Yet Another "What are my chances" thread

[tbo]

I'm sure I'm going to get blasted on this but I'm curious to know from you guys what my chances are for an MD/PhD (or even MD only). Quite frankly, in an ideal world away from the insanity that is med school admissions, I would love doing an Md/PhD (or MD/MS Clinical Investigation) and staying in academic medicine (clinical research mainly). Here's my story. I totally screwed up undergrad and took a few years off to mature and get my life on track - UGPA 2.98. Went to work for big pharma and did 2 years of clinical research there - learned a lot about how trials are designed and completed. I went to get a Master's at a top-10 med school in Biomedical Informatics. Finished with a 3.82 and am getting my thesis published in a OK peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Investigative Medicine).

Now I'm at a phenomenal teaching hospital doing clinical research. I have one co-authorship in Annals of Surgery, 3 in press and 2 preliminarily submitted to other specialty-specific journals. I know most of the data by heart since I've been working closely on each one. My boss has also given me my own project (first authorship) on a pretty timely topic in the field. I've also forged very strong relationships with a few Directors at my hospital to co-publish on a number of interesting novel topics. Even got to sit in on a Senior Scientific Advisory Committee with 2 Nobel Laureates and a host of deans from various med schools (great stuff). I'm working on a paper with a few of these committee members that they're looking to publish in NEJM (this guy has a number of first authorships in NEJM and JAMA). Needless to say, I feel quite comfortable with the research part of MD/PhD admissions.

The problem is my academic record and my MCAT - I took it during my Dark Ages and got a 29S -- borderline even for the lowest tier MD-onlys. But I think I have an interesting story to tell. I'm just concerned about getting electronically weeded out. I plan on applying for 2008 - by then I wouldn't be surprised if I've hit double digit publications of substance (making a meaningful contribution to each of them). I plan on taking the April 2007 MCAT. Now that I have a better understanding of myself and my shortcomings, I am shooting for at least a 33. I've basically written off many of the MSTPs but am so driven by the idea of doing an MD/PhD that I won't let anything stop me from applying. I would be entirely remiss not to.

I know there are a lot of good perspectives here at SDN and wouldn't mind hearing what you think, what you would recommend doing in the next year or so, etc. I recognize that my chances are very slim, but I'm going to do it regardless, so help a man out here .

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Shatterstar17]

Jeez I can't possibly know anything for sure, but the thing that has shone through this entire process to me is how person-oriented even some of the very top MSTP's are. They're all relatively small programs, and it feels like they have a chance to really get to know you. I know you're worried about not even making it to the point where they can know you (your low GPA). But why just shoot for a 33? Study your ass off. Get a 36. It sounds like you're smart enough and determined enough. Don't give them any excuse to weed you out early.

And even then, in no place that I know of is there a ranking of MSTPs by GPA or anything silly like that. The worst that could happen is there'd be one 3.0 folded into an army of 4.0's at some top program. Some MD-only adcom member might blanche momentarily, but it seems like any MSTP program director worth her salt would have enough pull to get you through, what with everything else.

Give it a try. And certainly don't apply MD-only! It seems like you'll have a much better shot MD/PhD. Good luck.

 

[Hard24Get]

Hey there:

Why would someone blast you? We Mud-Phuds are nice

If you already have a master's, can't you complete the PhD in less time? Or do you want a PhD in something else? I think your story is interesting, but I don't know how much the "double-digit" publications will help since they are mostly clinical and most MSTPs are basic science heavy (unless you are going for Bioinformatics, in which case see above).

Also, it sounds like it has been more than a few years since you took the prereqs for the MCAT and med school. You might want to consider retaking some of these course to 1) Increase the GPA 2) Prepare for MCATs and 3) Satisfy requirements for schools that might impose time limits on these sorts of things.

Good luck

I'm sure I'm going to get blasted on this but I'm curious to know from you guys what my chances are for an MD/PhD (or even MD only). Quite frankly, in an ideal world away from the insanity that is med school admissions, I would love doing an Md/PhD (or MD/MS Clinical Investigation) and staying in academic medicine (clinical research mainly). Here's my story. I totally screwed up undergrad and took a few years off to mature and get my life on track - UGPA 2.98. Went to work for big pharma and did 2 years of clinical research there - learned a lot about how trials are designed and completed. I went to get a Master's at a top-10 med school in Biomedical Informatics. Finished with a 3.82 and am getting my thesis published in a OK peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Investigative Medicine).

Now I'm at a phenomenal teaching hospital doing clinical research. I have one co-authorship in Annals of Surgery, 3 in press and 2 preliminarily submitted to other specialty-specific journals. I know most of the data by heart since I've been working closely on each one. My boss has also given me my own project (first authorship) on a pretty timely topic in the field. I've also forged very strong relationships with a few Directors at my hospital to co-publish on a number of interesting novel topics. Even got to sit in on a Senior Scientific Advisory Committee with 2 Nobel Laureates and a host of deans from various med schools (great stuff). I'm working on a paper with a few of these committee members that they're looking to publish in NEJM (this guy has a number of first authorships in NEJM and JAMA). Needless to say, I feel quite comfortable with the research part of MD/PhD admissions.

The problem is my academic record and my MCAT - I took it during my Dark Ages and got a 29S -- borderline even for the lowest tier MD-onlys. But I think I have an interesting story to tell. I'm just concerned about getting electronically weeded out. I plan on applying for 2008 - by then I wouldn't be surprised if I've hit double digit publications of substance (making a meaningful contribution to each of them). I plan on taking the April 2007 MCAT. Now that I have a better understanding of myself and my shortcomings, I am shooting for at least a 33. I've basically written off many of the MSTPs but am so driven by the idea of doing an MD/PhD that I won't let anything stop me from applying. I would be entirely remiss not to.

I know there are a lot of good perspectives here at SDN and wouldn't mind hearing what you think, what you would recommend doing in the next year or so, etc. I recognize that my chances are very slim, but I'm going to do it regardless, so help a man out here .

 

[Hard24Get]

Give it a try. And certainly don't apply MD-only! It seems like you'll have a much better shot MD/PhD. Good luck.

Is anyone on the MD-PhD forum NOT at Penn???

 

[Shatterstar17]

Is anyone on the MD-PhD forum NOT at Penn???

Well, not yet.

 

[hawkeey]

Retake your MCAT and then I think you would be an excellent MD/PhD applicant

 

[QofQuimica]

Why would someone blast you? We Mud-Phuds are nice

Also, it sounds like it has been more than a few years since you took the prereqs for the MCAT and med school. You might want to consider retaking some of these course to 1) Increase the GPA 2) Prepare for MCATs and 3) Satisfy requirements for schools that might impose time limits on these sorts of things.

I agree with Hard24Get on both counts: this forum is much friendlier than pre-allo, and you should take some classes at the UNDERGRAD level to bring up your GPA above a 3.0 if at all possible, as well as retake the MCAT. The problem is that AMCAS calculates separate GPAs for UG versus grad, so unfortunately your UG GPA won't be helped by your MS. You have to take more UG classes if you want to raise your UG GPA, which is what many med schools use to screen applicants.

There is a user here named relentless11 who might be helpful to you; he's a current PhD student with a low UG GPA who is taking some UG classes while he's in grad school to get his GPA up. He plans to apply for med school after his PhD. I don't think he posts in here much, but he posts in the non-trad forum. You might try PMing him for some advice.

Best of luck to you.

P.S. I am not at Penn.

 

[tbo]

Thanks all for the comments. I was pleasantly surprised at the positive feedback.

But why just shoot for a 33? Study your ass off. Get a 36. It sounds like you're smart enough and determined enough. Don't give them any excuse to weed you out early.

There's no doubt I'd take a 39 if I got it. Just want to be realistic in my MCAT prognostic abilities. I took a practice MCAT on the day of the April 2006 MCAT and scored a 33 (without much preparation), so I like the odds of scoring better next year.

If you already have a master's, can't you complete the PhD in less time? Or do you want a PhD in something else? I think your story is interesting, but I don't know how much the "double-digit" publications will help since they are mostly clinical and most MSTPs are basic science heavy (unless you are going for Bioinformatics, in which case see above).

you should take some classes at the UNDERGRAD level to bring up your GPA above a 3.0 if at all possible, as well as retake the MCAT

While I learned a boatload of relevant info during my Master's in BMI, I think it's more of a supportive skill set rather than a career for me. Research is fundamentally based on good information use and in no small part has helped me get to where I'm at today. More importantly, research that advances medicine is really where I want to be. I am of the small minority (it seems) that wants to pursue clinical research opportunities - PhD in Epidemiology, Clinical Effectiveness, or Clinical Investigation. These are also quite quantitatively based and require a sound foundation in information/data use.

The idea to take some UG courses is one I considered for a while. Done correctly, I feel like I'd have to do classes full-time (also, in order to make meaningful strides in boosting my UG GPA). This would clearly detract from continuing my research projects. Part-time classes might be the way to go.

Additionally, I find it curious-but-interesting that this MD/PhD forum seems to be heavily weighted towards the basic sciences - perhaps a simple reflection of what MD/PhD committees and program directors think as well (can this be proven?). While it makes perfect sense that this is one of the most valuable aspects to the joint degree, there's been such a tremendous push to develop the clinical research enterprise (see Zerhouni's NIH Roadmap on Re-engineering Clinical Research). With the emergence of K30, K23's for clinical research-specific awards, you would suspect this would be a booming area for MD/PhD programs as well, no?

 

[SeventhSon]

Additionally, I find it curious-but-interesting that this MD/PhD forum seems to be heavily weighted towards the basic sciences - perhaps a simple reflection of what MD/PhD committees and program directors think as well (can this be proven?). While it makes perfect sense that this is one of the most valuable aspects to the joint degree, there's been such a tremendous push to develop the clinical research enterprise (see Zerhouni's NIH Roadmap on Re-engineering Clinical Research). With the emergence of K30, K23's for clinical research-specific awards, you would suspect this would be a booming area for MD/PhD programs as well, no?

This is an area of intense debate. It has been generally held that clinical research/retrospective type studies don't require a PhD, and that a post-IM fellowship is sufficient. I had an interesting conversation with the director at penn (skip) about this topic, since there were clinical research-oriented candidates at my interview there. Although some places (penn, harvard) were the two where I was interviewing with such candidates, many other schools explicitly said they prefer not to consider such applications, and I really think the reason is that with such few funding spots, they are not willing to "give up one" for a non-basic science researcher.

 

[Neuronix]

I had an interesting conversation with the director at penn (skip) about this topic, since there were clinical research-oriented candidates at my interview there.

I'm curious what he had to say. You were probably here on a day when we were interviewing such candidates, as even the Penn program is heavily weighted towards the basic sciences. We usually take around 1 not basic science person per year (lumping in clinical research, social science, and business/economics).

 

[tbo]

This is interesting. I agree that a lot of clinical research need not require extremely scientific, critical study design (eg. retrospective show-and-tell-type papers), but I think properly run clinical studies that are randomized, controlled prospective studies really require skill and experience -- skills and experiences very much analagous to basic science. Arguably, you have far more control over your experimentation in a basic lab (by definition) and therefore might need a more solid command of those research skills, but you could very much say the same for properly run clinical studies. I would argue even more than a PhD training can offer (post-doc and the like).

What I continue to hear is that you're disadvantaged applying as a non-basic science person, but based on my anectdotal experience at a teaching hospital, it's an expertise that is sorely lacking. I wonder if that is changing, or I'm just deluded.

 

[SeventhSon]

I'm curious what he had to say. You were probably here on a day when we were interviewing such candidates, as even the Penn program is heavily weighted towards the basic sciences. We usually take around 1 not basic science person per year (lumping in clinical research, social science, and business/economics).

i don't remember exactly what he said, but basically he said that there has been kind of a sea change with respect to the view that clinical research and/or public policy only required a fellowship and that it was advantageous to have some clinical researchers (more than now) with a PhD. Of course, from this I can infer that the demand for clinical researchers/public policy with PhDs is still not great enough to justify giving away tons of spots in an MSTP.

He was always very careful to use the phrase "physician-investigators" rather than physician-scientists, which I found interesting, because this language (at least to me) is more consistent with MD/PhDs in both basic science and clincal research/PP

But yeah, even having one MSTP that is geared toward non-basic science is notable, because penn and harvard were the only two places where i met such a student or one was being considered.

 

[Booyakasha]

i don't remember exactly what he said, but basically he said that there has been kind of a sea change with respect to the view that clinical research and/or public policy only required a fellowship and that it was advantageous to have some clinical researchers (more than now) with a PhD. Of course, from this I can infer that the demand for clinical researchers/public policy with PhDs is still not great enough to justify giving away tons of spots in an MSTP.

He was always very careful to use the phrase "physician-investigators" rather than physician-scientists, which I found interesting, because this language (at least to me) is more consistent with MD/PhDs in both basic science and clincal research/PP

But yeah, even having one MSTP that is geared toward non-basic science is notable, because penn and harvard were the only two places where i met such a student or one was being considered.

Yeah, that's what he said. I was standing next to you when you had that conversation and I couldn't help overhearing!

 

[blkprl]

You do have a good story.....
I suggest that you retake the mcat and score mid to upper thirties (or a 45 if that's what you want) speaking from experience the mcat has a lot of weight when it comes to mstps because most of the competitive applicants have significant research, papers etc...

as Dr. Q suggested you might also want to boost your undergrad gpa by retaking the prereqs...
that's my $0.02.

I'm sure I'm going to get blasted on this but I'm curious to know from you guys what my chances are for an MD/PhD (or even MD only). Quite frankly, in an ideal world away from the insanity that is med school admissions, I would love doing an Md/PhD (or MD/MS Clinical Investigation) and staying in academic medicine (clinical research mainly). Here's my story. I totally screwed up undergrad and took a few years off to mature and get my life on track - UGPA 2.98. Went to work for big pharma and did 2 years of clinical research there - learned a lot about how trials are designed and completed. I went to get a Master's at a top-10 med school in Biomedical Informatics. Finished with a 3.82 and am getting my thesis published in a OK peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Investigative Medicine).

Now I'm at a phenomenal teaching hospital doing clinical research. I have one co-authorship in Annals of Surgery, 3 in press and 2 preliminarily submitted to other specialty-specific journals. I know most of the data by heart since I've been working closely on each one. My boss has also given me my own project (first authorship) on a pretty timely topic in the field. I've also forged very strong relationships with a few Directors at my hospital to co-publish on a number of interesting novel topics. Even got to sit in on a Senior Scientific Advisory Committee with 2 Nobel Laureates and a host of deans from various med schools (great stuff). I'm working on a paper with a few of these committee members that they're looking to publish in NEJM (this guy has a number of first authorships in NEJM and JAMA). Needless to say, I feel quite comfortable with the research part of MD/PhD admissions.

The problem is my academic record and my MCAT - I took it during my Dark Ages and got a 29S -- borderline even for the lowest tier MD-onlys. But I think I have an interesting story to tell. I'm just concerned about getting electronically weeded out. I plan on applying for 2008 - by then I wouldn't be surprised if I've hit double digit publications of substance (making a meaningful contribution to each of them). I plan on taking the April 2007 MCAT. Now that I have a better understanding of myself and my shortcomings, I am shooting for at least a 33. I've basically written off many of the MSTPs but am so driven by the idea of doing an MD/PhD that I won't let anything stop me from applying. I would be entirely remiss not to.

I know there are a lot of good perspectives here at SDN and wouldn't mind hearing what you think, what you would recommend doing in the next year or so, etc. I recognize that my chances are very slim, but I'm going to do it regardless, so help a man out here .

 

[byong_soo]

Hey tbo,

I am not an expert at MSTP admissions and am an applicant myself, although not 100% set yet. I did hear from people that excellent research experiences can make up for GPAs. I guess it's repeating theme, but if you do well on ur MCAT retake you will be in a good shape! I'm sure you can get interviews in at least a few places, and if u can get to that point, you can show them how promising you are in person! Good luck!!


And adding to this thread is also my grateful request for evaluation as well. (hehe thank you thank you! )
I am more of a traditional applicant than tbo. I don't have my MCAT scores yet, so I'm waiting to see my MCAT scores to decide whether to apply for MSTPs for research-oriented MD programs like UCB-SF joint, yale, UCSD, etc.
I know I only listed top-tier schools. The list is not finalized but I think I will probably add some lower-tier ones and subtract some of the schools that may not have my research of interest. Hopefull have about 18-20 schools (good number no??) What range of MCAT scores do you think I should be expecting to apply for top-tiers? Am I being foolish to apply only to these kinda schools? I know that these questions are probably asked way too often, but I really appreciate you guys' kind help to this year's applicants like me. keke


Criticisms and comments on my list of schools and other app etc will be very very much appreciated. Thank you so much in advance guys~~

 

[byong_soo]

oops forgot to show some love on my last post
here it is:

 

[SeventhSon]

Yeah, that's what he said. I was standing next to you when you had that conversation and I couldn't help overhearing!

hahah damn it i always think it's funny for people to know who i am but i have no clue who they are online. happened to me a couple times.