Cedars-Sinai

November 28, 2006 at 6:10 pm | Posted in neurosurgery | Leave a comment

This was by far my most interesting interview. Turns out Cedars is not actually in Beverly Hills. The residents were very emphatic about the fact that it was located in West Hollywood. Later I spoke to one of the LA natives on the interview, who thought it was funny that they had been so emphatic, since you’d think they’d prefer to be associated with a rich part of town over a gay part of town. But I suppose from a patient population point of view the gay neighborhood adds diversity.

The people there were interesting. I ran into a girl I met earlier on the trail, who intimated that the other students from my rotation at Barrow have been badmouthing me to anyone who will listen. So unprofessional.

This was one of those interviews where they test both your dexterity and moral compass. We had to tie a square knot with a shoelace around a candle shaped like a billiard ball (and with a similar tendency to roll away from you), while answering questions. It was harder than it sounds, although I did manage to do it in the end. Then another interviewer asked me how I would solve a particular ethical dilemma. Ethical questions are usually pretty easy to answer, since there are usually a number of ways to solve a problem that don’t involve unethical behavior. I don’t understand why people find them difficult.

The weird activity at this interview was writing a paragraph in our own handwriting on a blank piece of paper, and then signing our names, and printing our names underneath it. The paragraph could be about anything we wanted, so I used the opportunity to write them my thank you note. At one point, I asked Dr. Danielpour what he was going to do with our paragraphs, and I didn’t get a straight answer. I’m sure it’s for handwriting analysis, though. And sure enough, I just did a search on handwriting analysis and found a do-it-yourself site where you can enter in information about the writing vs. the signature vs. the printing and get a superficial analysis of the person’s character. So I entered in the information from my writing (which was a little less slanty and a lot less loopy than normal), and well, at least it presents a picture consistent with my interview. Still, it’s a bit irritating that they’d rely on a computer-generated superficial analysis. At least do us the courtesy of getting a professional opinion.

As for the program itself, here’s the pro and con list.

Pro:
1. Lots of faculty
2. Nice facilities
3. Good research support (mostly tumors/spine)
4. Lots of flexibility
5. Excellent spine and tumor experience
6. In a big city
7. Good operative volume
8. Huge book fund (>$1000)

Con:
1. 1 resident/year
2. Service can run without residents
3. Weak trauma
4. ? Vascular
5. Los Angeles
6. Program rep could go either way at this point
7. Weak ICU experience
8. Cost of living in LA
9. Loupes paid for, but out of PD’s pocket
10. High-maintenance patients