MS3 Clinical Grades

[Guest]

If u want to try, then you should dual apply, because odds are against you. You would not even be interviewed at my program, and these days I think that’s prob true at most programs

[Guest]

You really think a 230 step 2 with 20 pubs is “odds are against you”? I wonder what program this is

[Guest]

(11-30-2022, 12:58 PM)Guest Wrote: You really think a 230 step 2 with 20 pubs is “odds are against you”? I wonder what program this is

Multiple other specialties that are out there for you bro. Neurosurgery is for the best of the best.

[Guest]

This entire conversation is so bad. If you think you can’t match with a 230 step 2 and 20 pubs you’re out of your mind.

[Guest]

230 step 2 and 20 pubs? you matching at a top program, relax

[Guest]

alot of folks here are underestimating the quality of canidates nowadays. ive seen guys with 20, 30 pubs not matching and being forced to scramble for radioogy or internal. the quality has increase, plus you compete with foreign grads who have like 100 pubs.

From what i udnerstand, if you want a gurantee you'll have to have 265 min with 25 pubs min, plus good recs and grades of course.

[Guest]

Agreed. Subtract 10 from the Step score and and 5 pubs if you go to a T-5 school. The comment about 100 pubs seems exaggerated, however. Just look at the Johns Hopkin first year class and UCSF. All are sub-25 publications. Rule of thumb is 20-30 if you want to be safe. After that it's diminishing returns.

[Guest]

Senior resident who reviews apps.

Neurosurgeons are the best of the best. If you think we’re stupid enough to not be able to glean what the quality of your work is, think again.

100 papers where you’re first author on many, second on many, your research has a theme, and you can explain your work - exceedingly rare but sure, you’ll be thought of highly.

What happens more often is these applicants are at a paper mill producing work that will often never get cited. Trust me, writing a paper on the predictors of doing a fellowship after residency has no one impressed, or a bibliometric study, or a NSQIP paper telling me being obese leads to worse outcomes in X surgery. Raiding every and any database, jumping across every subspecialty of neurosurgery, and pushing out public health, social science, economic, or education papers just to reach that magic number, doesn’t look good. Most often these folks are middle authors on many papers, don’t have a theme in their research, and the question is raised, will they be able to be as productive not in their little paper mill cocoon and at another program.

We routinely rank applicants highly with less research who produce work that matters, who can explain their research, who lead their research, whose research has a natural arc. If your research has the potential to move the needle in neurosurgical care, I want to know about it. Warm irrigation cuts recurrence of chronic SDH in half after evacuation? Gold. I can use that in the OR tomorrow.

We are trying to match leaders in neurosurgery, not copy pasters. We do take the time to see what you put on your app.

If you don’t like this, no worries. I’m sure some programs value aimless volume.

[Guest]

(12-04-2022, 03:37 AM)Guest Wrote: alot of folks here are underestimating the quality of canidates nowadays. ive seen guys with 20, 30 pubs not matching and being forced to scramble for radioogy or internal. the quality has increase, plus you compete with foreign grads who have like 100 pubs.

From what i udnerstand, if you want a gurantee you'll have to have 265 min with 25 pubs min, plus good recs and grades of course.

(12-04-2022, 06:42 AM)Guest Wrote: Senior resident who reviews apps.

Neurosurgeons are the best of the best. If you think we’re stupid enough to not be able to glean what the quality of your work is, think again.

100 papers where you’re first author on many, second on many, your research has a theme, and you can explain your work - exceedingly rare but sure, you’ll be thought of highly.

What happens more often is these applicants are at a paper mill producing work that will often never get cited. Trust me, writing a paper on the predictors of doing a fellowship after residency has no one impressed, or a bibliometric study, or a NSQIP paper telling me being obese leads to worse outcomes in X surgery. Raiding every and any database, jumping across every subspecialty of neurosurgery, and pushing out public health, social science, economic, or education papers just to reach that magic number, doesn’t look good. Most often these folks are middle authors on many papers, don’t have a theme in their research, and the question is raised, will they be able to be as productive not in their little paper mill cocoon and at another program.

We routinely rank applicants highly with less research who produce work that matters, who can explain their research, who lead their research, whose research has a natural arc. If your research has the potential to move the needle in neurosurgical care, I want to know about it. Warm irrigation cuts recurrence of chronic SDH in half after evacuation? Gold. I can use that in the OR tomorrow.

We are trying to match leaders in neurosurgery, not copy pasters. We do take the time to see what you put on your app.

If you don’t like this, no worries. I’m sure some programs value aimless volume.

From what I have seen at my personal institution (T-5 neurosurgery program), those who were academically productive in medical school continue to do so in residency. I've seen many, if not most, residents that you describe who published a few high quality studies in med school completely drop the ball in residency. Meanwhile, the person who published 30 (even if lower quality) continues to be a machine. I know, from meeting a few Barrow residents a while back, that their program specifically looks at volume. Sort of make sense since Lawton is a machine as well. I find the comment about having a theme interesting though. Maybe someone just enjoys multiple discipline of neurosurgery? I've personally put out spine, vascular, and tumor papers because of my broad interests. Not sure why one would just have to focus on spine, etc.

[Guest]

While the resident here claims otherwise--and perhaps his program is unique--numbers do matter. I spoke to a few PDs from well-reputed neurosurgery departments and all have told me so.

Everyone knows that publications as a med student are mostly BS, but they are a good proxy for determination, time-management, statistical and writing skills, analytical skills, ability to collaborate, etc. Same for USMLE scores--everyone knows memorizing obscure facts of diseases is useless, but its a good proxy for intelligence, dedication, drive, etc. Being able to put your findings out to the community is important, too.

In my class we have kids who are doing meta-analyses and UWORLD on Fridays and those who are drinking on the weekends. Who would a decent PD prefer?

You can cope by saying PDs prefer people who don't put too much effort, who like to skid by, who are fun etc. But my own observations suggests otherwise.

If you don't have solid USLME and publications, good luck because you will need it in today's environment. Neurosurgeons are the best of the best and deep down everyone wants to become one.