Another Year Off Question--Need Feedback

[FutureDoc4]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hey Everyone, I asked the question below in the research forum and got limited feedback. Since my primary interest is in derm (melanoma, etc), I was wondering if any of you had any thought about career development when comparing the fellowship to a year off Masters in Clinical and Translational Research. I really do enjoy research and I cannot envision my career without it (so, I am not doing this just for it to look "good" but I am wondering if one would be better when applying to residency (because I don't think my training at one place or another would be drastically different)).

Previous Post:
I was wondering if any people could chime in on taking a year off fellowship program (such as Doris Duke, Cloisters etc). vs. taking a year off to complete a MSc in Translational Research (I am an M1 right now)... I am pretty torn between the two options....the benefit of the year off fellowship is that your paid for that year.... but I am not sure what will be better for my career and my development as a scientist.... I am very interested in cancer research and would like to run my own translational research lab one day.. any thoughts on the pros/cons between the two programs? Thanks in advance.

 

[cancerman51]

first, you might want to consider md/phd

second, i would seriously look at hem/onc instead. in contrast to derm which has a history of ending research careers due to inadequate funding and poor mentorship, onc has a much better path towards research careers than dermatology does.

Moreover, if you do derm, you need to rely on derm foundation for fellowship funding, but in onc it is an assumed (and funded) part of your training. as an oncologist, you also have much better access to NIH grants (NCI is much bigger than NIAMS which funds derm).

doris duke is a solid program, so is the NIH cloisters program

 

[Dermocrat]

The bottom line is, the more time you take off to do research, the stronger your application. That's for everyone who wonders if they should do summer research, a year off, or a PhD. The rest of your derm application rests on (in no particular order): letters of recommendation, step 1 score, rank (if you get one), evals in your dean's letter. *edit: the reputation of your med school also matters...I always forget that one.

Now for your particular question (operating under the assumption that you are going into derm, which I think is a fine idea. There is very strong support for people to go into basic/translational research in derm...2+2 programs, research tracks, etc):

The goals of a year off should be (1) publication, (2) training, (3) making your application unique. Getting a masters would certainly add to your uniqueness, and presumably, could/should result in some publication. Also, as you seem to be saying that you want to do more clinical research than lab research, it might be good head start on learning how to do research. So it seems to me that you could fulfill all of the criteria that I mentioned (of course, this is all my opinion. I haven't matched yet, but I think I will be happy in March). Also, I found that many of the programs at which I interviewed require a research project during your residency. You would be ideally positioned to actually do something meaningful with this time.

On the other hand, all good translational research is built upon good basic research. It might be good to get some exposure to the process. It's a lot easier to design good studies in a wet lab than it is on patients. And there's another advantage basic science: if you know your project well, you stand a strong chance of knowing far more about your subject that the people that interview you. If you can explain it well, they will love you.

Sorry to leave you without a piece of advice either way, but I hope I've made some points worth considering.