apart from medicine (1 Viewer)

[bingman]

Hello guys
i'm sitting the hsc and umat this year and am really determined to get into med. but i really have no idea what i am going to do in the case that i dont make it. I've considered nursing, medical radiation sciences, psychology, med science, but i still have absolutely no idea what i want to do.

basically i want to do something that i would relaly enjoy and not just allow me to transfer to medicine easier.

i was wonderin if anyone can tell me how different is nursing from medicine?

what exactly do you do in medical radiation sciences, like diagnostic radiotherapy? do you get to diagnose and interpret the results of scans, etc or do you take the scans and let doctors interpret them? how much contact do you have with patients and are you allowed to suggest treatment options etc?

oh and also with the umat, how do you improve section 2 scores? i did a few practise tests on the medentry website and my sect 1 and 3 scores and percentiles have really improved. but my sect 2 is awful, and my scores and percentile arent improving at all. in fact im losing marks, and literally by 10 or so marks from what i got in my first sect 2 practise paper, (<40% if u count percentiles). i would really hate for sect 2 to the factor that is preventing me from getting into med, especialy when i'm getting good in the other sections.

Thanks in advance!

 

[velox]

When the umat was implemented UNSW released an official document stating that while practice in sections 1 and 3 yielded small gains with section 3 being greater, practice made no improvement in section 2. So the best advice is probably to read the questions carefully and put yourself in that situation. Make sure the answer displays thought for the patient, after all it is called 'understanding people.'

HTH

 

[mervvyn]

I can't recall the timing exactly from last year, but a lot of your questions can be answered by the careers guide and perhaps the UAC book as well - the former has descriptions of most careers available and would help you to see what is involved and whether you want to find out more, the latter will tell you about the courses and what qualifications you get - see your careers advisor basically.

Nursing vs med - apart from the obvious with study (med is harder to get into and takes a lot longer to get through) the main differences are in terms of care vs diagnosis. In a hospital context, nurses are the primary carers whereas doctors are more or less consultants for treatments. This is a bit less true in the community because GPs for example can build long term relationships with their patients and nurses may have more senior diagnostic roles, but is still relatively the case. Med also has a greater expectation of coping with detailed scientific knowledge (that's my general impression) because of that diagnostic role.

 

[FinalFantasy]

oh and also with the umat, how do you improve section 2 scores? i did a few practise tests on the medentry website and my sect 1 and 3 scores and percentiles have really improved. but my sect 2 is awful, and my scores and percentile arent improving at all. in fact im losing marks, and literally by 10 or so marks from what i got in my first sect 2 practise paper, (<40% if u count percentiles). i would really hate for sect 2 to the factor that is preventing me from getting into med, especialy when i'm getting good in the other sections.

Thanks in advance!

lol my section 1 scores are crap, tell me how to improve section 1 LoL

 

[who_loves_maths]

Originally Posted by bingman
i would really hate for sect 2 to the factor that is preventing me from getting into med, especialy when i'm getting good in the other sections.

i hope you're worrying for the right reasons... section 2 tests understanding of ppl, i think if anyone does appalingly in this section then the most important thing to worry about is perhaps whether they are suited to become a doctor or not? rather than just worrying about the marks...

the UMAT test was introduced for exactly this reason - to eliminate those ppl who enter Med courses simply because their parents 'force' them to, or the 'money is good', and have no real passion or sense for the responsibilities and importance of the actual profession of being a medical doctor.

 

[ishq]

i hope you're worrying for the right reasons... section 2 tests understanding of ppl, i think if anyone does appalingly in this section then the most important thing to worry about is perhaps whether they are suited to become a doctor or not? rather than just worrying about the marks..

That is such a cliche.

 

[velox]

WLM has a point. Quoting from a guywho has been a dr for 8yrs.


"I am a pre-UMAT medical graduate, been a doctor now for 8 years. The first bunch of UMAT students have just graduated and become doctors. Most of us have our own opinions on the selection criteria, but so far the doctors the new system is producing seems to be no different in quality to the pre-UMAT years. We'll really have to wait a few years to see whether the new emphasis has made a difference though. The ONLY deficiency that I see is that the new graduates have poorer theoretical grasp than the older intake, but I don't really mind that. Knowledge can always be acquired, the correct attitude is much harder."

 

[FinalFantasy]

^ yea true but many ppl who dun have this "correct attitude" and "real passion" still get through the UMAT and get in medicine lol

 

[ishq]

^ Agreed. A correct attitude/dedication is most important and knowledge (though also a pretty big task) can be acquired.

I guess, the way I see it, most universities have incorporated a pretty rigorous interview stage to determine that their candidates have the correct attitude. So, it is up to the candidate to maximise their chances of getting to that stage. If they really are dedicated, then they will ensure that none of their section marks fall behind.

And as for Section II, I disagree...not completely, but partly, but with what wholovesmath said. The section II responses that we have to choose from, may, in the end not be the most favourable one in that condition, when treated real life. Wouldnt each doctor act upon what they think is right? Other factors would obviously come into play. I think that for SII, learning the differences in word choice, tone etc... is pretty good. "not suited to become a doctor"..is a bit too harsh.

Who is suited to become a doctor? A person with a love for the people? Or a person with a love for the clinical art?

A question: Cannot professional empathy be learnt? Are doctors not trained in the art of patient communication? We are young, a tad naive(most of us) I reckon its okay if we are a bit unsure.

As the guy in velox's qoute said, "Most of us have our own opinions on the selection criteria, but so far the doctors the new system is producing seems to be no different in quality to the pre-UMAT years."

That said, my UMAT training is going downhill too. Somebody help me with Type II. Its a nightmare.

 

[FinalFantasy]

That said, my UMAT training is going downhill too. Somebody help me with Type II. Its a nightmare.

hahaha, dun worry the medentry guy said that type 2 q's will be even less this year, just guess it right away as soon as u c it and move on
but now i need help w\ section 1, i have the logic but i can't do it when the logic is covered with high levels of english!!

 

[bluesky100]

i was wonderin if anyone can tell me how different is nursing from medicine?

!

1) I think nursing (compared to med) tends to take on a more holistic approach, focusing on the patient as a whole rather than their illness/disease or the patient’s objective experience of signs and symptoms - that's the biggest difference I can think of - I may be wrong, not sure - I don't know anything about medicine.

2) Nursing also focuses on evaluating the response of the person to the actual or potential response to a health problem (nursing diagnosis) rather than evaluating cause of disease (medical diagnosis).

 

[velox]

Nurses would be good in section 2.

 

[Lexicographer]

Nurses would be good in section 2.

No...GOOD nurses would be good in section two. Remember there are bad nurses also.

 

[bingman]

lol my section 1 scores are crap, tell me how to improve section 1 LoL

For section 1, how it works fo rme is to read carefully and then (1) consider whether the responses are actually relevant. Usually at least two are totally irrelevant and introduces info that is based on prior knowledge and not from the umat stimulis material. (2) Apply ur understanding of the leftover responses to the passage to see whether it can be inferred/concluded/assumed/whatever from the passage. It seems to work for me but i guess maybe everyone has different methods.

Also for those questions with numbers involved, especially percentages e.g. percentage of ppl in workplace x compared to percentage of ppl in workplace y, i often consider what the numbers reflect, especially that higher percentages dont always mean higher numbers.

i hope you're worrying for the right reasons... section 2 tests understanding of ppl, i think if anyone does appalingly in this section then the most important thing to worry about is perhaps whether they are suited to become a doctor or not? rather than just worrying about the marks...

i think im worrying for the right reason, cos i dont really care abt the money and my parents arent forcing me.
Its just that for some reason with sect 2, after reading/considering how medentry reasons their answers, my marks have dropped significantly.

Hello lexicographer, sorry for thinking that you were kim's brother

 

[FinalFantasy]

For section 1, how it works fo rme is to read carefully and then (1) consider whether the responses are actually relevant. Usually at least two are totally irrelevant and introduces info that is based on prior knowledge and not from the umat stimulis material. (2) Apply ur understanding of the leftover responses to the passage to see whether it can be inferred/concluded/assumed/whatever from the passage. It seems to work for me but i guess maybe everyone has different methods.

Also for those questions with numbers involved, especially percentages e.g. percentage of ppl in workplace x compared to percentage of ppl in workplace y, i often consider what the numbers reflect, especially that higher percentages dont always mean higher numbers.

hey thx for dat on Section 1, but i think my main problem is.. those english q's, i.e those ones with long passages with complicated words lol
i can usually do da others

As for section 2, u just gota *ignore* the logic and just do wat u "feel"
den u'll do good, well dats how i do it anyway

 

[velox]

Ironic, since the answer is the logical thing to do if you were a doctor lol

 

[RyBo]

i hope you're worrying for the right reasons... section 2 tests understanding of ppl, i think if anyone does appalingly in this section then the most important thing to worry about is perhaps whether they are suited to become a doctor or not? rather than just worrying about the marks...

But thats really the question though. I mean, is a doctor who does not understand people necessarily a bad one?
I think it's very specialty-releated. A GP definately needs to be able to understand people. A radiologist or a neurosurgeon, maybe not so much.
Would you rather have a heart surgeon who has no interpersonal skills, but is damn skilled and knows his medicine, or a heart surgeon with heaps of interpersonal skills, but little knowledge of medicine?

the UMAT test was introduced for exactly this reason - to eliminate those ppl who enter Med courses simply because their parents 'force' them to, or the 'money is good', and have no real passion or sense for the responsibilities and importance of the actual profession of being a medical doctor.

Not true. Interviews do that to some extent, but not UMAT. If a person wants to get in because of the money or parents, then they will study for UMAT, or may be naturally takented at the problems on the test. After all, UMAT tests logical reasoning (S1 and 3) and empathy (S2). People who are being forced by parents or want the money may have both of these skills already.

 

[Bob.J]

these arguments/discussions are quite pointless i reckon.
If someone who doesn't give a shit AT ALL about people (ie. hates talking to people, no interest in medicine/science whatsoever) and does get into med, then good for them. They're going to have to treat patients, deal with people and COMMUNICATE no matter what they do and if they really don't like med at all and do it for the money they may get rich but boy will they hate their life.

whatever, whatever, whatever, blah, blah, blah

 

[velox]

Rybo, have you ever been in hospital?

Go talk to a neurosurgeon, then post back about whether they have to have communication skills or not.

As bob.j said who cares?

Use this time to study and not bitch about it.

im out, better study.

 

[RyBo]

yeah, but in the meantime they have denied more suitable applicants a position, wasted hundereds of thousands of taxpayers dollars in getting medical training, and are a tax on the health system because they are not contributing fully.

I also have been to a hospital - (but have not talked to a neurosurgeon). The point I was trying to make is that attitude and intelligence are just as important, if not more important than communication skills in some medical specialties. I do see your point though. A neurosurgeon does have to communicate with patients about the risks of surgery, and talk to hospital admin, ect.


Yes, I agree, discussing this isn't useful, and yes, i guess i should be studying.