How to compare cardiology fellowship programmes fairly
A method for comparing programmes using the same fields, so that missing information is not mistaken for a disadvantage or an advantage.
Compare like with like
Compare programmes of the same subspecialty and pathway. A clinical fellowship, a research post and an observership carry different responsibilities and should not be ranked against one another.
Use the same fields for every programme
For each shortlisted programme record the duration, the stated case exposure, the number of positions, funding, eligibility, the application route and the deadline. Put the source and the date beside each value so you can see how current it is.
Treat blanks as unknown
When a field is empty, the source did not state it, or it was not found in the pages checked. That is different from a refusal. Ask the programme before you drop it from your list.
Weigh volume with supervision
Case numbers describe a centre, not your personal experience. Ask how procedures are shared among fellows, how supervision works and how much protected time exists for research or teaching.
Think about the whole move
Include the cost of living, language, licensing and visa timelines, family needs and the likelihood that the training will be recognised where you plan to work. A programme that fits on paper can still be impractical.