San Francisco, CA
Applicant sentiment — from 150 anonymous posts, 2016–2027
5.5 / 10
What anonymous posters said
Anonymous posters frequently discussed the interview process, including timing of invite calls, rejections, and Step 2 score requirements before rank lists. Several commenters described the program as highly regarded for clinical training and subspecialty exposure, though opinions on workload and culture varied, with some calling it demanding and others disputing negative characterizations. Multiple posts noted few internal candidates remain for residency and suggested California ties may be helpful in admissions.
AI-generated summary of opinions expressed in anonymous, unverified posts. It describes what posters wrote, not verified facts about this program. Based on these 150 posts · Updated Aug 2026 · Contest or respond to this entry · Takedown & right of reply
❌1. Elitist (to no one's surprise), and many faculty give preferential treatment to rotating medical students from more prestigious schools. As much as they emphasize being socially attuned and progressive, at the end of the day, they're just another ivory tower institution masquerading as a social justice warrior.
❌1. You don't actually HAVE to be a former pediatrician to apply for this and be considered. Wish I knew this earlier, I would have applied.
❌2. Interviewer made disparaging comments about where I went to school
❌1. You don't actually HAVE to be a former pediatrician to apply for this and be considered. Wish I knew this earlier, I would have applied.
❌1. Elitist (to no one's surprise), and many faculty give preferential treatment to rotating medical students from more prestigious schools. As much as they emphasize being socially attuned and progressive, at the end of the day, they're just another ivory tower institution masquerading as a social justice warrior.
❌2. Interviewer made disparaging comments about where I went to school
💬1. It does say on their website "preferred but not required;" I wonder if they've taken applicants w/o previous peds residency. > guess we will find out soon > this is the first year of the track and it seemed like everybody was an MS4 during the interview +1
Page 28 of 31
^^^Lotta anxiety here right now lol....
Harvard, Stanford, Penn, and NYU will crash the sheet
Mid or low-tier program sends out an invite -> "Congrats! Internal or external? Any ties to the program?" vs Top-tier program send out an invite "I DIDNT GET AN INVITE THERE SO YOU MUST BE A TROLL. WHY ARE YOU COMMENTING ANONYMOUSLY? LIARRRRRRRRR"
Please stop. This is not productive.
Anyone from UCSF get an invite?
UCSF internal invite
UCSF internals are given courtesy interviews and invites were sent out at the start of the interview season
I️ really wish someone would archive, I️ think we could all use a fresh start after the whole UCSF debacle.
Agreed!
UCSF invite (call received on 11/8) l Thanks! What time did you receive the call?
LIARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR WHY IS ONLY ONE PERSON POSTING? AND WHY IS HE/SHE COMMENTING ANONYMOUSLY? SHOW US YOUR CALL RECORDS AND YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICATE
Please refrain from resolving other poster's comments... even ridiculous ones like this.
Normally, I would agree with you, but the comment above is basically trolling. So it will be resolved/deleted if posted.
I resolved the invite comment and it was not an anonymous comment.
Anonymous or not, it's trolling and adds nothing to this conversation.
Stanford invite!!! Holy crap. Through ERAS - 1/12/18.
andddddddddd... cue the delusional outrage.
Congrats! x1
Internal or external?
Internal
External x2
hmmm stanford doesn't traditionally use ERAS for invites
The email was through ERAS but there was no ERAS scheduling (since there's only 1 date)
the denial is apparently still alive and well here
But... but... It's November, which is the 11th month of the year, and 1=2, where the 2nd letter in Stanford is "t," meaning that Stanford gives out invites on Tuesdays. IT'S A TROLL, EVERYBODY!
Stanford typically does internals on separate date - not this year?
Stanford didn't release anything lol
are you sure, how do you know? Was this the troll too? I was wondering ... MODERATORS: any news on whether this stanford thing was a troll or not?
Please don't let this turn into a UCSF-style debacle. I got an interview - you can choose to believe it or not. I love how no one questions Case Western, Vandy, or Minnesota.
Thanks! I believe you, was just confused by all these unhelpful comments. Do you mind telling me if you're external or an internal student/away rotator? I really appreciate it.
No problem, external with ties to CA I thanks!!
I sent UCSD a LOI last week after invites had gone out. They just responded saying no invites have actually been sent out yet...
Dang, don't know what to believe anymore... thanks for the info!
WTF, can people stop trolling!? What is wrong with you people. Get a life.
I got a call last week. No email has been sent to us yet, but they confirmed our interview date over the phone. They said we will recieve info via email in the coming weeks.
I personally know the UCSD derm staff and they told me they have not even begun discussing applicants yet.
Then I got a prank call on Wednesday 11/8/17 at 1:49PM.
Curiouser and curiouser... Do you remember the name of the UCSD person you spoke to? Maybe there are unique circumstances with your application. Because phoning prior to invitations going out is highly unusual.
Are you sure it wasn's UCSF, they called people on 11/8 |So sorry! UCSF!! I misread it. I am so sorry. Not UCSD. So so sorry!
All cleared up then! Not a troll. Was an innocent mistake. It happens! Good luck to all who are interested in the rest of the UC's to come...
Derm moderator.. can you please delete the telephone date and time since that was inaccurate. Thank you. And I apologize.
Removed it from interview page,thanks!
UCSF rejection x10 (timestamp 11/21)
how important do you guys think ck is? scheduled to take it in a few days and my practice tests scores have gone progressively down from 250+ last week. should i delay or just take it? taken the nbmes/ UWSA
From what I have been told research shows that delaying the test only reduces your score. No one is going to change you on the rank list if you have 245 vs 255 on Step 2. They are going to go off if they liked you in the interview.
I would delay it. I have mine scheduled for December but I will be postponing until after ranking. Only select derm programs care for it (UCSF, Cleveland, Stony Brook), so if you are not interviewing there, it won't matter. Also, I have cleared it with multiple TYs/prelims that no score by ranking is totally fine.
hmm not sure about this. Many program websites say Step 2 is required for rank
ive explicitly been told ck scores MUST be in before rank list by multiple people. you may want to check that. i am interviewing at stony brook actually :/ really hope they don't care tons.
What multiple people or what websites have you heard from/read that say Step 2 is required for rank? I personally checked 70+ program websites and only saw UCSF and Cleveland (did not apply to Stony Book). I have also asked multiple derm PDs/PCs if they require Step 2 for rank and they say no, and same with my top 4 TYs. I personally think your time is better spent banging out an extra 3-4 papers in the month you would otherwise spend studying.
"Bang out 3-4 papers in the month you would've spent studying"... yeah because that's how research works x3
I never said research; I am talking about reviews, case reports, and letters. These can supplement real research projects that you probably already have ongoing.
Anyone know if Utah requires CK to rank?
UCSF phone call x1
Scheduled to take step2 late and the results might not be in time for rank lists ... anyone have experience with matching without having those scores in? (Seems like a few places like UCSF require it but most don't say anything one way or the other about having these prior to rank lists)
my school told me that i needed CS and CK in before rank list for derm. idk why so i took it. the only school saying they require it absoluetly before rank list i think is stonybrook, downstate, and ucsf. you may still get asked about it at interviews by other places though. can't you just move up your test dates?
Thoughts on Michigan's reputation of long hours and "unhappiness" in residents?
I think the long hours are inherent to the University of Michigan program, in general. You can see the "Interview Impressions" in previous years' spreadsheets for more info. It's a very highly academic program, so it isn't likely going to change. They have talked about changing other aspects of the program like its very low exposure to cosmetic derm. Unhappiness in a program has different reasons but I think it's important to correlate that to what you want in a program.
Oh come on its only 3 years, miserable or not you come out well trained.
Well, there are other top 10 programs that are not as malignant as Michigan... you dont have to be miserable to be well trained... even UCSF had issues a little while ago but they got a new PD and things are improving for residents.
Well, Michigan got a new PD too a year ago I think and things have aparently not improved much.
i did away rotation at michigan and will not be ranking the program favorably based on my time spent there. my recomendation is to just try to talk to the residents in private nduring the pre-interview dinner. you will catch a whiff of what is going on.
I also rotated at Michigan. The residents are NOT happy. They do all the scut work (call backs, preauthorizations, etc). The attendings are very passive aggressive and at times condescending. It's an awful environment for training. They didn't match all their spots last year. I'm not surprised.
I also rotated and did not observe this at all. The residents were pretty happy with their hours.
So many red flags. Detached attendings. Unresponsive PD. Unmatched spot. Check the old sheets. Nothing's changed - residents are still miserable and it shows. You've been warned.
<--- LOL at this guy trying to match at Michigan. I rotated there and almost all attendings were very friendly.
I think UCSF requires a "rigorous, academic preliminary medicine year"...does anyone know of other programs that require this? May help people when formulating rank lists and attaching associated prelims
There's literally no way for them to enforce this. You match prelim at exactly the same time you match into derm
I would do what they say if you don't want to have a red flag by your name on day 1 of derm residency
Programs that have done RTM calls so far= Stanford, Yale, any others?
Only Yale
UCSF
Yale def did (I got a call), but Stanford doesnt do RTM calls and UCSF hasnt done them yet from what i was told by the PC
Stanford did not make RTM calls. Above we were saying they may call all people they interview to ask for questions. haven't done it yet it seems though,
I got an explicit RTM call from Stanford
Stanford doesn't do RTM calls, stop lying to troll us.
Man there are some sadistic assholes on this spreadsheet. The thought of potentially being a co-resident with one of them is terrifying x2
Some posts are shown because their comments mention this program.
Apparently we're not allowed to post interview invites from top programs on this spreadsheet (see Yale, UCSF)