents/year. Strong program. Brand new Smilow Cancer Center. PD Dr. Wilson is an unbelievable resident advocate, and is the real deal. Low scut, with tons of research opps. Having the Yale Univ there is a big boon for academics. New Haven is rough and cold.

6. Michigan – Ted Lawrence and Edgar Ben-Josef are phenomenal. If you care about academics and are motivated, you will thrive. Residents work hard during the clinical years, but get a solid year to do research. Ann Arbor is small and a bit out of the way (fly into Detroit, then 30 min ride out to Ann Arbor). Winters are cold, but standard of living high.

7. Hopkins – 3 residents per year. Ted DeWeese is one of the most charismatic and respectable chairman you’ll ever meet. Has a far reaching vision in Rad Onc, including emphasis on translational work. East Baltimore isn’t the most scenic, but Inner Harbor area and suburbs seem nice. Residents place well for jobs and are top notch.

8. Duke – 4 residents this year, but has a lop-sided resident structure (one class with 6). Brand new cancer center. Chair (Willett) is unbelievable and a great resident advocate. He’s also a co-director of the new cancer center, which speaks to his institutional rep and the institution’s commitment to the department. Very friendly group of residents, faculty who care about education, and a very high standard of living in the Raleigh-Durham area.

9. Stanford – 3 residents/year I believe. Lots of history here, and I do believe they are continuing to do great things. Hoppe is leaving (was known even last year), but faculty are very strong. Dr Donaldson is extremely impressive in particular. Interview day is rough and long. Expensive in the Palo Alto area, although if you’re up for a bit more commute, you can find some better priced places in the surrounding areas.

10. Wisconsin – 2 residents/year (one advanced, one categorical). Superb program and training. Great leadership and resident advocacy with Dr. Harari. Interesting 2 panel interview system. Strong residents, clinical training, and research opps. Madison can be tough to get to with just a small airport. Ice fishing in the winter sounds great though, and standard of living can be very high.

11. Wash U – With Dr. Hallahan coming on, many are hoping for expanded basic science opps and commitment here. However, he and the faculty are open to anything that motivates you. Downside is St. Louis, since it can be tough for a significant other (i.e. transferring jobs, etc). Not an expensive standard of living, and good academic job placements. This place is well known for its GYN experience, and two recent grads went to Stanford and Penn to become GYN attendings.

12. Penn – 4 residents/year. Program is in flux, as in huge and rapid growth. Residents used to cover multiple attendings, sometimes simultaneously. This is improving but the culture is still for residents to see every/most patients (depends on attending). Steve Hahn is amazing, and Eli Glatstein is a gem. Philly is +/- for many, although I personally liked it. The built in intern year makes for a long PGY1, and is difficult for those who are geographically tied down for the first year in another location. Overall good cost of living. Breaks up your research into 3 month blocks (total of ~9 months of research throughout residency). Even with those great basic science labs throughout the university, its tough to get things done with the broken up schedule – need to strongly consider Holman for contiguous time.

13. Chicago – 3 residents/year I believe? Historically well known and continues to be a top notch option in Chicago. The teaching style can be very much in your face, but it looks like these guys learn a lot. Solid basic science and clinical research opps.
 
Where does Emory fall in this mix? Just outside the top 20?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I've enjoyed reading everyone's take on program rankings. My question is: what really matters when looking for a job after residency? Is it really coming from one of these "top ten" places? Or do other things carry more weight, such as a program having protons, a program with lots of residents (bigger network for finding a job), training in the area you intend to work, or the brand name of the institution you trained at (even if the radonc department isn't as 'good' as the institution's reputation in general)?
And last, are the answers different based on whether you intend to practice in a private vs. academic setting?

thanks
 
Totem said:
I've enjoyed reading everyone's take on program rankings. My question is: what really matters when looking for a job after residency? Is it really coming from one of these "top ten" places? Or do other things carry more weight, such as a program having protons, a program with lots of residents (bigger network for finding a job), training in the area you intend to work, or the brand name of the institution you trained at (even if the radonc department isn't as 'good' as the institution's reputation in general)?
Click to expand...

All of these things play some role. However, most of it depends on where you want to go in the country and what type of job you are interested in.

And last, are the answers different based on whether you intend to practice in a private vs. academic setting?
Click to expand...

For academic jobs, research productivity as a resident is key as are connections. Both are "easier" to accomplish in top Rad Onc programs.
 
Gfunk6 said:
Too soon to say. Obviously Curran coming to Emory was huge and the program is big (3 residents/year) so the trend is positive I would think.
Click to expand...

Emory's allotment is up to 16 total
 
Could one/any of you post an idea of which programs in rad onc are top tier, vs mid, vs low tier?

I think I have a decent idea, but would like others' input.
 
Look at the Rad Onc Rankings thread.

If a program is in people's top 10 list > 75% of the time = top tier
If a program is in people's top 10 list < 75% of the time = mid tier
If a program is never/rarely mentioned on that thread = low tier *or* too new to form a definitive opinion
 
DrAwsome said:
Could one/any of you post an idea of which programs in rad onc are top tier, vs mid, vs low tier?

I think I have a decent idea, but would like others' input.
Click to expand...

This is from the rankings thread. A lot of people re-ordered this list so think of it as a mean tier system with variance due to individual opinions as well as evolution/devolution of programs from year to year.

Exceptional
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

Outstanding
Duke University Hospital Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago/University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago Program
University of Florida Program
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
University of Utah Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
William Beaumont Hospital Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program

Excellent
Case Western Reserve University/University Hospitals Case Medical Center Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
Emory University Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
University at Buffalo Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of Maryland Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Rochester Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
University of Washington Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program

Good
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
Baylor College of Medicine Program
University of Arizona Program
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Loma Linda University Program
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Jackson Memorial Hospital/Jackson Health System Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
Loyola University Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University Medical College Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University Hospital Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital Medical Education Consortium (AGH)
Medical University of South Carolina Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program
 
Honestly, I'd say that list is not very good nor accurate. It was put together by one user with a few other users modifying it.

You are better off taking a more comprehensive look at the rankings thread to see where many users have ranked programs in the last seven years or so. It's work, but if you really want a consensus opinion it's the best way to go.
 
JumpingFrenchmn said:
This is from the rankings thread. A lot of people re-ordered this list so think of it as a mean tier system with variance due to individual opinions as well as evolution/devolution of programs from year to year.

Exceptional
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

Outstanding
Duke University Hospital Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago/University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago Program
University of Florida Program
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
University of Utah Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
William Beaumont Hospital Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program

Excellent
Case Western Reserve University/University Hospitals Case Medical Center Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
Emory University Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
University at Buffalo Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of Maryland Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Rochester Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
University of Washington Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program

Good
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
Baylor College of Medicine Program
University of Arizona Program
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Loma Linda University Program
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Jackson Memorial Hospital/Jackson Health System Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
Loyola University Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University Medical College Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University Hospital Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital Medical Education Consortium (AGH)
Medical University of South Carolina Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program
Click to expand...

That's what I was looking for, thanks! :)
 
Another thing to keep in mind is that rad onc programs may dramatically chance over the course of 1-2 years, so these lists become outdated very fast. For example, take a look at Fox Chase, Vanderbilt, and William Beaumont.
Take everything on this website with a grain of salt and base your decision on the feeling you get when you go there...keeping in mind that even that may be outdated by the time your actually start RadOnc!
 
Talk to different people - you'll get many different points of view. Even on this forum, we're pretty skewed towards the top few programs (MDACC, Harvard, MSKCC, etc) and even our esteemed moderator gives a bit of extra love to UCSF. I thought that list (pasted above) was a nice one to get a quick sense of where the programs stood and then made my own conclusions from there. Good luck!
 
Gfunk6 said:
Honestly, I'd say that list is not very good nor accurate. It was put together by one user with a few other users modifying it.

You are better off taking a more comprehensive look at the rankings thread to see where many users have ranked programs in the last seven years or so. It's work, but if you really want a consensus opinion it's the best way to go.
Click to expand...

To further elaborate on the point that I believe GFunk is trying to make, there is a tremendous range in the quality of program in the "Outstanding" tier. Those who are "in the know" and educated on these matters could probably comfortably remove 5-6 programs currently listed as "Oustanding".
 
1
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

2
Duke University Hospital Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program

3
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Emory University Program
University of Washington Program
National Capital Consortium Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
University of Florida Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
University of Maryland Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program

4
Loyola University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
Ohio State University Hospital Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
University of Utah Program

5
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
University at Buffalo Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Rochester Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
University of Minnesota Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
Medical University of South Carolina Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program

6
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
Baylor College of Medicine Program
University of Arizona Program
Loma Linda University Program
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
William Beaumont Hospital

7
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
New York Methodist Hospital Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
 
GFunk, could you move some of this conversation to the Rad Onc rankings thread? Would be nice to have it in there...Hope to keep the convo going.
 
No one really has that strong of insight into all the programs so for one to person to make a list of all the programs and break them into tiers is pretty silly. I would make a radically different list than the one posted by memberblue and there really isn't a right or wrong list.
 
hot sauce said:
No one really has that strong of insight into all the programs so for one to person to make a list of all the programs and break them into tiers is pretty silly. I would make a radically different list than the one posted by memberblue and there really isn't a right or wrong list.
Click to expand...

I think the thing that concerns me most about lists like these is that some people may take it to be gospel and let it influence their rank list. While it may be possible to agree on what the top 10 programs are (although definitely not their order), I don't think anyone making these lists has done enough research to stratify the rest.
 
hot sauce said:
No one really has that strong of insight into all the programs so for one to person to make a list of all the programs and break them into tiers is pretty silly. I would make a radically different list than the one posted by memberblue and there really isn't a right or wrong list.
Click to expand...

I agree and this is a point I and others have made on this thread. That's why it's important to take aggregate data from posters over the years. One or two people will have skewed opinions but if you take the opinions of many users over nine years or so, I think the list should be pretty accurate.

Also, let's not kid ourselves. We pretty much all know the same programs are in the top 10 year after year for the most part.
 
The list adds little aside from continuing to give lip-service to the top 10-15 programs. Beyond that, the order appears to have been pulled out of a hat. IMO, lists should be followed by an explanation to be useful.
 
thesauce said:
The list adds little aside from continuing to give lip-service to the top 10-15 programs. Beyond that, the order appears to have been pulled out of a hat. IMO, lists should be followed by an explanation to be useful.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.
 
I'd agree that the top 10 (or 5) are basically agreed upon - minor changes there. The rest of the programs vary by many objective and subjective factors, thus having an all encompassing ranking may not apply to most people. Thanks for the post though!
 
Based on all the above responses, nobody in the southeast, midwest would ever have a spot.

Does no one rank the programs that are in their region?

You would think that there are no radiation oncologists anywhere else in the country.

-johnthomas75
http://the-d-o-c-t-o-r.blogspot.com/
 
johnthomas75 said:
Based on all the above responses, nobody in the southeast, midwest would ever have a spot.

Does no one rank the programs that are in their region?

You would think that there are no radiation oncologists anywhere else in the country.

-johnthomas75
http://the-d-o-c-t-o-r.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...

It depends upon how liberal your definition of "midwest" is, but the University of Wisconsin and the University of Michigan are both generally regarded as top 10 programs.
 
I just looked at this last list. How in the world were the tiers below the first one determined?
Some idiotic medical students are going to believe there is some rhyme or reason to this and assume its backed by some objectivity.

I propose that there be some objectivity to this, based on factors such as: procurement of plum private practice jobs, research productivity by residents by number of publications per resident, caseload and variety of cases without having to get farmed out, presence or lack of an academic year, board passing rates, number of national conferences attended per 4 years.

Some of this info is just data that could be mined through emailing PDs and others might be answered by polling private practices. It used to be sort of fun as a student to read through this stuff, but as I've progressed, I've realized that these so-called great places produce some unequipped residents.

If there is going to be a ranking, it ought be done better
 
SimulD said:
I just looked at this last list. How in the world were the tiers below the first one determined?
Some idiotic medical students are going to believe there is some rhyme or reason to this and assume its backed by some objectivity.

I propose that there be some objectivity to this, based on factors such as: procurement of plum private practice jobs, research productivity by residents by number of publications per resident, caseload and variety of cases without having to get farmed out, presence or lack of an academic year, board passing rates, number of national conferences attended per 4 years.

Some of this info is just data that could be mined through emailing PDs and others might be answered by polling private practices. It used to be sort of fun as a student to read through this stuff, but as I've progressed, I've realized that these so-called great places produce some unequipped residents.

If there is going to be a ranking, it ought be done better
Click to expand...

Could not agree more... with all points
 
More Accurate Ranking

1
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

2
Duke University Hospital Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program
William Beaumont Hospital

3
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital
Baylor College of Medicine Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
Case Western Reserve University
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University
Emory University Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
Loma Linda University Program
Loyola University Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Medical University of South Carolina Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University at Buffalo Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
University of Arizona Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of Florida Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
University of Maryland Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
University of Rochester Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Utah Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Washington Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
 
lazers said:
More Accurate Ranking

1
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

2
Duke University Hospital Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program
William Beaumont Hospital

3
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital
Baylor College of Medicine Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
Case Western Reserve University
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University
Emory University Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
Loma Linda University Program
Loyola University Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Medical University of South Carolina Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University at Buffalo Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
University of Arizona Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of Florida Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
University of Maryland Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
University of Rochester Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Utah Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Washington Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
Click to expand...

Some might argue otherwise on this list as well. Didn't Beaumont have a major shakeup in faculty recently?
 
lazers said:
More Accurate Ranking

1
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program

2
Duke University Hospital Program
Stanford University Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Chicago
University of Michigan Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program
William Beaumont Hospital

3
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital
Baylor College of Medicine Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
Case Western Reserve University
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University
Emory University Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
Johns Hopkins University Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
Loma Linda University Program
Loyola University Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Medical University of South Carolina Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University at Buffalo Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
University of Arizona Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
University of Florida Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
University of Maryland Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
University of Rochester Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Utah Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Washington Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
Click to expand...

Someone goes to Beumont
 
SimulD said:
I propose that there be some objectivity to this, based on factors such as: procurement of plum private practice jobs, research productivity by residents by number of publications per resident, caseload and variety of cases without having to get farmed out, presence or lack of an academic year, board passing rates, number of national conferences attended per 4 years.

Some of this info is just data that could be mined through emailing PDs and others might be answered by polling private practices. It used to be sort of fun as a student to read through this stuff, but as I've progressed, I've realized that these so-called great places produce some unequipped residents.

If there is going to be a ranking, it ought be done better
Click to expand...

I agree. But this is a lot of work and the response rate from programs/practices would most likely be low. In the meantime, how about throwing up your own rank list? :D
 
SimulD said:
I propose that there be some objectivity to this, based on factors such as: procurement of plum private practice jobs, research productivity by residents by number of publications per resident, caseload and variety of cases without having to get farmed out, presence or lack of an academic year, board passing rates, number of national conferences attended per 4 years.
Click to expand...

Another problem is that even an objective list may not help students with diverse career goals. A program might allow lots of research opportunities that would help foster a career in academia but be average in terms of clinical training, caseload diversity, brachy/procedure training, etc.

I would encourage all med students to really think about where you want to be after residency and consider this when choosing a program.

Along the same lines, perhaps the list should be divided into programs that produce outstanding clinicians (which may have value if going into private practice or clinically oriented academic programs) and those that allow opportunity to build an academic career or with translational/basic science research opportunities.
 
These ranking lists tend to factor in location as well as program strength IMO. There are definitely some overrated and underrated programs on most lists based on that. I'm not going to name any names though.
 
Knucklehead said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0evpnbIUQ4

We should ask this girl to opine.
Click to expand...

She didn't address the crucial issues of academics vs. private practice opportunities, case volumes, or available technology. I would have also liked to hear a more robust discussion about the resident quality of life. She limits her discussion only to the quantity of faculty, but I'm dubious that the size of these faculty are appreciably different.
 
Sauce;

But her affect belies a more nuanced understanding of the concerns you have enumerated, which isn't immediately obvious upon first viewing. For example, her audible wimpers imply a keen insight into the quality of life issues [higher cost of day care in Palo Alto]. Also, her physical agitation suggests either an appreciation of the lower clinical volume and referrals as compared to JHU, or suggests a wet diaper. I'm proud to have had her help organizing my rank order list, which she inscribed on my dining room walls with a forest green crayola.
 
Exceptional
Harvard Radiation Oncology Program (HROP)
University of Texas M D Anderson Cancer Center Program
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Program

Outstanding
Stanford University Program
University of California (San Francisco) Program
University of Pennsylvania Program
University of Michigan Program
University of Wisconsin Program
University of Chicago/University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago Program
Duke University Hospital Program
Washington University/B-JH/SLCH Consortium Program
Yale-New Haven Medical Center Program

Excellent
Johns Hopkins University Program
University of Florida Program
William Beaumont Hospital Program
Cleveland Clinic Foundation Program
University of Colorado Denver Program
Emory University Program
University of Utah Program
Fox Chase Cancer Center Program
University of Maryland Program
Case Western Reserve University/University Hospitals Case Medical Center Program
Mayo Clinic (Rochester) Program
University of Alabama Medical Center Program
New York University School of Medicine Program
University of California (San Diego) Program
Medical College of Wisconsin Affiliated Hospitals Program
Vanderbilt University Medical Center Program
University of Washington Program
Thomas Jefferson University Program
Mount Sinai School of Medicine Program
National Capital Consortium Program
Georgetown University Hospital Program
New York-Presbyterian Hospital (Columbia) Program
Henry Ford Hospital Program
McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University Program
Oregon Health & Science University Program
University at Buffalo Program
UCLA Medical Center Program
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School Program
University of South Florida Program (Moffitt)
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Program
University of Texas Southwestern Medical School Program
University of Virginia Program
University of Rochester Program
University of North Carolina Hospitals Program
UPMC Medical Education Program
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Program

Good
Albert Einstein College of Medicine Program
University of Louisville Program
Baylor College of Medicine Program
University of Arizona Program
City of Hope National Medical Center Program
Loma Linda University Program
University of Southern California/LAC+USC Medical Center Program
Kaiser Permanente Southern California (Los Angeles) Program
University of California (Irvine) Program
University of California (Davis) Health System Program
California Pacific Medical Center Program
College of Medicine Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville) Program
Jackson Memorial Hospital/Jackson Health System Program
Rush University Medical Center Program
Loyola University Program
Indiana University School of Medicine Program
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Program
University of Kansas School of Medicine Program
University of Kentucky College of Medicine Program
Tufts Medical Center Program
Wayne State University/Detroit Medical Center Program
University of Minnesota Program
University of Mississippi Medical Center Program
University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine Program
SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn Program
New York Methodist Hospital Program
New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens/Cornell University Medical College Program
SUNY Upstate Medical University Program
University Hospital/University of Cincinnati College of Medicine Program
Ohio State University Hospital Program
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Program
Drexel University College of Medicine/Hahnemann University Hospital Program
Allegheny General Hospital-Western Pennsylvania Hospital Medical Education Consortium (AGH)
Medical University of South Carolina Program
University of Texas Medical Branch Hospitals Program
Methodist Hospital (Houston) Program
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System Program

I wanted to update this list since it has not been manipulated in some time. I understand there will be some contention but this list was helpful during my app and interview process so wanted to update it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

P
Rad Onc oral boards
Replies
10
Views
661
Barcelona PSG
B
Gfunk6
Rad Onc? Burnt Out?
Replies
36
Views
1K
thecarbonionangle
thecarbonionangle
TheWallnerus
Rad onc supervision, the epilogue
Replies
10
Views
1K
elementaryschooleconomics
elementaryschooleconomics
U
Why is rad onc not more competitive?
2 3 4 5
Replies
233
Views
9K
medgator
M
D
Rad onc as a second residency?
Replies
25
Views
2K
SneakyBooger
SneakyBooger
Top