Mass General Brigham-MA

Historically about 16-18 << only? doesn't Harvard interview like 30-40?

It's been historically low. Want to say less than 40, maybe closer to 20-30).

could I ask where you got this figure from?

My memory, I matched a couple of years ago. I didn't interview there but I had friends who did.

why are you still checking this spreadsheet lol

speak for yourself, man, I appreciate wisdom from the elders

OP here, thanks.. I'm still here because I actually want to help lol

where are you for residency?

Midwest, big program. Want to maintain some anonymity still I guess.

thank you for being here OP

I've heard it's common in derm for programs to interview ~10 applicants per spot but that the very elite programs often interview fewer. Someone last year told me Harvard was ~5 per spot

It is not that low! People post ridiculous stuff on here. Last year Stanford interviewed 40.

First world problems. same.

c'mon it's still a problem for this person << yea dude dont be a dick

literally no one's gonna want the 1/16 date since UCSF is 1/15, Penn is 1/16 and Stanford is 1/17 bro...and I'm assuming people getting these programs get the lot of the others...good luck x2 << Yeah if you look at the interview swap page a small group of elite are all having conflicts at the same dates and the same places. Nobody is going to "swap" a non-conflict for a potential conflict.

lolololololololololololol... sorry not actually taking joy from the conflicts, just laughing at the fact that the top programs are all interviewing the same people.

yup, better late than never right? <<Yeah just don't want to be seen as annoying, but I am having trouble scheduling another interview bc I don't know which date the first one is

Is this for Harvard? I don’t think anyone has heard back yet from there? <<Yup. I don't want to piss them off but I do need to know the date...

Im realy sad about this one =[<same, Ive been lucky to have had interviews at most of the top programs so far, but penn was really my absolute dream. Idk what was wrong in my app, Im crushed.

Yeah I feel like we would see the same people at a lot of the top programs. It feels so strange to be invited to Harvard but not Penn - does anyone else feel the same?<invites from Harvard, UCSF, NYU...but not penn. I do not understand

Minus UCSF, same. So weird! I wonder why, especially in your case with 3 of the other top 5!<<im not sure tbh. I expected Penn more than UCSF considering i have no ties to the west coast. My only rationale is that my step isnt the absolute highest for these top places, and idk if penn considers step score more than some of the other top programs.

You know what, I too have a sneaking suspiscion Penn values high step scores more than any of the other top 5. I'm around a 255 so maybe they really want that 260+? I really wanted this one :(<<yea im in the low 250 range as well. oh well cant win em all.

True. And sounds like it's Penn's loss in your case :)<<best of luck to you in your interviews kind stranger, and congrats on your well deserved merits!

haha thank you!! :') you too!!

I was fortuante to top 5 IVs with step >260 soI think they just have a really good applicant pool and we missed out because they look for different things?

Congrats on the impressive score and interviews!! Yeah, could be! I think the person who commented in 14D explains well some one the inherent and unavoidable randomness in the process. <- do you guys remember what your responses to the penn supplmemt was at the beginning of the cycle? my step scores weren't as high as yours and i got penn but my response was interest in epidemiology

Congrats!! And that's strange about the tracks, do you think that mattered? And I just selected the 3 year track and combined clinical and research training. Maybe Dr. Gefland was the person who reviewed your app lol <- step 1 was mid 240s

i doubt a 250ish step 1 score would be the disqualifying factor in an otherwise outstanding candidate?

No it's not that it's disqualifying, it's that there's SO MANY qualified applicants with a 250ish step score, you just can't interview them all. <i guess my point is i feel like they would look at some other aspect to try to differentiate applicants rather than just a few points on a standardized test (at least that's the hope lol)

Yes one'd hope lol

On the bright side, I appreciated that the subject started with, “unable to offer interview” x6

There is no bright side. Nothing is bright anymore.

lol, I didn't get an invitation or a rejection so i don't know if I have sheer joy or more disappointment headed my way. ::shrug::

probably Harvard. Not sure who else has telederm

A lot of other schools have strong telederm programs << like who? <emory< a lot of programs have integrated it at one of their sites. VA commonly has telederm at a few programs across the country.

Iowa, BU, Michigan, mizzou, etc

ok but which one is best? how is Pitt?

not sure which is best, but some google searching may tell you. I hear Mizzou's is strong

<both

Screw those people, and you should also do some introspection to ask yourself why you would even care.<<how is a top 10 program even bad?? i dont understand this at all x2 I'm a little confused too - people will think you suck if you match at Harvard?

< who cares? you'll be at a top 10 derm program x2 also, you can't and shouldn't worry about what other people think. just worry about yourself

Thanks, this is 100% an ego problem x2

np. also if someone is saying something like that, speaks more to their character or lack thereof than yours (or your academic performance or whatever. remember you're in the top 1% of achievers in the world to be where you are now) - be proud of yourself of all you've accomplished!

But also think about the amazing applicants from mid-tier schools who won't even get an interview at a lot of those top programs that you would be so embarrassed to match at. x2

I kinda get this feeling too. For my school everyone seems to stay here or go to better programs all in top 10 while I do not have interviews in any top 10s

derm is a totally different ball game and honestly who cares about top10 whatever as the vast majority of derms dont go into academics anyway #realtalk

< ok here's an example. in ADDITION to being a rockstar applicant, connections are what get you to the top programs. example: one of the people who matched penn last year? her brother is a resident in the derm program at harvard and presumably knows the harvard and penn PD well. that sort of thing.

fml looks like my parents should have had more kids

LOL same. But I'm just saying this to say that you REALLY shouldn't feel bad / wonder why you're not getting an interview to top programs. There is SO much backdoor dealings etc that go on behind the scene that in reality almost none of the slots are open to just a good applicant without any STRONG connections of some sort. <- another example: one of the UCSF residents has an uncle who is a dermatologist at UCSF

LMAOOOO this is too good

But I thikn the IN ADDITION point is important, having a connection but being mediocre doesnt work as far as I can tell.

<so if we got an interview to a top program without being internal or rotator, do we assume someone had a connection or said something on your behalf?

no, assume you just got an invite, but know chances are low you won't match :)

That's not nice >:(. OP, you've earned that interview, especially without obvious connections. You should go rock it and show everyone what you're made of.

sometimes the truth isn't nice :/

Or maybe you shouldn't take out your frustriations on random people online.<<with that mindset, people wouldnt match from external schools then

not true, the girl who matched penn whose brother is a derm resident at harvard went to northwestern. and to the other person, that's pretty presumptous of you - I'm just being honest. How you decide to take that honesty is on you, not me.<<well thats exactly what im saying, barring no other "real connections" how do people match at a program they are not from.

to be clear, outside of the top 10 programs it's a whole different world. This level of neoptism is almost unique to these programs. <- equivalent of legacy status for undergrad

I knew an applicant who's father-in-law was the chair of a derm department....so needless to say they got an interview at that institution. Other "ties" are research. Some programs really favor their research fellows....who can spend one year or MORE doing research for the department. Often unpaid or super low pay. There's a lot of politics. I'm sure other fields are similar but because derm is small, the effects feel (and probably are amplified).

to add another great story, my friend told me that one of the people who matched to cornell last year? her mom is derm at cornell. connections are everything!

are you one of the 260/260, 7/7 H, 10 pubs kind of applicants? I feel like programs that think we won't rank them hihgly don't interview us<<not quite 260, but yes to everything else

close enough, that's probably what's happening to you :/<<but maybe i would go there!! --- So it looks like the Top 20 and the bottom 100 programs seem to discriminate against each others top candidates lol<<weird, you would think a great candidate for a top tier program would be a great candidate for any other program too

but with only ~40 interview slots they have to be realistic in interviewing people who they could match. What are the chances a top 10 student with 260s, all honors, and numerous pubs match at a no name program? --- But on the flip side they should know that the 265+ 7/7 AOA 10+ pubs from state schools would absolutely love to attend a top 10 derm program... Interview usssssss pls.

but the problem is there's also ~10 internal candidates they have to interview and then fill the ~30 other slots with people who have connections & people from other top 10 programs with 265+ 7/7 AOA etc etc --- You're so right!!! The truth hurts, but it's something that needed to be said. It's okay though, I'm sure I'll still end up somewhere great!

Now imagine if you have all those stats and are a DO?

can confirm that a state candidate can do well at the top 10 --- Research year??? Also not all state schools are midtier, so I'm specifically asking about midtiers << midtier

what's midtier though? top 40? --- Yeah probably anything 40 or higher is midtier IMO. God tier 1-20, good tier 21-40, midtier 41- all

so midtier is 41 and below? sorry I'm an idiot and don't get this ranking thing<<yea i would say 40-60 range << guys, the medical school is not one of the most important factors

it for sure is, and this is something that has already been discussed ad naseum here << telling you from experience, it is not. just because people talk about it on reddit/anonymous spreadsheet does not make it true <x1 med school tier absolutely is a very important factor<<agreed. having honored all rotations at harvard or hopkins is way more of an impact factor than having honored all rotations at a mid or low tier school. ---- WRONG, many top school give almost everyone honors, my crappy state school gives 10-15% x2 <not true, top tier applicant here and not many people honor everything. I think its safe to say we cant assume about schools unless we actually go there. <most MSPE letters also have grade distributions so programs see which schools do this. << at some top 20 programs, like 30-40% of the class gets AOA, so yes, the grading is easier<<idk what schools these are but my school def does not and I go to a top tier. Lets not make generalizations. << ummmm, I said "at some"<<great, have a cookie. << wait how can 30-40% of the class get AOA? Isn't one of the prerequisites for nomination to AOA being in top 25% of the class?

It is. That person is making crap up and blowing hot air out their asses because they don't go to a top school.

< what's amazing? (anyone sitting at 10+ interviews)

are you a stellar applicant? It could be that you're a good applicant from the region you're in and getting lots of interviews there are and at mid tier derm programs, but not quiteee good enough for a top 10? --- OP here, not regional at all, very diverse group of interviews, just none at big names

realize the big wig programs are SO random in who they interview, and the fact is most of them are going to end up matching internals anyways. You should be proud of how many interviews you have, it's super impressive! ---Thank you kind person! I do feel really good about how things are going, and definitely didn't mean to sound ungrateful. Just curious to see if there were any similar trends going on >> op of next cell, thank you for not being a dick about your >2 interviews

i am at a low-tier state school that did an away at a top 10 w/LOR from faculty at said institution, no invites from ANY place at all. --- I'm sorry man, that really sucks :( x2 << sounds like my life

Top 10 programs are mostly filled from within and from applicats from top 20 medical schools. >>> #truth hurts

This

No x6

< pls tell me your secret to your harvard interview or literally any other interview!!! << Option 1- be a superstar and pedigreed (260+, 7/7 honors, AOA, and from top school), Option 2 - know someone on the admissions comittee who knows and likes you, Option 3 - have someone who is a friend of someone on the admissions committee (another derm attending) vouch for your candiacy via LOR or phone call, etc. << for the record, I can tell you that I'm none of those 3<<same x2

oh are you 250+, 6/7 honors, AOA and from a mid tier school? :')

< that's actually the most concise and best summary! --- THE TRUTH!

Bwh pros: 12 weeks of research elective with no clinical responsibilities, epic, twilight system(can sign out at 4pm on many rotations), 4 weeks vacation in 2 week blocks, can trade 2 week blocks so pretty much get whatever schedule you want

< Could I ask where you got the 12 weeks of electives from? Per the website, prelims have only 2 months of elective time.<current intern. I have 11weeks i guess and then 4 weeks of back up call. First block of that i only got called in twice

that's actually pretty sweet if that's the case for every prelim. Something to ask about at the interview for sure

Cons - you work hard. Patient load always at maximum.

I'd love to go pretty much anywhere x7

<< first get the interview invites, then worry about ranking. << I think its reasonable to think about now, especially considering the possibility of having IV overlaps and having to drop a program

After talking with the lay public (my parents), going to a program with brand name recognition helps even if you're in private practice, since that's one the things people consider when choosing their doctor. But I have also been told med school prestige matters more.

Brand recognition and tier don't always match up. Hopkins and Vanderbilt are probably better known as names to average americans compared to UCSF. << probably matters more to people more familiar with medicine. Most don’t care about where a private practice doc trained. And echo that lay people don’t know strong training

The public knows about 10 big names. They care how nice their doc treats them.

Yea i would argue most patients do not know where their doctor went to med school or residency (or what residency is). I know many IMG docs who have busier practices and higher patient ratings because they have put more time in to hustle for their practice than their ivy league collegues.

<Another consideration is the type of training. You get exposed to cool rare things in top places, but their programs may advertise that majority go into academics and that is where their connections are. Lower tier places advertise the opposite since their connections are in other practice settings. <-- Yeah, this is not accurate. "Private practice connections" are mostly local (e.g. in the metro area a particular practice is in), regardless if a program is a "top" program or lower ranked. Having a "top" brand name attached to your name would still be valuable in private practice (both locally and outside the metro region of your program) - private practices like advertising "Harvard-trained" doctors, etc. It's silly, but a small consideration. Point being, lesser ranked programs are not going to have any more connections in private practice compared with a highly ranked program.

Top tier: UPenn Harvard UCSF NYU Mayo Michigan, Emory, Henry Ford?) and Michigan and Mayo are not top tier. Would add Stanford, Hopkins, and UCLA instead)

would also add UTSW https://www.mdedge.com/dermatology/article/157864/practice-management/us-dermatology-residency-program-rankings-based/page/0/1 <<what is the difference between this article and the doximity rankings? Is there more validity to one vs the other? << lol, someone put UCLA in top tier (UCLA isn't even a Department, it's a Division) >> lol UCLA low tier for sure << realistically, probably middle to low, great overall health system but will always have hands tied and no real ability to grow

UCLA is a solid program, strong surgical training, lacks the super complex patients of some more intense programs but it depends on what you are looking for in your training << I don't think anyone's saying it's a bad program, just not a top tier, that's kind of silly

UCLA is the perfect example of a low-to-mid tier program that is nonetheless quite competitive given it's in California. Again, there's often a disconnect between prestige/quality of training and competitiveness. Location, location, location.

No way that Hopkins and UCLA would be top tier over Michigan and Mayo

Mid-tier: OHSU, Iowa, Minnesota, UPMC >> Would probably put MN as low tier? >> Thoughts? Why? >> Minnesota would probably be in same tier as OHSU, Iowa, UPMC. Iowa has great faculty, but I think it does suffer from being in a relatively non-diverse, predominately white, smallish-city in Iowa. Minnesota, OHSU, and UPMC are in more urban environments with at least UPMC and Minnesota having more ethnic / racial diversity, (Portland is super white as well). Also, no one should trust that MDedge nonsense x5

To be fair they tried to make an objective measure. Many of the opinions here leave out some good programs and add in top medical schools that are not top derm programs

MN, Iowa as med-high tier? Would drop UPMC to low tier (just feel like no residents really enjoy it there but maybe that's just me lol)? And Iowa usually as a top 20 program on almost all ranking systems (though you cant always trust these things so who knows). I think its one of those places that suffers in many peoples minds because they have a not-so great med school and its in the mid west, but the derm program is actually extremely well-respected independednt of those facts

1. Penn 2. UCSF 3. NYU 4. Harvard 5. Stanford 6. Northwestern 7. Emory 8. UTSW 9. Hopkins 10. Wash U 11. Mayo 12. Michigan 13. Iowa 14. HF 15. OHSU 16. Colorado 17. Minnesota 18. Utah 19. Cornell 20. Vanderbilt

<-What is this list based on? Its totally inaccurate. Hopkins and Vanderbilt are mid tier programs at best. No Yale? No UW? No Wisconsin? No Miami? No Sinai? Cornell over Columbia? UPMC is definitely mid to top tier. Also, tiers maybe, but I dont understand how you can possibly rank 1 vs. 3 vs. 8 off the cuff << yeah, 1-3 is pretty standard, gets messy with next 5 I was about to post how accurate this list is. Some of the programs listed above are no way in the conversation. You can maybe disagree with Wash U/Cornell to the left tho. I'd agree Vanderbilt too high too

<Yale for sure. x4 . Think that list is pretty accurate for top 20 minus Wash U, Cornell, and Vanderbilt. Would replace with Yale and Columbia. And Cleveland Clinic maybe. <<I question the order of some of these too. Hopkins is not a top 10 (but it is a top 20 probably). I agree that Sinai, miami, Columbia would also be top 20. Vandy should not be on that list and neither should a few others.

<How good are the following programs: UPMC, Hopkins, UCSD, Miami.

I think those are all decent programs (mid-top tier?). I would say that I typically view Hopkins as a mid-tier program (they don't have a lot of diversity in terms of training sites, though Hopkins itself is a great hospital). Miami is typically considered a Top 10 program - but they also are quite disorganized, old facilities, longer hours (Saturday clinics). UPMC takes a lot of MD/PhDs and has great Mohs training, though I never found their program actually attracts people who want to be there. UCSD is solid, somewhat basic-science focused. It's outshined by other programs in California (e.g. Stanford, UCSF, USC) and San Diego has great weather / beaches, though admittedly isn't the most exciting place to live / lacks a lot of arts / culture compared to most bigger cities in the United States.

name me a state with better Mexican food tho

They're all top 10 programs. Mostly depends on what you want to specialize in and where you want to live<<could you elaborate more on these programs and future specialization ? x3

Harvard and Penn are very similar academic programs with strong emphasis on research and inpatient derm. NYU has better clinical volume/training. << NYU has probably the most "different" vibe of those - great clinical training...but a very large program with MANY facult, long hours, and historically not the happiest residents. Penn is great - probably a bit more "supportive" and "coddling" than UCSF or Harvard.

I just want them to be nice

I don't know, I've met a plenty of nice people who I'd rather not work with for one reason or another.

Is it because they can be passive aggressive?

YES, niceness and pass-agg seems to come in hand-to-hand for some bizarre reason. Saw plenty of that in FM and Peds

huh ok. I'll change my criterion to "genuinely nice" then. b/c I've met residents who are nice w/o being passive aggressive. Mostly in surgery/derm. oh also neuro << some of the applicant's attitudes and responses here make me think that they're actually OB/Surgery because of their uptight malignancy

I'd prefer surgery's outward malignancy, because at least they are forthright and they will tell you if they don't like you or if you are incompetent.

you know what this is so true, im with you on that passive aggressiveness then! // more attractive than me or smarter than me but not both at the same time// LOL

<< same here because that's me! i think i get along better with people who are really honest and work hard, having a great sense of humor is a cherry on top - meme > I feel like the admissions committee at my school selected against people with a sense of humor; so hard to come across. But lots of people who are honest and hard working

Did your school have grades or P/HP/H for preclinicals? I feel that schools with a more emphasis for grades end up with more serious students. I don't know whether that's associative or causative.

nah we're P/F. maybe we're just boring

< don't get me started on the bullshit that is grading. my school has restricted honors for the top ten percent of the clerkship overall, while other schools have a set number you have to score above. talking to other students on away rotations really opened my eyes to how much each school is different and how little programs care besides seeing the "H" next to the subject.

I went to a school with unrestricted honors. After getting some of my feedbacks, such as ([Name] was one of X students getting honors for this rotation), I realized that in the end, only 15-20% of students ended up getting honors anyway. They set the goalpost (specificed ahead of time) knowing that anyone could meet that standard, but very few people would actually make it. Ultimately, I think this was the right approach because people could still work hard for themselves, regardless of whether or not they met the challenge. << yep this is a great attitude to take to it if the goalposts are properly set! someone's schools had to get 90% on evals, 80% on shelf, unrestricted number. i was like....lol what.

Thoughts on UCSF testing straight P/F grading for clinical clerkships?

In general, I don't think UCSF has an amazing match list compared to Harvard, Penn, and Stanford if we remove the in-home matches. I do think that it will make things harder for the PDs << it might also skew towards the name. P from Harvard? Who even cares, it's Harvard. No H from MidTierStateU? LOL what a pleb. So i dont think UCSF policy will really change anything in the MSPE. << also would reduce the stress level for clinical clerkships. << P/F curriculums may have shifted pressure onto Step 1, could P/F clerkships put more pressure on Step 2?

possibly. Or more pressure on the LORs

Maybe they will move us over to EM's standardized letters of evaluation. I know that some admins in dermatology wanted to do that this year but they were not able to do so. >> 2 cells over in E

I understand that most derm PD's or people reading apps have a sense of individual schools and what the typical grade distributions are << it was made better this year by including graphs in the MSPE

really? I hate those graphs. fucks over half the people in the class << i mean im the OP in the cell to the left. it clearly shows <20 people in my class getting honors directly next to the text for my evaluations so IF, and big IF, the person actually reads why i didn't get honors, they can see that it was only a select few who did. idk, from the underachiever pov, it looks good. << Point taken

i think it'll start depending more on school prestige and LOR maybe like you said, and of course step scores. good school prestige begets good LOR so it's a trickle-down system all the way to the interviews haha. holy shit i forgot about SLOE, imagine that in Derm! hell no, fuck SLOEs. Hate being reduced to a single number/grade as if I were a cow << lol look at the charting outcomes and step score distribution, or like filters that exist already. i hate it too but sometimes its gotta be done

I'd rather be evaluated on the quality of my LORs than another hoop to jump through. Step 1 (and to a lesser extent, Step 2) is enough of an objective measure.

But still, you'd be surprised. In the state of California, Stanford and UCSF had middling average Step I scores compared to places UCLA and UCSD, probably because the students knew that Step I wouldn't matter as much for them in the perspective of other program directors would be happy to have some Stanford/UCSF students as part of the program.

do we have official numbers on these? I don't doubt that it exists, but it'd be nice to know the extent of the disparity of avg Step 1 scores of accepted derm applicants from top vs mid schools

I don't know, I go to a top 3 school. I got a slightly above average score for derm, and my Dean and PD told me that I should be "competitive anywhere" although they did warn me that the places that I'd get interviews may seem random and that I may not get all the interviews that I wanted (and I didn't)

Also at a top 3 with derm average step and don't have many interviews (but others here do). maybe trickles will come

<< prestige man, prestige. its exactly what you said, they'd love to have a person from x program on their resident and potentially staff roster. for us mid-low tier schools, we gotta kick ass on step 1 and etc to have a shadow of your position, potentially with not as good LORs << do we need more hoops to jump through, though? I don't think the answer to leveling the playing field for students not from the top tier schools is to create yet another metric. We have to do so much already, from getting a good Step 1 score, to kicking ass on clerkships, doing research, etc << true man. someone down the sheet suggested having a set number of programs to apply to, like 20 or so, i think that might really be playing with fire and lead to a LOT of people unmatched or SOAPing, both applicants and programs << for sure. we'd need a transition period or something. couldn't ERAS spend a fraction of their $$$ to hire a data scientist to study the optimal number of programs to apply to? << they did that, for derm it was high 30s. let me see if i can find link

https://students-residents.aamc.org/applying-residency/filteredresult/apply-smart-data-consider-when-applying-residency/ i think that is what we are discussing - meme