Training pathway for MD only physician scientists

[Lucca]

Hello everyone, I've been having second thoughts about the dual degree (and everything really, I think McAT studying is triggering my nihilism) not necessarily because of science or competition but because of seeing so many MD-only run labs at the medical schools I'm thinking of applying to. I know it has been said several times here before that you can do research with just an MD but "the training has to come from somewhere" and I was curious about what this actually meant.

Does this "training" mean a dedicated, fully research, non clinical post-doc until you have PhD level skills after fellowship or does it mean joining a PSTP or likeminded residency program with a significant research component? Does it mean both? Do MD/PhDs also join PSTPs or do they simply complete a post doc after fellowship in order to start pushing into their desired field?

A more precise way to state my question is: at what specific points do dual and single degree physician scientist training pathways converge and diverge?

I'd like to know in order to make a more informed decision about what kind of training I feel would best suit me. Originally, I thought that having my basic science training as early as possible, without debt, and before I had any serious external responsibilities (family, debts, clinical expectations and duties) was the way to go. However, if I have to spend four years earning the PhD but spend the same amount of time in extra training like the PSTP or post docs as an MD scientist then I may have to reconsider. Any insight is appreciated. Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ValentinNarcisse]

Hello everyone, I've been having second thoughts about the dual degree (and everything really, I think McAT studying is triggering my nihilism) not necessarily because of science or competition but because of seeing so many MD-only run labs at the medical schools I'm thinking of applying to. I know it has been said several times here before that you can do research with just an MD but "the training has to come from somewhere" and I was curious about what this actually meant.

Does this "training" mean a dedicated, fully research, non clinical post-doc until you have PhD level skills after fellowship or does it mean joining a PSTP or likeminded residency program with a significant research component? Does it mean both? Do MD/PhDs also join PSTPs or do they simply complete a post doc after fellowship in order to start pushing into their desired field?

A more precise way to state my question is: at what specific points do dual and single degree physician scientist training pathways converge and diverge?

I'd like to know in order to make a more informed decision about what kind of training I feel would best suit me. Originally, I thought that having my basic science training as early as possible, without debt, and before I had any serious external responsibilities (family, debts, clinical expectations and duties) was the way to go. However, if I have to spend four years earning the PhD but spend the same amount of time in extra training like the PSTP or post docs as an MD scientist then I may have to reconsider. Any insight is appreciated. Thanks.

Getting into top tier PSTPs is quite difficult for straight MD candidates. Usually the training occurs in an Instructor (post-doc effectively) after completing residency and fellowship.

 

[Lucca]

Getting into top tier PSTPs is quite difficult for straight MD candidates. Usually the training occurs in an Instructor (post-doc effectively) after completing residency and fellowship.

Ah I see. So the instructor position is more like training than it is a junior faculty position? Will PSTP graduates go through the same pipeline or will it depend on how productive/lucky they are on landing faculty positions post fellowship?

 

[Doctor&Geek]

Getting into top tier PSTPs is quite difficult for straight MD candidates.

Not necessarily. Several entrants here came with 1-2 years of research from medical school through HHMI, Sarnoff, etc.

Dropping out of an MSTP to eventually do PSTP probably is not advantageous.

It is rare for a PhD to be sufficient for avoiding a full postdoctoral fellowship with the goal of an independently funded lab. If you had a PhD with substantial work, you would be better off doing Whitehead, etc. and dropping medicine entirely.

If your PhD is in biostats or epi, your story is different, because your goal will not be to start a wet lab and it is historically not required to have a postdoc in either field. This would prepare you well for a career in clinical research, which is significantly different than lab work.

Several grant funding mechanisms exist for training of MDs in either basic or clinical research , including NIH Loan Repayment, KL2/TL1 awards, Damon Runyan, amongst others.