Template talk:Physician education and training in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details. |
| Portal | |
| Template | This article has been rated as Template-Class on the quality scale. |
| NA | This article has been rated as NA-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| Template | This page has been rated as Template-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| NA | This article has been rated as NA-importance on the importance assessment scale |
 |
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. | |
| Template | This article has been rated as Template-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Contents |
[edit] NRMP
The NRMP identifies six "types" of applicants for NRMP matching positions.
- U.S. Allopathic
- Canadian
- U.S. Osteopathic
- US born FMG
- Non-US born FMG
- Fifth Pathway
Source: Results and Data February 2008 www.nrmp.org
I propose each one of the these types be considered a pathway for entry into the US physician education and training system. Possibly the two foreign educated category be combined into one "IMG" category (since there's already one article on this.) Bryan Hopping T 13:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Those are pathways to this topic, not within this topic. Antelan talk 18:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- The topic is physician education and training. Physicians in the United States are educated at two types of U.S. medical schools. The may also be educated internationally and permitted to enter the U.S. training system via various pathways. Bryan Hopping T 19:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please see the question below. The point is that you are creating redundancies. Antelan talk 19:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- As you can see, the breakdown of pathways (4 at present), differs from the breakdown of degrees (2 at present).Bryan Hopping T 19:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, but a better formulation than having "pathways" and "degrees" would be "degrees" and "additional pathways", adding in the 2 beyond the traditional US MD and DO degrees. It avoids linking to 2 articles that are not actually about US physician education. Antelantalk 01:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Which two articles are not related to the education & training of US physicians? Bryan Hopping T 02:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- The ones that you keep reinserting, as one might have imagined. And based on that response, I can't tell if you understood what I was saying. Antelantalk 12:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- The article Osteopathic medicine in the United States discusses medical school and training, rather heavily. The article allopathic, though very incomplete at the moment, does mention several bodies of great import to physician education and training in the United States. Does that answer the question? I'm not sure if I do understand what you are saying.Bryan Hopping T 18:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- The core of my comment is that the allopathic link in this template is functionally redundant with MD, and osteopathic is functionally redundant with DO. MD and DO are relevant to training, and they give the reader links to and a sense of the philosophical differences. Therefore, I am combining the lists to keep it relevant and non-redundant. Antelantalk 19:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- The article Osteopathic medicine in the United States discusses medical school and training, rather heavily. The article allopathic, though very incomplete at the moment, does mention several bodies of great import to physician education and training in the United States. Does that answer the question? I'm not sure if I do understand what you are saying.Bryan Hopping T 18:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- The ones that you keep reinserting, as one might have imagined. And based on that response, I can't tell if you understood what I was saying. Antelantalk 12:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Which two articles are not related to the education & training of US physicians? Bryan Hopping T 02:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, but a better formulation than having "pathways" and "degrees" would be "degrees" and "additional pathways", adding in the 2 beyond the traditional US MD and DO degrees. It avoids linking to 2 articles that are not actually about US physician education. Antelantalk 01:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- As you can see, the breakdown of pathways (4 at present), differs from the breakdown of degrees (2 at present).Bryan Hopping T 19:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please see the question below. The point is that you are creating redundancies. Antelan talk 19:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- The topic is physician education and training. Physicians in the United States are educated at two types of U.S. medical schools. The may also be educated internationally and permitted to enter the U.S. training system via various pathways. Bryan Hopping T 19:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
Don't see the redundancy argument. In each section, the allopathic/osteopathic parallelism is seen. MD/DO, AMA/AOA, AAMC/AACOM. The "pathways" articles are the general categories of this parallelism, the other subsections offer specific examples of the two categories. Bryan Hopping T 19:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] What do "Pathways" cover that "Degrees" don't
See title. Hopping alluded to an explanation on the talk page, but there is none yet. Here is a good place for it. Antelan talk 19:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Redirects, Pathways, Allopathy
On wikipedia, internal links via redirects should be avoided, hence "comparison of MD and DO" is the correct form. And I'm also interested in an answer to the pathways question above. If no one explains this section should possibly be removed. Also, User:Hopping is, perhaps unintentionally, pushing the term allopathic, which is not common and considered insulting by many. This point has been raised on his user page. The allopathic article is short, and describes the controversial history of the term rather than what an MD actually is. Hence a link to the MD article is far superior. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.135.100.158 (talk) 17:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Perhaps we need an article that discusses these pathways in total, in addition to the articles that describe the individual components (i.e. the degrees, the exams, etc.)? Bryan Hopping T 19:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Protected
Bryan Hopping & whoever's using Tor...time to quit the edit warring here. Please take the time to discuss the best way to link from the template. — Scientizzle 20:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
