<p>^There are no clinical rankings. Those are primary care rankings. Primary care=/=clinical</p>
<p>Due to the accreditation process, medical schools pretty much have to teach the same things in the same way (PBL, science, some sort of doctoring course, ethics, etc.). Although the curriculum is not exactly the same, it is fairly standardized across med schools.</p>
<p>The primary care rankings ARE clinical rankings. Some medical schools are ahead in research activity, others are ahead in clinical education.</p>
<p>The LCME only does accredidation to check whether the medical school has met a minimal threshold of competency on a specific aspect. It does not RANK programs.</p>
<p>And medical schools don’t have to teach the same things in the same way and don’t. Really do your research before just making stuff up.</p>
<p>The primary care rankings rate how good a school is at placing its graduates into primary care fields (internal med, family med, peds, etc.). It speaks NOTHING to clinical education. Surgeons, dermotologists, radiologists, and about 20 other types of specialists all practice clinical medicine but they are not primary care physicians. Clinical=seeing patients. Many (most) types of doctors see patients. Only a few types are primary care. By your definition, Hopkins, Duke, and Stanford Med produce some of the worst clinicians in the country ;)</p>
<p>I suggest YOU look up the definitions of “clinical” and “primary care.” Hopefully, by the time you get through college and enter med school, you’ll have a better grasp of what medicine entails.</p>
<p>norcalguy is correct about primary care rankings.
The current rankings of medical school …whether it be primary care ranking or the over all academic ( research ) rankings does not reflect positively or negatively about the general medical education perse in any given medical school. As others have mentioned all medical schools in this country has to meet the LCME accredition. The medical students will have to learn the same materials and go through the same core clinical rotations.
The method of teaching can be different , the student body is definitely going to be different in different medical schools, moreover the emphasis of research, availability of speciality rotations and overseas experiences will differ…etc…So the “feel” for a particular medical school is going to be differnt from another. But there is no compromise of the general medical education one will receive in any of the US based medical schools.In other words you can become a very good clinical doctor coming from any of the US medical schools.
Residency/fellowship are the years where you will practice and learn hands on in your chosen field. The scores in the boards, class ranking, recommndation letters and to a smaller extend networking of alumni /faculty can be helpful in getting selected or matching with your chosen medical field. The first three in actual fact is very important in terms of where you will end up matching for your residency programs. (The last one will matter for competitive residencies.) Fellowships training again in some fields is a very different ball game.
It is also very true that not all the top medical schools have the top residency/ fellowship programs in all fields ie. dermatology, nephrology, plastic surgery. Things are much more complicated when you reach this level.</p>
<p>Norcalguy, I’ve actually already started medical school at UPenn and have ASKED residency program directors on faculty about the rankings. So I have a MUCH GREATER grasp of it, than your fantasy premed delusions.</p>
<p>Your ego definitely won’t get you too far in medicine much less a med school acceptance.</p>
<p>“By your definition, Hopkins, Duke, and Stanford Med produce some of the worst clinicians in the country”</p>
<p>Did I say that a school can’t be good at research and clinical education? Give me a break and don’t put words in my mouth norcalguy. You just continue to make an ass out of yourself. Clinical medicine is considered to be working with patients, so if you knew what you were talking about you would know that radiologists (most being diagnostic radiologists, not interventional radiologists) are not considered part of clinical medicine, in the traditional sense of direct patient care.</p>
<p>But I’m sure all the medical faculty at UPenn, are not as smart as you are.</p>
<p>Why any ranking is important? I heard that the only thing that is of any significant importance is to get into ANY American Med. School. I admire anybody who got in, no matter what the name of school. In addition, if you are into ranking and dream of certain specialty, how is that playing out? For example, U of Cincinnati College of Medicine bits (at least used to) Harvard Med. School in Dermatology ranking. Say if you are top of the top and cream of the cream of applicant and want to be a Dermatologist (dream on, miracle might happen), which school will you choose to go if accepted to both?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><em>Sigh</em> I just cannot believe someone of your intellectual ability is in med school.</p>
<p>You said that the primary care rankings are a measure of clinical education. Since those schools (Stanford, Duke, etc.) are ranked rather low in the primary care rankings, wouldn’t your implication be that these schools do not produce top of the line clinicians? Hopkins is only 26th, Duke is 41st, Stanford is 58th, and so on. YOU are the one who thinks the primary care rankings measure anything at all. I personally think they are useless. </p>
<p>If you re-read my post, I said and I quote “Many (most) types of doctors see patients.” I didn’t say ALL doctors see patients. I said most types of doctors see patients. Although, you can say that radiologists and pathologists work in clinical care if they are diagnosing diseases (as opposed to doing research) even though they don’t technically see patients. YOU are the one implying that only primary care physicians are clinical (and hence see patients). That is 100% false. Any kind of specialist can engage in clinical practice. </p>
<p>I think you should just quit now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The rankings you are referring to are residency rankings. They are rankings of the affiliated hospitals, not the med schools themselves. They have no bearing when you apply as a med student for residency except for the small advantage you might get applying to your med schools’ hospitals.</p>
<p>The research rankings (and hence overall prestige) of the med school is moderately important if you apply for a competitive specialty (like derm or plastics). But, your grades, AOA, research publications, USMLE scores, and recs are still more important. </p>
<p>The primary care rankings, they’re just garbage. There are huge fluctuations from year to year in the rankings, not to mention, they really don’t measure much of anything. Primary care specialities tend to be the least competitive specialities to begin with so it’s not saying much to say a school is great at placing its graduates into primary care.</p>
<p>Miami, if you want to stay in the area where you train & go into practice it can serve you well to get your training there. You will also meet other residents who will also stay around. If you are looking for a job in a big city, or one that is competitive because of location or $ or both, then the name residency will open doors for that.</p>
<p>Ummm, MiamiDAP, where are you getting your rankings from for Dermatology? USWNR does not even rank Derm programs. UPenn had the first Dermatology department in the United States and even does national board reviews for Derm residents. If you’re going to parrot false information esp. when saying University of Cinncinati’s derm program ranks higher than Harvard’s, please link your source.</p>
<p>Norcal, I think it’s funny how you continue to say what I was IMPLYING (i.e. what conclusions YOU reached based on what I said - and then try to say that’s what I meant), rather than what I was SAYING. I guess AP English Language didn’t work out too well for you. Of course, what do I know, I have a measly 11 posts compared to your 5,129. It’s nice to know that during 1st period study hall, you have time to talk about something you know nothing about on College Confidential. </p>
<p>Good luck to you.</p>
<p>MD2B2012,
I did not do much reserch at all, just Google’d it. I cannot say that it is accurate. However, it has been consistent over time that Cinci bits Harvard. </p>
<p>[The</a> Official Ranking of US Dermatology Departments](<a href=“http://www.residentphysician.com/Dermatology_rankings.htm]The”>http://www.residentphysician.com/Dermatology_rankings.htm)</p>
<p>Cinci - 29th, Harvard - 33rd</p>
<p>Umm, MiamiDAP, if you actually look at the rankings, these are not the rankings of the Dermatology programs themselves.</p>
<p>First off this was back in 2005, so how can it be “consistent over time” when it hasn’t been released in 3 years? Secondly, the rankings are how many NIH Awards they got in the year 2005. These aren’t rankings of the actual clinical graduate medical education residency programs. The way I know this is take a look at Pediatrics for example:</p>
<p>ResidentPhysician: [The</a> Official Ranking of US Pediatrics Departments](<a href=“http://www.residentphysician.com/Pediatrics_rankings.htm]The”>http://www.residentphysician.com/Pediatrics_rankings.htm)
vs.
USWNR: [Best</a> Children’s Hospitals - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/directories/hospitals/index_html/specialty+IHQPEDS/]Best”>http://www.usnews.com/directories/hospitals/index_html/specialty+IHQPEDS/)</p>
<p>Now I realize that the hospitals does not equal the medical school, but many are teaching hospitals for them. In the ResidentPhysician one, Texas Children’s Hospital which is the teaching peds hospital for Baylor is ranked #1, vs. in USWNR, it’s ranked #6.</p>
<p>I guarantee to you USWNR are well known, more consistent, and go by more than 1 parameter in rankings than the RP rankings that go by only 1 parameter.</p>
<p>I guarantee if you go to any academic dermatologist and ask them which is better Harvard’s academic program vs. Cinncinati’s they’ll tell you hands down it’s Harvard. For goodness sakes, Thomas Fitzpatrick, the so called “Father of Dermatology” who catapulted the field into what it is today, was the head of Harvard Dermatology.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A few reasons for this:</p>
<p>1) This is a ranking of NIH research dollars, not clinical education.</p>
<p>2) Harvard is likely to have a lot of non-NIH research funding whereas another med school won’t have the name recognition to pull in private funding.</p>
<p>3) It’s Harvard’s affiliated hospitals, not the med school itself, that makes it a research powerhouse. If you look at the NIH research funding of Harvard Med, it’s only around #26 in the country. I think we all know that Harvard’s better than #26. The reason Harvard is #1 atop the US News Research rankings is that those rankings take into account all of the research money the affiliated hospitals have (Harvard has a lot of affiliated hospitals and almost all of them are research powerhouses). Hence, it’s inaccurate to look only at the NIH dollars for the med schools, w/o regard for the affiliated hospitals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All this talk and you still don’t know the difference b/w “primary care” and “clinical.” That’s what it boils down to. Get a dictionary. You don’t need those fancy Penn Med professors to find out the answer. ;)</p>
<p>Your own med school (Penn) is only ranked in the 30’s in the primary care rankings. Many good med schools (Cornell-Weill, Mt. Sinai, etc.) didn’t even make the ranking. I recommend actually looking at the primary care rankings and their methodology before opening your mouth again.</p>
<p>Happytograduate:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s a matter of opinion whether you think the LCME has high standards. I personally do. Stanford Med, in 1999, was a few votes shy of being put on probation due to inadequate facilities (namely, the crappy state of the medical library). When I interviewed at the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons last year, there was quite a bit of construction going on. The tour guide told us Columbia P&S had gotten in trouble for not updating their facilities. Hence, if Stanford and Columbia medical schools are not meeting the standards, I think the standards must be pretty damn high.</p>
<p>I was fortunate to receive 13 interviews last year so I’ve been exposed to the curricula at many schools. While not exactly the same, every med school emphasized a) technological developments (lectures/audionotes online, histology moved from microscope to computer), b) small group learning (PBL), c) communications and physical exam courses (it was only 20 years ago, that no med school had these types of courses), d) some sort of ethics/psychosocial course, e) 4-6 person per cadaver in anatomy lab, etc. This is not to say that everything is exactly the same but every med school has the tools and structure in place to provide a sound education.</p>
<p>If you think the LCME has high standards, you are seriously misinformed.</p>
<p>“This is not to say that everything is exactly the same but every med school has the tools and structure in place to provide a sound education.” –> which shows even more that you really don’t know. UMKC doesn’t have cadavers, PBL, a lecture note service etc. Those aspects are not regulated by the LCME as requirements for medical education.</p>
<p>Every medical school has a clinical skills/physical diagnosis course it would be scary to send medical students to see patients without knowing basic clinical skills.</p>
<p>I still have a question: Is ranking important? I understand that if you get to one Med. school, go for it, no matter which one. But how you choose if you get to several Med. Schools (not very likely, but it might happen)? There is ranking, name recognition, cost difference…
And if we return to original topic of BS/MD programs, the main reason to be in such a program is to get into at least one Med. School. However, with few exceptions, majority of Med. Schools in these programs are not that highly ranked. The other side of it however, if you are in a combined program, you are insured to be with the highest caliber of students most of whom would be accepted at Ivy’s. That is because of great competition entering any of these programs.
Any thoughts / opinions / recommendations?</p>
<p>Yes,I agree with you on that.My son is at school which is ranked 80some so is GW and our State’s med school(both are lower).My husband is physician and he believes ranking is not imp.How hard you study and your usmle scores show your ability.</p>
<p>“And if we return to original topic of BS/MD programs, the main reason to be in such a program is to get into at least one Med. School. However, with few exceptions, majority of Med. Schools in these programs are not that highly ranked.”</p>
<p>Yes, and I think that was the point MD2B2012, as the original poster, was trying to make. If you look at his situation from his posts, you’ll see how he went from UMKC’s School of Medicine to end up being at UPenn’s School of Medicine.</p>
<p>“The other side of it however, if you are in a combined program, you are insured to be with the highest caliber of students most of whom would be accepted at Ivy’s. That is because of great competition entering any of these programs.”</p>
<p>True, but what use is it, if everyone in the program COULD have been accepted to an Ivy? In all that’s irrelevant. They’d be judged by the school that they are at which they chose, thus accepting the so-called “safer” route in exchange for a lesser caliber school.</p>