I regret matching to U of T Pathology

[regretfulmed2]

I regret matching to U of T Pathology. I ranked it first. 

The lifestyle aspect of the program is excellent on paper, but admin tasks and the educational environment makes my life miserable at work. Many of my co residents feel similarly. I feel not supported to succeed on the royal college, fellowships etc.

I don't see pathology being discussed here much. I hope this post helps somebody. If you are considering this program DO YOUR RESEARCH and talk to residents. The program is big and there are different experiences here. 

I am not going to elaborate here. No DMs please

[Bobthebuilder]

MS3 here looking to apply to UofT pathology next year and rank it first. I suggest you follow OP's advice and not apply.

With Love,

Bob

[Findanus]

I'm sorry to hear you're having a bad experience at UofT.

Try to enjoy the surrounding city and all its amenities. Your life after work can be quite fun if you choose it to be.

That being said, UofT has a good reputation and has matched previous graduates to competitive American dermpath programs, which is in my opinion the litmus test for determining program quality.

 

 

[rubikscube]

What are the best pathology programs in Canada in terms of training and support?

[Pathognomonic]

Can you please tell me your credentials to match path? ie. scores, electives. Tips in matching ? 

[TrojanRaggy]

On 4/12/2023 at 11:53 AM, Findanus said:

I'm sorry to hear you're having a bad experience at UofT.

Try to enjoy the surrounding city and all its amenities. Your life after work can be quite fun if you choose it to be.

That being said, UofT has a good reputation and has matched previous graduates to competitive American dermpath programs, which is in my opinion the litmus test for determining program quality.

 

 

I think the litmus test should be self-reporting by graduates as to how confident they feel in independently signing out cases after graduation and how supported they felt during their training. US fellowships (many of which are of questionable quality) should not be the gold standard.

[Edict]

Generally speaking Toronto programs tend to be larger with somewhat less support, but more opportunity. They also have attendings who are busier more academic staff and have more duties and less time to teach. They also often have bigger names, which can help down the line for fellowships etc.

As a result, there tends to be more admin work and more clinical work because of this and because Toronto is a competitive location, they don't have as much incentive to change it. People put up with this to be in Toronto. 

They also have more research opportunities but also have higher expectations for research productivity. So all in all, there is just more work period. 

Toronto also tends to be more sink or swim because they don't really need you, Toronto recruits internationally for attendings, they don't have to train locally, and can easily hire fellows too. 

Overall, the type of person who would be happy in Toronto is someone who is very self directed and more intense/keen than the average resident of that specialty. You will have less free time because of the added admin/clinical work. There is oftentimes more competition, but more opportunity as well. Those who handle the extra workload can have the sky as the limit. 

I joke that its impossible as a resident doctor to enjoy Toronto life, you either don't live in Toronto or you live in Toronto but never leave the hospital. 

 

[shikimate]

If you must have a job in the GTA then Toronto is a good choice. But beware that if you want a job in GTA pretty much a fellowship of some sort is expected.

Just be aware of these catches:

1) each fellowship year has an opportunity cost of at least 300K (in current $, likely >1 mil in future $).

2) pathologist salary is pretty much uniform provincially, although in bigger places you are more likely to find side gigs.

3) hemepath training is a plus (not necessarily a full fellowship).

4) most fellowship in Canada, and some in US, are not "certified". Unlike say forensic path that you have do an exam at the end, there's metric to measure if you've "succeeded" in your GI, gyne fellowship etc.

[Findanus]

On 4/28/2023 at 7:56 PM, TrojanRaggy said:

I think the litmus test should be self-reporting by graduates as to how confident they feel in independently signing out cases after graduation and how supported they felt during their training. US fellowships (many of which are of questionable quality) should not be the gold standard.

That's why I specifically said dermpath fellowships. They attract high-caliber pathology and dermatology candidates from the USA, as well as pathology residents from Canada, and because of this competition they are notoriously difficult to get accepted into. All of the American dermpath programs are of good quality, and dermpath has its own board examination and certification procedure. I argue that if a Canadian program consistently places its graduates in those fellowships, then that program is more likely to have the resources, be it research quality, teaching quality or connections, to achieve success in most other facets of pathology as well. 

I do agree that many fellowships of other kinds, particularly those without formal board examination and certification, may be of dubious quality. I especially wonder what purpose a 'surgical pathology' fellowship serves other than to provide an opportunity to fill knowledge gaps that weren't rectified during residency training.