Studying medicine (2 Viewers)

[randomunswmedstudent]

Was browsing this since I was feeling nostalgic about my year 12. I am a final year medical student at UNSW, and I'll give my honest opinion here: I emphasise I am generalising, but generalisations are to some extent founded on truth, and I reflect merely what I see on a day to day basis.

First what is good about UNSW? Nothing much really, the teaching can be lousy, there's not enough support, the people in medsoc are a bunch of stuck up pricks... but we work fucking hard, and have a course that is actually becoming reasonably tolerable.

To start, there are two parts to being a doctor, first is the basic sciences, second is practical art: you MUST know the basic sciences (eg anatomy, physiology etc), and you must be able to talk to your patients and confidently perform an examination/do simple procedures on them. The former of these you learn from textbooks, wikipedia (lol) and other resources, the latter, you practice on friends and family, and on real patients in hospital.

Now, the main difference between UWS and UNSW is the balance of these two. UWS places more emphasis on the latter, UNSW more on the former, which means that UWS students are more liked by doctors in hospital (hence why so many people say UWS has a better course?), but UNSW students a have much firmer grounding in the basic sciences (before you hate, I challenge any UWS student to do the 2004 AMC handbook and see if they can score above 50%). Both are important, but the basic sciences are more important if you want anywhere as a specialist: what separates a GP from a specialist is the degree of understanding of the basic sciences, and how to apply them to a clinical setting.

So, if you want to specialise, UNSW's basic sciences is pretty good, and it will help quite a bit in your post-grad training; BUT if you want to be a GP, then it doesnt matter which Uni you go to. I EMPHASISE this: if you know the theory inside out, you can always work out the clinical side; but you can never work out the basic sciences from the clinical side of things. Which is harder? I would say the basic sciences by far. Of course, you can suffer now or later, but bear in mind, you'll be competing with the stupid number of medical graduates that have more than doubled since 1999 to get into specialist programs (all you surgeon wannabes? in 2014 about 1000 doctors [for simplicity, out of a cohort of approx 2500 students who graduated in 2010?] competed for about 300 slots in all surgical disciplines; the competition is only getting worse, this year there are about 4500 medical students).

Which brings us to the MD vs MBBS debate and how this matters. Most specialties used a 'structured online CV' which gives points based on your qualifications, research, co-curricular activities etc. The MD is worth slightly more points than the MBBS so keep this in mind you you're aiming to get into these specialties. And the compulsory research year at UNSW? It's a hit or miss thing, but I can honestly say that because of that research year, I've maxed out the points you can get for doing research for most specialist programs, which has implications for my future career choices (4 journal articles, impact factor 7.3, 3.5, 1.7, 1.5; 2 conference proceedings at relatively prestigious international meetings [one was the RCOG/RANZCOG meeting in Queensland this year]). However, if you're confident you can get the points from elsewhere, by all means, go ahead. Just bear in mind there is an advantage to the UNSW research year (if you don't waste your time messing around).

Is UNSW more prestigious. Yes. Does this matter? Yes. My research was allowed by virtue of the fact I got to know professors, and professors are affiliated with universities. UNSW has far more professors given its more intensive research focus. I guess you could do research later on, but when you're studying your ass off again for specialty exams, you'd be hard pressed to find the time.

So if I had to pick again, between a 5 year course or the UNSW course, I would choose UNSW again because I know I don't want to be a GP. I'm not too scared about the practical sides of things since I've learnt enough to be ok-ish on the ward (and that stuff is easily learnt as an intern), but for the basic sciences I know and research I've conducted/participated in, it was definitely worth it.

 

[randomunswmedstudent]

I believe UWS's 3rd year (i.e. first year of clinical) students get attached to a team. Whereas we just wander around the hospital with no structure and doing whatever we please. Guess depends on the individual, but I would prefer being attached to a team.



Possibly UWS cut out the year of research so their degree was shorten to 5 years, rather than 6.

because you're a third year. Focus on studying for ICE, and learning stats/qualitative approaches to research for your ILP. If you want to be attached to a team, just tell the consultant and go for ward rounds.

 

[randomunswmedstudent]

Man, I could write essays about this
And maybe I will some day

I think it's fair to say a lot of people see UNSW as favourable because of prestige, and also stigmatise UWS.
Which is silly tbh

For med the uni itself makes very little difference, so it should REALLY come down to course structure, location and where you enjoy spending your time

Personally I love the UNSW BMed/MD structure and it's given me opportunities I wouldn't have had at UWS, so no regrets
But UWS definitely has benefits over UNSW too
And the quality of doctor I will be I feel depends more on me than it does on my uni

I would've loved to study UWS as well med though, it really is excellent

mate, you're a first year. shut up and study your HM-B stuff. You'll need it later on when you actually realise what you're talking about.

 

[enoilgam]

Of course, you can suffer now or later, but bear in mind, you'll be competing with the stupid number of medical graduates that have more than doubled since 1999 to get into specialist programs (all you surgeon wannabes? in 2014 about 1000 doctors [for simplicity, out of a cohort of approx 2500 students who graduated in 2010?] competed for about 300 slots in all surgical disciplines; the competition is only getting worse, this year there are about 4500 medical students).

It's funny, because to me, these numbers dont seem competitive at all. Compared to graduate programs in other fields those numbers are pretty good (for those, you are looking at ratios like 800 applicants for 20 positions for a top tier law firm or around 4,000 applications for 30 positions for a commerce program at a major company). I also recruit for a number of professional/non-graduate positions and it's not uncommon to see 25 - 200+ applications for a single position in those cases as well.

 

[Kiraken]

Was browsing this since I was feeling nostalgic about my year 12. I am a final year medical student at UNSW, and I'll give my honest opinion here: I emphasise I am generalising, but generalisations are to some extent founded on truth, and I reflect merely what I see on a day to day basis.

First what is good about UNSW? Nothing much really, the teaching can be lousy, there's not enough support, the people in medsoc are a bunch of stuck up pricks... but we work fucking hard, and have a course that is actually becoming reasonably tolerable.

To start, there are two parts to being a doctor, first is the basic sciences, second is practical art: you MUST know the basic sciences (eg anatomy, physiology etc), and you must be able to talk to your patients and confidently perform an examination/do simple procedures on them. The former of these you learn from textbooks, wikipedia (lol) and other resources, the latter, you practice on friends and family, and on real patients in hospital.

Now, the main difference between UWS and UNSW is the balance of these two. UWS places more emphasis on the latter, UNSW more on the former, which means that UWS students are more liked by doctors in hospital (hence why so many people say UWS has a better course?), but UNSW students a have much firmer grounding in the basic sciences (before you hate, I challenge any UWS student to do the 2004 AMC handbook and see if they can score above 50%). Both are important, but the basic sciences are more important if you want anywhere as a specialist: what separates a GP from a specialist is the degree of understanding of the basic sciences, and how to apply them to a clinical setting.

So, if you want to specialise, UNSW's basic sciences is pretty good, and it will help quite a bit in your post-grad training; BUT if you want to be a GP, then it doesnt matter which Uni you go to. I EMPHASISE this: if you know the theory inside out, you can always work out the clinical side; but you can never work out the basic sciences from the clinical side of things. Which is harder? I would say the basic sciences by far. Of course, you can suffer now or later, but bear in mind, you'll be competing with the stupid number of medical graduates that have more than doubled since 1999 to get into specialist programs (all you surgeon wannabes? in 2014 about 1000 doctors [for simplicity, out of a cohort of approx 2500 students who graduated in 2010?] competed for about 300 slots in all surgical disciplines; the competition is only getting worse, this year there are about 4500 medical students).

Which brings us to the MD vs MBBS debate and how this matters. Most specialties used a 'structured online CV' which gives points based on your qualifications, research, co-curricular activities etc. The MD is worth slightly more points than the MBBS so keep this in mind you you're aiming to get into these specialties. And the compulsory research year at UNSW? It's a hit or miss thing, but I can honestly say that because of that research year, I've maxed out the points you can get for doing research for most specialist programs, which has implications for my future career choices (4 journal articles, impact factor 7.3, 3.5, 1.7, 1.5; 2 conference proceedings at relatively prestigious international meetings [one was the RCOG/RANZCOG meeting in Queensland this year]). However, if you're confident you can get the points from elsewhere, by all means, go ahead. Just bear in mind there is an advantage to the UNSW research year (if you don't waste your time messing around).

Is UNSW more prestigious. Yes. Does this matter? Yes. My research was allowed by virtue of the fact I got to know professors, and professors are affiliated with universities. UNSW has far more professors given its more intensive research focus. I guess you could do research later on, but when you're studying your ass off again for specialty exams, you'd be hard pressed to find the time.

So if I had to pick again, between a 5 year course or the UNSW course, I would choose UNSW again because I know I don't want to be a GP. I'm not too scared about the practical sides of things since I've learnt enough to be ok-ish on the ward (and that stuff is easily learnt as an intern), but for the basic sciences I know and research I've conducted/participated in, it was definitely worth it.

w0t at the bolded

Furthermore, research opportunities with specialists is pretty easy to access irrespective of what uni you go to, it just takes a bit of initiative. A lot of people in my year are doing their honours project with doctors who are mainly affiliated with other unis, but were approached because they are at the top of their game in their medical field. Not to mention neuroscience research at UWS is basically top tier.

I do agree that UNSW has that extra year that allows for research that UWS students only get access to if they have good enough marks to do the research year or do concurrent honours, but research is one of those things where if you take initiative you can manage to do it even if your course doesn't set aside an entire year to do it.

 

[enoilgam]

Is research during undergrad a requirement for specialisation?

 

[Oer]

mate, you're a first year. shut up and study your HM-B stuff. You'll need it later on when you actually realise what you're talking about.

This is a forum to express opinions mate, a question was asked and I clearly said that my response was only my opinion. If you have something about what I said that you disagree with in particular, you can voice it, but just being rude for no reason doesn't really get anyone anywhere.
(Not even a first year, but still no reason to be dismissive).

w0t at the bolded

Furthermore, research opportunities with specialists is pretty easy to access irrespective of what uni you go to, it just takes a bit of initiative. A lot of people in my year are doing their honours project with doctors who are mainly affiliated with other unis, but were approached because they are at the top of their game in their medical field. Not to mention neuroscience research at UWS is basically top tier.

I do agree that UNSW has that extra year that allows for research that UWS students only get access to if they have good enough marks to do the research year or do concurrent honours, but research is one of those things where if you take initiative you can manage to do it even if your course doesn't set aside an entire year to do it.

Agree, if you're keen you can defs set up research opportunities with any uni. Just UNSW has it set up so it's a little easier.

Is research during undergrad a requirement for specialisation?

Not technically, but it can add towards a stronger CV when applying for certain specialties. Also can open doors to more opportunities.

 

[bangladesh]

So if I had to pick again, between a 5 year course or the UNSW course, I would choose UNSW again because I know I don't want to be a GP. I'm not too scared about the practical sides of things since I've learnt enough to be ok-ish on the ward (and that stuff is easily learnt as an intern), but for the basic sciences I know and research I've conducted/participated in, it was definitely worth it.

lol wtf u on about m8. That is the biggest generalisation i've ever seen. With regards to the MD vs MBBS, most colleges including RACS have made it super clear that they dont give a fuck about what degree you graduate with and mainly assess you on your post-grad achievements and that's clearly reflected by their assessment criteria.

 

[INADIKAP95]

Dentistry > Medicine

 

[Schmeag]

I emphasise I am generalising, but generalisations are to some extent founded on truth, and I reflect merely what I see on a day to day basis.

...

Both are important, but the basic sciences are more important if you want anywhere as a specialist: what separates a GP from a specialist is the degree of understanding of the basic sciences, and how to apply them to a clinical setting.

So, if you want to specialise, UNSW's basic sciences is pretty good, and it will help quite a bit in your post-grad training; BUT if you want to be a GP, then it doesnt matter which Uni you go to. I EMPHASISE this: if you know the theory inside out, you can always work out the clinical side; but you can never work out the basic sciences from the clinical side of things.

I see your generalisation and raise you by more generalisation. Basic sciences, apart from research, are probably most relevant when sitting the primary or entrance examinations to most specialties. The deeper knowledge of the basic sciences can be easily forgotten due to a lack of use during pre-vocational training and most find that they need to study everything again. The knowledge of basic sciences alone is useless and using it to "work out" the clinical side is potentially dangerous, otherwise medical scientists would make excellent doctors. You need to use up-to-date evidence and clinical knowledge to make safer judgements.

Not sure why the hate on GPs--they need to know about the basic sciences as well as everything else. Among other things, a doctor in general should have an understanding of the basic sciences, be aware of current evidence, and apply it to a clinical setting.

Is research during undergrad a requirement for specialisation?

No, consider it optional. Sometimes it is helpful as Oer says. It can also be a waste of space. As a whole, if you are going to do research for the purpose of entering a training program, it should be recent and relevant.

lol wtf u on about m8. That is the biggest generalisation i've ever seen. With regards to the MD vs MBBS, most colleges including RACS have made it super clear that they dont give a fuck about what degree you graduate with and mainly assess you on your post-grad achievements and that's clearly reflected by their assessment criteria.

I agree. A quick squiz at the RANZCOG selection criteria reveals that MD is explicitly not counted. Some sections are purely related to postgraduate years (eg clinical experience, postgraduate qualifications).

The only relevant section for the RANZCOG criteria a medical student could significantly contribute to would be in awards (eg top of the class) and if they are classified rural or Indigenous, although some points could be allocated for research and presentations, and miscellaneous criteria. Maximum points for research is capped at two 1st author publications. Some other colleges have a time limit for how old research can be.

 

[randomunswmedstudenv]

So ya, I guess I should offer my apologies if I come across as rude and confrontational. I was stressed as hell yesterday, and have read your points, and indeed many of them are fair. My apologies to Oer in particular: I sound like a prick (and probably am one. Damn.)

Schmeg is right on certain points, and I guess I state I do not intend to become a GP is given the fact that in my home country, any doctor who has a MBBS can after their internship become a GP (so they really get looked down on back home; BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE HERE). Somewhat relevant to this discussion is that I did enter as a local student which means that I am still eligible to apply for most of the post-grad training options here.

Does research matter? Yes. Yes it does. Your research/term supervisor often are just as important as your CV, and what they say or write about you will determine if you get on to the training programs. Are the programs hard to get onto? Yes. Very. Last year, it is said that up to 50 GP's missed out on places, and the GP college is traditionally a college that is under-subscribed. Why does research matter, your supervisor's research grants, department funding and promotions are to some extent determined by their publications; and research is one of the most things that will get you there (and not sucking at ward stuff of course, but its really hard to suck so bad your supervisor won't endorse you). Of course other factors contribute, but being good at this sets you apart. Is being at UNSW helpful? It encourages its students to pick these skills up, but to what extent will depend on the student. Of course, one could argue that you could do your undergrad at any university and it'd be fine, so I guess there is some truth there, but I would hesitate to accept it fully.

Schmeg also is right about the research counting to points, but take RACS for example, the MD is worth something on most of their structured CVs. But he's right that you can get points from elsewhere, but research does take up a fair chunk, and indeed, these other points aren't too hard to get. If you want go look up the different colleges: each will assign differing points based on the research you undertake.

Now I have to disagree strongly with Schmeg on his point Re: the basic sciences. Indeed you can forget them, but only up to a point. You're right that you it can be dangerous to work out the clinical side, but most of the time this is certainly not the case. When a patient tells you they've been on prednisone for like two weeks, and while they're in hospital for some reason or another, they've had it ceased, you would jump when any tests/symptoms pointing to anything even remotely suggestive of hypernatremia/hyperkalemia. No you must know the basic sciences. Can you afford to forget them? No, good clinical practice is always grounded in this. Evidenced based medicine? Nice you mention it, but if you don't know the basics, better to hit the books for best practices change continuously, but the sciences stay the same (and how much can they change? A lot. The Term breech trial and its modern controversies are beautiful examples; and the role of bridging LMWH in surgical patients on warfarin for AF recently published in the NEJM is another gut wrenching one; I could go on all day about these but my point is made).

---

now to enoilgam's question, is this competitive? yes. post-graduate training 20-30 years ago used to be along the lines of, 'if youre interested in it, you'll get into it'. But now, only 30% can get into ALL surgerical disciplines (ortho, gen, vascular etc) for example, and this a Australia/NZ thing, so there were only 300 places in these two countries. Almost all of these candidates would have jumped through most of the hoops already to get there (which takes a surprising amount of money and training, eg, going for courses, doing graduate diplomas etc). To make matter worse, consider it something like the remaining 70% will still be there next year to compete again; and quite a few trainees on the general surgical program are doing this as a bridge into the specialty they actually want to get into (eg cardiothoracics), so the real number of fresh blood entering the system is probably lower. And the coup-de-grace? The fact of the matter is the sudden increase in the number of medical school graduates which is peaking this year, will mean that the full extent of competition has yet to be fully appreciated; and many consultants I've talked to say they're only just beginning to see the tides come.

Which brings me to the point: many say that it is not enough to practice good medicine anymore, you must do all these crazy things to jump through hoops etc, to have a chance of getting into a specialty you want. Some may accuse me of fear mongering, but I disagree: the situation is probably grimer than what I make it to be. Does research matter? As is, optional (though more on the side of its highly recommended) is the word of the day, but I see its role increasing in the years to come.

---


final note? I'm writing these with a disposable email. Probs against the rules so the moderators can feel free to delete my posts, though I believe I raise many points that many fail to consider. Will be lurking around using random usernames every now and then, so I do welcome your thoughts: maybe i'm just nervous about being a doctor soon, but I'm really worried about getting into post-grad training in the future.

 

[Oer]

So ya, I guess I should offer my apologies if I come across as rude and confrontational. I was stressed as hell yesterday, and have read your points, and indeed many of them are fair. My apologies to Oer in particular: I sound like a prick (and probably am one. Damn.)

Schmeg is right on certain points, and I guess I state I do not intend to become a GP is given the fact that in my home country, any doctor who has a MBBS can after their internship become a GP (so they really get looked down on back home; BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE HERE). Somewhat relevant to this discussion is that I did enter as a local student which means that I am still eligible to apply for most of the post-grad training options here.

Does research matter? Yes. Yes it does. Your research/term supervisor often are just as important as your CV, and what they say or write about you will determine if you get on to the training programs. Are the programs hard to get onto? Yes. Very. Last year, it is said that up to 50 GP's missed out on places, and the GP college is traditionally a college that is under-subscribed. Why does research matter, your supervisor's research grants, department funding and promotions are to some extent determined by their publications; and research is one of the most things that will get you there (and not sucking at ward stuff of course, but its really hard to suck so bad your supervisor won't endorse you). Of course other factors contribute, but being good at this sets you apart. Is being at UNSW helpful? It encourages its students to pick these skills up, but to what extent will depend on the student. Of course, one could argue that you could do your undergrad at any university and it'd be fine, so I guess there is some truth there, but I would hesitate to accept it fully.

Schmeg also is right about the research counting to points, but take RACS for example, the MD is worth something on most of their structured CVs. But he's right that you can get points from elsewhere, but research does take up a fair chunk, and indeed, these other points aren't too hard to get. If you want go look up the different colleges: each will assign differing points based on the research you undertake.

Now I have to disagree strongly with Schmeg on his point Re: the basic sciences. Indeed you can forget them, but only up to a point. You're right that you it can be dangerous to work out the clinical side, but most of the time this is certainly not the case. When a patient tells you they've been on prednisone for like two weeks, and while they're in hospital for some reason or another, they've had it ceased, you would jump when any tests/symptoms pointing to anything even remotely suggestive of hypernatremia/hyperkalemia. No you must know the basic sciences. Can you afford to forget them? No, good clinical practice is always grounded in this. Evidenced based medicine? Nice you mention it, but if you don't know the basics, better to hit the books for best practices change continuously, but the sciences stay the same (and how much can they change? A lot. The Term breech trial and its modern controversies are beautiful examples; and the role of bridging LMWH in surgical patients on warfarin for AF recently published in the NEJM is another gut wrenching one; I could go on all day about these but my point is made).

---

now to enoilgam's question, is this competitive? yes. post-graduate training 20-30 years ago used to be along the lines of, 'if youre interested in it, you'll get into it'. But now, only 30% can get into ALL surgerical disciplines (ortho, gen, vascular etc) for example, and this a Australia/NZ thing, so there were only 300 places in these two countries. Almost all of these candidates would have jumped through most of the hoops already to get there (which takes a surprising amount of money and training, eg, going for courses, doing graduate diplomas etc). To make matter worse, consider it something like the remaining 70% will still be there next year to compete again; and quite a few trainees on the general surgical program are doing this as a bridge into the specialty they actually want to get into (eg cardiothoracics), so the real number of fresh blood entering the system is probably lower. And the coup-de-grace? The fact of the matter is the sudden increase in the number of medical school graduates which is peaking this year, will mean that the full extent of competition has yet to be fully appreciated; and many consultants I've talked to say they're only just beginning to see the tides come.

Which brings me to the point: many say that it is not enough to practice good medicine anymore, you must do all these crazy things to jump through hoops etc, to have a chance of getting into a specialty you want. Some may accuse me of fear mongering, but I disagree: the situation is probably grimer than what I make it to be. Does research matter? As is, optional (though more on the side of its highly recommended) is the word of the day, but I see its role increasing in the years to come.

---


final note? I'm writing these with a disposable email. Probs against the rules so the moderators can feel free to delete my posts, though I believe I raise many points that many fail to consider. Will be lurking around using random usernames every now and then, so I do welcome your thoughts: maybe i'm just nervous about being a doctor soon, but I'm really worried about getting into post-grad training in the future.

No worries, figured you mighta been stressed or something. Sorry for snapping back. You seniors are my inspiration. <3

One point I might make on the MD, is that the concept of a basic medical degree being called an MD is still relatively new, with the MD classically being a higher research degree equivalent to a PhD (a level 10 classification). While MDs such as the UNSW MD are technically Masters equivalent (a level 8 qualification). So MD really means two things now, with the Level 10 degree now being renamed to a DMedSci to avoid confusion (though some confusipn probably still remains).
Usually you'll see the term "MBBS or equivalent" on things like RACS CV scoresheets. I would imagine that it's possible that the "new" MD is counted as an MBBS equivalent.

 

[enoilgam]

now to enoilgam's question, is this competitive? yes. post-graduate training 20-30 years ago used to be along the lines of, 'if youre interested in it, you'll get into it'. But now, only 30% can get into ALL surgerical disciplines (ortho, gen, vascular etc) for example, and this a Australia/NZ thing, so there were only 300 places in these two countries. Almost all of these candidates would have jumped through most of the hoops already to get there (which takes a surprising amount of money and training, eg, going for courses, doing graduate diplomas etc). To make matter worse, consider it something like the remaining 70% will still be there next year to compete again; and quite a few trainees on the general surgical program are doing this as a bridge into the specialty they actually want to get into (eg cardiothoracics), so the real number of fresh blood entering the system is probably lower. And the coup-de-grace? The fact of the matter is the sudden increase in the number of medical school graduates which is peaking this year, will mean that the full extent of competition has yet to be fully appreciated; and many consultants I've talked to say they're only just beginning to see the tides come.

Which brings me to the point: many say that it is not enough to practice good medicine anymore, you must do all these crazy things to jump through hoops etc, to have a chance of getting into a specialty you want. Some may accuse me of fear mongering, but I disagree: the situation is probably grimer than what I make it to be. Does research matter? As is, optional (though more on the side of its highly recommended) is the word of the day, but I see its role increasing in the years to come.

I think it's reflective of nearly every professional field in this country - from what Ive seen of the professional employment market, being good is no longer good enough.

final note? I'm writing these with a disposable email. Probs against the rules so the moderators can feel free to delete my posts, though I believe I raise many points that many fail to consider. Will be lurking around using random usernames every now and then, so I do welcome your thoughts: maybe i'm just nervous about being a doctor soon, but I'm really worried about getting into post-grad training in the future.

It's becoming a common theme for many graduates - Id sure prefer to be in your position though .

 

[randomunswmedstudenv]

lol wtf u on about m8. That is the biggest generalisation i've ever seen. With regards to the MD vs MBBS, most colleges including RACS have made it super clear that they dont give a fuck about what degree you graduate with and mainly assess you on your post-grad achievements and that's clearly reflected by their assessment criteria.

My apologies if I came across as rude, and indeed you are correct, but only up to a point. what you do as an undergrad will haunt you for many years. Getting prizes/being an anatomy tutor in uni does add up, and these do count to your points on your CV. I dare suppose I will sound like a prick at this point, but your being at UNE has several very strong points going for you: your anatomy is great, and I've heard quite a few of you run the anatomy course that RACS uses. So rather than attacking the strengths of others, use your own to your advantage. Maybe we'll meet some day at a surgical interview and we'll be able to discuss in greater detail then.

 

[randomunswmedstudenv]

Dentistry > Medicine

lel

 

[Schmeag]

Does research matter? Yes. Yes it does. Your research/term supervisor often are just as important as your CV, and what they say or write about you will determine if you get on to the training programs.

Research for the sake of a referee may not be a good motive on its own; supervisors may not be involved in assessing your clinical practice and referees older than two years may not count. Research for research's sake to enter a training program should be done within a close timeframe to the year of entering training in the relevant field. Research in order to get promoted at this stage is premature unless it is a PhD in a subspecialty of your choice (and you'd better make sure that's where you really want to go).

Schmeg also is right about the research counting to points, but take RACS for example, the MD is worth something on most of their structured CVs.

I don't think the MD counts since it is an MBBS equivalent. Something like an MMed would count.

Now I have to disagree strongly with Schmeg on his point Re: the basic sciences. Indeed you can forget them, but only up to a point. You're right that you it can be dangerous to work out the clinical side, but most of the time this is certainly not the case. When a patient tells you they've been on prednisone for like two weeks, and while they're in hospital for some reason or another, they've had it ceased, you would jump when any tests/symptoms pointing to anything even remotely suggestive of hypernatremia/hyperkalemia.

The example you provided is not in-depth knowledge of the basic sciences and is clinically relevant. I am talking about obscure anatomy or having to know about the Sonic hedgehog gene and its purpose. There is a bulk of information taught in medical schools that is really more suited to academia than the clinical setting. This is superfluous in clinical medicine, which is more about translating into practice the bits that actually mean something to patients.

maybe i'm just nervous about being a doctor soon, but I'm really worried about getting into post-grad training in the future.

The main thing is whether you are prepared to be flexible with your career prospects. If this is the case, I doubt you will have difficulty finding a training program, even if it might take longer to get on and longer to train nowadays. It's not a race to become the youngest consultant and those who have trained in disprate fields seem to be more well-rounded. Comparatively speaking, I have to say that doctors are better off than most other disciplines in terms of being able to find a job that supports a decent quality of living,

 

[Kiraken]

i'm not really a fan of the false dichotomy of basic sciences and clinical skills, and found that in good clinical practice they go hand in hand in a manner that makes them both as important as each other. For example, basic sciences only really have relevance when you're a doctor when they are clinically relevant (unless you're interested and do extra stuff as a hobby).

As a medical student, I guess it's to do with learning styles too, I found myself learning far more effectively when I could relate what I was learning in textbooks/lectures with patients I see on the ward or clinical scenarios I have seen at hospital/clinic. Even in terms of anatomy, textbook anatomy and anatomy tutes with cadavers certainly facilitate a good understanding of anatomy, but the human anatomy in a surgical setting does look different and i found it helped me gain a greater appreciation and understanding of anatomy than a textbook ever will. Basically what I'm saying is that it's less about taking basic sciences and clinical stuff as separate entities and more like taking them in conjunction, and some students might flourish in an environment where the focus is on teaching these sciences in a clinical setting where they learn the relevance of it from real patients they see on the ward and others might learn more from learning from lectures/textbooks then applying that knowledge to the ward and seeing how it works in practice.

 

[sy37]

the people who pick unsw for medicine because of the prestige factor solely are the one's who inevitably fail their careers as doctors and / or live miserably the rest of their lives

you be a doctor to save people, for the collective good of human kind. I do not see how such a passion can be in harmony with such a hedonistic pursuit

for what it's worth, I've seen good and bad doc's from both universities, actually one of my doc's is a usyd lecturer, he smokes in his office 90% of the time when I'm coming in and his knowledge is archaic at best.

 

[bangladesh]

My apologies if I came across as rude, and indeed you are correct, but only up to a point. what you do as an undergrad will haunt you for many years. Getting prizes/being an anatomy tutor in uni does add up, and these do count to your points on your CV. I dare suppose I will sound like a prick at this point, but your being at UNE has several very strong points going for you: your anatomy is great, and I've heard quite a few of you run the anatomy course that RACS uses. So rather than attacking the strengths of others, use your own to your advantage. Maybe we'll meet some day at a surgical interview and we'll be able to discuss in greater detail then.

I definitely wasn't attacking you or the strength of other universities, I'm sorry if I came across as though I was. I do get your point with regards to being an anatomy tutor, in fact any teaching roles you take on will defs be a massive bonus on your CV. But your initial post made it sound like UNSW grads end up being specialists and GPs are from other unis which certainly isn't the case. Again, you said you were having a bad day so allg. I'm sure you're nice in real life.

 

[Medman]

Calm your farms. Anyone from any university can become a specialist!

Research isn't necessary but is smiled upon. Given how competitive specialties are consultant recommendations and interview will count for the majority of the intake criteria. If you conducted research it will help elevate if you are on par with the recommendation+interview. At the end of the day if you do research and ignore your job as a a clinicianl your consultants won't give you a great recommendation. It's all a balancing act. Also if you fail your exam a number of times during your speciality training you may be kicked out of the program forever. For example for Basic Physicians Trainee (BPT) you are allowed 3 tries for the written and clinical exams. If you fail the 3rd time you can no longer be a BPT. Most people do pass (50%+) however there have been cases where people failed 3 times (Fail rates per year sit around 40%). Also if you fail multiple times it's also hard to be rehired at hospitals. Something I learnt recently which adds to the pressures of life.