(12-21-2020, 08:20 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
Can anyone expand on the case is better at vascular claim? I just don’t see it. For same reason as skins volume mentioned above I suspect CCF gets most.
Not super familiar with the programs but I did interview at Case when I applied. Bambakidis is a fairly big name in open vascular. I think Selman is/was vascular-oriented as well. Did not do CCF or OSU but I thought Case was a solid spot.
(12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
LOL, CCF is not an "academic" institution by any stretch of the imagination
aNy sTrEtCh oF tHe iMaGiNaTiOn
(12-21-2020, 09:31 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
LOL, CCF is not an "academic" institution by any stretch of the imagination
aNy sTrEtCh oF tHe iMaGiNaTiOn
Please elaborate
(12-21-2020, 11:49 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 09:31 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
LOL, CCF is not an "academic" institution by any stretch of the imagination
aNy sTrEtCh oF tHe iMaGiNaTiOn
Please elaborate
I would presume what the poster meant by using the alternating lowercase/uppercase "sarcasm" text is that they disagree with the poster who stated that Cleveland Clinic is not "academic". To say such a think is asinine and is born from the same ill-informed position that would lead one to state that "MGH is the only academic program" or that "Pitt and Barrow are the only residents that know how to operate." It subjects all programs to a binary system that is not truly reflective of the nature of neurosurgical practice. I'd recommend looking at the AANS Exit Strategy Course for Senior Neurosurgery Residents ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HO3v3__...annel=NREF) --> on none of the slides in the "academics" video does it say "university-affiliated" though many, if not most, academic programs are. The course shows that there is really a spectrum of practice settings ranging from true "private practice" to multi-specialty practice to hospital-employed to being employed by a university-affiliated center. The majority of neurosurgeons do not exist in the university setting or even the academic-setting, at large, because they are the worst financial models and are not necessary for you to do research unless you need the basic science lab. They are also probably poor choices unless you have this "need" to do basic science research or are dying to teach students. Also, confining the term "academic" to only those institutions that have affiliated research universities (e.g. Hopkins, UCSF, MGH, Columbia) would be to classify as "non-academic" multiple institutions that have made undeniable contributions to medicine e.g. the Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic. Many of these programs have huge names in neurosurgery (e.g. Mike Lawton and Juan Uribe @ Barrow, Spinner @ Mayo, Tom Mroz + Mike Steinmetz @ Cleveland Clinic). These people are thought leaders in the field and can help you get university-affiliated jobs if you so want. Also, if you look, you'll see that residents at some of these programs are far more academically productive during residency than are their counterparts at university-affiliated centers (e.g. Barrow and Mayo are both top 5 and Cleveland Clinic is ahead of Case --> doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyy217).
(12-21-2020, 08:20 PM)IGuest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
Can anyone expand on the case is better at vascular claim? I just don’t see it. For same reason as skins volume mentioned above I suspect CCF gets most.
(12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 08:20 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
Can anyone expand on the case is better at vascular claim? I just don’t see it. For same reason as skins volume mentioned above I suspect CCF gets most.
Not super familiar with the programs but I did interview at Case when I applied. Bambakidis is a fairly big name in open vascular. I think Selman is/was vascular-oriented as well. Did not do CCF or OSU but I thought Case was a solid spot.
CCF is almost entirely endovascular with occasional open cases. Case has 3 open/endo faculty who all lean open, and one open faculty (Selman) who does everything open. Nobody at CCF have the vascular name/clout of Selman and Bambakidis. It’s a solid program.
(12-22-2020, 07:11 AM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 11:49 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 09:31 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
LOL, CCF is not an "academic" institution by any stretch of the imagination
aNy sTrEtCh oF tHe iMaGiNaTiOn
Please elaborate
I would presume what the poster meant by using the alternating lowercase/uppercase "sarcasm" text is that they disagree with the poster who stated that Cleveland Clinic is not "academic". To say such a think is asinine and is born from the same ill-informed position that would lead one to state that "MGH is the only academic program" or that "Pitt and Barrow are the only residents that know how to operate." It subjects all programs to a binary system that is not truly reflective of the nature of neurosurgical practice. I'd recommend looking at the AANS Exit Strategy Course for Senior Neurosurgery Residents (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HO3v3__...annel=NREF) --> on none of the slides in the "academics" video does it say "university-affiliated" though many, if not most, academic programs are. The course shows that there is really a spectrum of practice settings ranging from true "private practice" to multi-specialty practice to hospital-employed to being employed by a university-affiliated center. The majority of neurosurgeons do not exist in the university setting or even the academic-setting, at large, because they are the worst financial models and are not necessary for you to do research unless you need the basic science lab. They are also probably poor choices unless you have this "need" to do basic science research or are dying to teach students. Also, confining the term "academic" to only those institutions that have affiliated research universities (e.g. Hopkins, UCSF, MGH, Columbia) would be to classify as "non-academic" multiple institutions that have made undeniable contributions to medicine e.g. the Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic. Many of these programs have huge names in neurosurgery (e.g. Mike Lawton and Juan Uribe @ Barrow, Spinner @ Mayo, Tom Mroz + Mike Steinmetz @ Cleveland Clinic). These people are thought leaders in the field and can help you get university-affiliated jobs if you so want. Also, if you look, you'll see that residents at some of these programs are far more academically productive during residency than are their counterparts at university-affiliated centers (e.g. Barrow and Mayo are both top 5 and Cleveland Clinic is ahead of Case --> doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyy217).
Exactly. "Academic" is a bit more nuanced than "affiliated with a university" and calling CC "not academic by any stretch of the imagination" is just dumb
(12-22-2020, 07:11 AM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 11:49 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 09:31 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (12-21-2020, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote: Really think that this depends upon what you want, but in general, I'd say OSU > Case. OSU has better spine and skull base, whereas Case/University may have better open vascular/endovascular. Feel like tumor is a push, or OSU is better, if anything, since it doesn't have to compete w/ another academic institution right next door and is in a larger metropolitan area (source: Wikipedia --> if you trust that one). Columbus is also one of the faster growing large US cities, whereas Cleveland is stagnant, like many rust belt cities. Also, from a case perspective, OSU is growing and has ~7100 cases for FY2019 split across 16 total residents vs. Case (which I think has like 4000/yr) for 16 total residents. To this point, OSU is actually looking to expand their residency compliment. Last, OSU has more NIH/research funding ($1.8million --> rank 24 vs. $0.57million for Case --> rank 41) + Lonser as chair (former NIH neurosurgery head). So I think academic or clinical, OSU probably has the edge. However, if cerebrovascular is your think, Case might have the advantage. Agreed with poster above that the spine guys (namely Mendel) are better known @ OSU.
LOL, CCF is not an "academic" institution by any stretch of the imagination
aNy sTrEtCh oF tHe iMaGiNaTiOn
Please elaborate
I would presume what the poster meant by using the alternating lowercase/uppercase "sarcasm" text is that they disagree with the poster who stated that Cleveland Clinic is not "academic". To say such a think is asinine and is born from the same ill-informed position that would lead one to state that "MGH is the only academic program" or that "Pitt and Barrow are the only residents that know how to operate." It subjects all programs to a binary system that is not truly reflective of the nature of neurosurgical practice. I'd recommend looking at the AANS Exit Strategy Course for Senior Neurosurgery Residents (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HO3v3__...annel=NREF) --> on none of the slides in the "academics" video does it say "university-affiliated" though many, if not most, academic programs are. The course shows that there is really a spectrum of practice settings ranging from true "private practice" to multi-specialty practice to hospital-employed to being employed by a university-affiliated center. The majority of neurosurgeons do not exist in the university setting or even the academic-setting, at large, because they are the worst financial models and are not necessary for you to do research unless you need the basic science lab. They are also probably poor choices unless you have this "need" to do basic science research or are dying to teach students. Also, confining the term "academic" to only those institutions that have affiliated research universities (e.g. Hopkins, UCSF, MGH, Columbia) would be to classify as "non-academic" multiple institutions that have made undeniable contributions to medicine e.g. the Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinic. Many of these programs have huge names in neurosurgery (e.g. Mike Lawton and Juan Uribe @ Barrow, Spinner @ Mayo, Tom Mroz + Mike Steinmetz @ Cleveland Clinic). These people are thought leaders in the field and can help you get university-affiliated jobs if you so want. Also, if you look, you'll see that residents at some of these programs are far more academically productive during residency than are their counterparts at university-affiliated centers (e.g. Barrow and Mayo are both top 5 and Cleveland Clinic is ahead of Case --> doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyy217).
There are lots of words in this post without any substance. Go to the NIH Reporter and tell me how many R01 funded surgeons you find at CCF; now do the same at the UCSF, Hopkins, MGH, Wash U, or UCLA. Look up their alumni and find me one graduate with a publication in Nature or Cell, or tell me how many MD/PhDs choose to matriculate in their resident or faculty roster. This may come as a shock to many of you but just because you publish something in Cureus or World Neurosurgery doesn't make you "academically productive" or a "leader in the field". By the way, the only one confining the term "academic" to any of the aforementioned institutions is you. I have no problem with the CCFs or the Barrows of the world, and could care less if they have a university affiliation associated with them. They have a residency training and practice model that few in the world are able to replicate, and in fact, many of them ought to look to places like CCF if they want to survive in an increasingly competitive healthcare environment. Just don't call them academic because they have none of the objective criteria I stated above to back that up.
I interviewed at many of these programs and it is extremely clear which ones are able to talk about and criticize your research on a very high level. CCF was not one of them.
I’m sure some people will disagree, but you don’t need to run a lab to be academic. In the end we are surgeons, and understanding the clinical management of surgical diseases is just as important as understanding the underlying molecular biology. Skull base surgeons treat mostly benign extra-axial tumors and few run labs, can they be academic? Is Lawton an academic? I think a good institution that calls itself academic will have 50/50 people on staff, but I think it’s unfair to say CCF/Barrow are not academic when they have faculty that have advanced the surgical treatment of disease (Benzel, Lawton, etc.)
(12-22-2020, 05:56 PM)Guest Wrote: I’m sure some people will disagree, but you don’t need to run a lab to be academic. In the end we are surgeons, and understanding the clinical management of surgical diseases is just as important as understanding the underlying molecular biology. Skull base surgeons treat mostly benign extra-axial tumors and few run labs, can they be academic? Is Lawton an academic? I think a good institution that calls itself academic will have 50/50 people on staff, but I think it’s unfair to say CCF/Barrow are not academic when they have faculty that have advanced the surgical treatment of disease (Benzel, Lawton, etc.)
^^^
Did anyone else who interviewed at OSU/rotated feel like the residents were at odds with the attendings? That's the vibe I got in my interview
|
