Any MD-PhD's going into psychiatry out there?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

strangeglove

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Messages
708
Reaction score
98
I'm in my last year of the MSTP and am applying to residencies in psychiatry. My PhD is in the area of cognitive neuroscience. I'm wondering if there are any other MD-PhDs out there who are following the same path. If so, I think it would be great to share thoughts.

Members don't see this ad.
 
If you don't mind (no pun intended) me asking, How did you decide on psychiatry versus neurology, neuroradiology, or other clinical specialty?
 
I'm in my last year of the MSTP and am applying to residencies in psychiatry. My PhD is in the area of cognitive neuroscience. I'm wondering if there are any other MD-PhDs out there who are following the same path. If so, I think it would be great to share thoughts.
Rah! Rah MSTPs going into psychiatry! My PhD was in molecular neurobiology. :)

Vader: For me, everything was right about psych and wrong about neuro. (I didn't consider neuroradiology or other sub because I liked psych so much.) It was obvious to me as soon as I did the rotations.

Clinical: I like to talk to patients (doesn't count if they're comatose). I hate procedures. I like feeling there's something I can do (the arsenal of treatments in psychiatry is much more effective in general than that in neurology).

Research: Psych is wide open. There's not a drop of pathophysiology there yet. That's our job! In comparison, neuro seems closed. They know a lot about the basic mechanisms of many diseases. There's always more to find out, but the framework is there. That's not as exciting for me.

Practical: Lifestyle is huge. Hours in psych are much better; and if you want to take that time and put it towards research, you can get farther faster than you would putting in twice the clinical time, as you would have to in neuro. Funding: there is a ton of money and encouragement out there for basic researchers in psychiatry. I think it may be because the field tends to attract more social-intervention types than basic scientists; but whatever it is, it's fine with me.

Anyways, that's my pitch for psych. ;)
 
Members don't see this ad :)
If you don't mind (no pun intended) me asking, How did you decide on psychiatry versus neurology, neuroradiology, or other clinical specialty?

I'm glad you asked. Actually, your pun is very apt. Psychiatry is the clinical discipline that deals with the mind. As all good monists know, mind = brain. Ergo, psychiatry is about all about neuroscience. It all really depends on how you frame psychiatric questions. You can think about things like anxiety or drug craving in terms of symptoms and treatment, but you can also think about them in terms of the amygdala, the orbitofrontal cortex, the insular cortex, etc. Cognitive neuroscience is especially germane to psychiatry because it specifically addresses questions of mind, as opposed to molecular or cellular neurosciences, where there are a few emergent levels to pass through before you get to a memory or a feeling. For this reason, I hope that my cellular/molecular neuroscientist colleagues (a big shout out!) are steeping themselves in cognitive neuroscience if they hope to develop treatments for mental illnesses.

As for neurology: Historically, neurologists have studied things like memory and language (think Wernicke, Broca, Damasio). This is because neurologists have access to patients who have brain damage and develop strange and fascinating mental impairments. Interestingly, the clinical application of this research to disease is more in psychiatry than neurology. The fact that a patient forgets something or cannot recognize a face after stroke, epileptic seizure or Alzheimer disease does not change the antiplatet drug, antiseizure drug or the cholinesterase inhibitor that you will give them. However, it may affect how we think about things like schizophrenia and panic disorder. Modern neurological research is largely concerned with things like molecular mechanisms of cell death and excitability, inflammation and vascular physiology. These are questions that could just as easily be asked about the heart.

Neuroradiology is an interesting area, but, again, it has little to do with the mind. Unless, of course, one is studying functional imaging, which is a very important technique that has helped unravel brain-mind relationships. However, from what I can tell, most MDs doing functional imaging research are either psychiatrists or neurologists. The neuroradiologists who are doing this kind of work are really involved in the method more than the brain theory. Neuroradiology requires a good understanding of neuroanatomy (which all good psychiatrists and neurologists should have, but, unfortunately, many lack). Otherwise, it is a technical discipline concerned with things like tissue fat and water content, which, again, are questions that could pertain just as easily to the heart.

So, there is my long-winded answer. I hope it has elucidated why a neuroscientist would want to go into psychiatry.
 
Thank you both for the great replies.

Did you every consider combined training in neuropsychiatry?

How about behavioral neurology?

Thanks!
 
Thank you both for the great replies.

Did you every consider combined training in neuropsychiatry?

How about behavioral neurology?

Thanks!

Sure. It seems like neuropscyhiatry deals primarily with psychiatric consequences of diseases that have traditionally been considered the province of neurology, such as Huntington's disease, Alzheimer disease and Parkinson' s disease. Another way of looking at it is that neuropsychiatry deals with many of the mental and emotional aspects of diseases that cause gross brain pathology (i.e. you can see it on structural MRI), such as dysexecutive syndromes, agitation and depression. There seems to be quite a bit of overlap with geriatric psychiatry, since many of the these patients are older. Although neuropsychiatry has the word "neuro" in it, it is not really about neurobiological explanations of mental illnesses, so much as it is about a particular set of diseases.

Behavioral neurology is concerned with many of these same disorders. It seems that they are really experts in Alzheimer disease, although I've observed Alzheimer disease being better managed by psychiatrists, specifically geriatric psychiatrists, than by neurologists. This is because psychiatrists are generally better at managing the psychosocial aspects of Alzheimer disease, which are paramount. Behavioral neurology is not so interesting to me because there are only so many Alzheimer patients that I can see in a day.

I'm much more interested in things like mood disorders, anxiety disorders and disorders of volition (e.g. eating disorders, addiction). These fall under general psychiatry, or other subspecialties that do not have the word neuro in front of them. Eventually, all psychiatry will be neuropsychiatry. I just hope that medical schools will start to teach neuroscience for psychiatrists trying to understand mental illness, rather than to neurologists trying to figure out where a lesion is. A MRI can do that just fine, and knowing where the lesion is doesn't do much to change how you treat someone.
 
I'm in my last year of the MSTP and am applying to residencies in psychiatry. My PhD is in the area of cognitive neuroscience. I'm wondering if there are any other MD-PhDs out there who are following the same path. If so, I think it would be great to share thoughts.
I'm not as far along as you are (current M1), but psych is one of the specialties I'm thinking about. My PhD is in pharmaceutical chemistry, and I would like to end up in a specialty where having a chemistry background would be useful. (I am doing separate MD and PhD degrees.)

Vader: I haven't ruled neuro or the neuro subspecialties out yet, actually. I just don't feel ready to commit one way or the other on neuro since I don't have much experience with it.
 
Thank you both for the great replies.
Did you every consider combined training in neuropsychiatry?
How about behavioral neurology?
Thanks!
Frankly, I am not sure of the purpose of doing neuropsychiatry, or of getting double-boarded in neuro and psych, for someone who plans to continue in research. Basically you are doing 1-3 years more of postgraduate training, essentially in order to specialize in a particular subset of diseases (mostly Alzheimer's and other geriatric dementias). But there is no patient population that requires a trained neuropsychiatrist. You could see these same patients as a neurologist, or as a psychiatrist (with the appropriate choice of electives in your residency training of course).

Now I am sure it is very nice to have a broader exposure to the sister discipline; but is it worth another 1-3 years of time away from research? For me, I would rather take that time and put it into a new research direction.

As far as behavioral neurology is concerned, I don't know enough about it to say anything. I had an attending who classified himself as a behavioral neurologist, but as far as I could see he was a regular neurologist who specialized in epilepsy. I am not sure whether the 'behavioral' part was in reference to some specific part of his training or whether it was just a phrase he used to characterize his professional interests.
 
I'm not as far along as you are (current M1), but psych is one of the specialties I'm thinking about. My PhD is in pharmaceutical chemistry, and I would like to end up in a specialty where having a chemistry background would be useful. (I am doing separate MD and PhD degrees.)

Vader: I haven't ruled neuro or the neuro subspecialties out yet, actually. I just don't feel ready to commit one way or the other on neuro since I don't have much experience with it.

Yes, I am sort of in the same boat, although my Ph.D. is in neuroscience. My work in the lab has been straddling the border of neurology and psychiatry (studying a knockout mouse that has some interesting behavioral manifestations that relate to prefrontal cortex function). For clinical specialty, I am considering neurology, psychiatry or something on the border.

I guess I will have to see how my clinical rotations play out and whether I enjoy talking to patients and/or tapping reflexes, what types of patients I am more interested in treating, and how I "fit in" with other people in the two fields.
 
I think that the most important determinant of which specialty you go into is whether you enjoy the day to day activities of that specialty. In psychiatry, it is critical that you have a facility with and enjoy talking to patients and listening to their problems. Many times, these are problems that neurologists will roll their eyes at (think about the patient with migraines or with "pseudoseizures" who also has depression and somatoform disorder). I've wanted to go into psychiatry since college. It was in my mind as I chose a lab for my PhD. My PhD these asked psychiatric questions. Because I was so focused on psychiatry, as the time approached for me to return to the clinics - which was time that I did not see patients - I became quite anxious about the possibility that I would dislike the clinical side of psychiatry, especially since so many students I had met had had negative experiences with it. Fortunately, doing my junior clerkship in psychiatry was a blast and it helped to confirm my decision t become a psychiatrist (what a relief!). I guess my advice is: Try to get some exposure to the specialty you want to go into before and during your PhD if you are in an MD-PhD program. It can really help shape your thoughts about what you want to do your PhD in. It can also help you figure out if a preconceived PhD idea is in line with your clinical interests.
 
I'm currently applying to MD/PhD programs as we speak, and I have always had a deep interest in psychiatry, particularly in depressive, anxious, or aggressive behaviors. I was hoping you all could spare a few pointers on how exactly you chose your lab for research, how not to lock yourself in to studying one disorder, how to best gain exposure to the different fields of research in psychiatry and neuroscience, how your views have changed over your years of schooling...

Also, what would be the best avenues for me to pursue as far as gearing up my knowledge of current research in these fields? What journals do you recommend, etc...

Thanks for any help!
 
I'm currently applying to MD/PhD programs as we speak, and I have always had a deep interest in psychiatry, particularly in depressive, anxious, or aggressive behaviors. I was hoping you all could spare a few pointers on how exactly you chose your lab for research, how not to lock yourself in to studying one disorder, how to best gain exposure to the different fields of research in psychiatry and neuroscience, how your views have changed over your years of schooling...

Also, what would be the best avenues for me to pursue as far as gearing up my knowledge of current research in these fields? What journals do you recommend, etc...

Thanks for any help!

My advice would be to keep an open mind during your first 2 years of medical school. This is when you will get the most exposure you will ever have to the scientific basic of a broad array of clinical disciplines. This is a great opportunity to figure out what sort of diseases interest you from a pathophysiological perspective. One thing that you may want to sort out relatively quickly is whether you are interested more in cognitive/behavioral/systems neuroscience or in molecular/cellular/developmental neuroscience. The approaches to the brain are quite different in these and often people on one side do not pay much attention to the research of people on the other side (try to avoid this). To get a good sense of the breadth of the filed, I would recommend reading the Journal of Neuroscience, Nature Neuroscience, Science and Nature. Given your stated interests, I would consider looking into the field of affective neuroscience. You may want to read some key books in this area, such as Descartes' Error and The Feeling of What Happens by Antonio Damasio, The Emotional Brain and The Synaptic Self by Joe Ledoux. You may also want to look into the work of Richard Davidson, Raymond Dolan and Edmund Rolls. There are also some psychiatrists interested in these sorts of questions, such as Scott Rauch.
 
Yes, I am sort of in the same boat, although my Ph.D. is in neuroscience. My work in the lab has been straddling the border of neurology and psychiatry (studying a knockout mouse that has some interesting behavioral manifestations that relate to prefrontal cortex function). For clinical specialty, I am considering neurology, psychiatry or something on the border.

I guess I will have to see how my clinical rotations play out and whether I enjoy talking to patients and/or tapping reflexes, what types of patients I am more interested in treating, and how I "fit in" with other people in the two fields.

Why would you say that your research straddles the border of neurology and psychiatry? I would say that research on prefrontal cortex function is squarely in the domain of psychiatry. Psychiatrists are the ones who are interested in things like working memory, attention and emotion (all functions of the prefrontal cortex, as you probably know), because observing abnormalities in these functions helps them to diagnose and treat specific illnesses. Most neurologists don't care whether the lesion is in the prefrontal cortex or in the occipital cortex, except when they are trying to impress each other during rounds. The key clinical question they are concerned with is how the lesion got there (i.e. underlying pathology) and how to prevent another one. These are, of course, very important questions, but they do not require knowledge of what the prefrontal cortex actually does.

I wonder how many people out there are considering neurology as a career because they think that this is the field that deals with the mind-brain connection? It is really not, in my opinion (I formed this opinion after I did my neurology rotation). It is more like internal medicine for the brain. Now, there are many very smart neurologists out there asking very interesting questions about the mind-brain, such as the neural basis of language, memory and emotion. However, there is not much that a neurologist can do with this information except be fascinated and pass it on to psychiatrists, who have the ability to use it to actually help their patients. This includes helping patients with neurological diseases such as Alzheimer, Parkinson disease and stroke, who develop behavioral disturbances.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Why would you say that your research straddles the border of neurology and psychiatry? I would say that research on prefrontal cortex function is squarely in the domain of psychiatry. Psychiatrists are the ones who are interested in things like working memory, attention and emotion (all functions of the prefrontal cortex, as you probably know), because observing abnormalities in these functions helps them to diagnose and treat specific illnesses. Most neurologists don't care whether the lesion is in the prefrontal cortex or in the occipital cortex, except when they are trying to impress each other during rounds. The key clinical question they are concerned with is how the lesion got there (i.e. underlying pathology) and how to prevent another one. These are, of course, very important questions, but they do not require knowledge of what the prefrontal cortex actually does.

I wonder how many people out there are considering neurology as a career because they think that this is the field that deals with the mind-brain connection? It is really not, in my opinion (I formed this opinion after I did my neurology rotation). It is more like internal medicine for the brain. Now, there are many very smart neurologists out there asking very interesting questions about the mind-brain, such as the neural basis of language, memory and emotion. However, there is not much that a neurologist can do with this information except be fascinated and pass it on to psychiatrists, who have the ability to use it to actually help their patients. This includes helping patients with neurological diseases such as Alzheimer, Parkinson disease and stroke, who develop behavioral disturbances.

Your points are well taken, but I think that I must have had quite a different experience so far with neurology and psychiatry, and particularly with behavioral neurology. The behavioral neurology that I have experienced (which may be unique to our institution) is quite concerned with things like working memory, attention and emotion, among other cognitive and behavioral functions, because these aspects, as you mentioned, have a profound impact on functional status and outcomes. Here, patients are evaluated by a multi-disciplinary team (neurologists, neuropsychologists, geriatricians, nurses, social workers, etc). Patients are indeed often prescribed antipsychotics and anti-depressants for controlling behavioral manifestations of their disorders.

Historically, many of the great advances in our understanding of the mind-brain connection have actually come from neurologists, at least in part due to neurology's historical focus on the physical substrate (i.e. the brain). For years psychiatry had ignored the brain and focused squarely on the mind. While this isn't so true any longer, psychiatric residencies (at least the few I am familiar with) still teach things like psychoanalysis and Freudian concepts of the mind, while often neglecting neuroanatomy, physiology, genetics, biochemistry, etc. It is truly unfortunate for us (and for patients) that because of historical circumstances, we have an artificial fragmentation of American neurology and psychiatry. From what I have seen, patient care can benefit from a multi-disciplinary approach.

From a research perspective, at my institution, the faculty conduct research that often crosses the artificial departmental divisions, and that crosses disciplines (i.e. combining genetics with physiology and behavior). Again, here there is great benefit derived from crossing traditional boundaries. Many of the high-impact papers in scientific journals these days have resulted from a multi-disciplinary approach. I hope I live to see the day when young physician-scientists who are interested in brain-mind connections no longer must be forced to choose one track (or else spend eternity in training!).
 
Your points are well taken, but I think that I must have had quite a different experience so far with neurology and psychiatry, and particularly with behavioral neurology. The behavioral neurology that I have experienced (which may be unique to our institution) is quite concerned with things like working memory, attention and emotion, among other cognitive and behavioral functions, because these aspects, as you mentioned, have a profound impact on functional status and outcomes. Here, patients are evaluated by a multi-disciplinary team (neurologists, neuropsychologists, geriatricians, nurses, social workers, etc). Patients are indeed often prescribed antipsychotics and anti-depressants for controlling behavioral manifestations of their disorders
Historically, many of the great advances in our understanding of the mind-brain connection have actually come from neurologists, at least in part due to neurology's historical focus on the physical substrate (i.e. the brain). For years psychiatry had ignored the brain and focused squarely on the mind. While this isn't so true any longer, psychiatric residencies (at least the few I am familiar with) still teach things like psychoanalysis and Freudian concepts of the mind, while often neglecting neuroanatomy, physiology, genetics, biochemistry, etc. It is truly unfortunate for us (and for patients) that because of historical circumstances, we have an artificial fragmentation of American neurology and psychiatry. From what I have seen, patient care can benefit from a multi-disciplinary approach.

From a research perspective, at my institution, the faculty conduct research that often crosses the artificial departmental divisions, and that crosses disciplines (i.e. combining genetics with physiology and behavior). Again, here there is great benefit derived from crossing traditional boundaries. Many of the high-impact papers in scientific journals these days have resulted from a multi-disciplinary approach. I hope I live to see the day when young physician-scientists who are interested in brain-mind connections no longer must be forced to choose one track (or else spend eternity in training!).

Vader - I agree with much of what you say, especially your lamentation about the fragmentation of psychiatry and neurology (poor Freud was a neurologist whose bearded visage became the archetype for psychiatrists). Certainly, behavioral neurology has historically been an area that has fostered research into the mind-brain connection. This is due to the fact that behavioral neurologists have special access to patients with brain damage, which affords them a window into the mind-brain that few others can have (I know because my PhD, which studied lesion patients, was done in a behavioral neurology department). Sadly, however, the ability of behavioral neurologists to use this knowledge to improve their patients lives is extremely limited. Yes, there are the behavior management aspects, as you mentioned, but these can be handled just as easily by psychiatrists, who know a good deal about things like antidepressants and antipsychotics, as well as the psychosocial aspects of their patients' problems.

My point is that I agree behavioral neurologists have access to very interesting patients that provide a special insight into the mind-brain connection. Indeed, I would strongly consider behavioral neurology as a specialty if, for example, I wanted to have access to stroke patients in order to do research on how damage to specific neural systems affected specific cognitive functions. However, most of this knowledge will be used by neurobiologically oriented psychiatric researchers (there are many) who are looking to target cognitive/behavioral/pharmacologic therapies at specific neural systems that are disrupted in psychiatric disorders. It won't be long before psychiatric residency training will catch up. Neurology researchers, in contrast, are mostly looking at things like cellular and molecular mechanisms that mediate neuronal injury and dysfunction in stroke, epilepsy and degenerative diseases. As I mentioned before, this is research that treats the brain as an organ, rather than as a substrate for mind processes. To see evidence for what I'm talking about, look at the research rosters of the top neurology and psychiatry departments. How many neurologists are actually studying the mind-brain connection out there? Now ask yourself how many psychiatrists are doing this?
 
Hi, I'm a PGY-1 psych resident, and a MSTP graduate.

As for how I got to psychiatry... I had an interest in neuroscience ever since I took a neurophysiology course in college. I ended up doing some electrophysiology research, and after I decided to do the MD/PhD, I ended up in a lab doing more of the same. Clinically, I figured I was going to do something neuro: neurology, neuropath, neurorads, maybe psych but I didn't know which exactly. All I knew was that I liked brains.

However, after almost a year, a whole lot of things started to change at once. The project was going nowhere, I was bored looking at oscilloscopes all day, I started taking the required behavioral neuro class, and a new faculty member moved in next door who was doing all of this cool behavioral and functional neuroanatomy work. I realized my interests had changed, that behavior was the aspect of neuroscience that got me excited. Turned out that the new faculty member was interested in stuff my advisor was doing and vice versa, so I started a new project with the both of them as co-advisors, and things worked out beautifully. My new project involved sexual behavior and reward circuitry in rats. Besides being something I was intellectually passionate about, it was perfect from a practical standpoint, because I used so many varied techniques - behavior, immunohistochemistry, tract tracing, genomics, etc.

So this would be my advice for picking a project: 1) the obvious, pick a mentor you can learn something from. 2) pick a project that lets you use a wide range of techniques, not because it's terribly important to know the specific techniques, but because it's important to learn different ways to approach a specific problem, esp in an inherently multidisciplinary field such as neuroscience. 3) don't be afraid to switch labs, better to lose a year than stay on the wrong path.

Anyway, when I entered my clerkships, I was hoping I would like psych because on an intellectual level it seemed like such a perfect fit with my interests in behavioral neuroscience. And I did - first and foremost, I loved the patients. Most people have a binary reaction to psych - they either love or hate it, and I think it boils down to whether you like the patients. Also, I liked the fact that the field is in a state of growth and evolution, and that at this point what we don't know far outweighs what we do know. As a scientist, I find that exciting. And I like that in addition to the science, pysch is also intimately concerend with things outside of medicine like social issues, psychology, philosophy, politics. The lifestyle is nice too - amenable to both research and an outside life.

When I did my neuro rotation, I kept an open mind. But I really did not enjoy the day-to-day practice of neurology. Like someone said above, it's like IM for the brain. In some ways, it's kind of the opposite of psych in that they can diagnose and explain the mechanism for a lot of pathology, but they can't do a heckuva lot about it. Whereas with psych, we have some meds that can really impact people's symptoms and improve their quality of life, but we're still pretty sketchy on how they work. The latter makes for a more exciting future IMO. As for the combined residency option, I thought about it very briefly. I think many people who go into psych have a moment of pause where they consider the possibility that they won't be a "real doctor." But my interests are how the brain controls behavior. Although some neurologists are interested in this, the bulk of neurology is concerned with how the brain controls motor/sensory function and peripheral nerves and whatnot, and I didn't want to spend even more years in training studying stuff I'm not interested in.

As far as residency goes, the basic structure of a psychiatry residency is already set up to make a research track very feasable. Most are front-loaded so that you do your hospital rotations and call in the first 2 years. The third year is outpatient, and there is some time for research. And the 4th year at most programs is usually 80-90% elective, which of course can be set aside for research. Some (like mine) have a formal research track with extra didactics and protected time, but it's not usually a separate application process like the IM fasttrack programs. Also, the field is hungry for people with basic science research experience and interests. I was told by some of my faculty mentors that as an MD/PhD, I would pretty much have my pick of where to do residency. I didn't believe it until I started interviewing, but it's true. I have good stats but not stellar derm applicant stats, and was pleasantly surprised to find that I was so "desirable." Didn't stop me from stressing out about the match though :rolleyes:

Anyway, hope this was helpful. Please excuse the typos, damn finger bandaids, damn cat.
 
The difference between neuro and psych might actually be smaller than you think. Firstly they are of the same lincensure board and the neuro/psych docs often have similiar personalities at a hospital and get along pretty well (lots of them get married, in fact.) Even the exams cover 25% of the other specialty. I think clearly if you want someone to manage your psych meds you'd be much better off going to a neurologist than some other IM specialty if a psychiatrist is not available.

Neither specialty gets a lot of money. Neither is very comeptitive. The top people in both tend to remain in academia. It is possible to do crossover fellowships like sleep, behavioral, addiction, etc.

I think for neuro MSTP the decision for neuro vs. psych can be made later rather than sooner. The key decision I think is vs. neurosurg, vs. neurorads, vs. neuropath, vs. optho, vs. anesth. etc. Those are totally different specialties with different lifestyles and different research options that might need to be considered carefully.

The few differences btw neuro. and psych. that I'm aware of. Psych residency has more CBT/analysis stuff, neuro has more peripheral stuff (which should really be in rheumatology or something). Neuro can do interventional these days (but, really, as an MSTP?! are you crazy??), psych can't. Neuro residencies tend to have more commitments, less time for research, but gives a better training medically (personal opinion). If i get a stomach problem I would go see a neurologist before I see a psychiatrist if a GI isn't available. Etc. Both have relatively good lifestyle, but psych tends to have a better schedule. There tend to be more women in psych than neuro but more FMG go for neuro (for lack of a good command of English?)
 
I'm very pleased to see this thread picking up like this. Let's keep it up!

I think that the choice of specialty for the neuroscience-interested MD-PhD student is very important, not only for the student, but also for determining where the fields of psychiatry and neurology will be heading in the next 20 years. I predict that the number of MD-PhD students getting PhDs in neuroscience will increase more than in any other field in the coming years. Where these students go will have a big impact on how neuroscience research is applied to clinical problems.
 
The difference between neuro and psych might actually be smaller than you think. Firstly they are of the same lincensure board and the neuro/psych docs often have similiar personalities at a hospital and get along pretty well (lots of them get married, in fact.) Even the exams cover 25% of the other specialty. I think clearly if you want someone to manage your psych meds you'd be much better off going to a neurologist than some other IM specialty if a psychiatrist is not available.

Neither specialty gets a lot of money. Neither is very comeptitive. The top people in both tend to remain in academia. It is possible to do crossover fellowships like sleep, behavioral, addiction, etc.

I think for neuro MSTP the decision for neuro vs. psych can be made later rather than sooner. The key decision I think is vs. neurosurg, vs. neurorads, vs. neuropath, vs. optho, vs. anesth. etc. Those are totally different specialties with different lifestyles and different research options that might need to be considered carefully.

The few differences btw neuro. and psych. that I'm aware of. Psych residency has more CBT/analysis stuff, neuro has more peripheral stuff (which should really be in rheumatology or something). Neuro can do interventional these days (but, really, as an MSTP?! are you crazy??), psych can't. Neuro residencies tend to have more commitments, less time for research, but gives a better training medically (personal opinion). If i get a stomach problem I would go see a neurologist before I see a psychiatrist if a GI isn't available. Etc. Both have relatively good lifestyle, but psych tends to have a better schedule. There tend to be more women in psych than neuro but more FMG go for neuro (for lack of a good command of English?)

I think I tend to look at the two specialties (psych & neuro) in a similar way. After reading more, I found that neuropsychiatry/behavioral neurology fellowship (now a single fellowship) sounds pretty interesting, although it would be an additional 2 years of training. This relatively young field seems to have a lot of cross-over in terms of both patients and research.

Not to change the subject, but have any of you read Eric Kandel's new autobiography "In Search of Memory"? He has quite an amazing story of personal and career development...
 
Does Johns Hopkins offer the MD/PhD in Psychiatry in the MSTP? I looked on their site and I don't see it. That's kind of weird because every other college I've looked at does.
 
Does John Hopkins offer the MD/PhD in Psychiatry in the MSTP? I looked on their site and I don't see it. That's kind of weird because every other college I've looked at does.

As far as I know, there is no such thing as a PhD in psychiatry, much as there is no such thing as a PhD in surgery or internal medicine. Psychiatry is a clinical specialty. PhD areas that may be relevant to psychiatry include neuroscience, psychology (perhaps you have mistaken this for psychiatry), anthropology, molecular biology, genetics, physiology, etc. PhDs are given in basic sciences or humanities, not in clinical disciplines. Perhaps you are applying to a different set of MSTPs than I did, but I don't know of any that offer a PhD in psychiatry. I know for a fact that Hopkins does not.

Also, the PhD options for an MSTP student are usually a function of which graduate programs are available at a given school. In other words, there is no PhD that is only available to MSTP students. By the same token, even though a school may offer a PhD in a specific field, the MSTP may not allow you to do a PhD in this area.
 
Sorry, it was poor wording on my part. I saw that one of the students in the MSTP program at Stanford had her department listed as Psychiatry. Johns Hopkins doesn't seem to have that department listed in the MD/PHD section. I guess, as you said, students just specialize in one of the areas you listed. I just wondered why Psychiatry wasn't listed as a department.
 
Sometimes they do list the MD/PhDs according to the home department of their mentor. For example, I see my department listed as Radiology sometimes because that's my PI's primary appointment, even though my PhD is in the department of Biophysics. It's just a nuance.
 
Perhaps some of the more senior folks could elaborate on what types of experiences you had during your psych clerkship that sparked or confirmed your interest in psychiatry?

For the psych clerkship, are there particular elements that we should look out for? Questions to ask?

Thanks again for this valuable thread! :)
 
Top