05-26-2020, 08:09 PM
Really appreciate the continuing input from all of the residents. Would anyone be able to talk about Emory or Vanderbilt?
Programs in this cycle
|
05-26-2020, 08:09 PM
Really appreciate the continuing input from all of the residents. Would anyone be able to talk about Emory or Vanderbilt?
05-26-2020, 09:15 PM
Brown -- is becoming/has become the true New England spine powerhouse under Gokaslan. Very few complex cranial cases, those cases go to Boston. Do not expect to become a skull base expert. Neuro IR is very strong, they run endovascular. Good PA/NP support. However, Rhode Island Hospital is the biggest single trauma center in New England, and can get quite busy. Residents are an eclectic group, seemed capable of working fairly autonomously, and seemed to get along fairly well with each other. Brown has very strong basic neuroscience research, but neurosurgical research leaves something to be desired.
Overall, traditionally weak program that has improved greatly in the past few years, especially in spine.
05-26-2020, 09:30 PM
(05-26-2020, 09:15 PM)Guest Wrote: Brown -- is becoming/has become the true New England spine powerhouse under Gokaslan. Very few complex cranial cases, those cases go to Boston. Do not expect to become a skull base expert. Neuro IR is very strong, they run endovascular. Good PA/NP support. However, Rhode Island Hospital is the biggest single trauma center in New England, and can get quite busy. Residents are an eclectic group, seemed capable of working fairly autonomously, and seemed to get along fairly well with each other. Brown has very strong basic neuroscience research, but neurosurgical research leaves something to be desired. Thanks, Brown resident
05-26-2020, 10:34 PM
05-27-2020, 10:56 PM
06-07-2020, 03:12 AM
(05-20-2020, 01:12 AM)Guest Wrote:How do these places compare to Penn and WUSTL?(05-20-2020, 12:49 AM)Guest Wrote:(05-19-2020, 12:27 AM)Guest Wrote: Can any residents and/or previous rotators talk about the differences between Pitt, USC, BNI, and UW? (i.e. case volume, academic opportunities available, lifestyle, culture, etc.)
06-07-2020, 03:46 AM
(06-07-2020, 03:12 AM)Guest Wrote:(05-20-2020, 01:12 AM)Guest Wrote:How do these places compare to Penn and WUSTL?(05-20-2020, 12:49 AM)Guest Wrote:(05-19-2020, 12:27 AM)Guest Wrote: Can any residents and/or previous rotators talk about the differences between Pitt, USC, BNI, and UW? (i.e. case volume, academic opportunities available, lifestyle, culture, etc.) All very different. Wash U is somewhat of a unique place in that it's very well balanced. Just to use some subjective scores to illustrate this (not trying to rank different places), it would be something like 7/10 operatively and 9.5/10 in terms of research. For a place with a ton of R01s and the Wash U basic science research infrastructure they do quite a few cases. However, the autonomy and volume are definitely a step down from BNI/Pitt/USC/Mayo etc. Penn is very weak operatively and doesn't come close to any of the ones listed above.
07-01-2020, 02:06 AM
Former UCSD med student here. Matched at a different program. UCSD's program isn't perfect but it is very good in many aspects. There was a large breadth and depth of cases from complex spine (Pham, Taylor) to complex skull base (Schwartz, U). Most of the residents were strong. The hospital was wonderful and the experience across the two UCSD campuses, the pediatric hospital, and the VA provided a great variety of case complexity and diversity. San Diego was also a very beautiful city to live in. The biggest problem with the program was the thin-skinned leadership of their chairman with a Napoleonic complex. He hired new faculty that would worship him, and ignored those that would challenge him. The lack of a real vascular surgeon or a neurosurgical-trained endovascularist is all the proof you need to know that he doesn't like competition. He clearly favored his enfolded fellows (only UCSD residents) over the residents who were not. He would also take offense to residents who would not scrub his cases, including a certain chief resident who he suspended after he blew the whistle on a policy that looked after department finances over providing equal care for homeless and immigrant patients. UCSD is a very good program if you can get past the malignant chairman. FWIW, I am at a program with a known malignant chairman and I think he's rather reasonable compared to UCSD's.
07-01-2020, 03:10 AM
(07-01-2020, 02:06 AM)Guest Wrote: Former UCSD med student here. Matched at a different program. UCSD's program isn't perfect but it is very good in many aspects. There was a large breadth and depth of cases from complex spine (Pham, Taylor) to complex skull base (Schwartz, U). Most of the residents were strong. The hospital was wonderful and the experience across the two UCSD campuses, the pediatric hospital, and the VA provided a great variety of case complexity and diversity. San Diego was also a very beautiful city to live in. The biggest problem with the program was the thin-skinned leadership of their chairman with a Napoleonic complex. He hired new faculty that would worship him, and ignored those that would challenge him. The lack of a real vascular surgeon or a neurosurgical-trained endovascularist is all the proof you need to know that he doesn't like competition. He clearly favored his enfolded fellows (only UCSD residents) over the residents who were not. He would also take offense to residents who would not scrub his cases, including a certain chief resident who he suspended after he blew the whistle on a policy that looked after department finances over providing equal care for homeless and immigrant patients. UCSD is a very good program if you can get past the malignant chairman. FWIW, I am at a program with a known malignant chairman and I think he's rather reasonable compared to UCSD's. One of the best posts on this website. Love it. as a UCSD resident, I verify this.
07-01-2020, 10:33 AM
(07-01-2020, 02:06 AM)Guest Wrote: Former UCSD med student here. Matched at a different program. UCSD's program isn't perfect but it is very good in many aspects. There was a large breadth and depth of cases from complex spine (Pham, Taylor) to complex skull base (Schwartz, U). Most of the residents were strong. The hospital was wonderful and the experience across the two UCSD campuses, the pediatric hospital, and the VA provided a great variety of case complexity and diversity. San Diego was also a very beautiful city to live in. The biggest problem with the program was the thin-skinned leadership of their chairman with a Napoleonic complex. He hired new faculty that would worship him, and ignored those that would challenge him. The lack of a real vascular surgeon or a neurosurgical-trained endovascularist is all the proof you need to know that he doesn't like competition. He clearly favored his enfolded fellows (only UCSD residents) over the residents who were not. He would also take offense to residents who would not scrub his cases, including a certain chief resident who he suspended after he blew the whistle on a policy that looked after department finances over providing equal care for homeless and immigrant patients. UCSD is a very good program if you can get past the malignant chairman. FWIW, I am at a program with a known malignant chairman and I think he's rather reasonable compared to UCSD's. Considering that Pham’s only been there for two years, that means you were at UCSD recently. Way to out yourself to an entire program and chairman. Smart move buddy. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|