(01-07-2022, 08:43 PM)Guest Wrote: This is true. But anytime someone suggests here that the residents in the top 10 programs are of higher caliber in terms of intelligence and ability, the residents from the remaining 110 programs start whining.
A product of the millennial "everyone get a trophy" generation. The Bioengineering major from MIT who goes to HMS and then MGH is equivalent in IQ to the psych major who scrapes into a low-tier med school and then scrambles into a low-tier NS residency.
And of course, if the MIT/HMS grad needs to spend less time in the OR--because he grasps concepts quicker and learns faster--then he is a bad surgeon and he is pulled down by the bottom-tier students.
We see this here all the time. The bottom-tier residents constantly putting down the top students. We see this on this thread, too.
(01-07-2022, 08:43 PM)Guest Wrote: This is true. But anytime someone suggests here that the residents in the top 10 programs are of higher caliber in terms of intelligence and ability, the residents from the remaining 110 programs start whining.
Lol. 50-100 students each year interview at “top 10 programs”. Some choose to go to other programs because you don’t solely base your decision on prestige. Doesn’t mean your IQ or intelligence isn’t the same.
Posts: 683
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2016
Reputation:
6
I think the issue here is the assumption that IQ is a comprehensive metric of intelligence. Surgery is too complex a task to be quantified by a single mode of testing. Problem solving, time management, interpersonal intelligence, creative thinking, spatial reasoning, motor skills, focus/motivation, etc are not equally represented on IQ tests. However, they all have major roles in being a surgeon. I have not personally met anyone who was universally gifted across all aspects of cognition. So, while some may excel in a given niche, they tend to be balanced by a normal range of slightly below to slightly above average (relative to peers) abilities in other realms. My experience is that, while there are transient fluctuations in an individual trainee's learning curve, for the most part trainees progress at a fairly consistent rate when provided a consistent education. Now, if you have someone who dodges ORs to study/do research versus someone who stays late to double scrub cases, then you will over time see a difference between them. The former will probably publish more/do better on the boards, the latter will become better at surgery and OR management.
Similarly, you will see residents with a strong focus in a given area progress in that area far further than peers, but if too focused they may have weakness in a different area that they avoided. You also can't be good at something that you weren't exposed to. I once worked with a fellow whose programs basically did all PCDFs. This fellow had basically no anterior neck skills whatsoever but could really crank them out from behind.
If anything, I have found a moderate trend for extraordinarily book smart people to be very indecisive in the OR. I've always attributed it to the fact that, unlike all the data roiling around in their heads, there is often no 100% correct data driven answer and that is confounding. In terms of operative savants, they are rare. I've seen one out of a few dozen trainees. This person picked up operative skill noticeably faster than peers from day one, but as to my point above about no one being universally gifted, his or her clinical judgement and interpersonal relationship skills were below average relative to peers and, ultimately, he or she graduated as an average resident.
(01-08-2022, 08:57 AM)Focus Wrote: I think the issue here is the assumption that IQ is a comprehensive metric of intelligence. Surgery is too complex a task to be quantified by a single mode of testing. Problem solving, time management, interpersonal intelligence, creative thinking, spatial reasoning, motor skills, focus/motivation, etc are not equally represented on IQ tests. However, they all have major roles in being a surgeon. I have not personally met anyone who was universally gifted across all aspects of cognition. So, while some may excel in a given niche, they tend to be balanced by a normal range of slightly below to slightly above average (relative to peers) abilities in other realms. My experience is that, while there are transient fluctuations in an individual trainee's learning curve, for the most part trainees progress at a fairly consistent rate when provided a consistent education. Now, if you have someone who dodges ORs to study/do research versus someone who stays late to double scrub cases, then you will over time see a difference between them. The former will probably publish more/do better on the boards, the latter will become better at surgery and OR management.
Similarly, you will see residents with a strong focus in a given area progress in that area far further than peers, but if too focused they may have weakness in a different area that they avoided. You also can't be good at something that you weren't exposed to. I once worked with a fellow whose programs basically did all PCDFs. This fellow had basically no anterior neck skills whatsoever but could really crank them out from behind.
If anything, I have found a moderate trend for extraordinarily book smart people to be very indecisive in the OR. I've always attributed it to the fact that, unlike all the data roiling around in their heads, there is often no 100% correct data driven answer and that is confounding. In terms of operative savants, they are rare. I've seen one out of a few dozen trainees. This person picked up operative skill noticeably faster than peers from day one, but as to my point above about no one being universally gifted, his or her clinical judgement and interpersonal relationship skills were below average relative to peers and, ultimately, he or she graduated as an average resident.
Thanks a lot of this post, very insightful. A high IQ post 
(01-07-2022, 09:50 PM)Busted Wrote: (01-07-2022, 08:43 PM)Guest Wrote: This is true. But anytime someone suggests here that the residents in the top 10 programs are of higher caliber in terms of intelligence and ability, the residents from the remaining 110 programs start whining.
A product of the millennial "everyone get a trophy" generation. The Bioengineering major from MIT who goes to HMS and then MGH is equivalent in IQ to the psych major who scrapes into a low-tier med school and then scrambles into a low-tier NS residency.
And of course, if the MIT/HMS grad needs to spend less time in the OR--because he grasps concepts quicker and learns faster--then he is a bad surgeon and he is pulled down by the bottom-tier students.
We see this here all the time. The bottom-tier residents constantly putting down the top students. We see this on this thread, too.
http://neurosurgeryhub.org/showthread.ph...&pid=21897
This guy right here is exactly who you are talking about. Bioengineering major from MIT who went to HMS then MGH. At the end of the day he's at Washington State University to be closer to family.
https://www.providence.org/doctors/profi...ic-c-chang
Is it true that Barrow is racist towards minorities? Is that why the PGY-2 left? Dude was the only ethnic person in his class.
and then replaced the PGY2 with another non white resident?
I would imagine it has to be at least a little uncomfortable being there if you're black
Replacing a non-white resident with another non-white resident doesn't mean that the racism is non-existent. The new resident could simply be unaware of what went down and Barrow could be covering its tracks. Barrow has a track record of minorities leaving based on a prior post
"5 minority residents in the last 20 years:
1 Black
2 Indian
1 Latino
1 Asian"
23 out of 28 residents are nearly all white. CEO is also a white male. Does that not sound suspicious to you?
Hell, even their Black neurology resident filed a lawsuit alleging racism
https://casetext.com/case/thompson-v-dignity-health
"Dr. Thompson was the only Adult Neurology resident of his Barrow residency class that was required to complete his first year at a different institution. (Doc. 93-1 at 3.)"
The PGY2 they fired deserved it. Was notorious amongst subIs for arrogant behavior l. Getting fired was just deserts
|
