Clinical and basic science

[7502]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Heading to med school next year and am curious if it is reasonable to pursue both clinical and basic science research as a med student (and become sufficiently involved in both) or should I just stick to one side? Would it be more feasible if I took a research year?

 

[evilbooyaa]

It's possible but you have to budget your time very well to maintain grades as well as research obligations.

I would generally focus on giving yourself a solid 1/4-1/2 a year to get acclimated to the pace of medical school, then go out looking for research opportunities. Do you already know what you want to do?

And yes, it would be much more feasible if you took a research year. However, if I were in your shoes, I'd want to be 95% confident in my specialty choice before I took a research year for it.

 

[7502]

Would you pursue both types of research simultaneously?

 

[VisionaryTics]

Would you pursue both types of research simultaneously?

I don't think you can make this decision before starting medical school. Like the above poster said, take the first semester to get your feet on the ground. Then consider starting research.

You could do both types of research, but you would definitely be in the minority as somebody who could juggle medical school and multiple serious research projects.

 

[GadRads]

I do it. It's not easy. I started right away as an MS1 but I will stop soon once I finish a manuscript so I can focus on Step 1, which is around the corner. I commit about 10 hrs-15 hrs a week, depending on exams. For example, I spent 5 hrs last night working on a paper. I also study an average of 2.5 hours per day, which is less than most in my class, but I am above average. I also have a life--I go out almost every weekend.

 

[7502]

I do it. It's not easy. I started right away as an MS1 but I will stop soon once I finish a manuscript so I can focus on Step 1, which is around the corner. I commit about 10 hrs-15 hrs a week, depending on exams. For example, I spent 5 hrs last night working on a paper. I also study an average of 2.5 hours per day, which is less than most in my class, but I am above average. I also have a life--I go out almost every weekend.

Do you think it would be feasible to start clinical research after step (end of ms2) and still aim to get 2-3 pubs? Basic science will definitely take longer, but i have little experience in clinical.

And thank you all for the valuable info!!

 

[ulikedaggers]

Do you think it would be feasible to start clinical research after step (end of ms2) and still aim to get 2-3 pubs? Basic science will definitely take longer, but i have little experience in clinical.

And thank you all for the valuable info!!

Depends how far along the projects are. Can you start 2 new projects and get them published by the time you graduate? Probably not.

 

[7502]

Well wouldn't you have to publish by the end of 3rd year for it to count towards residency apps?

 

[dyspareunia]

Well wouldn't you have to publish by the end of 3rd year for it to count towards residency apps?

On your app you can say that the paper has been submitted for pub. Obviously not as good as something that's actually published, but it probably counts for something.

Plus I think residency apps are due in September.. So you potentially have until then to be published. Also if you get published between September and whenever you interview you can mention it then.

 

[GadRads]

Do you think it would be feasible to start clinical research after step (end of ms2) and still aim to get 2-3 pubs? Basic science will definitely take longer, but i have little experience in clinical.

And thank you all for the valuable info!!

I have extensive experience in basic science, and my honest advice is to avoid pure basic science, especially if you want a first-author paper. As you said, they are just much more time consuming. My current work is translational, and I have a very supportive group and advisor. I still do some bench work, but nothing as crazy as a full-fledged hardcore basic science project.

I will advise you start clinical research ASAP. Just manage your time well and be super efficient with studying. You can adjust your time commitment as you feel your bearings. Also aim to have a very productive summer between M1 and M2. From what I see, M3 might be the least productive for research. We had an M3 try to do some research, but rotations just ruined her efforts.

 

[7502]

I have extensive experience in basic science, and my honest advice is to avoid pure basic science, especially if you want a first-author paper. As you said, they are just much more time consuming. My current work is translational, and I have a very supportive group and advisor. I still do some bench work, but nothing as crazy as a full-fledged hardcore basic science project.

I will advise you start clinical research ASAP. Just manage your time well and be super efficient with studying. You can adjust your time commitment as you feel your bearings. Also aim to have a very productive summer between M1 and M2. From what I see, M3 might be the least productive for research. We had an M3 try to do some research, but rotations just ruined her efforts.

Can you expand on what your translational research is? That sounds like exactly what I want to do. Pm maybe?

 

[GadRads]

Can you expand on what your translational research is? That sounds like exactly what I want to do. Pm maybe?

We do gene expression studies in response to specific interventions on patients. It has good turn around time and data is robust.

 

[evilbooyaa]

Can you expand on what your translational research is? That sounds like exactly what I want to do. Pm maybe?

Basically, if the end goal of an experiment is to eventually start a clinical trial (of a drug, an implant, etc.) and use it in humans, then it's translational. This is still considered basic research.

Basic research with no clinical trial goals (trying to find out the mechanism or what the drug interacts with to cause its effects) is also basic science. To me, translational is more interesting, but there are people out there who want to find out the mechanism of how everything interacts, which is critical to the progression of science

Say you find a drug that inhibits Location 1 that does something useful, but also has toxicity [translational]. Someone finds out that Location 1 signal transduces Location 2, 3, and 4 [non-translational]. A drug that inhibits Location 3 is toxic without doing something useful. A drug (or a knockdown) that inhibits Location 4 is useful without the toxicity. Now you can focus on making treatments that focus on Location 4 (and avoid the toxicity).