Toronto vs Queens vs Ottawa

[battleford]

I don't mean to introduce another topic to this thread, but I'm struggling to make my decision between Ottawa and Mac. Any advice? I would really appreciate it

Ottawa gives you an extra year to decide for CaRMS.

 

Ottawa gives you an extra year to decide for CaRMS.

 

lol you've somehow spun that as a positive for ottawa? say what you will about any of the schools, but saving a year is a definite plus for mac&calgary

[battleford]

Statistics from CaRMS match 2012 http://www.carms.ca/eng/operations_R1reports_12_e.shtml

 

% of applicants matched to 1st choice discipline in 2012 match, 1st iteration (table 11):

 

McMaster: 88.3%

Ottawa: 95.2% (3rd in the country, MUN being 1st with 96.2% and UWO 2nd with 95.8%)

Canada: 90.8%

 

% of applicants matched to 1st choice rank list in 2012 match, 1st iteration (table 10):

 

McMaster: 50.3%

Ottawa: 60.6%

Canada: 61.0%

 

If you look at these raw numbers, it looks like Ottawa training gives you a better chance to reach the speciality you desire, but not necessarily at the location you desire the most.

 

HOWEVER, way more medical students from UofO choose FM as their 1st choice (40.6% vs 28.6%, table 27), therefore positively affecting the % of applicants matched to their 1st choice discipline and rank list.

 

CaRMS match statistics may be useful to help you choose a medical school if you are willing to move and establish yourself across the country, but you need to be careful interpreting these data.

 

 

They KEY point to look at is how many people are applying to less competitive programs like family. If 40% of Ottawa grads are listing FM as #1, well then already 40% of their class is guaranteed first choice discipline.

So 60% of the class is applying to a specialty as first choice, and since the total match rate for Ottawa is 60.6%, this suggests that the specialty match rate for Ottawa was 33%. That's not so great after all!

[Med0123]

They KEY point to look at is how many people are applying to less competitive programs like family. If 40% of Ottawa grads are listing FM as #1, well then already 40% of their class is guaranteed first choice discipline.

So 60% of the class is applying to a specialty as first choice, and since the total match rate for Ottawa is 60.6%, this suggests that the specialty match rate for Ottawa was 33%. That's not so great after all!

 

This is the beauty of having public access to these numbers

In addition, don't forget that the data I presented are from the latest match (2012) only, to evaluate the trend you need to look at least at the 3 last years match statistics in my opinion

[battleford]

Toronto and Mac are the programs that will be recognized internationally, particularly if you want to do global health. i hate to say it, but even the bottom students from U of T are known to have their stuff down for residency programs. And if you ever want to do research or academic medicine, Toronto is the place to be.

 

Consider if you want to do a speciality or family, ottawa had one of the worst first choice match rates for residency specialties this year. you can do family at either, and mac has more of an international reputation because of their medical epidemiology program

 

I think medical students are pretty comparable across the board, so the point about UofT students is moot. Having said that, you are right about Toronto & Mac (and I'll add McGill) having great international reputations.

 

With respect to match rates, people should consider 3 things:

1. if possible, go to med school where you want to do residency.. will greatly improve your chances...

2. if you think you might slightly interested in more competitive specialties, then consider going to a research-intensive school (UofT, Mac, McGill again) b/c that will open up doors across the country for you

3. ignore match rates! these are not applicable b/c some schools (ex. Ottawa, NOSM) have high percent going into family which inflates their numbers.. (the charter class at NOSM boasted having 100% match rate... well that's easy to accomplish when everyone ranks family somewhere on their list)

[NLengr]

I think medical students are pretty comparable across the board, so the point about UofT students is moot. Having said that, you are right about Toronto & Mac (and I'll add McGill) having great international reputations.

 

With respect to match rates, people should consider 3 things:

1. if possible, go to med school where you want to do residency.. will greatly improve your chances...

2. if you think you might slightly interested in more competitive specialties, then consider going to a research-intensive school (UofT, Mac, McGill again) b/c that will open up doors across the country for you

3. ignore match rates! these are not applicable b/c some schools (ex. Ottawa, NOSM) have high percent going into family which inflates their numbers.. (the charter class at NOSM boasted having 100% match rate... well that's easy to accomplish when everyone ranks family somewhere on their list)

 

 

I disagree that research intense locations help with competative specialties. Two reasons:

 

1. The advantage of getting a bit more research is offset by the disadvantage of being in a larger environment. A smaller school means you are Albee to work closer with more of the staff. A closer relationship with more staff means more people to influence PDs in your favour. In competative areas this matters, a lot. More the. Enough to offset seeing more research. Besides in small schools there are still lots of opportunities to do research if you want.

 

2. When we select candidates in my highly competative specialty our main points are work ethic, personality and knowledge. Research is way down this list. In fact unless you first authored a landmark paper or put something in the NEJM etc., it's basically a check box. I'm in one of, if not the most desirable program for my field, in the country by the way.

 

Point: Go to whatever school you think will make you happier. If you are a competent student you can match where you want. You'll be in the school for 4 years, you want those to be enjoyable.

[battleford]

I disagree that research intense locations help with competative specialties. Two reasons:

 

1. The advantage of getting a bit more research is offset by the disadvantage of being in a larger environment. A smaller school means you are Albee to work closer with more of the staff. A closer relationship with more staff means more people to influence PDs in your favour. In competative areas this matters, a lot. More the. Enough to offset seeing more research. Besides in small schools there are still lots of opportunities to do research if you want.

 

2. When we select candidates in my highly competative specialty our main points are work ethic, personality and knowledge. Research is way down this list. In fact unless you first authored a landmark paper or put something in the NEJM etc., it's basically a check box. I'm in one of, if not the most desirable program for my field, in the country by the way.

 

Point: Go to whatever school you think will make you happier. If you are a competent student you can match where you want. You'll be in the school for 4 years, you want those to be enjoyable.

 

Point taken. What program are you in?

 

I still disagree however and my counterpoint is as follows: Canada is a small country in terms of medicine. The most prominent names in any specialty tend to work in Toronto, McGill, Mac, maybe UBC.

 

So:

-going to a small school gives you a leg up in that department only

-going to Toronto, Mac, McGill, UBC lets you do research with BIG names... those names will carry weight across the country and ultimately better chances of matching

[NLengr]

Point taken. What program are you in?

 

I still disagree however and my counterpoint is as follows: Canada is a small country in terms of medicine. The most prominent names in any specialty tend to work in Toronto, McGill, Mac, maybe UBC.

 

So:

-going to a small school gives you a leg up in that department only

-going to Toronto, Mac, McGill, UBC lets you do research with BIG names... those names will carry weight across the country and ultimately better chances of matching

 

I don't disclose my program online. Sorry.

 

Buddies between staff outweigh big names at least half the time. But your point is also valid.

 

I think we are debating very minor points. We both know that work ethic, personality and knowledge are carrying the day for 99.9% of the clerks matching.

[battleford]

I don't disclose my program online. Sorry.

 

Buddies between staff outweigh big names at least half the time. But your point is also valid.

 

I think we are debating very minor points. We both know that work ethic, personality and knowledge are carrying the day for 99.9% of the clerks matching.

 

Agreed, these points are only useful for the minority of applicants who were accepted to multiple schools.

 

Work ethics, personality, and knowledge are definitely super important traits. Preparing to apply to a competitive specialty myself, I know that they are not enough. You need strong reference letters, and if you can get them from bigger names, it helps. So my point is that it is easier to do that at the more renowned institutions such as TO, Mac, McGill, UBC.

 

Going to a small school and establishing good relationships there will be good at that school. And that's great if you want to do residency in that city. But it won't help you at other schools.

[NLengr]

Agreed, these points are only useful for the minority of applicants who were accepted to multiple schools.

 

Work ethics, personality, and knowledge are definitely super important traits. Preparing to apply to a competitive specialty myself, I know that they are not enough. You need strong reference letters, and if you can get them from bigger names, it helps. So my point is that it is easier to do that at the more renowned institutions such as TO, Mac, McGill, UBC.

 

Going to a small school and establishing good relationships there will be good at that school. And that's great if you want to do residency in that city. But it won't help you at other schools.

 

Actually, even for competitive specialties they will be enough to rank 9o% of the applicants. Even for the rest, it's a bit of a mixed bag of stuff that determines it.

 

I think you are over estimating the value of a name and under estimating just how much personal connections matter when getting a job. I agree that a letter from a big name in a field is worth more than a name from a more obscure practitioner. HOWEVER a recommendation from a good trusted friend of the PD is even more valuable. In business and medicine (I have worked in each) your buddy's word is always the most value. A PD is gonna put a lot of weight on the re ommendation of a guy he spent 5 years hanging out with everyday than the word of someone he just knows the name of. He knows his buddys judgement My take on things is:

 

Letter from good buddy of the PD > letter from big name random guy > letter from no name random guy.

[MrsSnrub]

As long as we're hijacking this thread...Queen's vs Western anyone?

[battleford]

 

Letter from good buddy of the PD > letter from big name random guy > letter from no name random guy.

 

Sure. BUT:

 

1. The rank list is ultimately made up by committee. Unless the reference happens to be buddies with the entire committee, it's not as valuable.

 

2. You're going to say the PD is the most important member of the committee and you're right (even tho most programs give everyone an equal vote). But, how many PDs could one person truly be on "buddy" terms with.

 

So while I agree a letter from the buddy of the PD is valuable, the letter from a big name in the field is going to carry weight with the WHOLE interview committee and with EVERY interview committee.

[A-Stark]

lol you've somehow spun that as a positive for ottawa? say what you will about any of the schools, but saving a year is a definite plus for mac&calgary

 

Well, given Mac's match rate this year and some anecdotal stuff from Calgary students I've talked to, three-year programs are *absolutely* at a disadvantage when it comes to competitive specialties. Considering your other posts, I think you would understand the importance of having more time to meet the right people and get the right work done for CaRMS.

 

They KEY point to look at is how many people are applying to less competitive programs like family. If 40% of Ottawa grads are listing FM as #1, well then already 40% of their class is guaranteed first choice discipline.

So 60% of the class is applying to a specialty as first choice, and since the total match rate for Ottawa is 60.6%, this suggests that the specialty match rate for Ottawa was 33%. That's not so great after all!

 

Ranking family medicine first does not "guarantee" matching, and much the same goes for other "less competitive" specialties like internal medicine.

 

You're also using the wrong numbers - 60% of Ottawa's graduates this year got their first choice discipline and location while 95% got their first choice discipline. Assuming as you do that 40% ranked family first (the actual number was 38%) and that they all matched to family, then 55% of the class matched to their first choice specialty while 5% failed to match. That works out to a specialty match rate of almost 92%.

 

God med students are ****ing innumerate...

 

A-stark, I was referring to the specialty rate as opposed to family medicine match rate. I agree with Med0123, a three year trend would be more reasonable however. You are taking your stance based off one encounter on the ward over a flagyl order? Toronto and Mcgill have centuries of history and hundreds of graduates who would buck that trend. I'm not saying other schools don't have exceptional trends, but Toronto and Mcgill are ranked as the preeminent medical institutions. Ottawa is not even top 10. Check the latest issue of Mcleans if you need an external reviewer. Don't bring up accreditation either, because Toronto has yet to get their results for the most recent visit.

 

I didn't say my anecdote was evidence of anything. On the other hand, a single piece of anecdotal evidence is better than the waste of space that is the Macleans ranking which - incidentally - has NOTHING to do with the quality, structure, or any other characteristic of any undergraduate or postgraduate medical education program.

 

And centuries of history? It's this kind of self-important claptrap that gives TO a bad name around the country.

 

Point taken. What program are you in?

 

I still disagree however and my counterpoint is as follows: Canada is a small country in terms of medicine. The most prominent names in any specialty tend to work in Toronto, McGill, Mac, maybe UBC.

 

So:

-going to a small school gives you a leg up in that department only

-going to Toronto, Mac, McGill, UBC lets you do research with BIG names... those names will carry weight across the country and ultimately better chances of matching

 

Research is not that important. Letters from staff who know you well and can comment positively on your work ethic, professionalism, and knowledge from the specialty you are applying for are what you need.

 

It's quite true that Canada is a small country in terms of medicine - which means that program directors tend to know each other and know who the "names" are in different centres. But then places like Toronto are quite big and there are a lot of different people working in the same specialty who may not even know each other (unless it's a very small one). As one PD at Dal put it to me, doing an elective at UofT would help get a letter, but not necessarily one from someone known to the selection committee at UofT let alone elsewhere.

[battleford]

Well, given Mac's match rate this year and some anecdotal stuff from Calgary students I've talked to, three-year programs are *absolutely* at a disadvantage when it comes to competitive specialties. Considering your other posts, I think you would understand the importance of having more time to meet the right people and get the right work done for CaRMS.

 

Ranking family medicine first does not "guarantee" matching, and much the same goes for other "less competitive" specialties like internal medicine.

 

Research is not that important. Letters from staff who know you well and can comment positively on your work ethic, professionalism, and knowledge from the specialty you are applying for are what you need.

 

 

1. I'm not sure how you can draw conclusions from a one-year abberation (mac) or from anecodetal evidence (as you admit to re: Calgary). "God, med students are so ***** unable to critically appraise." For most people, saving a year is definitely worth it.

 

2. Ranking family medicine all but guarantees you matching. As a CMG, that's pretty much a lock assuming you rank a few FM programs. (admittedly, some FM programs are competitive but it's usually due to location - TO, Vancouver, etc)

 

3. Research is important, don't try to fool people to the contrary.

[A-Stark]

1. I'm not sure how you can draw conclusions from a one-year abberation (mac) or from anecodetal evidence (as you admit to re: Calgary). "God, med students are so ***** unable to critically appraise." For most people, saving a year is definitely worth it.

 

No, at Calgary they do all their electives (in second year!) before the core rotations, which makes it MUCH more difficult if they decide late-ish. So many people I know have changed their minds over time or were undecided until mid-way through clerkship. It does not help to be forced to enter the match with less experience and less time.

 

And given how laughably far off your "33%" number was, I feel ably justified in my comment. (That and having been the epidemiology unit rep for my class...)

 

2. Ranking family medicine all but guarantees you matching. As a CMG, that's pretty much a lock assuming you rank a few FM programs. (admittedly, some FM programs are competitive but it's usually due to location - TO, Vancouver, etc)

 

The only difference between a competitive specialty and one that is "non-competitive" is that the former is competitive regardless of location. But that doesn't mean that unmatched family spots this year (or any year) are where people want to go.

 

3. Research is important, don't try to fool people to the contrary.

 

It's not unimportant, but you don't need to have Science or Nature publications... unless you're applying to UofT Internal Medicine. (They may have done away with that one...)

[meds2013er]

No, at Calgary they do all their electives (in second year!) before the core rotations, which makes it MUCH more difficult if they decide late-ish. So many people I know have changed their minds over time or were undecided until mid-way through clerkship. It does not help to be forced to enter the match with less experience and less time.

 

And given how laughably far off your "33%" number was, I feel ably justified in my comment. (That and having been the epidemiology unit rep for my class...)

 

 

 

The only difference between a competitive specialty and one that is "non-competitive" is that the former is competitive regardless of location. But that doesn't mean that unmatched family spots this year (or any year) are where people want to go.

 

 

 

It's not unimportant, but you don't need to have Science or Nature publications... unless you're applying to UofT Internal Medicine. (They may have done away with that one...)

 

I find it troubling that you will take a single piece of anecdotal evidence over a ranking that actually involves stabs at measurement. I hope you don't take the same approach in your clinical practice. Fortunately or unfortunately, it's not a 'self clap trap', I don't go to U of T. You shouldn't have such defenses about going to a smaller medical school, I am sure you will do just fine in CARMS.

[battleford]

No, at Calgary they do all their electives (in second year!) before the core rotations, which makes it MUCH more difficult if they decide late-ish. So many people I know have changed their minds over time or were undecided until mid-way through clerkship. It does not help to be forced to enter the match with less experience and less time.

 

And given how laughably far off your "33%" number was, I feel ably justified in my comment. (That and having been the epidemiology unit rep for my class...)

 

 

 

The only difference between a competitive specialty and one that is "non-competitive" is that the former is competitive regardless of location. But that doesn't mean that unmatched family spots this year (or any year) are where people want to go.

 

 

 

It's not unimportant, but you don't need to have Science or Nature publications... unless you're applying to UofT Internal Medicine. (They may have done away with that one...)

 

A competitive specialty and a non-competitive specialty have way more differences than just that location. That's just ignorant. Non-competitive specialties such as family medicine have MORE spots than applicants. Hence, it's pretty much a guaranteed match. Competitive specialties like derm, plastics, optho, have almost HALF the number of spots as applicants. So please check your facts.

 

Further, your application of a one-off aberration and anecdotal evidence is laughable. Being the epi rep doesn't make that any better, in fact it suggests of all people, u should know better. Just b/c you think Calgary students don't fare well doesn't mean that's fact. I haven't looked at the numbers, so I'm not making claims, but it doesn't seem you've done any fact checking either.

[NLengr]

3. Research is important, don't try to fool people to the contrary.

 

It's pretty low on the importance list come matching time (note, this is limited to my knowledge of my specialty, I can't comment for sure on others). I can say from my perspective, unless you are publishing a landmark paper as first author it's not that important to us. Most med student research is either simple, poor quality or mostly done by a much more experienced doc. Hell resident led research is similar. It's more of a tool at match time to show you have work ethic and interest.

 

Again, concentrate on the big three:

Work ethic

Personality

Knowledge

 

If you are among the best at all three, you will match very high.

[NLengr]

I find it troubling that you will take a single piece of anecdotal evidence over a ranking that actually involves stabs at measurement. I hope you don't take the same approach in your clinical practice. Fortunately or unfortunately, it's not a 'self clap trap', I don't go to U of T. You shouldn't have such defenses about going to a smaller medical school, I am sure you will do just fine in CARMS.

 

2012 grad (look at sig). Already matched.

[caduceus]

Question, if med school is all Pass/Fail, then is the "knowledge" component of one's application solely assessed through reference letters? Or is there some other measure that I am not aware?

[NLengr]

Question, if med school is all Pass/Fail, then is the "knowledge" component of one's application solely assessed through reference letters? Or is there some other measure that I am not aware?

 

Elective experience at the center to which you are applying is generally how a program would assess. Spending 2 weeks with someone is a good way to assess them.

 

If you haven't done an elective I guess it's much harder. For our program I think almost everyone, if not everyone, who we ranked this year did at least a site visit.

[NLengr]

Dude, everyone knows you can't get into ROAD without research. Quit it already.

 

The match isn't about work ethic, personality, and knowledge. Those are abstract qualities with no operational definitions. I could know more about Radiology than anyone in the world but you could never find that out about me with a paper application and interview. When you spout crap like this you aren't helping.

 

If you could read correctly you'd figure out that I said research is much less important than the aforementioned three components, not that its not required.

 

People place way to much value on it come CaRMS time. Sure you need it for a competative specialty but it's not like it's near the top of the list of qualities we look for. Any applicable research is adequate. It's not like we do critical analysis of each applicants research, rank the quality, then use that to determine rank order list.

 

You are free to not listen to me if you want. I am just passing along my experience as someone who has been involved in candidate selection for a specialty that is one of the most competative in medicine. Maybe its different in whatever field you are a resident in. Maybe the selection processes you have been part of were hugely focused on research. As I said, I am only passing on my experience.

 

The three qualities are easy to assess for us. We only really rank people we have worked with. It's not that hard to sit down as a group and figure out who has them and who doesn't. I'll tell you right now, candidates have come through our program with their names as part of impressive papers, but they were lazy (late for rounds, didn't actively look for work, didn't stay late if there was work to do). They didn't make it off the bottom of our rank list.

[thatonekid]

Does having a smaller class size like at Queen's make a big difference in terms of experience? In terms of lectures and class time, is Toronto's really that much more than Queen's or is that sort of just overplayed around here. I haven't been able to really see what a typical day at Queen's is like, while Toronto has a weekly breakdown of their schedule.

Queen's schedule varies day-to-day and week-to-week. The only things that are constant is that you have 2 afternoons a week off (and one of them is always friday afternoon- long weekends!), clinical skills one afternoon a week, one afternoon of anatomy/histology(in 1st term) or facilitated small group learning (in 2nd term- going through cases in small groups with a physician) and lunch every day. For the rest of the time, you have a combination of lecture, small group learning (SGL), and directed independent learning (DIL).

 

Term 1 had more lectures than term 2 because we were learning foundational material (anatomy, histology, physiology, etc.). In term 2, you have a few lectures a week, but it's mainly SGL where you work in small groups of students and apply concepts to clinical scenarios. DIL can be done whereever/whenever (at home, at school, on the weekend, etc) and is basically time for you to study or prep for an upcoming SGL session (so even though it's built into the timetable, you don't have to consider it to be "class time").

 

I think that having a smaller class size definitely makes a difference, but it's totally a personal decision.

[quackster]

Does having a smaller class size like at Queen's make a big difference in terms of experience? In terms of lectures and class time, is Toronto's really that much more than Queen's or is that sort of just overplayed around here. I haven't been able to really see what a typical day at Queen's is like, while Toronto has a weekly breakdown of their schedule.

 

The only time the class is "big" at UofT is during lectures. During a lecture, I doubt it matters much if there are 100 or 200 people in the room.

 

Everything else we do is in small groups, so having a large overall class size is kind of moot. In ASCM (Clinical Skills) groups there are 5-6 students, PBL, 5-6 and seminars, 10-20

 

Most of us in the class know each other, despite there being so many of us. The diversity is pretty awesome, and I wouldn't call the large class size a negative in any way.

[battleford]

But do you find that you're limited in your access to performing procedures or getting hands on time because of the number of learners in front of you? Ottawa almost seems like a nice balance between the advantages of the smaller Queen's class and the larger Toronto class. My one main reason for not accepting Ottawa is because I'd like to experience a new city, but I'm having a hard time justifying that for Toronto right now.

 

My experience is that this is something people often toss around, but learning opportunities are up to you. If you are a keen clerk and eager to learn, you will get learning opportunities, at any Canadian med school. If you are lazy, you will be able to get by at any Canadian med school with minimal effort and no one will care about you. So from that perspective, class size doesn't really matter.

 

Kingston is a small class size, but also has just two hospitals (one is pretty small), and limited catchment area.

 

Ottawa has a larger class size, larger hospitals, more patients.

 

Toronto has the largest class size of the three, the most hospitals, the most patients.

 

In any of those centres, you will find ample learning opportunities. In my opinion, the biggest difference between the schools is access to awesome research opportunities (with a huge edge to Toronto over both Ottawa and Kingston)

[simpy]

So it's not true then that UofT students tend to be much more stressed due to their heavy lecture schedule? uOttawa students have so much more time off for electives or studying, whereas the 9-5 schedule of Toronto makes me think that there's a lot less time for doing anything but studying.

 

Cheeze, did you join Queen's facebook group for the 2016s? Lots of good information there, and you can ask all the questions you want about the curriculum!