Does not having research as "Most Meaningful" lower your chance at a top school?

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Title says--asks--it all. What does everyone think? Is it necessary (or helpful) to mark research as a "Most Meaningful Activity" if you're aiming for a top 20 medical school?

I think whatever you pick should be congruent with your experiences. If you have little/no research then there it doesn't serve you. I don't remember this question on AMCAS, but if they're including it then I see a big opening for questions that ask you to describe why it's most meaningful on interviews.

Originally Posted by Valadi

I think whatever you pick should be congruent with your experiences. If you have little/no research then there it doesn't serve you. I don't remember this question on AMCAS, but if they're including it then I see a big opening for questions that ask you to describe why it's most meaningful on interviews.

It was new this last cycle. That said, no, it shouldn't hurt you. I had plenty of research but didn't use it as a "most meaningful experience" IIRC. Nevertheless, it came up in my interviews at most schools (esp. those that were more research-intensive). I'd probably argue that if research is your most meaningful experience as a premed, you likely didn't have much of a pre-MEDICINE experience at all.