Concentration of PhD, during MD/PhD

[jade25]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone knew if there are limitations to the area of concentration for the PhD part of an MD/PhD track. In other words, are you only allowed to do scientific research in a biological lab or can you do your PhD while working on clinical medicine? Any input would be great!

 

[Primate]

Hi,

My impression is that most schools want most of their students to work in a wet-lab/bench setting. Some do not even allow any other option.

The more enlightened (or well funded and so can afford the daliance 😉 ) programs that allow students to pursue PhDs in "non-traditional" areas will still most often advise against or even prohibit working in a strictly clinical realm. Their reasoning is that you'll have plenty of time in clinics and that the PhD should be a time to acquire a different skill set.

There is a very recent trend, with which I strongly agree, to emphasize clinical research in a few programs (the Case Western Reserve University SOM/Cleveland Clinic effort to train MDs in clinical research is a notable and perhaps the most formalized one to date). However, these are not yet MD/PhD programs but rather an extra year in which one is trained in clinical research. This may change, but I believe it to be the current situation.

Now, if anyone has a more up to date info set or a different take on things, I would be very much interested in a reply. While the typical MSTP has its place, I think the current level of training/understanding of clinical research is what is leading to the current quality thereof (more simply, clinical research is in need of more rigor). That should happen in med school, certainly in all of our general education and also perhaps as a separate masters level track. I don't know enough to recommend for or against a clinical science PhD, but it strikes me that the MD should be just that.

Best,
P

 

[MacGyver]

primate,

MD is a professional degree, not an academic one. Training in clinical research is no part of the current training. If you want clinical training added, you will have to add more length to the MD curriculum or take some of it out to fit it in.

Med school doesnt train people to think like scientists

 

[Primate]

In general, I am in agreement. However, I do think that training in clinical research is important, even in the context of a purely professional degree. This stems from the concept of evidence based medicine and a belief (with which you may disagree) that this is the type of clinical medicine we should all be practicing. IMO, one needs to understand the pitfalls and pros of various types of studies in order to interpret the results (in other words, if the study sucks, don't implement the recommendations, & v.v). If one has limited facility with the methods, it's hard to base one's clinical practices on the results. "Clinical science" is not the same thing as lab-work.

I DO NOT (sorry to shout 😉 ) think that med school should train future docs to be scientists, and, very clearly, it does not. I do think that practicing evidence based medicine is the best way to provide care for our patients.

Even though I have a science background, I'm still a hard-core clinician at heart.

I think we're probably on about the same page of music and that I didn't make my pov sufficiently clear before. Lemme know if that's not the case. 😀

P