Delete
Last edited:
M.D./Ph.D and competitive residencies questions
- Thread starter 21385
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,675
- Reaction score
- 2
First, I would suggest that you do not try to choose your residency now if you haven't even applied to medical school or a combined program. More importantly, I don't think it's wise to choose a specialty simply because it is more competitive. If and when you are at a better time to make those decisions, you have to make sure that the specialty is the right fit for you (though there might be multiple good fits).
Secondly, I highly doubt that mstp grads aren't getting into competitive specialties because of scores. I'd guess that its primarily a combination of personal interests and research areas. The large majority of mstp people I've talked with plan on going into a field at least marginally related to their broad area of research (where at least the basic problem solving techniques are similar), and to programs that give them enough flexibility to continue some form of research. I think a better way to ask the question that I think you're asking would be to look at the location of the programs that students are ending up at, within the specialties that they chose.
I guess the overall point is that you shouldn't apply for MD/PhD programs to get a leg up in the residency application process (it probably does help, but it doesn't mean you'd be a shoe-in for top notch programs). Only apply if it's something you're passionate about.
Secondly, I highly doubt that mstp grads aren't getting into competitive specialties because of scores. I'd guess that its primarily a combination of personal interests and research areas. The large majority of mstp people I've talked with plan on going into a field at least marginally related to their broad area of research (where at least the basic problem solving techniques are similar), and to programs that give them enough flexibility to continue some form of research. I think a better way to ask the question that I think you're asking would be to look at the location of the programs that students are ending up at, within the specialties that they chose.
I guess the overall point is that you shouldn't apply for MD/PhD programs to get a leg up in the residency application process (it probably does help, but it doesn't mean you'd be a shoe-in for top notch programs). Only apply if it's something you're passionate about.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,477
- Reaction score
- 31
It is very difficult to be a lab PI and surgeon at the same time, even more difficult than in other specialties. I cannot name a single example of an 80/20 surgeon scientist; the number of R01 funded surgeon scientists is minimal at most, when compared to other specialties.
If your intention is not to go hardcore research, choose a different career path. Do not do an MD/PhD to pad your resume.
If your intention is not to go hardcore research, choose a different career path. Do not do an MD/PhD to pad your resume.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 410
- Reaction score
- 27
In general, surgical specialties tend not to attract many MD/PhDs because, in general, people who go through MD/PhD programs wanting to do research are usually geared toward more basic science research, and not so much 'clinical' research. Surgical practice and surgery residency training just don't lend themselves to a career in basic science research as much as other specialties, such as IM and pathology (which are two of the most common fields pursued by MD/PhDs entering residency training). Not to say that no MD/PhDs go into surgery training, just not near as many. That is why you don't see as many MD/PhDs matching into those type of programs.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2011
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 0
Some specialties lend better to the MD/PhD path and others don't. Procedural specialties where you need to be in practice, i.e. surgery, don't lend well to doing research in conjunction with your clinical duties. Also specialties that deal with acute cases may not be good. I'm sure you can think of others.
I second the poster above about choosing this path only if you are 100% dedicated to it.
As for residency, I think the answer is similar to the answer to "Podunk U genius vs Harvard slacker." Going to Harvard will not make up for a 2.0 GPA and 25 MCAT. Similarly, a PhD will not make up for poor board scores or grades because first and foremost residencies are training clinicians. At least that is the sense I get from one of Neuronix's I read a while back.
I second the poster above about choosing this path only if you are 100% dedicated to it.
As for residency, I think the answer is similar to the answer to "Podunk U genius vs Harvard slacker." Going to Harvard will not make up for a 2.0 GPA and 25 MCAT. Similarly, a PhD will not make up for poor board scores or grades because first and foremost residencies are training clinicians. At least that is the sense I get from one of Neuronix's I read a while back.
Since no one wants to answer your question, and want to spout the usual "surgeons don't have time to do good research " Skip Brass mantra, I will enlighten you on my experience, since I doubt the above posters are going into surgery or have been on the interview trail in a surgical subspecialty.
My best friend and I are graduating MD/PhD this year, and he is doing ortho and I am doing ENT. I can say, without a doubt in the world, the PhD was a tremendous help in getting interviews and making us more competitive. This applies to the big name, research intensive programs. We are by no means academic superstars...Step I from 230-250, similar step 2, only a few clinical honors, him AOA but not me. There are 8 people from our school applying into ortho, and his interview list is by far the most impressive (despite being numerically inferior to every single other applicant). My scores and grades are well below the average ENT applicant, but I received over 25 invites, and interviewed at 7 of the "top ten" programs in the country, and all of them mentioned how valuable my research experience was. Was it in ENT? Of course not...it was biochemistry. Basic science is just that...your training experience is applicable in any field of research, as you are taught to think like a scientist.
Of course, you have to have decent enough scores to get you in the door in any competitive field. However, I cannot stress enough the value (again, at the research based programs) of having basic science first author publications, extramural funding, being a bit older and more mature, and being able to talk about how basic science research will make you a better surgeon, etc etc. There are plenty of academic surgeons out there with RO1 grants. I met 9 on the interview trail this year. It is completely doable. Even if that's not what you want, having the experience will make you a better resident.
I also wanted to be a surgeon when I applied for MD/PhD, so I know where you are coming from. Just remember to keep an open mind about all medical specialties, as you will likely change your mind as your path winds on and you become older and your priorities change.
Good luck,
G
My best friend and I are graduating MD/PhD this year, and he is doing ortho and I am doing ENT. I can say, without a doubt in the world, the PhD was a tremendous help in getting interviews and making us more competitive. This applies to the big name, research intensive programs. We are by no means academic superstars...Step I from 230-250, similar step 2, only a few clinical honors, him AOA but not me. There are 8 people from our school applying into ortho, and his interview list is by far the most impressive (despite being numerically inferior to every single other applicant). My scores and grades are well below the average ENT applicant, but I received over 25 invites, and interviewed at 7 of the "top ten" programs in the country, and all of them mentioned how valuable my research experience was. Was it in ENT? Of course not...it was biochemistry. Basic science is just that...your training experience is applicable in any field of research, as you are taught to think like a scientist.
Of course, you have to have decent enough scores to get you in the door in any competitive field. However, I cannot stress enough the value (again, at the research based programs) of having basic science first author publications, extramural funding, being a bit older and more mature, and being able to talk about how basic science research will make you a better surgeon, etc etc. There are plenty of academic surgeons out there with RO1 grants. I met 9 on the interview trail this year. It is completely doable. Even if that's not what you want, having the experience will make you a better resident.
I also wanted to be a surgeon when I applied for MD/PhD, so I know where you are coming from. Just remember to keep an open mind about all medical specialties, as you will likely change your mind as your path winds on and you become older and your priorities change.
Good luck,
G
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,931
- Reaction score
- 8,935
Not exactly. A better analogy would be, going to Harvard will not make up for a 3.3 GPA and a 28 MCAT, even if you have extensive research experience. Even if you are middle of the road at a top tier program with a national average step 1 score, your chances of getting a very competitive specialty at all are dicey. This is especially true since MD/PhDs can't match to community program.
It annoys me that people take what I said out of context. If you are a middle of the road MD/PhD student, you may not be able to land a competitive specialty. I am not talking about students who are poor (equivalent of 2.0 GPA) or have serious red flags.
Sulfinator said:
I agree with this to a large extent. Some students remain hell bent on basic science research as a senior MD/PhD and some do not. Residency decisions are multifactorial. I have definitely had my share of conversations with other MD/PhD students who have said "yeah that specialty sounds great but that's really competitive so I won't consider it." I have seen students who have been convinced not to apply in something by advisors. I have seen students not match.
That being said, surgery only seems to be a strong interest to a small minority of MD/PhD students. There are a lot of branches of surgery that are not that competitive. So to me, it seems silly to say students are not choosing ortho/plastics because they're competitive. If they wanted either and were marginal, they would apply gen surg as a backup and we'd see a lot more MD/PhDs in gen surg.
Doctor&Geek said:
I 100% agree with this. Don't start an MD/PhD program not serious about doing a majority bench research career. If you are set on being a basic researcher AND a surgeon, good luck to you.
Read: Skip Brass is my MD/PhD director.
Look at the websites at Hopkins, Iowa, Michigan, UCLA, Mass Eye and Ear, Cleveland Clinic, UNC, U Washington and you will find several RO1 holding, full time surgeons with full labs, post-docs, multiple yearly publications, and excellent operating schedules. Are they in the lab 80% of the time? No, if that's what they wanted to do, they would have done IM.
You do not have to spend 80% of your time doing research to be a productive surgeon scientist, despite what the NIH (all IM docs and straight PhD's) have to say.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,931
- Reaction score
- 8,935
You really think I parrot Skip Brass??? You'd think if I was so brainwashed that I'd be heading into IM myself. I'm not.I'm all about balanced lifestyle. You can't have a balanced lifestyle in plastics or ortho residency. You might be able to approach one as an attending, then throw in a busy lab and you've screwed up any chance of that.
That is just my viewpoint on things. I do think it's going to be more challenging to set up a basic research career as a surgeon. I do think the op's post did not address a majority basic science research career desire. I do think the op is going to hear serious resistance to this idea in interviews if they do apply MD/PhD.
What I did not say is that it's impossible. I did not say nobody in surgery is doing this. I did not say you shouldn't do it. Maybe you should direct your comments at Doctor&Geek.
Also, "Only a few honors" doesn't get you AOA. At least not at my school. You need to honor almost everything.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,477
- Reaction score
- 31
- My general impression is that within all surgical specialties, the desire for research-oriented folks as residents exists, but the level of that desire can wildly vary between specialties (let alone particular programs within a specialty). Neurosurgery appears to be highest in desire, with Orthopedics and General lower. Too few MSTPers go into Plastics for me to get an accurate idea, but if you find examples, I'd encourage you to cross reference them in Pubmed to find out what kind of research they've done.
- Positions at programs that will position you for a surgeon scientist career are highly competitive and limited. Faculty positions at institutions from whom you will be able to obtain a *real* startup package that will allow you to succeed in research are even more highly competitive and limited. If you decide to proceed, finding a program with a proven track record of putting out successful surgeon scientists is imperative, and remember your choices are already quite limited!
- In general, I have been unimpressed by the quality of fundamental basic science research done by surgeon investigators; many of them have lab lieutenants doing a lot of the ground work because they're in the OR. I, of course, could be (and probably am) mistaken, as others can drag out surgeons I've never heard of who publish regularly in Nature/Cell/Science (or even close to that) as examples. EDIT: Sidransky doesn't count because he trained as an internist.
- Jim Goldenring (Vanderbilt) had a presentation at an AAMC GREAT meeting in 2008 entitled "Surgical Career Pathways for MD/PhD graduates". Read it.
(After you read this, remember that I'm not telling you that you can't be successful. I'm telling you it's harder. Also note that Dr. Goldenring, while trained as a surgeon, does not do surgery anymore.)
- Finally, I don't believe in the idea that basic science training helps on the wards - I don't have time right now to elaborate.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,477
- Reaction score
- 31
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 510
- Reaction score
- 7
Yikes...lumping IM docs with straight PhDs, sounds about as big of a generalization as oh calling all surgeons glorified mechanics. There are a ton of examples at most of the top academic medical centers of physicians and surgeons who run near full time clinical practices and strong research programs. The shot at IM was completely unnecessary...pretty sure top cards and GI fellowships are as competitive as anything.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,477
- Reaction score
- 31
WTH dude, you have two first author ENT case reports in press as a medical student, along with four first author publications and coauthors in Nature and Science.
You are a star, even for an MD/PhD applicant.
All I was sayin was that my PhD was not related to the field I am matching in.
I'm sorry if I came off as abrasive, ad did not mean to lump IM with anything, so if I offended anyone, I apologize. I just cannot tell you how irksome it is to have people espouse the attitude (not saying anyone did here) that being a surgeon and being successful in research are mutually exclusive. It's like being told you've wasted your time doing research if all you wanted to do was peddle around in the OR. As if I've sold out or something....
Of course it is easier to have an active research career in specialties other than surgical subspecialties...there ARE more opportunities, and you DO have more time. Lifestyle is no question neuronix, but that is an entirely different discussion.
So good luck everyone, please don't be discouraged if you find yourself loving both the lab and the OR. You're up for a challenge, but it is by no means impossible.
-G
I'm sorry if I came off as abrasive, ad did not mean to lump IM with anything, so if I offended anyone, I apologize. I just cannot tell you how irksome it is to have people espouse the attitude (not saying anyone did here) that being a surgeon and being successful in research are mutually exclusive. It's like being told you've wasted your time doing research if all you wanted to do was peddle around in the OR. As if I've sold out or something....
Of course it is easier to have an active research career in specialties other than surgical subspecialties...there ARE more opportunities, and you DO have more time. Lifestyle is no question neuronix, but that is an entirely different discussion.
So good luck everyone, please don't be discouraged if you find yourself loving both the lab and the OR. You're up for a challenge, but it is by no means impossible.
-G
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 2,801
- Reaction score
- 1,186
I don't think you are being abrasive and I think you bring a different and useful viewpoint to the OP's question. I don't think you are wrong, but neither are any of the other posters. I do feel, however, your arguments would hold significantly more weight if you had pursued this course and were already successful; alas, you are still at the begining of your training and have nothing to back up your claims, except for your ambition.
I am a few years ahead of you and can give my impressions as well. No one says what you propose is impossible- just improbable. I find it more likely that: A- you find an academic or private job towards the end of residency and never do basic science or translational research again, or B- You get pissed at your department for not giving you enough time to do research and go full-time to pursue your interests, than successfully running an R01-funded lab and have significant OR time. That's coming from my experience and my MD/PhD friends who started as you. I chose Pathology and my way forward is crystal clear. You will have to fight your residency training for significant research time. You may have to take a LOA from residency to get that. You may have to do a separate Post-Doc for research. Once an attending, you will have to fight for protected research time (they will pay you $$ to be in the OR, not play with mice). You will likely need external grant support BEFORE you get an academic job if you want any chance of getting a start-up package and lab. They probably will let you dink around with departmental funding, but you will not have much time and may get stuck with clinical research. And, you will do all this while making significantly less money than your peers. Again, it is possible, even doable; yet few people actually complete this given the difficulties involved. In Path some residents get start-up packages and labs promised them before they even start residency.
The notion that you found 9 PIs with R01s in your field is something. Out of 24 interviews you found 9 PIs- that says that in your field (ENT) it is possible. However, what percentage of faculty is that? I don't think I interviewed at a single institution that had that few R01-funded PIs in one department. Point is- you are seeking out a very difficult path fraught with obsticles from your personal life, department, funding, time.... for all these reasons most MD/PhDs chose IM/Path/Neuro etc.- these are paths of least resistance towards fulfiling physician-scientsit status.
We all hope you succeed. Certainly let us know how it goes.
I can only speak for myself, but I'm planning to do non-competitive residency in research (or just do a post-doc or try for a K award) because I know that I want a career in research and teaching (and have some bad grades from screwing studying to spend more time on research/programming). I don't particularly care to spend five years of residency away from my research (post two years of clinicals from medical school--bad enough for me), though neurosurgery is an area of medicine that does fascinate me (and plan to shadow as much as I can during my PhD years). However, I tend to be the kid who resents my medical school at times for limitting the time that I can spend on graduate work during MS1/MS2, so I'm guessing that a neurosurgery residency would tick me off enough to quit residency for a faculty position...
I think it is also program dependent with regards to residency. At UW, for example, the residency is 6 or 7 years (1 or 2 full, completely protected research years with no call). They have a pathway set up for you to have a K grant ready to go by the time you finish. At the smaller programs they only give you like 3 months of unprotected time.
I guess what I'm saying is I think I have the option to be very productive in basic science research while still being a full-time surgeon. And if the research opportunities dry up for my field of interest I could always sell out and make $5000/day putting ear tubes in.
I guess what I'm saying is I think I have the option to be very productive in basic science research while still being a full-time surgeon. And if the research opportunities dry up for my field of interest I could always sell out and make $5000/day putting ear tubes in.
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2003
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction score
- 1
Just to throw in my 2 cents/summary to the OP:
(1) DO pursue the MD/PhD if you will feel that your life will not be complete without doing significant bench research in the next several years and your foreseeable career. This is irrespective of what you want to do clinically.
(2) Otherwise, stop right there and do MD only. If you kick butt in med school and do a shorter (like 1 yr) research experience, you will be in as good a shape as any MD/PhDs for applying in these specialties, at least if current trends hold. The 3-4-5+ quality adjusted life years in lab are not worth it if you're only doing this to bolster your CV. You can do basic, or clinical research as an MD only later on in residency if you wish (in fact, many surgical residencies build in significant research time). MD-only researcher surgeons do exist.
(3) If (1) holds, you CAN do surgical training and, as the above posters have indicated, pursue a majority lab research career (or even possibly start it with (2) and a research fellowship). It is possible with hard work and luck, but significantly harder than in less procedure oriented fields because of systemic factors.
(4) In my general observational experiences of MD/PhDs I know, lifestyle considerations are less important when we're starting the program as ex-premeds, but often rise in terms of priorities as we get married/reproduce/have aging parents/burn out, etc. Many of us change our minds with respect to our clinical goals with these issues in mind as our training goes on.
Good luck!
(1) DO pursue the MD/PhD if you will feel that your life will not be complete without doing significant bench research in the next several years and your foreseeable career. This is irrespective of what you want to do clinically.
(2) Otherwise, stop right there and do MD only. If you kick butt in med school and do a shorter (like 1 yr) research experience, you will be in as good a shape as any MD/PhDs for applying in these specialties, at least if current trends hold. The 3-4-5+ quality adjusted life years in lab are not worth it if you're only doing this to bolster your CV. You can do basic, or clinical research as an MD only later on in residency if you wish (in fact, many surgical residencies build in significant research time). MD-only researcher surgeons do exist.
(3) If (1) holds, you CAN do surgical training and, as the above posters have indicated, pursue a majority lab research career (or even possibly start it with (2) and a research fellowship). It is possible with hard work and luck, but significantly harder than in less procedure oriented fields because of systemic factors.
(4) In my general observational experiences of MD/PhDs I know, lifestyle considerations are less important when we're starting the program as ex-premeds, but often rise in terms of priorities as we get married/reproduce/have aging parents/burn out, etc. Many of us change our minds with respect to our clinical goals with these issues in mind as our training goes on.
Good luck!
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 410
- Reaction score
- 27
Just for the record, I found that to be mildly insulting.
Whatever, if the truth insults you, i make no apologies. He asked if the mdphd would help in getting a competitive surgical residency. The answer is yes. The answer is not the posts about how difficult the career will be. I have been hearing that from every non surgeon mdphd for years.
Being mdphd will help you get a competitive surgical subspecialty provided the program values research. Some do more than others.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2009
- Messages
- 106
- Reaction score
- 0
Not true, the original question asked:
"That's not really where I want to end up and I'm just not sure if so many of them are choosing these traditionally not-very-competitive residencies because of their personal interests, test scores, research ambitions or simply because the M.D./Ph.D double degree doesn't help them that much in the application process for highly competitive surgical"
You answered the latter half. Everyone else was answering the first part: that MD/PhD students tend to choose IM and other non surgical specialties out of personal interest and research ambitions.
Fair enough. I assumed because he indicated his interest in surgery that his overall question was whether mdphd would help. I let my disdain blind me to the other question, which I believe was answered quite well. My apologies.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 410
- Reaction score
- 27
Humbly accepted.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
VERY GOOD advice there.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
I absolutely DISAGREE with this.
Why? I'm an MD-PhD student and I plan on going into surgery. My PhD is in CLINICAL work and I DON'T plan on doing research long-term. I'm doing the PhD to improve specialized knowledge and establish better technique to assist me as a surgeon.
For example, if you think you might want to do plastics, find a burns specialist to work with. If you want cardiology, find an imaging specialist. This way, your area of research is general enough so that if you change your mind on what field you're interested in then your research still benefits you, but if you do ultimately decide on that particular field then you're golden.
I hate lab work and had met with a few advisers beforehand who had mentioned that type of work as a possibility. I turned them down. If you want surgery, do a PhD that is strictly clinical, and no one says you have to do bench work or any type of research long-term. And by all means, the dual degree WILL make you more competitive for residency. It will probably function like an additional 20 points on step-one. So if you get a 220 on step-one, think as though you're applying with a 240. That's still only borderline competitive. If you get a 260, you're applying with a 280. And it's not easier said than done. Use the first 1.5-2 yrs of your intercalated PhD research to do additional USMLE practice questions. If you do >10,000 questions, you will eclipse 260.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,931
- Reaction score
- 8,935
Did you go into your MD/PhD interviews stating this plan?
Personally, I think you're wasting several years of your life obtaining a PhD you will barely use.
Also, the advice to take step 1 after or during your PhD is seriously misguided IMO. Take the time you need to study for step 1, on the order of 6 weeks (+/- 2 weeks) full-time with practice books and questions. Don't do this after being out of clinical world for awhile. A PhD is a full-time endeavor. If you want to take several months out of the start of your PhD to study, that might be ok (assuming your PI is okay with it). But, expect your PhD to take that much longer.
Last edited:
What are Farrah Fawcett, Patrick Swayze, Michael Jackson, and Ed McMahon getting for Christmas?
anonymous000
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
Thank you for answering the question. This is the best response I've read. I'm also an MD-PhD going into surgery, and this news is both comforting and assuaging.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
This reinforces an important point that you can only understand and internalize the value of the PhD if and only if you are doing one yourself. There is SO much reading and writing involved that it is both unequivocally and irrefutably valuable irrespective of the degree to which your specific research actually intertwines with your career path. It is never a waste of time. In fact, it is the least nominal of any degree, including the medical one (that is also something you realize pretty much immediately during/after the literature review [which is just the beginning!]).
Also, Neuronix does raise a good point that for SOME PEOPLE, postponing step-one prep in combination with extended studying is not extravagantly beneficial. However, that is contingent on your learning methods. If you are the type of person who has been learning and making gains SPECIFICALLY because of your university's program ITSELF (i.e. read all of the lecture slides, go to every prac, adhere strongly to the syllabus), it is in your best interest NOT to postpone studying for the exam during the initial intercalated PhD years. If on the other hand you are the type of person who generally finds med school lectures worthless, doesn't look at lecture slides, doesn't go to every prac, YET STUDIES >8 HOURS/DAY independently using BRS, FA, Goljan, HYs, QBanks, UCV, etc., it IS in your best interest to study alongside the initial PhD years, because additional study time is essentially the same as that during the first two med years. That is an important point. Independent studier --> temporally displace step-1 during initial PhD years; curriculum-/syllabus-based learner --> take step-1 at termination of 2nd year. This is also a reason why so few people score >260. The material in step-1 is not hard, as Goljan says, but it's a mere matter of managing the brevity of the timeline involved. If you can make the extended timeline tractable and do all of the QBanks, including having read FA minimum 3x, a 250+ is a guarantee and a 260+ is very much within reach. The study pattern should include a percentage devoted to the PhD concurrent to a percentage devoted to additional step-1 studying (e.g. 75/25); keep in mind, time devoted to step-1 should not be thought of as detracting from that possibly spent on the PhD, since the material in step-1 is necessary to know for the rest of your career! And reinforcement/repetition is key.
That is probably some of the best first-hand advice anyone will ever read on this website. I write that from personal experience. If you want not a 240, but a 260, the # of practice Qs and times reading/understanding FA is everything. There should never be an MD-PhD independent learner scoring <250.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
Also a reiteration of the fact that lab work does in fact = death. As I've written in one of my previous posts above, CLINICAL work at the PhD level is ideal.
I'm not really sure I get this. You are saying to study throughout your PhD in order to boost your step I score? Why not just study harder as an MS2, get a 250+, and then enjoy your free evenings?
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,355
- Reaction score
- 887
I disagree with the implication that all MD/PhD students following some protocol should score 250+. Nobody should feel worse about themselves based on your ignorant and misplaced comments. I go to a very good school, scored very well for the sake of anonymity, and worked my ass off- and I'm smarter than you, as are my classmates. The majority of them did not score 250+. While there is truth to your formula, most US students can't 'do all the Q-banks.'
In the US, completing Step1 is typically a requirement for entering the PhD. Most US citizen MD/PhD students are not in school in Australia (or some other place), where your situation is different, and step 1 may be even more important for landing a US residency. We don't have the option to research/step 1 prep 75/25 during our PhD, as if we would desire that.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
The irony is that you should check out this post:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=597742
Pollux studied during third-year and devoted his time to both step-1 and course work.
There should be no hard feelings if you didn't score 250+. Nobody here is insulting your intelligence aside from you (evident, as you've become defensive).
The above link should also be useful to anyone who is looking to break 260 (and not looking to settle for less).
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
Enjoying your free evenings should = reading ;-)
Reading --> making gains --> gaining confidence --> augmented incentive/desire to read more --> reading --> making gains --> (cyclical)
I've found that meeting friends for lunch is the easiest way to stay social (and sane). That way, gains via studying nocturnally can still be achieved.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2012
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
I actually agree with Anonymous000. I know someone who achieved a high score by doing that.
Anonymous000, I'm new to this website and am also an MD/PhD student. If you have any more advice to offer up, I'd really appreciate it!
Anonymous000, I'm new to this website and am also an MD/PhD student. If you have any more advice to offer up, I'd really appreciate it!
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2008
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1
Please PM me with any questions you may have. I'd be happy to address them.
- Joined
- May 10, 2011
- Messages
- 999
- Reaction score
- 56
You mean you aren't going to let us enjoy tonight's production of Sockpuppet Theatre?
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2011
- Messages
- 215
- Reaction score
- 0
Alas, poor Jabaway! I knew him, Anonymous000.
- Joined
- May 16, 2010
- Messages
- 35
- Reaction score
- 0
People are actually banned from this website?! Woooow! What happened to free speech? I just have a couple of words to say from reading this thread, "SUPER-EGOS" & "POWER TRIP!"
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 9
People are actually banned from this website?! Woooow! What happened to free speech? I just have a couple of words to say from reading this thread, "SUPER-EGOS" & "POWER TRIP!"
There is a terms of use you agree to when you sign up with the website. That person violated the terms of use and got banned. Nothing to do with power-trips and super-egos.
