Both are terrific programs in Texas. Anyone who has had experiences interviewing or doing residency at either program care to comment?
UTSW vs BCM
- Thread starter HiDoc88
- Start date
- Joined
- May 7, 2009
- Messages
- 934
- Reaction score
- 52
** making popcorn **
Oh boy. Will be following.
Oh boy. Will be following.
I'm a resident on UTSW in IM and I can tell you this program is awesome. I love it here so far and could not have asked for a better group of individuals to work with and learn from. Its a top notch residency program across the board, but particularly in IM. You learn by seeing a LOT and building confidence. Academics are key with great didactics.
In regards to some of the "malignant rumors" that SDN has apparently spread in the past, I cant speak to the program 10 years ago, at which time UTSW (and really most residency programs) were vastly different with ACGME changes, but let it be known--this place is NOT malignant; it is certainly a place where you will work hard but I absolutely love my co-residents and seniors too. The new PD we have this year is an incredibly caring and thoughtful guy and seems to really make an effort to dispel some false claims.
The program has been very dynamic recently with multiple new changes implemented--specifically 4 +1 and an ambulatory didactic curriculum to address gaps in outpatient fund of knowledge. Chiefs are very hard working, approachable and responsive.
The work load is busy, however I think it has been completely manageable. Frankly, if you're planning on being a good clinician, you should strive for a program that prepares you well clinically and I think theres no shortcut to this other than seeing a large volume of patients with various pathology. The residents, by the time you are R3, are VERY well trained and versed. Research and academics are top notch and really abundant---you can find any niche here that suits your interests and fellowship aspirations.
It is by far that best regarded program in Texas and the area (#12 or so US News and WR for IM residency--if you care bout that stuff). Fellowships matches are excellent.
My thoughts on BCM is that it has been slipping considerably over the past few years (unclear if this is due to financial problems or this is kinda overhyped)--when interviewing there, I was very underwhelmed by the program and individuals running it. Texas Medical Center, though very impressive, seemed daunting and disjointed for my taste. When applying for residency and having talked to multiple advisors and faculty in different places, appears the reputation has taken a huge hit and is reflecting in the quality of fellowship matches. Overall the energy of Baylor seemed stagnant, if that makes sense but just my opinion. I encourage speaking to a resident there on their thoughts.
Hope this answers any questions, can PM me if you have any specific ?s
In regards to some of the "malignant rumors" that SDN has apparently spread in the past, I cant speak to the program 10 years ago, at which time UTSW (and really most residency programs) were vastly different with ACGME changes, but let it be known--this place is NOT malignant; it is certainly a place where you will work hard but I absolutely love my co-residents and seniors too. The new PD we have this year is an incredibly caring and thoughtful guy and seems to really make an effort to dispel some false claims.
The program has been very dynamic recently with multiple new changes implemented--specifically 4 +1 and an ambulatory didactic curriculum to address gaps in outpatient fund of knowledge. Chiefs are very hard working, approachable and responsive.
The work load is busy, however I think it has been completely manageable. Frankly, if you're planning on being a good clinician, you should strive for a program that prepares you well clinically and I think theres no shortcut to this other than seeing a large volume of patients with various pathology. The residents, by the time you are R3, are VERY well trained and versed. Research and academics are top notch and really abundant---you can find any niche here that suits your interests and fellowship aspirations.
It is by far that best regarded program in Texas and the area (#12 or so US News and WR for IM residency--if you care bout that stuff). Fellowships matches are excellent.
My thoughts on BCM is that it has been slipping considerably over the past few years (unclear if this is due to financial problems or this is kinda overhyped)--when interviewing there, I was very underwhelmed by the program and individuals running it. Texas Medical Center, though very impressive, seemed daunting and disjointed for my taste. When applying for residency and having talked to multiple advisors and faculty in different places, appears the reputation has taken a huge hit and is reflecting in the quality of fellowship matches. Overall the energy of Baylor seemed stagnant, if that makes sense but just my opinion. I encourage speaking to a resident there on their thoughts.
Hope this answers any questions, can PM me if you have any specific ?s
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,014
- Reaction score
- 342
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Don't worry about it though, BCM IM residents badmouth you too.I went to medical school at one and am doing IM residency at the other, so I feel somewhat qualified to respond. I'm on an ambulatory month, and hell, I'm a little bored Anyway, here's one man's opinion:
This "debate" is probably a little indicative of the absurd hair-splitting that often occurs on SDN. Fact is, both programs are part of a large pack of 30 or so schools that are similar in reputation and training, and anyone who claims a significant difference between the two in those areas probably just has an ax to grind.
As far as clinical training, the bread and butter general medicine experience at both schools is incredibly similar given the gold-standard public/VA axis that both possess, though I think there are a few wrinkles differentiating the two. At UTSW, you will get much more ICU experience, especially during the second year; whether that makes any difference to you would be determined by if you really think that training is necessary for your future career plans (for most people it's not). At Baylor, there is a nice private hospital experience at St. Luke's that gives residents a different perspective and more exposure to cutting-edge devices/practices, especially at THI. Again, not as important as the VA/Ben Taub experience, but a bonus.
As far as "prestige" and fellowship match, I'd say both are pretty close. There is no doubt that losing Methodist (while not affecting the clinical experience at Baylor one bit), definitely drew many really big faculty names out of the Baylor fold, which undoubtedly affected resident research opportunities, and in turn perhaps did give the fellowship match a little hit. However, the days of BCM's financial future truly being up the air are no more, and probably haven't really been a worry for the last 3 or 4 years (even the abandoned Baylor Hospital building is slowly being opened up, FWIW). Anyway, I don' t think matching cardiology or GI is an issue from either school, and I think you'll be able to do essentially whatever you want to do from either.
As far as overall gestalt, there is a difference in culture. UTSW, while not "malignant", is undoubtedly a more hard-driving place, with more emphasis placed on academic medicine during rounds and elsewhere, and I did feel the faculty there demanded more of the medical students and residents. Baylor is a "nicer" place, where I do feel the residents are a little happier, however I'll say something may be lost educationally when you're not being pushed to your limit.
In the end, that's probably what I'd make my decision on - which culture you think you'd thrive in - because the clinical experience and fellowship match are probably a wash and the issues of BCM's stability are moot in 2012.
Anyway, just the opinion of a guy who has first-hand opinions of both places, I'd be interested to know what others think.
Anyway, here's one man's opinion: This "debate" is probably a little indicative of the absurd hair-splitting that often occurs on SDN. Fact is, both programs are part of a large pack of 30 or so schools that are similar in reputation and training, and anyone who claims a significant difference between the two in those areas probably just has an ax to grind.
As far as clinical training, the bread and butter general medicine experience at both schools is incredibly similar given the gold-standard public/VA axis that both possess, though I think there are a few wrinkles differentiating the two. At UTSW, you will get much more ICU experience, especially during the second year; whether that makes any difference to you would be determined by if you really think that training is necessary for your future career plans (for most people it's not). At Baylor, there is a nice private hospital experience at St. Luke's that gives residents a different perspective and more exposure to cutting-edge devices/practices, especially at THI. Again, not as important as the VA/Ben Taub experience, but a bonus.
As far as "prestige" and fellowship match, I'd say both are pretty close. There is no doubt that losing Methodist (while not affecting the clinical experience at Baylor one bit), definitely drew many really big faculty names out of the Baylor fold, which undoubtedly affected resident research opportunities, and in turn perhaps did give the fellowship match a little hit. However, the days of BCM's financial future truly being up the air are no more, and probably haven't really been a worry for the last 3 or 4 years (even the abandoned Baylor Hospital building is slowly being opened up, FWIW). Anyway, I don' t think matching cardiology or GI is an issue from either school, and I think you'll be able to do essentially whatever you want to do from either.
As far as overall gestalt, there is a difference in culture. UTSW, while not "malignant", is undoubtedly a more hard-driving place, with more emphasis placed on academic medicine during rounds and elsewhere, and I did feel the faculty there demanded more of the medical students and residents. Baylor is a "nicer" place, where I do feel the residents are a little happier, however I'll say something may be lost educationally when you're not being pushed to your limit.
In the end, that's probably what I'd make my decision on - which culture you think you'd thrive in - because the clinical experience and fellowship match are probably a wash and the issues of BCM's stability are moot in 2012.
Anyway, just the opinion of a guy who has first-hand opinions of both places, I'd be interested to know what others think.
I went to medical school at one and am doing IM residency at the other, so I feel somewhat qualified to respond. I'm on an ambulatory month, and hell, I'm a little bored
This "debate" is probably a little indicative of the absurd hair-splitting that often occurs on SDN. Fact is, both programs are part of a large pack of 30 or so schools that are similar in reputation and training, and anyone who claims a significant difference between the two in those areas probably just has an ax to grind.
As far as clinical training, the bread and butter general medicine experience at both schools is incredibly similar given the gold-standard public/VA axis that both possess, though I think there are a few wrinkles differentiating the two. At UTSW, you will get much more ICU experience, especially during the second year; whether that makes any difference to you would be determined by if you really think that training is necessary for your future career plans (for most people it's not). At Baylor, there is a nice private hospital experience at St. Luke's that gives residents a different perspective and more exposure to cutting-edge devices/practices, especially at THI. Again, not as important as the VA/Ben Taub experience, but a bonus.
As far as "prestige" and fellowship match, I'd say both are pretty close. There is no doubt that losing Methodist (while not affecting the clinical experience at Baylor one bit), definitely drew many really big faculty names out of the Baylor fold, which undoubtedly affected resident research opportunities, and in turn perhaps did give the fellowship match a little hit. However, the days of BCM's financial future truly being up the air are no more, and probably haven't really been a worry for the last 3 or 4 years (even the abandoned Baylor Hospital building is slowly being opened up, FWIW). Anyway, I don' t think matching cardiology or GI is an issue from either school, and I think you'll be able to do essentially whatever you want to do from either.
As far as overall gestalt, there is a difference in culture. UTSW, while not "malignant", is undoubtedly a more hard-driving place, with more emphasis placed on academic medicine during rounds and elsewhere, and I did feel the faculty there demanded more of the medical students and residents. Baylor is a "nicer" place, where I do feel the residents are a little happier, however I'll say something may be lost educationally when you're not being pushed to your limit.
In the end, that's probably what I'd make my decision on - which culture you think you'd thrive in - because the clinical experience and fellowship match are probably a wash and the issues of BCM's stability are moot in 2012.
Anyway, just the opinion of a guy who has first-hand opinions of both places, I'd be interested to know what others think.
LOL. I've talked to several physicians from TX familiar with Baylor's situation and it is far from "a moot point in 2012." in short, the Baylor program is bankrupt. Regardless, I think you've said what everyone needs to hear hear:
"I'll say something may be lost educationally when you're not being pushed to your limit."
As the quality residents and fellows migrate, so too will the fellowship opportunities.
While it's clear from your needlessly sarcastic response that you've already made up your mind on this topic, I thought I'd respond just to clear up some of these issues for other people that are reading.
No doubt, Baylor was in a ****ty place financially back in 2007 when the credit crisis hit. But ever since the new president was brought in in 2010, things have turned around quite a bit. The college is pretty close to breaking even on the budget this year, and like I said, will be opening up the previously abandoned Baylor Hospital building and moving the entire Baylor Clinic practice there over the next year.
Here is a nice interview with the BCM president from last year, which I think highlights most of these issues in layman's terms, though it's a little old:
http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/07-24-11-paul-klotman-baylor-interview/
I'd be curious to know what objective data you have that backs up your assertions that BCM is currently bankrupt? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm honestly curious about and trying to learn more about the situation there.
As far as the fellowship opportunities "migrating"; BCM provides a fellowship match list on interview day, which doesn't look too shabby to my eyes. Again, it's easy to speak in terms of hearsay or insinuation, but I try my best to stick to the facts.
Anyway, like I've said, I have experience at both places and don't really have a horse in the race. I think both are great programs, just that different kinds of people would fit in better at each.
Last edited:
I don't think my previous response was too sarcastic, I'm just tired of people minimizing the Baylor financial situation. As far as objective data, all I can tell you is that I've talked at length with several MDs who work in the TX healthcare system and they have all universally told me to stay away d/t the current financial situation (yes, bankrupt). I think a quick review of both residency programs would show applicants that UTSW provides a more rigorous training program...I personally believe that even if you are going to be an internist in "the middle of the nowhere" you still will benefit...
I went to medical school at one and am doing IM residency at the other, so I feel somewhat qualified to respond. I'm on an ambulatory month, and hell, I'm a little bored
This "debate" is probably a little indicative of the absurd hair-splitting that often occurs on SDN. Fact is, both programs are part of a large pack of 30 or so schools that are similar in reputation and training, and anyone who claims a significant difference between the two in those areas probably just has an ax to grind.
As far as clinical training, the bread and butter general medicine experience at both schools is incredibly similar given the gold-standard public/VA axis that both possess, though I think there are a few wrinkles differentiating the two. At UTSW, you will get much more ICU experience, especially during the second year; whether that makes any difference to you would be determined by if you really think that training is necessary for your future career plans (for most people it's not). At Baylor, there is a nice private hospital experience at St. Luke's that gives residents a different perspective and more exposure to cutting-edge devices/practices, especially at THI. Again, not as important as the VA/Ben Taub experience, but a bonus.
As far as "prestige" and fellowship match, I'd say both are pretty close. There is no doubt that losing Methodist (while not affecting the clinical experience at Baylor one bit), definitely drew many really big faculty names out of the Baylor fold, which undoubtedly affected resident research opportunities, and in turn perhaps did give the fellowship match a little hit. However, the days of BCM's financial future truly being up the air are no more, and probably haven't really been a worry for the last 3 or 4 years (even the abandoned Baylor Hospital building is slowly being opened up, FWIW). Anyway, I don' t think matching cardiology or GI is an issue from either school, and I think you'll be able to do essentially whatever you want to do from either.
As far as overall gestalt, there is a difference in culture. UTSW, while not "malignant", is undoubtedly a more hard-driving place, with more emphasis placed on academic medicine during rounds and elsewhere, and I did feel the faculty there demanded more of the medical students and residents. Baylor is a "nicer" place, where I do feel the residents are a little happier, however I'll say something may be lost educationally when you're not being pushed to your limit.
In the end, that's probably what I'd make my decision on - which culture you think you'd thrive in - because the clinical experience and fellowship match are probably a wash and the issues of BCM's stability are moot in 2012.
Anyway, just the opinion of a guy who has first-hand opinions of both places, I'd be interested to know what others think.
Do you have any insight into other IM programs in Texas (UTHSC-H, UTHSC-SA, UTMB, etc)? There isn't much (recent) information about these programs and any thoughts/opinions would be much appreciated.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2006
- Messages
- 323
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't think the financial status of the institute should greatly affect clinical training, but you're right about there perhaps being less opportunities for research, etc. I don't think the difference between the two institutions is so vast that roughing it out at UTSW is worth it for, to my understanding, an extremely rough three years (again: not BAD, but not ideal for those who want something more laid-back and still learn).
Okay this has been discussed ad nauseum.
I recently finished residency at BCM, and have also interviewed in UTSW. Here's the gist:
1. UTSW > BCM for national and regional reputation (but hey - BCM has more NIH money than UTSW in the latest ranking!!! though 200M vs. 160M will not really affect anything and no one cares!). If you rank UTSW higher than BCM or decide to go to your UTSW interview instead of BCM because it's "better", no one will fault you. That's not to say BCM sucks, but reputation is what it is and everyone knows UTSW's reputation is better. I just tried searching for fellowship matches and only got "2006-2012" matches from UTSW, so I cannot compare the two (you can download ours per year). Our match this year doesn't seem to be as good as previous years, but about 2/3-1/2 of the class decided to do PC/Hospitalist. However, only 1 person (an FMG) did not match among those who did apply. Most everyone got their first choices but I don't think anyone interviewed at big name places (UCSF/MGH/BW/ETC) except for those in low-demand specialties. And before you ask, no one dissuaded anyone from applying.
2. BCM's financial problems are a thing of the past. I personally know and have had frank discussions with higher ups in BCM and St. Luke's about BCM's finances, and we are not in the red anymore. The split was long ago. We may have lost some big name people to Methodist for those golden recommendation letters, but there is still a TON of basic science research going on (see NIH funding above). No effect at all with clinical training. It was so bad there were talks of a TX state bailout years ago - there is no chance of this happening now, but it is reassuring that no way will TX let BCM go down. Aside from all these hearsay, one other big indicator that BCM's finances are much better: we are taking on a LOT of BCM students (who have all the inside info) into our IM residency now. 3-5 years ago, none of them wanted to be here, now there's a good maybe 15-20 of them per year. So, if you avoid BCM just because of RubyRed's "several MD's who work in TX" (who knows how connected they are to the system?), you are doing yourself a disservice.
3. I have never been to UTSW for enough time (just a few hours for interviews) so I cannot compare the two aside from reputation, but I do agree that BCM has a very relaxed atmosphere and it is true that this likely has led to a less "academic" training. Something we should improve on. Also, UTSW grads who are residents in BCM tend to be more "intense", and they admit it too - I don't know if that translates to UTSW residency being more intense (again, I don't know because I didn't train there), but I can imagine a more "intense" residency will force you to be more "academic" like what was postulated above.
Okay. Can we please get rid of this "financial ruin" thing with BCM now? /end rant
PS. Regarding a previous thread asking about UT Houston - Texas Heart is more affiliated with BCM and BCM residents rotate there not UTH residents. So there are no advantages to matching with THI if you are from UTH. UTH does have MD Anderson, and we do not rotate there so that is one advantage of UTH over BCM.
I recently finished residency at BCM, and have also interviewed in UTSW. Here's the gist:
1. UTSW > BCM for national and regional reputation (but hey - BCM has more NIH money than UTSW in the latest ranking!!! though 200M vs. 160M will not really affect anything and no one cares!). If you rank UTSW higher than BCM or decide to go to your UTSW interview instead of BCM because it's "better", no one will fault you. That's not to say BCM sucks, but reputation is what it is and everyone knows UTSW's reputation is better. I just tried searching for fellowship matches and only got "2006-2012" matches from UTSW, so I cannot compare the two (you can download ours per year). Our match this year doesn't seem to be as good as previous years, but about 2/3-1/2 of the class decided to do PC/Hospitalist. However, only 1 person (an FMG) did not match among those who did apply. Most everyone got their first choices but I don't think anyone interviewed at big name places (UCSF/MGH/BW/ETC) except for those in low-demand specialties. And before you ask, no one dissuaded anyone from applying.
2. BCM's financial problems are a thing of the past. I personally know and have had frank discussions with higher ups in BCM and St. Luke's about BCM's finances, and we are not in the red anymore. The split was long ago. We may have lost some big name people to Methodist for those golden recommendation letters, but there is still a TON of basic science research going on (see NIH funding above). No effect at all with clinical training. It was so bad there were talks of a TX state bailout years ago - there is no chance of this happening now, but it is reassuring that no way will TX let BCM go down. Aside from all these hearsay, one other big indicator that BCM's finances are much better: we are taking on a LOT of BCM students (who have all the inside info) into our IM residency now. 3-5 years ago, none of them wanted to be here, now there's a good maybe 15-20 of them per year. So, if you avoid BCM just because of RubyRed's "several MD's who work in TX" (who knows how connected they are to the system?), you are doing yourself a disservice.
3. I have never been to UTSW for enough time (just a few hours for interviews) so I cannot compare the two aside from reputation, but I do agree that BCM has a very relaxed atmosphere and it is true that this likely has led to a less "academic" training. Something we should improve on. Also, UTSW grads who are residents in BCM tend to be more "intense", and they admit it too - I don't know if that translates to UTSW residency being more intense (again, I don't know because I didn't train there), but I can imagine a more "intense" residency will force you to be more "academic" like what was postulated above.
Okay. Can we please get rid of this "financial ruin" thing with BCM now? /end rant
PS. Regarding a previous thread asking about UT Houston - Texas Heart is more affiliated with BCM and BCM residents rotate there not UTH residents. So there are no advantages to matching with THI if you are from UTH. UTH does have MD Anderson, and we do not rotate there so that is one advantage of UTH over BCM.
Last edited:
Thank you for your insight
Thanks for all the input everyone! It seems quite clear that UTSW is the stronger and more well-regarded institution of the two. But can anyone comment on and break down some of the pros that BCM has over UTSW?
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 0
Former UTSW resident. Here's my two cents.
If you want to get to the nitty gritty, UTSW is better but it depends on what you want to do. When I trained in residency it was a tough residency program, not like it is now due to the ACGME work hr restrictions. I can recall staying almost 40 hours on a call to manage a sick patient. But, you can't do that now. The autonomy was great. I intubated more patients as a 3rd yr resident than all the PCCM fellows that came from outside institutions. But autonomy, learning by being thrown in the fire is a thing in the past.
Pros: If you want to do cards or pulm, UTSW hands down. More ICU months than almost every other residency program. A lot of well-known cardiology faculty in all aspects of cards. Fellowship match in most subspecialties is very good, in cards it's exceptional (Cleveland Clinic, Wash U, Duke). Strong basic science (more nobel prize winners than any other institution says something)
Cons: If your not sure what you want to do, it may not be the best. Getting exposure to endocrine, rheum, etc is less.
Overall, either way you go, as long as you enjoy your program, it won't matter.
If you want to get to the nitty gritty, UTSW is better but it depends on what you want to do. When I trained in residency it was a tough residency program, not like it is now due to the ACGME work hr restrictions. I can recall staying almost 40 hours on a call to manage a sick patient. But, you can't do that now. The autonomy was great. I intubated more patients as a 3rd yr resident than all the PCCM fellows that came from outside institutions. But autonomy, learning by being thrown in the fire is a thing in the past.
Pros: If you want to do cards or pulm, UTSW hands down. More ICU months than almost every other residency program. A lot of well-known cardiology faculty in all aspects of cards. Fellowship match in most subspecialties is very good, in cards it's exceptional (Cleveland Clinic, Wash U, Duke). Strong basic science (more nobel prize winners than any other institution says something)
Cons: If your not sure what you want to do, it may not be the best. Getting exposure to endocrine, rheum, etc is less.
Overall, either way you go, as long as you enjoy your program, it won't matter.
Copied from another post:
BCM FELLOWSHIP MATCH:
Cards:
Baylor - 3
UTSW - 1
Texas Heart Institute - 2
Yale - 1
Lankenau - 1
UTHouston - 1
IU - 1
GI:
Baylor - 3
UTSanAntonio - 1
DNM - 1
1 unmatched
Renal:
Univ. of Penn - 1
Univ. of Washington - 1
The Methodist Hospital - 1
Heme/Onc:
UTMDACC - 1
Baylor - 1
NIH - 1
Einstein/Montefiroe - 1
Mt.Sinai - 1
ID:
Mayo Clinic - 1
UTMB - 1
Baylor - 1
Allergy/Immunology:
Univ.California San Diego - 1
Pulm/Critical Care:
Rush - 1
Baylor - 1
Univ. of Cincinnati - 1
UTSW FELLOWSHIP MATCH
Cardiology
Baylor Dallas
Scott & White
UTSW X 5
SUNY Stonybrook X 2
Univ Maryland
Univ South Florida
Loyola Chicago
Univ Colorado
UT Houston
GI
Scott & White
UAB
Univ Maryland
UTSW X 2
Nephrology
Wash Univ
MGH/BWH
H/O
Ohio State
UTSW
NYU
Stanford
UC Davis
Allergy
LSU
Pulmonary
Boston Univ
UTSW X 2
Baylor
Univ Michigan
Hope that helps!
BCM FELLOWSHIP MATCH:
Cards:
Baylor - 3
UTSW - 1
Texas Heart Institute - 2
Yale - 1
Lankenau - 1
UTHouston - 1
IU - 1
GI:
Baylor - 3
UTSanAntonio - 1
DNM - 1
1 unmatched
Renal:
Univ. of Penn - 1
Univ. of Washington - 1
The Methodist Hospital - 1
Heme/Onc:
UTMDACC - 1
Baylor - 1
NIH - 1
Einstein/Montefiroe - 1
Mt.Sinai - 1
ID:
Mayo Clinic - 1
UTMB - 1
Baylor - 1
Allergy/Immunology:
Univ.California San Diego - 1
Pulm/Critical Care:
Rush - 1
Baylor - 1
Univ. of Cincinnati - 1
UTSW FELLOWSHIP MATCH
Cardiology
Baylor Dallas
Scott & White
UTSW X 5
SUNY Stonybrook X 2
Univ Maryland
Univ South Florida
Loyola Chicago
Univ Colorado
UT Houston
GI
Scott & White
UAB
Univ Maryland
UTSW X 2
Nephrology
Wash Univ
MGH/BWH
H/O
Ohio State
UTSW
NYU
Stanford
UC Davis
Allergy
LSU
Pulmonary
Boston Univ
UTSW X 2
Baylor
Univ Michigan
Hope that helps!
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 970
- Reaction score
- 339
Here's how I would decide between the 2 programs
College football: TCU/SMU > UHouston/Rice, also Dallas gets the nod with Texas/OU and Cotton bowl
Pro football: cowboys have the history and the stadium but the texans more recently have somewhat more success even though I don't know about this past weekend
MLB: rangers with 2 consecutive world series appearances
NBA: mavericks with some more recent success compared to the Hakeem days but James harden may bring some new life to the rockets
NHL: by default dallas
So my conclusion, dallas is overall a better sports city than houston
College football: TCU/SMU > UHouston/Rice, also Dallas gets the nod with Texas/OU and Cotton bowl
Pro football: cowboys have the history and the stadium but the texans more recently have somewhat more success even though I don't know about this past weekend
MLB: rangers with 2 consecutive world series appearances
NBA: mavericks with some more recent success compared to the Hakeem days but James harden may bring some new life to the rockets
NHL: by default dallas
So my conclusion, dallas is overall a better sports city than houston
Ugh, I go back and forth on these two schools. Anyone want to speculate OR provide data on any of the following:
1. Quality of didactics/education
2. Research opportunities/availability/time
2. Responsiveness of the PD
1. Quality of didactics/education
2. Research opportunities/availability/time
2. Responsiveness of the PD
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 970
- Reaction score
- 339
I don't know what kind of data you need but for 1) we have 1 hr of lecture time every day during lunch which ranges from journal club, resident update where you lecture on any medical topic, our infamous popourri, etc in addition to having an ambulatory medicine lecture during each of your plus one weeks 2) every intern/resident gets one month of special elective and those who are pursuing fellowship will use that time for research (out of my classmates going to fellowship pretty much everyone was able to get involved in some form of research) 3) our new PD is one of the nicest people out there and hell bent on listening to every concern/complaint from our housestaff and doing something about it and it has shown
hope that helps
Yes that does help, actually quite a lot. I appreciate your response a lot.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 970
- Reaction score
- 339
I think the most important change thus far that has come under this new PD change is there is definitely a different atmosphere about this program, right now there are things in active discussion that haven't been formally annouced but should have pretty significant impact on the program.
As some one who reviewed fellowship applications, I could tell that UTSW was hardcore because the PD letter provided very objective data about candidate's exact rank in the class. Most programs give tertiles or quartiles, but not UTSW. This is great for reviewers like me who are trying to grade applicants, but I wonder if this hurts applicants. I would think that an average resident from UTSW would be better than an average resident from say xyz program..
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 970
- Reaction score
- 339
Unless you're either the chief residents, program directors, chair, most people within the program don't have really have access to those numbers like step/ranking etc but if you go through all the prior matching threads, then you might find some stats to help you. i will say that for our interview days, we had significant majority percentage of applicants who had done some form of research prior mentioned on their brief applicant bios
BCM and UTSW are both great places to get an education and have respected ABIM pass rates that are respectible (BCM 86% vs. UTSW 88%) http://www.abim.org/about/examInfo/data-pass-rates.aspx. .
On a personal note, if you want to go to a place just because of prestige your life will suck and you will get burned out it that was the main factor you made that choice. I am glad that I just made that realization two days ago because it was not too late to change my #1 choice to a solid program in an environment that is awesome from a prestigous but stuffy research-based program.
I think that It really depends on the type of person you are and not the person you think you should be My thoughts are that if you are really deep deep down a gunner you should do UTSW because they do an ENTIRE YEAR in the MICU/CCU throughout their program. I hate watching people die so those are my least favorite rotations. Infact, while I was interviewing their one of their residents told me that she feels that the crazy amount of time in intensive care their ABIM pass rates have dropped. However, I have no doubt that with the PD's that those two schools have will only make their programs stronger.
Also, all this mess about funding. Guys this is Texas and everybody knows that the people bank rolling our programs are billionares that got rich off of oil. If you don't believe me Google T. Boone Pickens, Ross Perot, and even Jerry Jones that have all donated enough money to get their name on the side of a hospital. I went to UTSW and one of the APD told me they are loaded and when I went to BCM the PD told me that they have enough to continue to expand. You don't build more hospitals if you can't keep the lights on. Furthermore, Texas is the 11th strongest economy in the WORLD, do you think they would let a program shut their doors to our alreaady underserved populations. If so, you are naive.
Lastly, as I stated before, picking a program should really be about what you feel life about it,.You can lie to yourself and think about ranks, NIH funding, and that dream Medicine Chair spot just waiting behind those doors that you will eventually hate. However I cannot believe that someone can really bee 100% undecided regarding two different programs, if you are that Indecisive than maybe you shouldn't go into a field where your next decision has someones life on the lime.
Just my 2 cents.
On a personal note, if you want to go to a place just because of prestige your life will suck and you will get burned out it that was the main factor you made that choice. I am glad that I just made that realization two days ago because it was not too late to change my #1 choice to a solid program in an environment that is awesome from a prestigous but stuffy research-based program.
I think that It really depends on the type of person you are and not the person you think you should be My thoughts are that if you are really deep deep down a gunner you should do UTSW because they do an ENTIRE YEAR in the MICU/CCU throughout their program. I hate watching people die so those are my least favorite rotations. Infact, while I was interviewing their one of their residents told me that she feels that the crazy amount of time in intensive care their ABIM pass rates have dropped. However, I have no doubt that with the PD's that those two schools have will only make their programs stronger.
Also, all this mess about funding. Guys this is Texas and everybody knows that the people bank rolling our programs are billionares that got rich off of oil. If you don't believe me Google T. Boone Pickens, Ross Perot, and even Jerry Jones that have all donated enough money to get their name on the side of a hospital. I went to UTSW and one of the APD told me they are loaded and when I went to BCM the PD told me that they have enough to continue to expand. You don't build more hospitals if you can't keep the lights on. Furthermore, Texas is the 11th strongest economy in the WORLD, do you think they would let a program shut their doors to our alreaady underserved populations. If so, you are naive.
Lastly, as I stated before, picking a program should really be about what you feel life about it,.You can lie to yourself and think about ranks, NIH funding, and that dream Medicine Chair spot just waiting behind those doors that you will eventually hate. However I cannot believe that someone can really bee 100% undecided regarding two different programs, if you are that Indecisive than maybe you shouldn't go into a field where your next decision has someones life on the lime.
Just my 2 cents.
I'm a midwestern boy and I looked at some of the Texas programs, I've heard that UTSW and Baylor both play fast and loose with 80 work week restrictions. I've also heard this from one of the residents. Anyone from those programs care to comment on that reputation?
