Yes. Some good points. Students should look at what degree of autonomy is given to not only the PGY6 but equally as important or arguably more important I would look at the degree of autonomy given to the early years PGY2 through 4 for VIR integrated residents.
I would also look to see if the attendings are rounding and doing formal consults (not just the residents) similar to how a surgical service would.
Also, it is important to look to see if all service lines are being developed not just the ones that all have (interventional oncology, hepatobiliary , and venous). You want to see that they are going to compete for cases in the other arenas such as PAD ,neuro cases and even aneurysmal disease.
If they are doing over a 1000 cases but over 1/2 of those cases are lines and biopsies and drains, that is not a great spread. You want to have arterial experience throughout the body including the brain, legs, pelvis, arms, mesenteries, renal, intercostals etc. So you want to also have comfort in radial access as well as pedal access. You want to get very comfortable with not only super tortuous vessels of PAE but also difficult calcified vessels of PAD tibial /pedal CTOs.
If the program is not competing for these cases currently do they have a plan in place on how they are going to market and get those referrals? AT the least they should have you train with cardiology or vascular surgery to acquire those skills (but you should be the primary operator or assist just behind the attending). In many it is more like an observorship.
In the real world, if you do not have a clinic ( a place to see and follow patients), ability to admit patients and some clinical and technical ability in common disorders such as PAD, hemodialysis work, Fibroids, veins, pain interventions the likelihood of being successful drops. With current level of evidence and limited amount of HCC (ie most gets transferred to transplant centers) there is not enough interventional oncology to have a thriving VIR practice.
This information is not transparent as the programs (some are big names) that do not have quality volumes or training do not want to be disadvantaged in recruiting to programs that offer robust training.