Basic Research or Clinical Research ( Imaging )

[inty]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I am planning to pursue research after residency to get into cardiology fellowship. With that perspective I want to know whether doing basic research at a university program for 3 years would make me more competitive or doing one or two years of clinical research in Cardiac Imaging with a well known Cardiac Imaging specialist/academician.

I will greatly appreciate input of all program director, cardiology fellows and forum members watching this forum.

 

[grendelsdragon]

I am planning to pursue research after residency to get into cardiology fellowship. With that perspective I want to know whether doing basic research at a university program for 3 years would make me more competitive or doing one or two years of clinical research in Cardiac Imaging with a well known Cardiac Imaging specialist/academician.

I will greatly appreciate input of all program director, cardiology fellows and forum members watching this forum.

For some basic thoughts about the basic versus clinical research tracks for a physician scientist, you can read my post from the MD/PhD thread:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=6661181&postcount=7

Essentially, you have to choose based upon your own personal interests. There is no easy decision here, and I sincerely doubt that anyone here can tell you anything substantial that should sway your opinion! Good luck.

 

[inty]

Thank you Dr. Grendelsdragon. I understand that it depends on personal interests and I love both paths. However during fellowship selection process which one weighs more in terms of competitiveness ? As an attending who would you prefer ? Also years of research count more or the number and quality of publications?

I will appreciate your input.

 

[grendelsdragon]

The greatest impact research will have with competitiveness in cardiology fellowship is with high impact first-author publication/s. Duration of research commitment is not inherently relevant. However, it usually takes at least 2 years to do quality 1st author work. The problem is that the longer you wait to start cardiology fellowship, the rustier your clinical skills will be. It's a delicate balance. Additionally, if your goal is private practice, I would not recommend any prolonged research commitment.

As for the clinical vs basic research, you are not going to get me to tell you! 😀

 

[dragonfly99]

Do research with whomever you think can help you get in to fellowship. I would suggest the 1-2 years with the academic imaging person. He/she can presumably write you a letter of recommendation, and you could potentially get a publication(s) sooner. Too many pitfalls in basic research, and 3 years is a LONG time to be stuck in a lab if things don't work out, plus you have dug yourself into a hole in terms of being out of clinical medicine such a long time.