Academic appointment: MD/PhD vs MD vs PhD?

[localanesthesia]

I am interested in academia... I like to teach, and I like the freedom that academics have.

I am wondering.... does anyone know if it would it be easier to get an academic faculty appointment with both an MD and a PhD, compared to an MD alone or a PhD alone?

Thanks for your advice or answers.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gbwillner]

I am interested in academia... I like to teach, and I like the freedom that academics have.

I am wondering.... does anyone know if it would it be easier to get an academic faculty appointment with both an MD and a PhD, compared to an MD alone or a PhD alone?

Thanks for your advice or answers.

Define "easier"....

it will be much more difficult to get into Med school, and even more difficult to get MD/PhD than just PhD. Plus, you're looking at an extra 4 years + residency (optional). So in this sense it will be much harder.

But assuming that you go through with it, it probably will make it easier to get a faculty position somewhere, assuming similar research success.

 

[solitude]

If you're looking for an academic position of any kind, then yes, MD/PhD is the best path. Compared to a basic science faculty position, obtaining a faculty position in a clinical department of a medical school is much easier. If you are interested in a faculty position spent mostly conducting research, it is still easier with MD/PhD because you will likely see patients on the side: this generates revenue, and also better rationalizes your hiring by a clinical department.

In general an MD/PhD will be a more attractive hire than an MD because the MD/PhD (at least theoretically) better understands the scientific process, which often translates into better research, clinical or otherwise.

 

[dr.z]

I am interested in academia... I like to teach, and I like the freedom that academics have.

I am wondering.... does anyone know if it would it be easier to get an academic faculty appointment with both an MD and a PhD, compared to an MD alone or a PhD alone?

Thanks for your advice or answers.

I don't think its going to make your life easier than MD alone faculty. Maybe easier than PhD alone especially if you are planning to do research and clinical work.

 

[QofQuimica]

I don't think its going to make your life easier than MD alone faculty. Maybe easier than PhD alone especially if you are planning to do research and clinical work.

I agree.

OP, I really think it depends on what kind of work you want to end up doing. I mean, if I had wanted to go on further down the path as a chemistry department faculty member, then an MD wouldn't really be very helpful. In fact, it might discourage departments from hiring me if they thought they'd have to pay me a lot more for my "useless" MD. On the other hand, if you want to do some kind of translational or clinical research, you probably do need the MD in many cases. I think that before you try to decide what schooling path you want to take, you should first give some more specific consideration to what your ultimate career goals are. If you know exactly where you want to end up, then it will be a lot easier for you to figure out what you need to do to get yourself there.

 

[Scottish Chap]

I am interested in academia... I like to teach, and I like the freedom that academics have.

I am wondering.... does anyone know if it would it be easier to get an academic faculty appointment with both an MD and a PhD, compared to an MD alone or a PhD alone?

Thanks for your advice or answers.

You will be judged only on your research accomplishments - not whether you have a Ph.D. or M.D. If you want to conduct academic research, do a Ph.D. because that's the best preparation. If you want to be a physician, do an M.D. because that's the only way to practice medicine (legally). No reason to do both for a career in research.

 

[nrisa]

I think it depends on the type of research you would like to do. For very basic science research (like crystallography, for example), an MD may not be necesary, but if you are interested in translational research or disease-based research, then an MD would be very important. I'm an MD-PhD student and my PI is on the faculty recruitment committee at my school. He tells me that MD-PhD's definitely have an advantage, especially given the push towards translational research at most top institutions. But of course you should enjoy both clinical medicine and research or you will be miserable during your entire training period.Good luck!

 

[Scottish Chap]

I think it depends on the type of research you would like to do. For very basic science research (like crystallography, for example), an MD may not be necesary, but if you are interested in translational research or disease-based research, then an MD would be very important. I'm an MD-PhD student and my PI is on the faculty recruitment committee at my school. He tells me that MD-PhD's definitely have an advantage, especially given the push towards translational research at most top institutions. But of course you should enjoy both clinical medicine and research or you will be miserable during your entire training period.Good luck!

He would tell you that - given your local envornment and his vested interests. That still doesn't mean it's reality. Bottom line: research can really only be learned by years of actually doing the work and an MD doesn't give one a 'leg up' in a research career, IMHO and in my experience. Anecdotally, I know a MD/PhD who never did a residency - he went right into a research post as an x-ray crystallographer. He's now a full professor.