Applying MD/ PhD to Harvard possible with just one pub?

[futuredocn]

Hello guys, I am in a little bit of a dilemma. I plan on applying MD/PhD this coming cycle. However, I am not so confident about my research accomplishments. I only have one first author pub in a good journal in an area of research I don't plan on entirely pursuing (it's in radiology, but I want to work in a nuclear cardiology lab). I am from a small LAC, so securing research opportunities is extremely challenging. I have worked in a cardiovascular research lab this past summer (around 400 hours, but no pubs) and I am certain that's the field of research I want to pursue. I am currently a college senior graduating this May. From then on, I will be working in a nuclear cardiology lab at Harvard Medical school while applying to med school. With all other parts of my application being strong (GPA, MCAT, clinical and nonclinical volunteering etc.), do I even consider applying MD/ PhD to Harvard or any other top institution with just one publication in radiology and no publication in cardiology if I want to be in nuclear cardiology lab?

I am a student of color if that makes a difference.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[candbgirl]

What are your stats and ECs like? If you don’t apply you won’t get in.

 

[DrDriven07]

If you have great research along with competitive stats for MD/PhD then you will be competitive at Harvard along with the rest of the top programs. I only had a 2nd author publication in strictly basic science (not in my field of interest), and I have interviewed at several top programs including Harvard this cycle. Lastly, I am also URM FYI.

You can PM me if you want to chat more about this topic or see my stats.

 

[KnightDoc]

What are your stats and ECs like? If you don’t apply you won’t get in.

This^^^^. Harvard is, well, Harvard, and it's a long shot for everyone.

That said, people are accepted each and every year. No telling how an application from a URM will hit them, but a first author pub in a good publication is great. It shows you are accomplished and productive.

My understanding is that your pubs, which are not nearly a hard requirement in the first place, absolutely do not have to be in your area of future interest, but I am admittedly not an expert here. In any event, your application sounds great regardless. Why wouldn't you take your shot, win, lose or draw?

People on SDN are far from infallible, and it's your future. I wouldn't consider not applying. Your hedge is applying broadly as opposed to not applying T10 at all! As @candbgirl mentioned, you didn't provide stats. They are probably more important to your chances at T10 than how many pubs you have.

 

[MyOdyssey]

There's a Physician Scientist subforum on SDN.

Physician Scientists

For students interested & current students in Physician Scientist Training Programs or biomedical research programs.

forums.studentdoctor.net

You can post a What are My Chances thread there.

There's a What are My Chances sticky thread there that explains the general chances for MD/PhD candidates and the factors that medical schools consider:

What are my chances? Read before asking. [Updated 2019]

Hey everyone, To help demystify this process, I want to address the frequently asked admissions question about what does it take to get into a program. The standard disclaimer applies. We're anonymous Internet guys and we don't know you personally. You may look great on paper but not get in for...

forums.studentdoctor.net

That subforum tends to draw many of the physician scientists.

As for shooting your shot, the question is not do you apply this year or not at all. A lot of MD/PhD candidates take one or more gap years to bolster their research portfolios.

 

[futuredocn]

What are your stats and ECs like? If you don’t apply you won’t get in.

Thank you guys so much for the feedback, it lifted up my spirits!
Stats are:
3.88 cGPA, 3.86 sGPA
518 MCAT
Around 1000 hours of research (three separate research, only summer )
Nearly 500 hours of clinical volunteering
400 hours nonclinical volunteering
Strong letters
1 pub as first author, named outstanding researcher for a summer of research, several poster presentations and leadership roles.

 

[futuredocn]

If you have great research along with competitive stats for MD/PhD then you will be competitive at Harvard along with the rest of the top programs. I only had a 2nd author publication in strictly basic science (not in my field of interest), and I have interviewed at several top programs including Harvard this cycle. Lastly, I am also URM FYI.

You can PM me if you want to chat more about this topic or see my stats.

Hey! Thank you so much for the words of encouragement! I tried messaging you, but it says I am limited from contacting you or viewing your profile. Can you please message me first? Maybe I can pm you after you start a chat first.

 

[futuredocn]

There's a Physician Scientist subforum on SDN.

Physician Scientists

For students interested & current students in Physician Scientist Training Programs or biomedical research programs.

forums.studentdoctor.net

You can post a What are My Chances thread there.

There's a What are My Chances sticky thread there that explains the general chances for MD/PhD candidates and the factors that medical schools consider:

What are my chances? Read before asking. [Updated 2019]

Hey everyone, To help demystify this process, I want to address the frequently asked admissions question about what does it take to get into a program. The standard disclaimer applies. We're anonymous Internet guys and we don't know you personally. You may look great on paper but not get in for...

forums.studentdoctor.net

That subforum tends to draw many of the physician scientists.

As for shooting your shot, the question is not do you apply this year or not at all. A lot of MD/PhD candidates take one or more gap years to bolster their research portfolios.

These are so good! Thanks a lot!

 

[candbgirl]

Thank you guys so much for the feedback, it lifted up my spirits!
Stats are:
3.88 cGPA, 3.86 sGPA
518 MCAT
Around 1000 hours of research (three separate research, only summer )
Nearly 500 hours of clinical volunteering
400 hours nonclinical volunteering
Strong letters
1 pub as first author, named outstanding researcher for a summer of research, several poster presentations and leadership roles.

I think Harvard and other schools will be impressed by your application. Don’t forget to apply to your state schools too. And make sure your letters are strong.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

You will be competitive but never set your sights on a single school. MD applications are like lottery tickets (probably more like a small raffle as opposed to powerball).

Apply broadly to peer schools. You may get rejected from Harvard, Yale, Stanford but get into Columbia, Hopkins. It’s impossible to predict for a single school so better to approach it as a basket.

 

[Kyler Mwwrray]

Thank you guys so much for the feedback, it lifted up my spirits!
Stats are:
3.88 cGPA, 3.86 sGPA
518 MCAT
Around 1000 hours of research (three separate research, only summer )
Nearly 500 hours of clinical volunteering
400 hours nonclinical volunteering
Strong letters
1 pub as first author, named outstanding researcher for a summer of research, several poster presentations and leadership roles.

You have a strong application. If you don’t get into harvard you’ll get in somewhere.

 

[VaultArmitage]

Thank you guys so much for the feedback, it lifted up my spirits!
Stats are:
3.88 cGPA, 3.86 sGPA
518 MCAT
Around 1000 hours of research (three separate research, only summer )
Nearly 500 hours of clinical volunteering
400 hours nonclinical volunteering
Strong letters
1 pub as first author, named outstanding researcher for a summer of research, several poster presentations and leadership roles.

Just a quick note from a current applicant. 1000 hours of research is quite low for MD/Ph.D. Admissions. Most applicants have 4000+ hours at least with 1-2 gap years. I'm a traditional applicant with about 3500 hours from doing research year-round since freshmen year and I've been told that has hurt me.

Realistically you'll need more research hours I think. Of all the interviews I've done so far, I've only met one other traditional applicant straight out of undergrad. I think this highlights the emphasis programs place on longitudinal research.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Why would hours be more important than output?

 

[DrDriven07]

Why would hours be more important than output?

I believe MD/PhD programs look mainly for longevity in doing basic or translational research. Specifically, they like to see that you have done research for multiple years to make sure you not only know what you are getting into but also so that you can hopefully develop some independence in your work that you can speak about in a interview. It has become increasingly common that MD/PhD applicants take gap years. I have met very few on the interview trail that have not taken a gap year to pursue additional independent research.

Output in terms of publications can be solely based on luck (being at the right place at the right time). Presentations is a good output in my opinion as it will allow you to display ownership in your work

 

[LizzyM]

I'd also say that you need to highlight your skill set and how it meshes with specific investigators at that particular school. A big part of the MSTP at any school is finding a "lab" in which to do your dissertation research. Are there PIs at Harvard (and elsewhere) doing work you have the capacity to contribute to and that would use the research skills you already have and help you build on those skills?

It is not my field but radiology and nuclear cardiology could have a some overlap in which case you could make a case for being a good fit and for the skills that went into your radiology publication being applicable to nuclear cardiology research as well.

 

[futuredocn]

Just a quick note from a current applicant. 1000 hours of research is quite low for MD/Ph.D. Admissions. Most applicants have 4000+ hours at least with 1-2 gap years. I'm a traditional applicant with about 3500 hours from doing research year-round since freshmen year and I've been told that has hurt me.

Realistically you'll need more research hours I think. Of all the interviews I've done so far, I've only met one other traditional applicant straight out of undergrad. I think this highlights the emphasis programs place on longitudinal research.

I will have 2000 more projected hours by the time of application. Does that make any difference at all?

 

[sarcasm]

You will get more insight posting in the “physician scientist” forum here where nearly all of the MD/PhD applicants and a few MSTP program directors hang out—some of the replies in this thread are not totally accurate/comprehensive in what makes a good candidate (let alone the caliber of candidate that gets accepted to the MSTP at Harvard) for MD/PhD or MSTP programs. Posting in the physician scientist forum will help you get the in-depth advice you’re looking for. Hope that helps and good luck!

 

[jb2000]

Im in the camp that hours don't matter at all and are just used to proxy for effort put in if there is no other measurable output metric for that activity...but if OP already has a first author publication, there's no need to go use effort since the effort is already exemplified in a piece of scientific literature they probably had a very large role in creating. OP you should be fine.

 

[skankhunt42]

Hello guys, I am in a little bit of a dilemma. I plan on applying MD/PhD this coming cycle. However, I am not so confident about my research accomplishments. I only have one first author pub in a good journal in an area of research I don't plan on entirely pursuing (it's in radiology, but I want to work in a nuclear cardiology lab). I am from a small LAC, so securing research opportunities is extremely challenging. I have worked in a cardiovascular research lab this past summer (around 400 hours, but no pubs) and I am certain that's the field of research I want to pursue. I am currently a college senior graduating this May. From then on, I will be working in a nuclear cardiology lab at Harvard Medical school while applying to med school. With all other parts of my application being strong (GPA, MCAT, clinical and nonclinical volunteering etc.), do I even consider applying MD/ PhD to Harvard or any other top institution with just one publication in radiology and no publication in cardiology if I want to be in nuclear cardiology lab?

I am a student of color if that makes a difference.

This is the quintessential SDN post

 

[deleted1114112]

.

 

[guytakingboards]

Take this for what its worth, as I'm not a MD/PhD, but when I semi-involved in a clinical/PhD tract recruitment the other people at my institution weren't particularly concerned with the longest CV. (I do have a basic science Masters degree and an MD)

Obviously, not being a complete newb to research is important. But what we looked at was:

-Can the person speak intelligently on their prior research experience? What were the goals of their project(s)? How were they involved? What are the applications and/or future directions of that work?

-What are their career goals and how would the research tract enable them to pursue/reach their goals? Do they truly have an understanding of the research process, from the conception of an idea to fundraising to grant execution to publication?

Long story short, we were more concerned with future potential rather than past performance. Past performance is certainly a helpful indicator of future performance but I've also seen:

1) People with relatively short CV's who just "get research" and know what the training will involve and what it will enable them to do in the future.
2) People with longer CV's who spent 100's if not 1000's of hours running Western Blots but don't give me the vibe that they got the full picture of what they were doing (or that they could run a basic science lab or translational/clinical team in the future).

 

[mudfud26]

It matters because undergraduate research output is highly dependent on your lab, PI, and circumstantial factors, and pretty much luck at times. If you get a first author journal in a prestigious journal after <1,000 hours of research, you're either doing some sort of data hoarding clinical research, or you were given an entire project from start to finish that happened to work out perfectly. PhDs in translational sciences/basic sciences work full-time to get what, a few pubs during their entire PhD?

I don't particularly know much about radiology research and the degree of effort it takes to produce that pub, or what OPs involvement was from start to finish on the publication. With that being said, this is WashU's data on research hours for MSTP programs. From what it sounds like OP is <1000, and no one was interviewed in that pool.

At least for OP, this might be out of pocket but aren't MSTPs usually geared towards those pursuing basic science/translational research? You seem to just want to focus on small-scale niche research that MDs can do easily. Not really sure if this is something set in stone, but maybe something to consider before committing to a +6 year track.

Current MD-PhD applicant. I spoke to a PSU faculty member this week and she commented that difficult research experiences make you heartier for the rough patches ahead. Specifically, she had her PI quit in her second year and had to find a new lab to complete her thesis, so encountering difficulty in her Post-doc years was less of a problem. Other people at her institution who had smooth sailing in their PhD years tended to struggle and possibly quit when they encountered problems in their research.

I've been researching full time for my gap years and had plenty of difficulty in my experiments. I think programs like to see that you can persist and adapt when experiments don't work as expected. That kind of experience ensures that you will stay in the program and make it worth their money. It's really rare to get a publication accepted or grant funded on the first go, so you're in for a lifetime of persistence.