UC San Francisco-CA

x2 you never know what people want. Most people at the top end up fitting in somewhere.

< okay so there are something like a few hundred seats though right? Like so the top 40 take the top 5-10 programs, and then everywhere else is regional or what? like its not like only even the top 100 people would match

regional and totally random. And heavily influenced by rotators, connections, compelling reasons someone wants to move.

Make sure you ask specifically if there are peds derms at your programs. Many very good programs don't have a fellowship trained pediatric dermatologist, especially if located in a "less desirable" geographic location.

I actually thought that I had a good shot for both... here's what I get for getting my hopes up

sadness, sadness all around today x2 <-- could be worse

Great for if I failed CS. x2

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

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

don't think it's that high

Let's say 800 people apply... they probably interview 40-50 so max they're inteviewing is 5% of candidates... no? I mean ball park << when you say AND, you're multiplying stats right, so im going to assume that at least 90% of people missed out on all of Harvard, Stanford, UCSF, AND Penn

So to make this simpler, what are the chances of getting an interview at one the top 5, say UCSF, Harvard, Stanford, NYU, and Penn?

how many people do you think get all 5 of the top 5 places? 4/5? 3/5?

~10%, ~12%, ~15% respectively I'd say? ---- Probably 15-20 people get 5/5 for the top 5. I've realized that it's mostly the same people getting all the top 10 interviews." <- coming from one of these schools i can tell you that this is not the case and the number with all 5 is much fewer.

I'm sure there are some godly people out there with all of the top 5 plus the next top 5, and ideally they will drop some of them for the rest of us :p<<<guilty :) but have trickled many invites so wishing everyone the best of luck

sigh managed to get NYU/harvard/stanford/UCSF...and no penn...and ive lived near penn my whole life. idk what went wrong there, was my top choice

So there are a lot of layers to "why be angry at people who have lots of interviews". I want to go back to making memes. 1. I don't think anyone is GENUINELY angry at applicants with tons of interviews because by definition, their CV is good enough that they earned them. It's ironic that some of the programs that choose the applicants to interview think the applicant will actually rank them in their top 4 or 5 or to actually match unless the program is similarly stupendous. Okay UVermont, I get why you're jizzing in your pants over the 275/275/15 pubs/AOA candidate that is fake-gushing over your program, but is he more likely to rank UCSF or your university? These programs invite the top-tier candidates who have multiple interviews at places they won't actually go to, leaving candidates within the residency's "league" out in the fucking cold, and then both program and applicant are left wondering what happened come match time. It's a huge waste of time for both people. Just think back to medical school interviewees who hoarded interviews or acceptances. You fuckwads out there with 12 interviews at 10 locations you'd never realistically want to match at are playing the game, no shame in that, but absolutely fuck the entire process come rank time because unlike med school interviews, it's one and done this time. 2. The rest is more personal and if you don't understand an inferiority complex you'll never understand what I would have typed anyway.

< yo is this guy writing war and peace what's going on

Well, this guy mentioned that he's getting a beer first

mb you go ahead, my dude. let it all out << omg i literally choked a bit on my beer at that 'writing war and peace', fuckin hilarious dude that shit made me cackle <PS: HOW FUCKING COINCIDENTAL ---> <- As the OP of this row, thank you for your time and candor << meme king here, no problem, i love when a real-life example presents itself to reinforce my assertions

<< lol preach. do you think limiting the # of places we can send apps to (e.g. <20 derm programs) could help solve this? << I think limiting number of interviews could be good. Even a high limit like 15 which guarantees a match based on past data would help distribute spots and help programs use their interview slots more efficiently since it would make the people with more than that make decisions earlier << what % of applicants realistically get 15+ interviews though? I feel like an interview cap won't help even out the distribution unless we were talking something lower, like 8. Which no one would agree to .

The match statistics show 28 survey respondants with over 15 fyi so not huge, but not insignificant << wow is the 28 statistic official from ERAS, or just this spreadsheet?

here's my analogy: let's play russian roulette with 2 bullets loaded in a 10-chamber system. you feel good about those odds? no? then shut the fuck up about 80% matching, because that other 20% means you fucking DEAD. no, in fact i think it'll make it worse. the top-tier applicants will go 80/20 split top and mid, us mid-tiers will go 10% top 90% everywhere else, programs will be similarly inundated and there will be zero trickle.

< I disagree that programs will be similarly inundated. If applicants apply to 60 programs on average, reducing the number of apps each applicant can submit will reduce the number of apps programs review accordingly << each program thinks they're going to get lucky with the top applicants that safety-apply to their program and think "this is our standard" and eschew the other applicants. so yeah maybe you're right, but i dont think so.

That would explain the dermatology residents from top 5 schools who end up in really random programs.

As someone at a top 5 school, I am praying for a random program. Most tend not to interview us unless there is some geographic connection

< I hate that it's become an arms race and I feel compelled to apply to programs I'm less interested in (who also likely isn't interested in me) just so that I can say I did everything I could << Programs are likewise trying to depersonalize and streamline the process with standardized LOR, Case-Western-esque "what's your rank" forms, etc. I feel like it's getting worse for everyone. << SLOE for EM situation, exactly << It's awful. Effectively screws over 50% of applicants who get bad evals.

I'd be so stressed if i was applying EM with those SLOEs < Unpopular opinion, but I think that long supplementary applications should required by every program (not the nonsense like Wake Forest's, though). It really helps people to explain why they would specifically like to go to an institution and people would only be filling them out for programs that they are serious about. Two of my interviews came from Supplementary Applications << I agree. It saves me from the pressure of writing a LOI too because I feel like I had the chance to say what I wanted to say in the supplemental.

Let’s be honest for some of us we really would go ANYWHERE vs not matching so even if it is “dead last” if they’d still be willing to go what’s the issue? << hoarding interviews i just said that. i literally just said that. the game is the game, but seriously wtf at these people. << the issue is that as it is, everyone is dropping thousands of dollars applying to dozens more programs than are likely to interview them. There has got to be a way to improve the efficiency of the system so that there is a more even distribution of interviews among every applicant << I've been thinking of a "match" type system for interview invites. Applicant must list top 20 schools of interest. If program wants to use "demonstrated intrest" as a factor in sending out interviews, they can do that. Top tiers would still get swamped, but I think smaller programs would be reassured that students actually want to go there.

< more like wtf at programs inviting the same people who can only go to 1 in the end << oh believe me if it's one thing i hate more than the applicants who hoard interviews, it's the fucking PROGRAMS above all else.

agree

do you actually believe that there are people with 8+ interviews at this stage? I feel like everyone I've talked to have like at most 5. << I absolutely believe it. << yes with 50% of interview invites released, there are absolutely people with high single/low double digit interview invites.

for sure the same 1-2 people are getting the invites at my school x2

maybe it's a good thing I don't talk to co-applicants at my school about the # of invites they have. sparing myself the mental stress.

<< /thread

DAMN IM OUT YOU SAID IT ALL

Damn, shots fired

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.

that was a stupid question on my end. what even is high/mid/low tier? like top 10/40/100 or something? but to harken back to your situation, the only things I can think of that could be adversely affecting you other than being from a "low" tier school would be not taking a research year / limited research or your geographical area. <I agree with you. I can't really think of much else besides geography and below average research. I have read all but one of my letters and they were strong. I really don't know what to do at this point.

I'm sorry, friend. I'm assuming it is then the combination of geography and below avg. research. But I'm also SURE you're going to get interviews. Just hang in there! Nothing else you can do now, and with a 260 you clearly worked hard already.

Yes minus the 260 :D

Glad to have you on my team << 260+ can give you that same "top tier" school curse where some programs may think you're out of their league. Hang in there, we're with you

im <260 but PhD (non-research track) and it doesn't look good. low tier school, did good aways, got LoR, SILENCE, it's crazy that this is happening.

0 interviews at all? <aside from internal no << did you get interviews from your aways?<--any updates for you?

top tier med school, 260+ Step 1, 15 publications, great LORs, 0 interview invitations. I'm devastated

Yooooo that SUCKS. Are there a lot of applicants from your school with your stats or better?

yes. double digit applicants, all similar .

damn I'm at a double digit school with way worse stats...now I know why I'm not getting invites

dang OP of this cell, man I feel for you. That is rough, but there is no way you do not match and get a lump sum of interviews at some point.

TBH, OP, if you're at a Harvard/Yale/Stanford etc. school, chances are you're going to match your home program. You're fine.

As someone from a top school with a top home program, not true. I wish that I could match into my program, but the schools want a residency class filled with the best folks from other great institutions to add influx of new idea, skills, and connections to the class. This is true ESPECIALLY if there are a ton of us.

im really starting to realize how big a factor the # of people applying from my school is

# of people applying is a factor but applicants from top schools are typically safer with fewer invites at top programs compared to non-top school candiates with mid/low tier interviews. Top programs want applicants from top schools so you're competing with a small pool of applicants for all the spots at Harvard/Yale/Stanford/Penn/UCSF etc.

This . If you look at the people in the Y/H/S/P etc. schools, 80% of residents are from that program, 15% from another Y/H/S/P etc., and MAYBE 1-2 a year from a more "random" school—and that person 100% either had a 100th percentile Step 1 score and/or connections. Also, if you look at their match lists from the past couple years, not a SINGLE one of those programs had an unmatched applicant. So not sure why you're "devastated" when you have a 100% chance of matching—and likely at your home or another top program (unless your personality sucks).

Swap out Yale for NYU, and you have the proper list of top programs.

I seriously dont know how this process works. thats insane . <<Not OP (have way lower stats than that lol), but as someone who goes to a top 5 place I can say with fact that there is not a 100% chance. I do not know how all top programs work, but the fact is even though we have more residents than the average program, the number of applicants from our school is greater than th enumber of spots. On top of that, our school does not rank its own first (but yes 1/2 the porgram tends to be our own/research/rotators). It is a top programs and it wants the best from the country. If you look at our match list it looks AMAZING, but it never mentions the people who do not match. I know for the last 3 years, there was 1 or more unmatched derm. We're all in this shit together

<--- I review applications. While there are some programs that highly value Step 1 score -- I think applicants overestimate how much most programs care about these things. I don't think there are any functional differences betweeen applications with a 240 versus 260 on Step 1. Again, the more important differentiators are clinical grades, letters of recommendation, research, and personal statement (probably in that order). << Agreed, and same is true for whether Top/Mid med school

< It's really heartening to know that, thank you! Do you know if most programs feel the same way you and the program you're at does about scores? And what programs really do care a lot about scores?

< does anyone know if school look at clinical grades out of 6 or 7 rotations? (aka including neurology or not?)

Rather than Sheet Daddy, Cell Daddy, and don't forget the grandaddy of them all, Workbook Daddy << LOL << bro we asked SD to move to another tab not to have it come up here again. Just go to the sheet daddy stats tab instead of posting this here. << um bruh, it's just one small highlight box << dude none of us want it here. Put it on the SD page if you want it << no, only you don't obviously and no one picked you as as the autocrat of this spreadsheet << it's not autocrat. MANY people expressed yesterday to have these stats and data on another sheet. << put it to a vote, most people sided with SD x5

A ton of activity today! Last year, UCSF sent its second batch of interviews in the Thursday following its Friday invitations, so maybe we can expect more later today? (In an hour or so?) >fingers and toes crossed!

MOVED TO MAIN CELL Who doesn't mind a small highlight box just with today's interview tallies to have one cell row per day? << lol could you have worded this question in a worse way? << who could not want it except someone who needs to micro manage everything?

<< mods wtf was the point of having the SD stats page if it is still going to be posted here? x1 << having a current list of the day's interview invites is not the same as SD stats

<< We already decided this yesterday. There was a seperate tab made! << no, one person decided it << SD's posts are HUGE too, this is entirely different

on the opposite end, looking at the list stressed me out because places I ranked high others didn't and places I ranked low others ranked high. Makes me wonder if I messed up my ROL x2

Its not really a surprise that people are ranking places like Harvard, Penn, Stanford, UCSF, etc. highly...

mrw no one is ranking my #1 as #1 or #2, which means i might match there and i would be very happy :))

<< N=1 but I had AOA, 250s/270s, good letters, and here I am unmatched x1

sorry to hear that. are you soaping? << Had 1 soap interview, had lots of people email/call to support me, no offer<aw im so sorry, what do you think went wrong? << no idea, I think they just interviewed a lot of people and liked them more than me I guess

maybe personality? I myself am an introvert, and I feel like people in derm treat introversion like a disease << they're missing out. sending you a virtual hug. << thanks. It sucks to get hopes up a 2nd time and fail, but I'll just do my prelim and apply again. Failing that, research fellowship << can't imagine how difficult it must be to have been disappointed a second time. glad you have a plan, and best of luck my friend<<I'm in the same spot as you, interviewed yesterday for a SOAP spot and was really hoping it would work out. As much as I'd love a spot to be open in round 2 I know it's unlikely. Just wanted you to know you're not alone in this process. Best of luck to you!

Do you guys mind sharing what program you interviewed yesterday? I myself am PGY1 in prelim right now soaping and didn't get a spot in round 1; how do we know if SOAP spots get filled for that specific program?< The list gets updated at the end of each round; each round lasts 2 hours then i guess it gets updated at 2 PM EDT< yes it gets updated at 205

How many intervieews did you have AOA/ 250/270 are crazy stats. << I had 9 interviews, 2 of them med-derm <<sorry you didnt match. I had 260s+ on steps and didnt match but was able to match to spot during my prelim year

How many interviews did you have? << 9 total, 2 med-derm, 2 from my aways, 1 from home. So I got only 4 random derm interviews

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

<Harvard for baller academic/research connections and opportunities, lots of med derm, less clinically heavy; NYU tons of clinics/Bellevue which you'll get baller, academics also good, UCSF work hard af but has a bit of everything and is great; Stanford is like the most supportive of the top 5 and will likely have the most good-feeling experience ... idk I'm a PGY1 that interviewed some of these so I don't actually know anything <<thanks for your insight! what do you mean harvard is less clinically heavy? like more inpatient experience? <<there's less resident clinic autonomy, you work a lot with attendings in specialty clinic and it's less ownership of your own patients, but it's like that anyways at the top academic programs as opposed to a small community program, just heard it's more accentuated at Harvard<<interesting, so are residents mostly just presenting patients and writing notes rather than coming up with management plans? <i imagine yes since you're seeing super complex patients at a tertiary care center<dang, fair enough. thank you! << "just present and write notes instead of coming up with management plans"? Is that an actual, serious comment? You think the residents just present the patient then stand there looking blankly at the attending waiting for them to just hand them a treatment plan? If you see complex patients, you learn how to come up with complex plans

< thanks for the input! What about penn?

PGY1. Loved Penn program (didn't match there but had it ranked #1). Amazing faculty, good autonomy, everyone seemed happy. Great exposure to procedures as well (which I felt was a weakness at Harvard)

Stanford - happy residents, assume great clinical experience (although no one seems to emphasize this as much about Stanford); UCSF - one of best if not best clinical experience in the country for complex derm, work you very hard though. Others I don't know as well. Go with your gut and where you felt like the personalities of the residents were most similar to yours.

Penn is the best all-round plus the procedural skill > Harvard. Stanford would be my #2 for the supportive vibe and innovation.

UCSF and Penn are definitly the two best/most well-rounded programs in the country. All the other "top" programs have significnt weaknesses (i.e stanford and harvard have weak derm surg, etc). NYU residents seem to work the hardest and seemed to me to be the least happy.