Would all DO schools pass LMCE accreditation?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Some outpatient clerkships aren't bad, but I think as people have said, when the majority (or even just IM) is primarily outpatient, it really harms training. Sure, people will catch up in intern year, but its still a problem.

I like your list a lot. The schools in bold are the worst medical schools in the country (for all of the aforementioned LCME reasons and more) and should have the daylights audited out of them by the COCA.

Just curious, what's up with PNWU? I've heard barely anything about them, good or bad. Maybe it's because I'm not out west.

I think PNWU has improved. I think VCOM needs to be reduced too only a single school.

In general branch campuses need to be just that, branches, with at max 50 students, not walmart style extensions.

From what I've heard from VCOM graduates, things were actually pretty good until they opened like 2 more campuses over the course of like 4 years. Things seemed to just go downhill because it couldn't scale.

I'm not sure why it's a problem to do a few completely outpatient rotations. Could you please explain?

Again, I don't think its a problem with an outpatient rotation per se, its more of an issue with having the majority of your rotations be outpatient. A lot of my preceptor-only rotations (primarily electives) were a combination of outpatient and inpatient, and I felt that they were great experiences. That said, I would have missed out on a lot if most of my core rotations weren't inpatient under residents.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I think reducing it too far for many schools risks creating enormous disparities for the community. Which is why my first point exists, KCU provides KS and MO more physicians than any of the MD schools, we have an enormous impact on the healthcare environment. We should be getting funding that reflects that.

Is it ok to do that in the name of reducing healthcare 'disparities'. I don't know... I will let the big wiz figure that out..
 
Is it ok to do that in the name of reducing healthcare 'disparities'. I don't know... I will let the big wiz figure that out..


There needs to be a balance. Otherwise it puts pressure on law makers to either ignore it or make people who aren't trained enough to act as subsitutes, ex. NPs, PAs, or worse NDs and DCs.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Is it ok to do that in the name of reducing healthcare 'disparities'. I don't know... I will let the big wiz figure that out..

Places like University of Indiana and University of Washington have like over 300 students per class.

I don't think it's that crazy for a school in an area with a lot of demand for physicians to have a class size of 300, provided it can adequately scale and train that many. Obviously the latter part is what concerns DO students, because ensuring good training (primarily good clinical training) with large class sizes is not really a strong point for DO schools.
 
Places like University of Indiana and University of Washington have like over 300 students per class.

I don't think it's that crazy for a school in an area with a lot of demand for physicians to have a class size of 300, provided it can adequately scale and train that many. Obviously the latter part is what concerns DO students, because ensuring good training (primarily good clinical training) with large class sizes is not really a strong point for DO schools.

This essentially. But there's an issue when a school goes beyond its resources (LMU) or participates in reckless expansion ( VCOM).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Places like University of Indiana and University of Washington have like over 300 students per class.

I don't think it's that crazy for a school in an area with a lot of demand for physicians to have a class size of 300, provided it can adequately scale and train that many. Obviously the latter part is what concerns DO students, because ensuring good training (primarily good clinical training) with large class sizes is not really a strong point for DO schools.
State universities for many reasons can accommodate a lot students as far as clerkship... I believe IU has 2 campuses.... when you have a DO school in the middle of nowhere, for instance, having more than 100 students will certainly make it difficult for that school to provide quality clinical rotations...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This essentially. But there's an issue when a school goes beyond its resources (LMU) or participates in reckless expansion ( VCOM).

The unfortunate part about VCOM's expansion is their VA campus was/is churning out some quality graduates, but now they're being lumped in with the branch campuses and the overall reputation of the program has taken a hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The unfortunate part about VCOM's expansion is their VA campus was/is churning out some quality graduates, but now they're being lumped in with the branch campuses and the overall reputation of the program has taken a hit.


I agree, VCOM was a rising start in DO education in my opinion. Then they went and opened 2 branch campuses within 4 years of each other. I mean that's some devry style crap right there.
 
I agree, VCOM was a rising start in DO education in my opinion. Then they went and opened 2 branch campuses within 4 years of each other. I mean that's some devry style crap right there.
at least they mandate class attendance (and dress codes, I believe) for their students. That has to count for something, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
at least they mandate class attendance (and dress codes, I believe) for their students. That has to count for something, right?

oh... you had me going there! :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
at least they mandate class attendance (and dress codes, I believe) for their students. That has to count for something, right?


I notice that a lot of lower tier schools mandate this policy for some reason. It doesn't help improve scores and yet they still keep it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I notice that a lot of lower tier schools mandate this policy for some reason. It doesn't help improve scores and yet they still keep it.

KYCOM has recently taken off mandatory attendance beyond the 1st semester. That took a lot of time.
 
Attendance policies in and of themselves aren't inherently bad per se, its more how strict they are or how they are enforced. Some schools with mandatory attendance policies don't even address attendance unless you're struggling to pass and skipping a bunch of classes.

Attendance requirements for labs/clinical skills courses is pretty common across the board.

I would also caution anyone that just because there is no formal attendance requirement, doesn't mean there are no consequences for skipping certain things. A couple students at a school that will remain nameless with no attendance policy told me that they essentially had "pop quizzes" worth 10% of their grades in certain classes, so if you didn't show up you were automatically knocked down a letter grade.

State universities for many reasons can accommodate a lot students as far as clerkship... I believe IU has 2 campuses.... when you have a DO school in the middle of nowhere, for instance, having more than 100 students will certainly make it difficult for that school to provide quality clinical rotations...

True, but this isn't universally the case, and a lot of DO schools do separate their classes into satellite campuses (it seems more common now than it was before).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
That is a huge issue and the lack of it would shut down all DO schools except for maybe the state funded ones (MSU, Rowan, Ohio Heritage, OSU, TCOM, and UNE though I don't know if UNE is public). And again, it's "resolved" with the AOA backed statement "holistic care and primary care focused" as well as the statement "we have the JAOA" which is a sorry excuse for a research journal.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
With only 1 month of summer, is there no chance to do productive research outside of school?
 
With only 1 month of summer, is there no chance to do productive research outside of school?

I wouldn't go as far to say doing productive research is impossible but I will say it makes doing it very very hard, especially to do something substantial if you choose to do wet lab work. You've lost essentially all research fellowships due to their 8 wk minimum commitment. You can still find research to do (will be working on two different projects this summer), so really it's all how you approach it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I wouldn't go as far to say doing productive research is impossible but I will say it makes doing it very very hard, especially to do something substantial if you choose to do wet lab work. You've lost essentially all research fellowships due to their 8 wk minimum commitment. You can still find research to do (will be working on two different projects this summer), so really it's all how you approach it.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app


The problem is that 4 weeks is barely enough to contribute to a project and if you didn't know the techniques before hand 2 weeks will be training at the minimal.
 
The problem is that 4 weeks is barely enough to contribute to a project and if you didn't know the techniques before hand 2 weeks will be training at the minimal.

In terms of basic science definitely you need to be well learned in whatever lab techniques you are going to perform. In terms of helping in clonical research with the data collection and what not that should be fine.


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile app
 
Actually, IU has the largest MD class in the US (or did until recently) because they have the big school in Indy, and 7 centers (one of which is becoming a four year school, apparently), which are all branch campuses. My best friend in science still works at one of them.

Let's see if I can still remember:

Gary
Ft Wayne
Bloomington
Evansville
South Bend
Muncie
Vincennes

State universities for many reasons can accommodate a lot students as far as clerkship... I believe IU has 2 campuses.... when you have a DO school in the middle of nowhere, for instance, having more than 100 students will certainly make it difficult for that school to provide quality clinical rotations...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The unfortunate part about VCOM's expansion is their VA campus was/is churning out some quality graduates, but now they're being lumped in with the branch campuses and the overall reputation of the program has taken a hit.


What is having a branch campus ruin a school's reputation ?
 
Attendance policies in and of themselves aren't inherently bad per se, its more how strict they are or how they are enforced. Some schools with mandatory attendance policies don't even address attendance unless you're struggling to pass and skipping a bunch of classes.

Attendance requirements for labs/clinical skills courses is pretty common across the board.

I would also caution anyone that just because there is no formal attendance requirement, doesn't mean there are no consequences for skipping certain things. A couple students at a school that will remain nameless with no attendance policy told me that they essentially had "pop quizzes" worth 10% of their grades in certain classes, so if you didn't show up you were automatically knocked down a letter grade.



True, but this isn't universally the case, and a lot of DO schools do separate their classes into satellite campuses (it seems more common now than it was before).


It is much more common. Having branch campuses permits growth that could not happen at 1 location. With a branch campus there are more resources available for the school and students. There are more physicians to work with and more health care facilities to rotate in. The concept of a branch campus is a game changer. It is allowing the DO profession to grow much more rapidly than it could have without them. The students will graduate, pass the boards, get their medical licenses and serve the needs to the population.
 
It is much more common. Having branch campuses permits growth that could not happen at 1 location. With a branch campus there are more resources available for the school and students. There are more physicians to work with and more health care facilities to rotate in. The concept of a branch campus is a game changer. It is allowing the DO profession to grow much more rapidly than it could have without them. The students will graduate, pass the boards, get their medical licenses and serve the needs to the population.


Rapidly growing their owners and board of trusties' bank accounts you mean?

Look, there's no such thing as a branch campus in the MD world. There are no Universities of Location 1 in location 2.

Furthermore it's not the schools that are established that are building up these excessive branch campuses. Sure, CCOM has AZCOM ( But AZCOM is more med school than some of the mother institutes that these branch schools came from).

If you want to pretend that it's totally fine for a low tier rural focus school to open 2 branch campuses within 4 years of each other, if you want to pretend that COCA allowing a school with poor COMLEX first time pass rates to increase their sizes as opposed to levying punishments, then you're why the field will continue to be negatively far into the future.

I'm all for DO schools being opened. But if it comes at the expense of quality, produces graduates who can barely pass the comlex, or are regarded as poor rotating 3rd and 4th years by clinicians and residency programs, then no, we need to put our foots down. And if we don't, then the LCME will when it inevitably brings about a second Plexner report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
It is much more common. Having branch campuses permits growth that could not happen at 1 location. With a branch campus there are more resources available for the school and students. There are more physicians to work with and more health care facilities to rotate in. The concept of a branch campus is a game changer. It is allowing the DO profession to grow much more rapidly than it could have without them. The students will graduate, pass the boards, get their medical licenses and serve the needs to the population.
Nice in theory but not exactly true in practice. Branch campuses are easier to pass through COCA. I question any benefits for students for a school to have a loose association with a school 4 states away. Maybe since OOS rotations are more accepted in the DO world, it's thought of as expanded access to rotations, but most MD students would balk if the school made them move 3 states away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Look, there's no such thing as a branch campus in the MD world. There are no Universities of Location 1 in location 2.

Eh that's not totally true. The Mayo Clinic has branch campuses. But yeah they are few and far between, and even when they have them I don't think anyone will be accusing Mayo AZ of having poor clinical rotations...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
It is much more common. Having branch campuses permits growth that could not happen at 1 location. With a branch campus there are more resources available for the school and students. There are more physicians to work with and more health care facilities to rotate in. The concept of a branch campus is a game changer. It is allowing the DO profession to grow much more rapidly than it could have without them. The students will graduate, pass the boards, get their medical licenses and serve the needs to the population.

The fact that quantity of DO's than the quality of DO's coming out is that important to you is mind boggling to me. It's shameful that we have new branch campuses with new class sizes of 150-270 with essentially minimal clinical faculty and sorry excuses for attaching to a state university with "amazing research opportunities".

No reason will be good enough to explain why leadership from admin at NYIT had eyes on the "physician shortage" in Arkansas. These sponsor state universities would be willing to open a state funded (and logically named) DO school and with that, would come with a small class size, stronger clinical faculty, more community support (like OUHCOM or MSUCOM or TCOM). Instead what we see is other private DO schools 100% absolutely rushing to get check mate in the numbers game so the DO body has more lobbying force down the road with equal footing to MD's in the AMA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
...Look, there's no such thing as a branch campus in the MD world. There are no Universities of Location 1 in location 2...

Yeah, that's not really true. A LOT of MD schools have satellite campuses. UCLA used to have one at UCR until UCR became its own school. Temple was planning to build a satellite in Pgh until it became too expensive so they made it just a clinical campus. IU, U of Wash, etc. etc. have satellites/branches of varying size and breadth.

Here's a link that lists all campuses. It lists what the campus covers (preclinicals 1&2, MS1-3, complete MS1-4). As you can see a couple have complete branches and even more have preclinical satellites (kind of like LECOM-SH, Touro-Middletown, KCUMB-Joplin I think?).

https://www.aamc.org/download/343556/data/official-regional-medical-campuses-may2013.xlsx

One big difference though is that the public all stay in-state, which makes sense given their funding. Another difference is that their sizes are much smaller than on the DO side. 50 vs. 100 for example.

...I'm all for DO schools being opened. But if it comes at the expense of quality, produces graduates who can barely pass the comlex, or are regarded as poor rotating 3rd and 4th years by clinicians and residency programs, then no, we need to put our foots down. And if we don't, then the LCME will when it inevitably brings about a second Plexner report.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Eh that's not totally true. The Mayo Clinic has branch campuses. But yeah they are few and far between, and even when they have them I don't think anyone will be accusing Mayo AZ of having poor clinical rotations...

You're right. See above.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
The fact that quantity of DO's than the quality of DO's coming out is that important to you is mind boggling to me. It's shameful that we have new branch campuses with new class sizes of 150-270 with essentially minimal clinical faculty and sorry excuses for attaching to a state university with "amazing research opportunities".

No reason will be good enough to explain why leadership from admin at NYIT had eyes on the "physician shortage" in Arkansas. These sponsor state universities would be willing to open a state funded (and logically named) DO school and with that, would come with a small class size, stronger clinical faculty, more community support (like OUHCOM or MSUCOM or TCOM). Instead what we see is other private DO schools 100% absolutely rushing to get check mate in the numbers game so the DO body has more lobbying force down the road with equal footing to MD's in the AMA.

This. Last night I wrestled with myself for 3 hours with whether or not I should apply to MSU, because a quality education is that important to me. In the end I couldn't do $90,000/year to my wife and kids but it was a serious internal battle. If we had more MSU's and OUCOM's in the DO world then DO's would have much more staying power. As it stands all that happens is that the bias gets fed and perpetuated further by the rapid quantity over quality expansion. They really drag down the DO image as whole regardless of how there truly are some solid programs that produce high quality physicians and residents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Probably one of the biggest issues with LMU-DCOM in terms of gaining clinical sites is the fact that it's in rural east Tennessee. It's difficult for the school to score ward sites because in state, they need to compete with Vandy Med, ETSU med, and UT Med. With 3 MD schools established in the biggest cities of TN, LMU-DCOM is left picking up scraps essentially in areas where none of the MD schools want to send their students. Bad for the students that want to go into specialties like myself, but I'd say for those interested in PC, it's really not that bad of rotation sites.

While urban rotations have significantly more advantages than rural rotations, what rural rotations do force you to do as a physician is to work with what you have. It essentially teaches you how to be resourceful - a skill that I'd say is often overlooked in urban sites. When you have a patient that's living below the poverty line in rural Appalachia, you can't just "refer" them out.

Now back to the LCME thing - yeah, I'd agree that DCOM probably wouldn't make the cut currently, but they are moving up in the research world. Perhaps not in the clinical research world, but in groundbreaking research they definitely are. They'll definitely need to work towards bettering their rotation sites and with a new Dean, we'll see if that gets accomplished. I know that DCOM recently expanded rotations into Florida, so definitely a start.
 
Probably one of the biggest issues with LMU-DCOM in terms of gaining clinical sites is the fact that it's in rural east Tennessee. It's difficult for the school to score ward sites because in state, they need to compete with Vandy Med, ETSU med, and UT Med. With 3 MD schools established in the biggest cities of TN, LMU-DCOM is left picking up scraps essentially in areas where none of the MD schools want to send their students. Bad for the students that want to go into specialties like myself, but I'd say for those interested in PC, it's really not that bad of rotation sites.

While urban rotations have significantly more advantages than rural rotations, what rural rotations do force you to do as a physician is to work with what you have. It essentially teaches you how to be resourceful - a skill that I'd say is often overlooked in urban sites. When you have a patient that's living below the poverty line in rural Appalachia, you can't just "refer" them out.

Now back to the LCME thing - yeah, I'd agree that DCOM probably wouldn't make the cut currently, but they are moving up in the research world. Perhaps not in the clinical research world, but in groundbreaking research they definitely are. They'll definitely need to work towards bettering their rotation sites and with a new Dean, we'll see if that gets accomplished. I know that DCOM recently expanded rotations into Florida, so definitely a start.

What groundbreaking research do they have?


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile app
 
The fact that quantity of DO's than the quality of DO's coming out is that important to you is mind boggling to me. It's shameful that we have new branch campuses with new class sizes of 150-270 with essentially minimal clinical faculty and sorry excuses for attaching to a state university with "amazing research opportunities".

No reason will be good enough to explain why leadership from admin at NYIT had eyes on the "physician shortage" in Arkansas. These sponsor state universities would be willing to open a state funded (and logically named) DO school and with that, would come with a small class size, stronger clinical faculty, more community support (like OUHCOM or MSUCOM or TCOM). Instead what we see is other private DO schools 100% absolutely rushing to get check mate in the numbers game so the DO body has more lobbying force down the road with equal footing to MD's in the AMA.


Is there scientific evidence that branch campuses or the newer schools produce incompetent physicians? If Dr. Still believed that small schools were not adequate to educate professionals, the profession would never have started.

NYIT is in Arkansas because it is a wonderful opportunity to educate physicians who are likely to remain in the area and take care of the local population. This is an example of taking advantage of new opportunities and sharing resources to meet a need. It is a brilliant and efficient move.
 
Yeah, that's not really true. A LOT of MD schools have satellite campuses. UCLA used to have one at UCR until UCR became its own school. Temple was planning to build a satellite in Pgh until it became too expensive so they made it just a clinical campus. IU, U of Wash, etc. etc. have satellites/branches of varying size and breadth.

Here's a link that lists all campuses. It lists what the campus covers (preclinicals 1&2, MS1-3, complete MS1-4). As you can see a couple have complete branches and even more have preclinical satellites (kind of like LECOM-SH, Touro-Middletown, KCUMB-Joplin I think?).

https://www.aamc.org/download/343556/data/official-regional-medical-campuses-may2013.xlsx

One big difference though is that the public all stay in-state, which makes sense given their funding. Another difference is that their sizes are much smaller than on the DO side. 50 vs. 100 for example.



Yeah, I agree with this.



You're right. See above.


Satellites =/= branch campuses. And ok, I meant it's not as bad on the MD side as it is on the DO side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Is there scientific evidence that branch campuses or the newer schools produce incompetent physicians? If Dr. Still believed that small schools were not adequate to educate professionals, the profession would never have started.

NYIT is in Arkansas because it is a wonderful opportunity to educate physicians who are likely to remain in the area and take care of the local population. This is an example of taking advantage of new opportunities and sharing resources to meet a need. It is a brilliant and efficient move.

Dr. Still's idea of what was adequate to educate professionals was met with the Flexnor report and with it 90% of DO schools at the time were shut down and the ones that remained Flexnor considered unable to even teach what Still envisioned.

Again NYIT is opportunistic in AR. They're making money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Is there scientific evidence that branch campuses or the newer schools produce incompetent physicians? If Dr. Still believed that small schools were not adequate to educate professionals, the profession would never have started.

NYIT is in Arkansas because it is a wonderful opportunity to educate physicians who are likely to remain in the area and take care of the local population. This is an example of taking advantage of new opportunities and sharing resources to meet a need. It is a brilliant and efficient move.

I never stated branch campuses produced incompetent physicians. Of course they'll produce competent physicians. Competent to pass COMLEX 1 and 2 and match into some program that they can get into. I'm saying that these campuses can do better in providing more resources to make them as successful as they can be when it comes to matching into the area that they want.

That reason about NYIT still doesn't make sense to me. Why did NYIT have to be the one to do it? Why couldn't DO's in the area work with the ASU admin to create a state-funded program that would protect that school by requiring 70-80% of the class to be filled by Arkansas residents? Instead it's now a private branch campus with a huge class size and mission statement that says to serve arkansas (when the school name says New York). It just doesn't make sense. I have yet to see Stanford School of Medicine - South Dakota Branch because of a physician shortage there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Oh man been a while since I have seen this thread topic.

The two things DO schools would need to improve the most are research and clinical rotations, as a whole. Many schools would most likely meet the bare minimums for LCME accreditation. However, MD schools as a whole function at a higher level than the bare minimum of LCME accreditation. In the end, there still would be quite a handful of DO schools that are not able to reach that standard.
There's also the funding issue- I believe the LCME target for funding is 80% not coming from tuition, but I could be incorrect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Probably one of the biggest issues with LMU-DCOM in terms of gaining clinical sites is the fact that it's in rural east Tennessee. It's difficult for the school to score ward sites because in state, they need to compete with Vandy Med, ETSU med, and UT Med. With 3 MD schools established in the biggest cities of TN, LMU-DCOM is left picking up scraps essentially in areas where none of the MD schools want to send their students. Bad for the students that want to go into specialties like myself, but I'd say for those interested in PC, it's really not that bad of rotation sites.

While urban rotations have significantly more advantages than rural rotations, what rural rotations do force you to do as a physician is to work with what you have. It essentially teaches you how to be resourceful - a skill that I'd say is often overlooked in urban sites. When you have a patient that's living below the poverty line in rural Appalachia, you can't just "refer" them out.

Now back to the LCME thing - yeah, I'd agree that DCOM probably wouldn't make the cut currently, but they are moving up in the research world. Perhaps not in the clinical research world, but in groundbreaking research they definitely are. They'll definitely need to work towards bettering their rotation sites and with a new Dean, we'll see if that gets accomplished. I know that DCOM recently expanded rotations into Florida, so definitely a start.

What you have stated are definitely concerns. This is why medical schools should not be building in extremely rural areas because otherwise access to research is hard and access to hospitals are extremely difficult (I'd say the same for KCOM too, people will say it is a good school as is, but remember it is a 100+ years old so it took time to be good). The second problem with the school is the lack of GME. I could only spot several residencies that are sponsored by the school, most of which are outside of TN. With GME sponsored by said school, it becomes a bargaining chip to allow students to rotate in hospitals where the residency is housed. Without this, you have the issues of dropped rotations and relocating on a short notice to a site far away. Even though LMU maybe expanding out to FL, who knows how long it will have this site for (for DO schools sites can come and go depending on how strong the affiliation is). For example, they had more sites in AL, but lost them as soon as ACOM came into the picture.

What your stating about rural rotations is more of a rationale rather than a reason. One can definitely have the best of both world without sacrificing one for the other. This is why we have 4th year, where we can explore other sides of medicine via elective rotations. One can have more urban sites with residents to get the feeling of being a residents. Then after the matching game, during 4th year, one goes to a rural hospital to rotate and learn what it means to be a rural doctor. At the very least, if the school want a true rural experience for 3rd year then at least set up GME in the rural hospitals and have students rotate there.

As for the research side of things, again it would make things easier if LMU were located in a small city. Otherwise resources for research will be lacking and limit the true potential of the school. People can make up for this by doing research fellowships or relocating near hospitals where research is going on during the summer (there have been students at LMU who did research during their 3rd year also).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Is there scientific evidence that branch campuses or the newer schools produce incompetent physicians? If Dr. Still believed that small schools were not adequate to educate professionals, the profession would never have started.

NYIT is in Arkansas because it is a wonderful opportunity to educate physicians who are likely to remain in the area and take care of the local population. This is an example of taking advantage of new opportunities and sharing resources to meet a need. It is a brilliant and efficient move.
Kek, NYIT is in Arkansas because they can make money. They don't give two ****s about anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
There's also the funding issue- I believe the LCME target for funding is 80% not coming from tuition, but I could be incorrect.

Yes this is true (well I believe it to be true LOL). I remember reading from AMSA that 50% of osteopathic school funding comes from tuition. Cannot really confirm those numbers though.
 
What groundbreaking research do they have?


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile app

The one that comes to mind right off the top of my head is the recent Homo naledi discovery that made the cover of Nat Geo this year. Dr. Zach Throckmorton was part of the team that made the discovery. From previous years, Dr. Jonathan Leo drew some national attention last year when he challenged JAMA's support of the pharmacokinetics behind SSRIs and the advertisements for these medications. It became a big deal when JAMA attempted to stonewall him rather than admitting the conflict of interest they had with the pharmaceutical company. I'm not familiar with the rest of the DCOM faculties research since I haven't spoken to many of them yet, but I'd say for a program that's only in it's 9th year, they're definitely moving in the right direction. It's a volatile environment for sure though - funding is extremely difficult to come by and as students here, we really need to put the leg work in in order to find it. Connections and networking for sure is what DCOM needs to push for not just amongst faculty, but it needs to be encouraged with the students as well. There's definitely a lack of drive for students here to do research. It's kept hush hush and the ones that are fortunate to get the opportunity usually got them by creating their project from the ground up.
 
Im sorry for derailing here. But I seriously was expecting this to be fake. Would not be so funny if he didn't work at a med school.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Funny thing - Dr. Throck taught us about the Throckmorton sign in radiology :laugh::laugh::laugh:
 
Funny thing - Dr. Throck taught us about the Throckmorton sign in radiology :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Well the next doc you mention in that post is Johnathan Leo and I was ready for it to be Johnathan Thomas (as in John Thomas) and then have it spiral into a really funny post....

....and then it was totally serious and caught me off guard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
What you have stated are definitely concerns. This is why medical schools should not be building in extremely rural areas because otherwise access to research is hard and access to hospitals are extremely difficult (I'd say the same for KCOM too, people will say it is a good school as is, but remember it is a 100+ years old so it took time to be good). The second problem with the school is the lack of GME. I could only spot several residencies that are sponsored by the school, most of which are outside of TN. With GME sponsored by said school, it becomes a bargaining chip to allow students to rotate in hospitals where the residency is housed. Without this, you have the issues of dropped rotations and relocating on a short notice to a site far away. Even though LMU maybe expanding out to FL, who knows how long it will have this site for (for DO schools sites can come and go depending on how strong the affiliation is). For example, they had more sites in AL, but lost them as soon as ACOM came into the picture.

What your stating about rural rotations is more of a rationale rather than a reason. One can definitely have the best of both world without sacrificing one for the other. This is why we have 4th year, where we can explore other sides of medicine via elective rotations. One can have more urban sites with residents to get the feeling of being a residents. Then after the matching game, during 4th year, one goes to a rural hospital to rotate and learn what it means to be a rural doctor. At the very least, if the school want a true rural experience for 3rd year then at least set up GME in the rural hospitals and have students rotate there.

As for the research side of things, again it would make things easier if LMU were located in a small city. Otherwise resources for research will be lacking and limit the true potential of the school. People can make up for this by doing research fellowships or relocating near hospitals where research is going on during the summer (there have been students at LMU who did research during their 3rd year also).


With KCOM they have a network of connections to rotation sites across Missouri and across the country that are strong. So at least you have an opportunity to obtain a solid clinical education if you're willing to move. With many schools the option itself is almost non existent.
 
With KCOM they have a network of connections to rotation sites across Missouri and across the country that are strong. So at least you have an opportunity to obtain a solid clinical education if you're willing to move. With many schools the option itself is almost non existent.

Do you know anything about how many students stay at their hospital for rotations or the quality of them?
 
Dr. Still's idea of what was adequate to educate professionals was met with the Flexnor report and with it 90% of DO schools at the time were shut down and the ones that remained Flexnor considered unable to even teach what Still envisioned.....

Yeah, that's some selective historiocracy there. Its inaccurate. 90% of DO schools didn't close after the Flexner report. There simply weren't that many to begin with (remember the first school opened in 1892, so its not like there were 50 open by 1910), and we all know that 5 or so remained standing. Its hard to get real numbers, but "several" seems to be the implication. Also the Flexner report ended up closing down ~60% of all US MD schools at the time, and something around 90%+ of all "alternative" schools, including ND and Homeopathy schools.

On a separate note, his report also closed down all but 2 HBCU MD schools, explaining that blacks were should only treat other blacks. Its pretty clear that Flexner had some very large biases, even with his selection of what he viewed as the "ideal" school (you know the one he went to in undergrad was affiliated with as a teacher). In any case, it was a different time, and for the most part his changes created far more regulation in medical training in a time when there was very little to begin with, which ultimately was a net benefit to the medical profession.

EDIT: So I got curious and I looked into this a little more and found that in his review of a ton of medical schools, Flexner visited the following schools of osteopathy:

1. LA College - merged in 1914, possibly because of aspects of the Flexner report, with the Pacific College
2. Pacific College - merged in 1914, possibly because of aspects of the Flexner report, with the LA College
3. Littlejohn College (Chicago) - later became CCOM
4. Still in Des Moines - later became DMU
5. Massachusetts College - In 1916 it lost AOA accreditation (possibly due to Flexner) and closed in the 1940s when it lost state recognition
6. Central College (Kansas City) - Its not clear if it was later reinvented as KCUMB in 1916
7. ASO (Kirksville) - later became KCOM
8. PCOM

The first 2 schools, following their merger, became the College of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, and for a decade (1918-1928) was the ONLY medical school in California after the closure of USC (likely because of the Flexner report), which later reopened in 1928. For those who don't know, this became the UCI medical school in the 60s with the whole CA DO and MD "merger". COMP opened 16 years later.

EDIT #2: OK, so I should have been doing something else, but I skimmed through a lot of the Flexner report. The guy cuts up on virtually every institution he reviewed save a handful that matched his "ideal". Its hilarious, because a lot of the common complaints of his about most medical schools at the time (e.g. after money only, barely any "ward" experience and situations where interns do all the work and students just "look on", having to travel long distances for ward experience, poor facilities, inadequate faculty, no permanent clinical faculty, etc.) are the same things we complain about now, although realistically by 1910's standards, I think we're doing quite a bit better.

That said, he also cuts up on many schools stating that they would perish and become extinct in the future with better regulation, only for those schools to comprise a LOT of the top 20 MD schools in the country today. I know, I know its been a century, its just funny to read it knowing what the future held.

He also had a very clearly low opinion of osteopathy and pretty much said nothing good about any of the DO schools he evaluated at the time, calling them all businesses and using "treatment" in quotes whenever he referred to what the students there were taught or did.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
With KCOM they have a network of connections to rotation sites across Missouri and across the country that are strong. So at least you have an opportunity to obtain a solid clinical education if you're willing to move. With many schools the option itself is almost non existent.

This is because of the amount of years KCOM had to develop those clinical sites and connections, being in a rural area slowed down its development for sure. MSU is still stronger in terms of clinical education because the fact it is in a city and a part of a university. It has done this in a fraction of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The problem with this is that the clinical training can be lacking. It's easy to set up pre-clinicals; getting quality rotation sites is another. This is why a number of ACGME PDs have a leery view of DO grads these days, not for the different philosophy of practicing Medicine.


It is much more common. Having branch campuses permits growth that could not happen at 1 location. With a branch campus there are more resources available for the school and students. There are more physicians to work with and more health care facilities to rotate in. The concept of a branch campus is a game changer. It is allowing the DO profession to grow much more rapidly than it could have without them. The students will graduate, pass the boards, get their medical licenses and serve the needs to the population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top