Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums


Super Moderators
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


rmorelan last won the day on February 10

rmorelan had the most liked content!


About rmorelan

  • Rank
    Super Moderator

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Occupation
    Was a computer programmer/project manager. Now a resident.

Recent Profile Visitors

10,646 profile views
  1. oh yeah hadn't thought of that actually - bouncing around and setting those up will be an entirely new sort of pain as well.....and once again anyone that for any reason - financial/personal etc. that cannot do that will be disadvantaged. in the end I stand by my original point - ultimately for all these competitive spots there are way more people than positions, so no matter what you do there will be a painful selection process which will be incredibly stressful and many people won't get want they want. You can design the system any way you want but you cannot avoid that underlying fact. So the question becomes how do you design a system that is as unbiased as possible, and with a large degree of fairness allocates those spots while respecting that system also has to include the needs of the hospitals and patient care. In all cases don't pretend that you can avoid the stress/pain of this - you cannot - it is going to hurt (and that won't be the only point in medicine that will be like that either looking further in residency/fellowship or staff positions). People are always going to do extra work to line up with whatever system you have be it the USMLE prior, or the Canada system where people a ton of ECs/research etc which otherwise they wouldn't do (in both cases you will note ha that "studying for the test rather than life" with the USMLE or doing ECs/research for acceptance sake primarily in Canada isn't helping you actually learn the MEDICINE or at least not efficiently in any case). All you can do is move around the point of stress.
  2. yeah I am not always a fan of them either - because they often are created with a less than perfect philosophy for medical testing. But this? No one can come close to understanding the quality of all the schools in the US. They will have to spend a lot more time screening people without a simple method with I would expect a ton of applicants. Resources are limited so it is hard to imagine there won't be some form of short cut taking at many places. You are left with research, ECs, and LORs and maybe clinical evaluations which are hit and mess (you may only have a couple of weeks working with in an area of interest during primary clerkship, and electives are messy and complex to). The first two are at best an imperfect tool for studying anything, and the LOR one is automatically biased by the place you did your school. Clerkship evaluations are also quite likely to be biased,. I wonder if some schools would start looking at shelf exam scores? Maybe those are more focused on relevant areas for each area.
  3. Honest that is exactly my main concern with this - at least prior you could come from any school and with great scores (something you can hopefully change) then you potentially move forward even for competitive things. Under this the med school where went to school is really going to matter. Every time we get rid of some stressful evaluation system we end up with some later on stress situation to compensate. There are a ton of weaknesses with the USMLE exam to be fair for residency evaluation - it doesn't test a lot of important things that matter a lot more and end performance in residency has at best a fuzzy relationship with your score - perhaps changing the test would have been a better option. They are going to end up with our CARMS situation but amped up with the fact they have way more schools, and those schools are way less standardized. People who cannot afford to go to high end schools are just going to be further disadvantaged.
  4. I am sure there is ha. There is going to be selection bias as well - if you want a more competitive specialty from an early point, or just have more publications and think you would be competitive in a field you discover you are more likely to have them and apply. Also tricky with CARMS - never any clear idea of what anyone really wants so people do what ever they can to hopefully get some traction.
  5. yeah honestly - people get these strange notions that there a way more systematic approach to this than there is. It is natural - it gives you something to distract yourself with - but ultimately it is just wasted mental energy. I am really going to have to clean up this thread ha.
  6. just so you can do it in a pass fail situation? if for fellowships way down the line (although that isn't always needed to be clear as someone doing US fellowships - you have to research if it is required) that would very likely work.
  7. yeah it was always something to make people think this person is potentially good or bad - this is going to make things a lot stranger for residency ha. At least with standardized scores you have some form of equalization. I am not sure how you are supposed to evaluate in any timely fashion the flood of applicants to various programs without some standardized tools. Canada is hard enough - imagine well over 10x the number of places in the US. I would be worried they would start using the med school reputation as some form of a proxy (which is bad because those are expensive - so now you introduced another bias)
  8. I wouldn't over think stuff like that , and I wouldn't call it rude really. MMIs are always a bit chaotic anyway.
  9. Of course - myself and the rest of the forum are here.
  10. always a complex question - and depends on your MCAT, detailed break down for each school vs their policies on forgiving GPA and to some extend ECs. However I generally say the best and usually only way to correct less than stellar UG grades is directly with superior subsequent UG grades. Keeping the option for a 5th year open is probably a good idea, along with making really sure you know the "weak spots" in schools policies to let you overcome any GPA issues. To be clear your first couple of year grades are not terrible either - this is all about optimization of chances.
  11. I don't think the staff are normally cruel or horrible people ha I just think someone got it in their head that stressing people out like this is somehow something necessary to test for in a candidate (perhaps because it rarely occurs despite efforts otherwise). That could explain it, but not excuse it. They may otherwise be great teachers, and the program may even be excellent. Problem is it is hard to take that chance.
  12. those grades may be relatively lower (and great job at pulling that up, now you are on track!) but they are still above Western's cut off. So nail the MCAT, continue with the GPA and if you do well enough you can see where you stand. Sometimes people do have to do an extra year to erase the impact of some "bad" stuff early n but you are even without drastic measure pulling up to a much better position. Take a look at the other schools as well - TO has that wGPA policy that may apply, Queens has best last two years as other examples.
  13. ha well that is a more complex question than at other schools - normally most places the answer is no they won't, as they need full years, and you simply won't have that prior to the point were admission decisions have to be made. but western does have a conditional acceptance pathway where you can apply and get in with only one year initially above their cut offs. In that case, and that case alone, they will look at your marks in June to confirm the year you just did also was above cut off (no pressure for your grades that year ha if you go that route - motivation I suppose is not a bad thing).
  14. well we aren't salaried usually - so it is somewhat hard to be both overworked, and under paid. Usually the busier the service, correspondingly the higher the pay (at least in the same discipline). In the US and in the NHS you are salaried (I believe usually - exceptions are there) so over work is a real possibility. It is funny sometimes as a resident where we getting crushed thinking this is so painful, while the staff is just smiling away.... that doesn't mean we don't have other ways that funding cuts can be bad for us and the patient - removing support workers for instance makes the doctor have to do more (or the resident in particular do more at the hospitals I have been at ha).
  • Create New...