UC San Francisco-CA

Most rankings are based on research output is my understanding

faculty turn over at ucla is an issue -- regardless still one of the best programs in the country. Both are powerhouse programs

really? Both powerhouses?

people on this sheet throw around "one of the best in the country" and "powerhouse" and the phrase "hands down" like its candy on Halloween x2; "powerhouse? powerhouse? we got UCSF and Stanford crushing it on the west coast, and about 20 stronger programs than UCSD and UCLA, and ya'll want to talk about powerhouse?"

Don't think you can go wrong with either. For me it would come down to am I an LA person or San Diego person.

yes

UCSF sent an email saying that they wouldn't but they also are doing 2nd looks is what was posted earlier

From my understanding the 2nd look is a GME-wide initiative and not derm specific or indicative of rank

Seems like both did. But UCSF is more of a URM thing

why the misinformation? Stanford did not send out RTM calls and UCSF invited SOME (not all) URM interviewees to a GME-wide second look. Why are we propagating so much BS?

scroll down and you will see people got RTM Stanford calls

ohh I see now

There is a person here who is absolutely desperate to match at Stanford and is spreading lies like crazy. I talked to a resident and they said they had NOT done RTM calls. The same person here keeps deleting/changing posts and is a genuinely manipulative person

I also rotated at UCSF and interviewed here and can say that this reputation of "malignancy" is not real at all. I thought interview day was totally representative of how the faculty are at baseline when I worked with them.

also rotated at UCSF and thought the people were genuine and kind

stanford << disagree. Residents talked more with each other than with applicants during the resident dinner lol -- just goes to show how tight knit and happy of a group they are. (or how little they actually see of each other)

I thought the people at Harvard were fantastic x2.

The Harvard residents are super shady. They have secret hang-outs but dont invite the residents that arent "cool" enough. Serious mean girls shit. Lol. Very clique-y.

Wait where did you hear this? FAKE NEWSSSSS << I didn't "hear" it. I experienced it. If you don't believe me, go confront one of the "popular" residents about it.

LOL love how in the cell to the left Stanford residents are called tight knit and happy for sticking together and Harvard residents are called cliquey

If you feel "left out" by the residency class, maybe you're the weird one

harsh lol

Penn > UCSF > Stanford = Harvard >> all others . (x2 though I did not go to one of these, I have the same order for the other 3, but it varies alot with who you happened to talk to) ^sounds like someone's desperate to go to Harvard/UCSF/Stanford : )

haha I agree with this order, and I am ranking Penn 1. If people are actually trying to alter ranks by these orders, that is kinda sad....if it works that's even more sad lol

UCSF and Penn were my favorites x5 <- damn lol, you guys are very lucky to have interviewed at both

didn't interview at UCSF, but had the other 4 "top 5" programs and agree Penn residents seem closest. I would put NYU up there as well

utsw residents were chill! did not expect that x2

very pleasant surprise. The program moved up on my list based on the people there which I was not expecting

Hopkins residents were so fun and nice! x3

I've heard this about other places. One school mentioned they no longer have a peds fellowship bc too many peds derm were ending up in that city . I wouldn't lie though, maybe downplay

lol, that sounds ridiculous. Peds derm is one of the specialties with the biggest shortage. I can't picture peds derm being saturated anywhere, but who knows, anything is possible in Boston/LA/SF/NYC???

<- i feel like a lot is based on history no? I know at NYU they trained some of the trailblazers in derm (like way way back) and it was also big during the AIDS epidemic -- That's good to know. Tbh, I actually don't know much of anything about derm history, and wasn't aware. So do you think they got their reputation mostly based on years of continuous contributions to the field?

NYU is the top creme de la creme program.

i would cream myself to match any of the top 5 x2 <My mentors have mentioned slightly different lists to me that they consider the top programs (though 3-4 of those always make the list), so it is all subjective. <<< Thanks for the input, good to know that they may not be as static as they seem

< would love to hear your mentors lists

Tufts, Harvard, BU, UCLA, UCSF

LOL <why are 3/5 in Boston? That just doesn't sound right to me.

Penn, NYU, Harvard, UCSF, Stanford (geography/city playing a role, but hoping for Penn) . <<tbh glad I do not have all of these. It would be too hard to choose

in terms of what? clinical vs research vs ... they are very different programs

In terms of whatever matters to you.

Clinically: UCSF, Penn>Harvard>Stanford>NYU

< really? I feel like clinically NYU would be the strongest by far because you're spending 2/3 of your entire residency at the VA+county/public hospital = lots of autonomy. << LOL that person has no idea what they're talking about. Clinically, it's UCSF > NYU > Harvard > Stanford > Penn. Overall reputation is Harvard > Stanford > Penn > UCSF > NYU << lol at these absurd rankings, true delusion

I've heard it's UCSF > Harvard > Stanford > NYU > Penn

Its almost as if the top 5 is interchangable and it really comes down to personal preferences and biases

haha so true x3

Look at last year’s rank sheet. Penn was most popular #1 rank then Stanford out of the top 5.

because everyone definitely writes their ranking and is definitely honest about it too

lol'ed at that gullible person

< there is literally no benefit to faking what you are ranking 1 because that only would dissuade people from also listing that one, which ends up in them possibly ranking where you actually want to go as 1. Also, it's anonymous. It's not each person's specific rank, but a tally of how many people are rankin each program a certain number on their list so there is very little benefit to lying. There is usually a 1/5 yield, so it's actually a good amount of people of the interviewees.

< https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16WyBDd4BhLhqR5F5BWMLRAKtq_Na3d9DHyokLtUg0rA/edit#gid=596104293

< can't say personally that I know specifics but have definitely heard from current residents ranking non top 5-10 places higher than such prestigious places for much better environments supporting of any career path.

If you want to do Mohs, it can be helpful to choose a program that has a Mohs fellowship (for instance, Stanford does not). You may want to also consider that certain top programs may be less likely to want to train their own residents. For instance, I've heard UCSF sometimes prioritizes non-UCSF residents for Mohs fellowship slots - in that case, the reasoning is they'd prefer to train people who'd be less likely to stay in the Bay Area as the market is already saturated there and they don't want to train more "competition" for their own practice. That's certainly not to say that any of those top programs won't be super supportive in your application to other top programs. It's honestly probably a case-by-case thing. << that's a BS made up story. They dont care if you stay in the area. You aren't "competition" for them. If that ridiculous postulation were true, no program would train people from their home program for fear of "competition" to their practice. Ridiculous. >> the competition piece is a common concern for Mohs surgeons, so it is true.. not sure who feels so confidents its not, it is, it is well known in the Mohs field that people dont want to train their own competitoin -- certainly not all mohs surgeons, but about 50% probably feel this way including some at academic institutions<< that may be true overall but the OP was specifically saying this about UCSf and it should have been a more general statement, because it doesnt only apply to UCSF. << seems like the OP is just trying to make UCSF look bad when, in actuality, it is probably one of the most supportive programs in the top 5 for Mohs

<--That's not true at all. UCSF basically always offers to keep their residents if they want to stay. I know that for a fact. They've had plenty of years where 2/3 or 3/3 fellows were UCSF residents.

OP here. This is based off discussions with a former UCSF resident who wanted to stay at UCSF but did not match there. I have no idea what this specific residents relationship with the department was...but can you tell you this is honest and true information I discussed with said resident. UCSF is a great and supportive training program. And this person did match elsewhere at a great program. Honestly not trying to mislead anyone. << one residnet not matching at their program doesn't mean "they dont like to keep their own residents." That was likely a resident specific issue. It's not helpful when you use broad/sweeping statements. <--- OP again. The way I was explained this was this was the "culture" at UCSF for Mohs - and same logic was applied to other internal applicants that year. I also personally know my own program's Mohs fellowship director prefers not to take internal candidates - though he's very supportive of getting them matched elsewhere. His rationale is more that he prefers to bring in "new" people to the program, rather than preventing "competition", though our metro area is also admittedly saturated with Mohs surgeons and it is difficult to impossible to find a full time position. I've also heard of other programs - like Mayo Rochester for instance - highly favor internal applicants. It's an institution-specific thing.

I will second the fact that its common knowledge that many places don't want to train their competition for Mohs. I have no knowledge about which specific programs / if this applies to UCSF, but just backing up the OP in saying that this line of thinking would not be out of place as it is prevalent in the Mohs field <<To echo this, this is true for many subspeciality fellowships in many different fields. New fields that are not recognized fellowships yet often have fellows sign noncompetes today which was true for some Mohs programs 15-20 years ago (and probably still true for the some that are not ACGME). Now, most fellowships can't have official noncompetes, but they will try to pick applicants with that in mind...medicine is a business.

this is true and has actually been studied/reported in the literature. https://journals.lww.com/dermatologicsurgery/Citation/2019/10000/Micrographic_Surgery_and_Dermatologic_Oncology.15.aspx

try Airbnb. Definitely a taste of SF cost of living

also interested in the original question. I am down to split a 2-bed hotel if the OP or others are interviewing on Jan 15! The week of jan 8th seems far more reasonable for prices. Seems like week after is a trainwreck. Maybe there is a conference?< i havent booked a room yet for the 15th. The prices are high. I would be interested in splitting a room

JPM20 is 1/13-1/16 that's why the hotels are all booked and ridiculously priced

down to split: dermapp2020@gmail.com

you thought the rent prices wouldn't somehow correlate with the hotel prices?<no, boston and nyc hotels are nowhere near as pricey as cities with similar costs of living. please leave out snarky comments if they're not helpful in answering the question.

<I just checked out SF hotel prices for fun and DAYUM! They are ridiculously high. Even in NYC you can find a nice hotel for $100-150

UCSF sent out an email for their hosting program. You can stay with a resident. Have you looked into that?

UCSF, Cornell, Yale, (but Cornell and Yale apparently required Step 2 prior to interviews, according to Frieda but I don't know how stringent this requirement is). Mayo also said in Frieda that it requires Step 2 prior to interviews, but I got a waitlist there, so I don't know how true it actually is. UCSF is also known to make individual exceptions, according to my dean. In short, if they didn't ask for it, then I wouldn't really think much of it. A couple of residents at different top 5 programs told me that they never updated the Step 2 and the rank list is made after the interviews anyway so there's so many factors going into it (but also note that they were from top medical schools themselves).<<will confirm they werent stringent on step 2 criteria. got an interview invite from both without having taken step 2 ck or cs by that time.

Great for if I failed CS. x2

<my understanding is that clinically there's virtually no appreciable difference; the top 5 have large faculty #s with lots of diverse research and may have the edge for impact/gearing for a career in academics. <--- There's really no difference between a Top 10 program and a Top 100 program. Academics is not particularly competitive - you're typically taking a salary cut for more work - and 80% of academic dermatologists don't do any significant research, so the argument that you need to be at a research-intensive residency program for a typical academic career isn't really applicable to most people. This is why I stress for people to choose the program they like they most based on faculty, location, culture, opportunities specific to your career goals. <-- I disagree. Academics at respectable institutions (read: ivies, stanford, UCSF, etc.) are extremely competitive, as well are fellowships. The statement that there is not difference between top 10 vs. top 100 is downright hilarious

only difference is that people not at the top 5 are the only ones that ask that question

heard it used to be great, but there have been some turnover with faculty (many leaving to USC, which is now considered a better program by some)> they have very little info on the website<anyone have any idea when the interview day will end?

email said around 1 oh please, I just hate the lies some times. USC as a health system was recently on probation. They are not jumping from UCLA in droves to USC.

this is actually not true - several faculty have been poached from UCLA to USC (in "droves") <yes, including USC's current PD and head Mohs surgeon.

before or after probation issues? Also 2 people don't constitute 'droves'

some after, some before. probation issues had nothing to do with the derm department. there are more than those 2.

either you have a UCLA invite and not a USC invite, or you haven't spent much time with both depts...

you don't have to believe me, look up their faculty list and see for yourself

☕☕☕

um, UCLA has like 8 more faculty than USC

quality, not quantity honey

<not a top CA program <There are many solid CA programs and UCLA is included in that. I know someone who ranked UCLA over UCSF & Stanford partially for locations reasons, but they did not feel like they were sacrificing quality of education. <Great location, but still not a top program compared to every others in CA. <true

not true

Stanford & UCSF are on another level, then UCSD, then UC-davis, UCLA & USC

would consider lower tier program. Not a department (it's a division under medicine) so there is limited upside for improvements. Location is amazing though if you want to be in SoCal x4 .

Would not say low tier. Would pick it above most of the 100+ programs, but not top tier/upper

In order: Stanford/USCF, UCSD, UC-Davis, UCLA, USC, UC-Irvine, Loma Linda/UCLA-Harbor, Kaiser Permanente, Opti West (Newport)

UCLA and UC Davis are not above USC

This one line represents the horrible sabotage that is going to plague every question about california programs this season

This whole thread is ridiculous. Pick whichever CA program suits you the best. Derm reputations are mostly based on how long the program has been around and how much research money they have. Remember that matching at a "top tier derm program" may be seen as > matching to other programs, but they're >>>>>>>>> not matching. Regardless, you'll be the envy of every other non-derm doctor

<Connections and clinical performance and LORs will be way more important for fellowships. This tends to be the case in all specialities where people are subspecializing. A really low score would be a red flag though. A low CK score will not help you match into your desired residency program. Nearly all dermatology programs require Step 2 scores prior to ranking applicants.

This is false. Programs don't need Step 2 scores in order to rank (exceptions being UCSF, and even then it could be discussed on a case-by-case basis, and according to Cornell, they may require it prior to application deadline) <a bunch of prelims have stated in the interview email that it's required before rank lists are due --- Unfortunately this is true :( Some of my top prelims will need to see my step 2

Step 3 apparently also matters for some fellowships, but idk if thats just IM or all specialties>>I have heard this too! This is crazy as studying well for step 3 during internship is almost impossible!!!

studying for step 3 during internship isn't hard because you just study the subject of whatever rotation you're on, do some practice Q's, review occasionally, and near the end of the year you'll pass with flying colors

<why post on the derm page? are u switching from another speciality to derm? yes. I am thinking that if I do not match to my advanced (rad onc) and just get into a prelim med, I would like to go down the path of doing the IM prelim and then doing derm research to get into dermatology<<why the switch from rad onc to dermatology?

Also, at this point, matching into derm is harder than rad onc.

Depends on the fellowship a good mentor will open up a LOT of doors!!

For reals, I think that getting a good mentor is the most challenging step. He/she should be able to make calls for you on your behalf. One of the people whom I'd worked with actually went out of their way to find an outside match PGY-2 position for a resaerch fellow.

< what are some good research positions (post prelim year)? All I know of is Yoo at UCSF?

do you mean Youn at Stanford?