MD/PhD '10 crowd

[Sh1ZA]

So now that the '09 people have applied its now time for the '10 people to take over.

So I've been reading posts on this forum, and it seems that a competitive applicant needs at least a 3.8 gpa, 35 mcat, 3 or 4 years research experience.

Here's what I have:
4th year Biochem/Art History double major (cgpa > 3.9)
2 years research in ochem (including two full time summers, one being at UPenn)
University tutor, hospital volunteer, community volunteer
Probably joining a biochem research group this year, and I'm planning to spend my year off doing full time research.
Taking MCAT sometime before june 09 when I'm ready.

So I'm trying to get into the top 5 programs (harvard, penn, ucsf, etc.)

Thanks for the input.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[URHere]

If you are asking what your chances are, you should check out this thread (beat you to it Neuronix ):

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=539268

As you can see, you really won't have a complete idea of how good your chances are until you take the MCAT - any speculation before then won't really do you much good.

As for it being time for '10 applicants to take over...most '09ers are still applying, and the first batch is just starting to interview. They won't be "done applying" until next summer.

 

[Sh1ZA]

so lets say i do well on the MCAT, like 35+, judging from your experience, do you think thats the minimum for interviews at the top programs?
what were your stats getting in?
Thanks

 

[CancerKiller007]

Chill is the word dude! 09 crowd is still in process. We will not be done till about June of next year. I suggest that you take it one day at time.

As for interview at top program, all I can say is it is possible with those stats but not certain. I know people who have been turned down from top programs with very strong stats. I think one thing I can say is make sure your personal statement is a unique (in a good way). Your personal statement and letters will make or break you once you have a good stats.

BTW, this is just a general guide. No one can predict anything about this enigmatic process. If I knew, what it took to get in....I would not be hanging around here....LOL!

 

[Ariodant]

I'll echo Cancerkiller's comment. In addition, I'd suggest that you talk to a few MD/PhD students, faculties and adcoms to get a more comprehensive view of this education/career path. I feel slightly worried whenever I see people guiding their application decisions with arbitrary rankings.

 

[Sh1ZA]

Okay, are any of you guys in the field? What can you say about it as far as what it takes to get in?

And are there any other potential applicants for 2010, I'm curious to know who else wants this and what motivates them.

 

[URHere]

I went through the application process last year, and started my program last month. In my opinion...

What it takes to get an interview:
-Good numbers - on one end of the spectrum, if your numbers are 3.8+/35+ they shouldn't be a hindrance to you at any schools. On the flip side, a sub-30 MCAT and low GPA (below 3.0) seem to be a hindrance almost everywhere.
-Essays that aren't superficial/arrogant/uninformed. Ideally, these essays should be honest and inspiring, but for most people, "not bad" is a high enough bar to aim for.
-Excellent recommendations, especially from your PIs.
-Research experience.
-(This really isn't that much different than the MD admissions process overall).

What it takes to get in:
-Ability to talk about research - this seemed to be the most heavily weighted part of every MD/PhD interview I attended. It is important to be able to talk about your research, your techniques, why you used those techniques, etc...and to seem at least somewhat enthusiastic while talking about it.
-Social skills. If the rest of your application is stellar enough, this may be overlooked somewhat, but generally, you need to be good at interacting with people.
-Everything I mentioned in the last section, plus other things you hear about on SDN - some amount of clinical experience, usually at least some sort of other EC, etc.

What it takes to do well and enjoy the field:
-You need to really enjoy research. Yes, there is a large clinical component, but at most schools research is intertwined heavily with the MD/PhD education from the beginning. To do well, and not get overly stressed or irritated, you should genuinely like research (and the PhD world, which is much different than most of undergraduate research).
-You need to be informed about programs ahead of time. While top-10 programs are amazing, it is far more important to attend a school that does quality research in fields that interest you. Going to a highly ranked school does you no good if you can't find a lab you like come PhD time.
-You need to be familiar with what you will be doing both as a PhD student, and as a postdoc/PI. You need to understand the lovely worlds of grant writing, protocol revisions, paper submissions, etc. As a student, you will need to know what type of hoops your school expects you to jump through before you graduate.
-Figure these things out BEFORE you apply! They could save you a world of trouble later.

 

[Neuronix]

If you are asking what your chances are, you should check out this thread (beat you to it Neuronix )

and I was thinking ohhhh... other people graduating in 2010! Oh wait...

Op, your chances are good. I dunno about top-5, but keep an open mind and you'll probably get in if not there somewhere quite good. The average at the top programs is MCAT 36.x typically and GPA 3.8x typically. So aim for above those in both. Also aim for as much research (4+ years, but even 3 is pretty good) as possible with pubs and all that.

I still think any MSTP is going to give you excellent training. But since you asked... Obviously no guarantees, and you'll need the great LORs, interview, essays, etc...

 

[Sh1ZA]

when you guys took the mcats, were you doing research and taking classes as well?
I started studying for the mcats and the fall quarter starts soon, im taking 4 classes (3 chem and 1 art history), tutoring (10-15 hrs/week), and volunteeering (4 hrs/week). Do you think it will be better to not do research and just go all out on the mcats, or is research that important where you have to keep it up all the time?

When did all you guys study the mcats if you spent your summers doing research, and how many of you took kaplan or princeton?

 

[sunshine8i8]

Some of my friends (myself included) try to do it all: research, classes, volunteering, MCAT. Sometimes it's okay, sometimes it's not. Some people (including myself) bomb classes; some people bomb the MCAT. Some people do perfectly fine.

Some of my friends take a whole quarter off from classes just to do research and study of the MCAT.

You should see how much you can handle; don't be too overconfident and know that you're handing a huge load. You can talk to your PI about it; I'm sure s/he will understand if you need to take a smaller work load or stop working for the month right before your test. Your PI is probably almost as invested as seeing you succeed as you are.

I took a Kaplan class which improved my score (compared to their diagnostic which might provide a bias) quite dramatically. What's especially nice about Kaplan is that if you do all the work on time, and you don't like the score or end up canceling the test, you can keep your Kaplan account active and retake the class for free. It's about a 10-12 hour commitment a week if you also do the suggested homeworks.

Best of luck entering class of 2010!

 

[Neuronix]

When did all you guys study the mcats if you spent your summers doing research, and how many of you took kaplan or princeton?

Took mine in August, after TPR, while doing 30hrs/week research and 5hrs/week volunteering.