The Student Room Group

Does going to a "prestigious" university benefit you as a Doctor?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
Your degree classification matters more than the prestige of the uni. Obviously however, it may help in a superficial way.

EDIT: Replies please? I'm genuinely interested.
(edited 10 years ago)
We have this discussion quite often, but there's usually no data except the old MRCP pass rates.

Anyway, in a similar previous post someone posted an interesting pdf. I uploaded it here, it's from the foundation programme website: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1830776/F2_career_destination_report_December_2012.pdf .

On the last page of that PDF there is what seems to be an analysis of how many graduates of each med school go on to secure an ST post. Oxford and Cambridge are leading (above 80%+ success rate, very few GPs), many other schools do what I would describe as equally well, but some did quite poorly as well.

Here is a screenshot of the page I am referring to:


Obviously there's the old correlation is not causation issue, but nevertheless given the discrepancies between the results of let's say equally well known schools, some of this could be down to teaching. Moreover, they don't really describe how they've calculated these percentages, so there could be some issues with this data. Finally, the MRCP P1 pass rate is 64% and not the oft quoted 40%.


To conclude this post: If the data above is sound (which I think it is), it would suggest that Oxbridge graduates had high career aspirations (i.e. applied on average to more competitive training schemes) and had a high rate of securing these appointments.

nexttime
figured you'd be interested
(edited 10 years ago)
Adding to the previous post if anyone is interested. This is based on the data above. The percentages are the fraction of candidates successfully securing ST training, excluding GP and psychiatry. Make of it what you will.

Reply 83
Original post by AnonymousPenguin
Adding to the previous post if anyone is interested. This is based on the data above. The percentages are the fraction of candidates successfully securing ST training, excluding GP and psychiatry. Make of it what you will.


What is ST training? Sorry for the noob question.
Original post by ukmed108

On the English route, students are given the choice between Manchester and Barts (just added recently), supposedly not very many chose Barts like 12 or so. Admittedly though, Barts wasn't an option when the students applied so they all were willing to go to Manchester so that might have skewed things.


Just to butt in slightly, but I got offered a place on the new St Andrews - Barts route and initially applied to stay in Scotland (with the intention being to end up in Edinburgh).
There wasn't really any choice about it, I don't think; it was either accept an offer on the St Andrews - Barts route, or don't go to St Andrews (we got an email before a formal offer was made asking if we would be interested; if we'd said no, we'd have been rejected).
Original post by KanKan
What is ST training? Sorry for the noob question.


When you graduate from medical school, you have to do postgraduate training to become a consultant/GP:

medical-school-career-path-full.png

ST training refers to specialist training after your foundation years. As entry to specialist training is competitive, it can be used as a measure of comparing medical graduates from different universities. For more info of the career progression pathway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernising_Medical_Careers
Reply 86
Original post by Asklepios
When you graduate from medical school, you have to do postgraduate training to become a consultant/GP:

medical-school-career-path-full.png

ST training refers to specialist training after your foundation years. As entry to specialist training is competitive, it can be used as a measure of comparing medical graduates from different universities. For more info of the career progression pathway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernising_Medical_Careers


Ooh, thank you! Another six years to specialise .. fun ^_^. Would the consultant process be different in Canada/America?
Original post by KanKan
Ooh, thank you! Another six years to specialise .. fun ^_^. Would the consultant process be different in Canada/America?


I am not fully sure on the process there. But from what I understand, in the US, you do a 1 year internship (similar to our foundation programme) followed by a residency (akin to specialist training) in a particular speciality, which is 4/5 years (not sure though). Then most people do a fellowship to widen their skills and possibly sub-specialize. Then you are an 'Attending Physician' which is basically like our consultant. I think Canada has a similar system.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 88
Original post by Asklepios
When you graduate from medical school, you have to do postgraduate training to become a consultant/GP:

medical-school-career-path-full.png

ST training refers to specialist training after your foundation years. As entry to specialist training is competitive, it can be used as a measure of comparing medical graduates from different universities. For more info of the career progression pathway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernising_Medical_Careers


What do you do if you cannot or choose not to pursue ST training? Clearly a large number of people don't do ST training, what are the other options apart from ST training?
Original post by ukmed108
What do you do if you cannot or choose not to pursue ST training? Clearly a large number of people don't do ST training, what are the other options apart from ST training?


It was all in the link posted by AnonymousPenguin (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1830776/F2_career_destination_report_December_2012.pdf).

But basically the summary table for F2 career destinations is:

f2 destinations.JPG

(I think the first column is for the regular foundation programme and the second column is for the academic foundation programme)
Original post by KanKan
What is ST training? Sorry for the noob question.


ST training refers to specialty training. It's what you have to do to become a consultant. Notably ST training does not refer to GP VTS training, which you need to become a GP.

Some people include GP training in the term ST training, but GP training is not included in the percentages in the table I posted.

Finally, there are also FTSTA appointments which essentially lead to being a staff grade doctor. Staff grade doctors supposedly have less responsibility and are paid significantly less.

A very small number of doctors will be appointed to academic fellowships, which prolong ST training in order to allow the doctor to do research. I don't know if these are included in ST training figures above, but as far as I know academic fellowships are essentially ST training as well. If these are excluded, it would probably disproportionately reduce the Oxbridge scores.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 91
Original post by AnonymousPenguin
ST training refers to specialty training. It's what you have to do to become a consultant. Notably ST training does not refer to GP VTS training, which you need to become a GP.

Some people include GP training in the term ST training, but GP training is not included in the percentages in the table I posted.

Finally, there are also FTSTA appointments which essentially lead to being a staff grade doctor. Staff grade doctors supposedly have less responsibility and are paid significantly less.

A very small number of doctors will be appointed to academic fellowships, which prolong ST training in order to allow the doctor to do research. I don't know if these are included in ST training figures above, but as far as I know academic fellowships are essentially ST training as well. If these are excluded, it would probably disproportionately reduce the Oxbridge scores.


I've noticed though that schools that had lower % of ST training had higher % of employment outside the UK. The article also states that people who chose to do further training outside the UK overwhelming chose to do so (choose outside over UK acceptance) rather than were forced to do so (no UK acceptance)

F2_career_destination_report_December_2012.pdf
Original post by ukmed108
I've noticed though that schools that had lower % of ST training had higher % of employment outside the UK. The article also states that people who chose to do further training outside the UK overwhelming chose to do so (choose outside over UK acceptance) rather than were forced to do so (no UK acceptance)

F2_career_destination_report_December_2012.pdf


Really we can't use this data to conclude anything. What we need is a table of medical school vs % of graduates in first choice career. Nevertheless, this is interesting and poses some questions- why do so many more people from Edinburgh and Bristol end up abroad compared to Oxford and Cambridge for example?
Reply 93
Original post by Asklepios
Really we can't use this data to conclude anything. What we need is a table of medical school vs % of graduates in first choice career. Nevertheless, this is interesting and poses some questions- why do so many more people from Edinburgh and Bristol end up abroad compared to Oxford and Cambridge for example?


I'm actually wondering, where do most people who apply abroad end up? Is it in the US? National statistics though in the US suggested only 80 UK nationals applied for US residencies in 2012. Its not possible that they were applying for fellowships because, you would need to complete ST in the UK to be eligible for fellowships.

Could it be Australia, New Zealand? Canada doesn't accept non-Canadian perm residents or citizens for its residencies.
Original post by ukmed108
I've noticed though that schools that had lower % of ST training had higher % of employment outside the UK. The article also states that people who chose to do further training outside the UK overwhelming chose to do so (choose outside over UK acceptance) rather than were forced to do so (no UK acceptance)

F2_career_destination_report_December_2012.pdf


Yes perhaps a better way to sort it would be to add up "other UK" (which I presume are mainly staff grade posts), "taking career break" and other categories.

I've done it here. Keele does surprisingly well, mainly due to the fact that they produce the largest fraction of GPs. BSMS once again puts in a pretty poor performance. New med school teething issues or some amazing non-med employer in the area?



About going abroad: I would presume it's mainly Australia and to a lesser extent New Zealand.

471 doctors (6.6%) reported that they had secured a service post outside of the UK and 78 (1.1%) had secured a specialty training post.


This is just speculation. I'm thinking the 78 who got foreign ST posts were mainly internationals going back home and the odd medic going to the US, and the 471 mainly went to Aus/NZ. AFAIK in Aus you need to do a year of supervised training and then work as a locum and/or get PR within a year-ish and apply for further training. I think there's also a test you need to take before any further training. I get the impression though that the place is filling up :/ (i.e. there's now more domestic graduates).

About the positive choice question. I wish it was more detailed. We can't tell whether it was a positive choice against a staff grade appointment or an actual ST training post. No one faces unemployment in medicine, but there is a chance of getting a job you don't actually like that much.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Asklepios
Really we can't use this data to conclude anything. What we need is a table of medical school vs % of graduates in first choice career. Nevertheless, this is interesting and poses some questions- why do so many more people from Edinburgh and Bristol end up abroad compared to Oxford and Cambridge for example?


Haha, yes this data isn't a perfect correlate for first career choice. It would be so easy to add a question about that to the exit questionnaire, but they just didn't. Oh well, what can you do.
Reply 96
Original post by ukmed108

Could it be Australia, New Zealand? Canada doesn't accept non-Canadian perm residents or citizens for its residencies.


Odd - I've seen adverts recently aimed at getting UK doctors to work in Canada (the rural parts specifically, i believe). Maybe they were making special exceptions, or maybe it wasn't 'residency' they were referring to.

Given the vast number of UK doctors in NZ when i was there on paediatrics, i'm going to guess there and Australia are the most popular choices.

Original post by AnonymousPenguin
Adding to the previous post if anyone is interested. This is based on the data above. The percentages are the fraction of candidates successfully securing ST training, excluding GP and psychiatry. Make of it what you will.


Pretty depressing overall i have to say! Only 66% of F2s go onto speciality training?! Less than half of some med schools?! Christ.

Do we know if this is only the immediate year post-F2? What about the success rate is if you take a year out doing locum/non-training positions and reapply? Is that just missing data?
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by nexttime
Odd - I've seen adverts recently aimed at getting UK doctors to work in Canada (the rural parts specifically, i believe). Maybe they were making special exceptions, or maybe it wasn't 'residency' they were referring to.

Given the vast number of UK doctors in NZ when i was there on paediatrics, i'm going to guess there and Australia are the most popular choices.


I was under the impression that all these rural posts are either looking for someone who is already a consultant or they're simply staff grade (equivalent) posts.



Pretty depressing overall i have to say! Only 66% of F2s go onto speciality training?! Less than half of some med schools?! Christ.

Do we know if this is only the immediate year post-F2? What about the success rate is if you take a year out doing locum/non-training positions and reapply? Is that just missing data?


I don't think those who take LAS/LAT posts are included. It shouldn't be surprising though, about half-ish of medical graduates are supposed to be GPs according to current government plans. If anything, the fraction of ST trainees is really high in the top schools.
Reply 98
Original post by AnonymousPenguin
I was under the impression that all these rural posts are either looking for someone who is already a consultant or they're simply staff grade (equivalent) posts.



I don't think those who take LAS/LAT posts are included. It shouldn't be surprising though, about half-ish of medical graduates are supposed to be GPs according to current government plans. If anything, the fraction of ST trainees is really high in the top schools.


The 67% figure includes GP training.

Hopefully its the case that lots of people take a year out then re-join the career pathway.
Reply 99
Original post by nexttime
The 67% figure includes GP training.

Hopefully its the case that lots of people take a year out then re-join the career pathway.


Canada does want UK GPs in rural areas but ones who have completed GP training. Taking a UK F2 grad would mean training them in residency which would cost Canada money.

Well since, its likely to be Australia and New Zealand that are the biggest choices. Would you say that UK grads would take up an Australia/New Zealand offer over a UK offer or is going abroad something you do because you can't find a UK offer?

Quick Reply

Latest