Best letters?

[Guest]

MS3 here. Have the scores, research, and dead set on Neurosurgery. Looking to go to a larger research center.

From what I have gathered, the name on LOR often matters more than the exact content of the letter. For example, a mediocre letter from Lawton is more turns more heads than an excellent letter from a neurosurgeon who isn't well known.

Are there any programs that have both? Generally a well-known surgeon with lots of connections as well as a track record for strong letters?

[Focus]

This is not true. A mediocre letter from a respected colleague sinks you more if anything. The issue is that you have no idea who I respect and who I don't respect. Some top program chairmen have consistently written glowing letters on students that I have found would not fit at my program. I weight their recommendations less. Pick based on places that will give you perspective and where you might want to train.

[Guest]

To add to what has already been said, a "track record for strong letters" doesn't really make sense to me IMO. If you do well, no matter where you go, you will get a strong letter.

Also a mediocre letter or god-forbid a bad letter is much much much worse than a glowing letter from someone I don't know.

tl;dr : ditto what Focus said

[Guest]

(04-18-2019, 10:53 PM)Guest Wrote: MS3 here. Have the scores, research, and dead set on Neurosurgery. Looking to go to a larger research center.

From what I have gathered, the name on LOR often matters more than the exact content of the letter. For example, a mediocre letter from Lawton is more turns more heads than an excellent letter from a neurosurgeon who isn't well known.

Are there any programs that have both? Generally a well-known surgeon with lots of connections as well as a track record for strong letters?

In addition to what's said above^^. Some big name chairs may write glowing letters, but they may do so for everyone so it ends up not meaning so much. Some may have a track record of being harsh in their letters, but getting a good letter from them then means a lot. It's almost impossible to predict this stuff when choosing sub-i's. Especially because the personal relationships between chairs/PDs are so variable.

The only thing i'd say is if you want to match at a large research center than it would help to have letters from chairs of large research centers. Personally, I did one of my sub-I's at a notoriously high volume program with not much emphasis on research, and I could tell when interviewing at similar programs that my doing well at that particular program meant more to them than others. So if you're looking to match at a research-heavy program like a Michigan, Columbia, Stanford, etc. it would help to sub-i at similar programs.

[Guest]

Let's get away from the notion that letters are mutually exclusive in terms of big-name writer and letter content. You can have your cake and eat it too in my experience. Sure there are some people who typically write two-three sentence rec letters (Berger, Brem) and you should approach them with a certain strategy i.e. meet them early in the rotation, go to their clinic if possible, etc.

Generally, you'll get a decent letter if you performed at the expected level during the Sub-I and didn't botch anything. Meet the intended letter writer personally for 15-20 minutes, give them a copy of your CV and personal statement.