The Student Room Group

Why is medicine so competitive?

Hi,

This is more of a discussion as I am genuinely interested to know why medicine is so competitive and hard to get into. Surely it'd be in the governments / countries best interest to have as many doctors as possible as that can only lead to a good thing, right?

If it's a matter of there aren't enough places per applicant then why not increase places? Yes, I know it's not as easy as it sounds and I would imagine it would involve a lot of money but I can only see that being a positive return on investment especially for the government when they get more doctors every year working hard for the NHS. I have heard that it costs around £250k per med school student in order to become a doctor but I am pretty sure that money is more than made back up after working in the NHS for your life.

Also, is it not in the universities best interest to get as many students every year? I'm not into economics or politics but surely they'd be benefiting from having more students. Is it not the case of more students = more money?

Every time I think of this it does baffle me and I was just wondered if anybody on TSR has any opinions or any reasoning behind this. Surely it's not just money

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Novichok
Hi,

This is more of a discussion as I am genuinely interested to know why medicine is so competitive and hard to get into. Surely it'd be in the governments / countries best interest to have as many doctors as possible as that can only lead to a good thing, right?

If it's a matter of there aren't enough places per applicant then why not increase places? Yes, I know it's not as easy as it sounds and I would imagine it would involve a lot of money but I can only see that being a positive return on investment especially for the government when they get more doctors every year working hard for the NHS. I have heard that it costs around £250k per med school student in order to become a doctor but I am pretty sure that money is more than made back up after working in the NHS for your life.

Also, is it not in the universities best interest to get as many students every year? I'm not into economics or politics but surely they'd be benefiting from having more students. Is it not the case of more students = more money?

Every time I think of this it does baffle me and I was just wondered if anybody on TSR has any opinions or any reasoning behind this. Surely it's not just money

The NHS controls how many medical places there are in the UK.

We are short of doctors, so several new medical schools have been set up for this purpose.

A lot of highly intelligent people who are good at science and want to help others apply for medicine and even then many do not get a place. It's a case of supply and demand and medicine remains, and probably always will be, one of the most popular and oversubscribed courses in the UK.
Prepare for a really lengthy response. In a PICU at a hospital for kiddos, nurses are expected to demonstrate a number of abilities and skills in order to help those very sick babies go home eventually. Critical care medicine is fast paced and full of emergency situations which happen daily. Resources are needed to help to boost baby survival rates, this includes skills. A growth mindset is mandatory. It goes beyond any question. In other words no doubt about it.
Teamwork is vital to save little lives along with strongly tuned up communication skills for example. You also need to show you have empathy and compassion as well at all times whilst working on the paediatric intensive care floor or unit to prevent death. Same applies to the neonatal intensive care unit in addition. A variety of skills and qualities are required to literally save babies from death sometimes in case. This is why medicine is fast paced and hard work.
But so worth it generally. When you reassure a anxious new mom her baby will be happy it lights up your day really. And when you are able to use your medical training to stop death claiming a terribly ill infant there are no words that can accurately aim to describe how most parents will feel about you. I hope this is useful.
Original post by tinygirl96
Prepare for a really lengthy response. In a PICU at a hospital for kiddos, nurses are expected to demonstrate a number of abilities and skills in order to help those very sick babies go home eventually. Critical care medicine is fast paced and full of emergency situations which happen daily. Resources are needed to help to boost baby survival rates, this includes skills. A growth mindset is mandatory. It goes beyond any question. In other words no doubt about it.
Teamwork is vital to save little lives along with strongly tuned up communication skills for example. You also need to show you have empathy and compassion as well at all times whilst working on the paediatric intensive care floor or unit to prevent death. Same applies to the neonatal intensive care unit in addition. A variety of skills and qualities are required to literally save babies from death sometimes in case. This is why medicine is fast paced and hard work.
But so worth it generally. When you reassure a anxious new mom her baby will be happy it lights up your day really. And when you are able to use your medical training to stop death claiming a terribly ill infant there are no words that can accurately aim to describe how most parents will feel about you. I hope this is useful.

Top post. Not everyone can have the qualities you possess, which is why it is hard to get into, and stay in, medicine.
PRSOM

To add to everything above, medicine is a demanding course and requires every student to have a certain set of qualities (ideally) in addition to being studious and having the ability to survive 5/6 years of strenuous hard work (let’s not even start on the post-grad exams). Therefore, it’s also about choosing the right person to become a doctor (which I’ll admit isn’t perfect at the moment, and that goes for dentistry too) - not everyone is able to fulfil the checklist of qualities required to be a doctor.
(edited 3 years ago)
Everyone wants to be a doctor. I mean most children you ask they say they wanna be a doctor
Reply 6
Original post by Mesopotamian.
Therefore, it’s also about choosing the right person to become a doctor (which I’ll admit isn’t perfect at the moment, and that goes for dentistry too) - not everyone is able to fulfil the checklist of qualities required to be a doctor.

The issue that I have with the system is that there are plenty of perfect applicants with perfect grades and attributes needed to be a good doctor. But due to [insert issues] there isn't enough places for them. I'd imagine that every year there are hundreds of students that would of made good doctors but didn't even make it to the interview stage. As a result, they take their 5th choice of biomed and regret it 3 years later.

I feel like there really isn't any good way (before interview) to determine who would make a good doctor and who would make a bad doctor. For Newcastle if you get a very high UCAT and predicted AAA in whatever subject you're almost guaranteed an interview. I've not taken the UCAT and I won't be taking it for a few years yet but from my very brief research I don't see how that alone can prove if somebody is capable or not.
I don't really get what you said about the high vacancies not meaning there should be more med students. And since so many people apply, as you said there are many to choose from, and many will check all the boxes and still get rejected because of places. I agree given the number of places they have to turn a lot down, but if they did increase the places they wouldn't have to select candidates with rubbish criteria like GCSE grades or ethical debates.

Also then why is the grade requirement for medicine not as immediately high than other subjects? Even for like oxford the requirement is A*AA, even lower than A*A*A for chemistry, but they have a notoriously high bar for GCSE grades, like 10. Why the random skew towards GCSEs instead of A levels, for one thing?
Original post by Novichok
The issue that I have with the system is that there are plenty of perfect applicants with perfect grades and attributes needed to be a good doctor. But due to [insert issues] there isn't enough places for them. I'd imagine that every year there are hundreds of students that would of made good doctors but didn't even make it to the interview stage. As a result, they take their 5th choice of biomed and regret it 3 years later.

I feel like there really isn't any good way (before interview) to determine who would make a good doctor and who would make a bad doctor. For Newcastle if you get a very high UCAT and predicted AAA in whatever subject you're almost guaranteed an interview. I've not taken the UCAT and I won't be taking it for a few years yet but from my very brief research I don't see how that alone can prove if somebody is capable or not.

I 100% agree with you and this is something I’ve complained about before. I’m studying dentistry and I can tell you that some students are lovely people and will make fantastic healthcare professionals in the future but there are some students who...well let’s put it this way, I feel sorry for their patients.

The UCAT - and even the interviews really - aren’t always good enough at differentiating the genuine students from the less-than-genuine students, but then the question is, what is a good method? Will any method, interview, exam, test etc ever be 100% accurate?
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 9
In an ideal world, if there is nothing that can be done to make more places per applicant then there should be more ways to determine who is the ideal student. I suppose more entrance exams could be done or higher proportion of interviews and make that the bottleneck. There are some schools like Cardiff where getting all 9's at GCSE is used to determine if you are going to be a good doctor. I think that's incredibly unfair and I am glad that there aren't many universities that think that the top grades translates into top doctors as there is more to it than that. Although, I am probably a bit biased considering I am resitting GCSE's.
Reply 10
Original post by Novichok

I feel like there really isn't any good way (before interview) to determine who would make a good doctor and who would make a bad doctor. For Newcastle if you get a very high UCAT and predicted AAA in whatever subject you're almost guaranteed an interview. I've not taken the UCAT and I won't be taking it for a few years yet but from my very brief research I don't see how that alone can prove if somebody is capable or not.

Essentially they want smart people and there's a variety of things that can give you a short list of smart people - each uni has its various preferences to weed out those who aren't strong enough/diverse enough candidates. Then you decide who has the most potential at interview.
Original post by Moonlight rain
Everyone wants to be a doctor. I mean most children you ask they say they wanna be a doctor


But most will not get in. It looks very heroic, but the amount of work it takes is daunting.
Original post by Oxford Mum
The NHS controls how many medical places there are in the UK.

We are short of doctors, so several new medical schools have been set up for this purpose.

A lot of highly intelligent people who are good at science and want to help others apply for medicine and even then many do not get a place. It's a case of supply and demand and medicine remains, and probably always will be, one of the most popular and oversubscribed courses in the UK.

Cuba a second world country train more doctors per head of population than any other country. It does not have any private schools or private tutors it has classes with 12 children per teacher it has free higher education.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Cuba
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 13
When it comes to the UCAT, asides from the SJT test I don't see how that can determine who is going to be a good doctor. You're going into medical school for 5 maybe 6 years whereas you're going to be a doctor for up to 60 years. Although there is a great amount of work that is required at medical school I think that admission tests and interviews should be primarily focused on what happens after medical (the bigger picture)
Omg yes!!! All my cousins want to be neurosurgeons
Original post by Novichok
In an ideal world, if there is nothing that can be done to make more places per applicant then there should be more ways to determine who is the ideal student. I suppose more entrance exams could be done or higher proportion of interviews and make that the bottleneck. There are some schools like Cardiff where getting all 9's at GCSE is used to determine if you are going to be a good doctor. I think that's incredibly unfair and I am glad that there aren't many universities that think that the top grades translates into top doctors as there is more to it than that. Although, I am probably a bit biased considering I am resitting GCSE's.

Oof are you an applicant/ med student yourself? Idk if you've done the admissions tests but they're difficult, plus there are already quite a few extra hoops to jump through for medicine (interviews for all med schools, 1/2 admissions tests, high predicted grades).. if they put more tests in it could actually deter students from applying. Plus, admissions teams and interviewers already interview a LOT of applicants, so doing more isn't the best option.

As you said with the GCSE comment, there are some things which people will do well on, and things which they won't. If you have more admissions tests or interviews as you suggested, you're gonna have applicants who will do well in say 2 of them, and do bad in the other 2. How do you rank which test is more important?

You've got a lot of smart kids applying to medical schools, so I guess a lot of these measures are trying to chuck good students out. It's not to say that these student's aren't intelligent, they just don't have the budget or facilities for more students.
Original post by Oxford Mum
But most will not get in. It looks very heroic, but the amount of work it takes is daunting.

Facts, it's a heck load of work! Then again I do feel like medicine has quite the stereotype of being long hours and hard work (which I'm certain it is), though a lot of other professions include this too. I feel like the main reason kids say it is because its well known, and (at least for me) I only knew of about 7 careers when I was in primary school :tongue: I used to want to be a vet until I was old enough to realise what euthanasia was o.o
Reply 17
That's a very interesting idea. Let's say at the end of year 1 which is mostly or all pre-clinical there would be a series of tests and only a certain percentage would be allowed to go onto the next year. It would be harsh to essentially kick out people if they didn't perform well but it would somewhat solve the problem of medical being so competitive to get into.

It sounds somewhat similar to the biomed transfer programs where only the top top percentage of students got invited to an interview and that was based on their performance within the year.
My God do they really let everyone in?! I suppose that would give all the remaining students who pass a major ego boost :lol:
:eek4: Their medical schools’ 1st year : 2nd, 3rd, 4th + 5th year proportions must be ridiculous! Wouldn’t that also be a major waste of money to the government who would have paid for the first year of >80% of failed students (assuming its subsidised by the government)?

Agree about the biomed transfer, if someone has their heart set on medicine, it’s probably better in most scenarios to just take a gap year and reapply, although I can sympathise that it’s not the most pleasant experience to have to go through all over again.

Quick Reply

Latest