Couple newbie questions

[Green Pirate]

I'm a freshman premed who has only recently become interested in the MD/PhD path.

First, how essential are publications? I'm working in a great lab where I'm learning so much and getting to do a lot of neat stuff. I really love this experience, but I'm not entirely sure I see many publications in the near future (it's a great experiment, but it's more of a long term thing... we have funding until 2011, so it's not a short term paper-pumping deal).

That brings me to my second question... do MD/PhD programs value diversity of research experience? Should I gain experience in 2 or 3 different projects (in different fields of medicine), or would it be fine if I stuck with one project throughout my 4 years?

I think that will be all for now... but feel free to preach any other advice you have to this young, impressionable mind.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Circumflex]

Publications are not essential, but I think that many applicants have their name on at least one paper.

I think a solid research experience is more valued than diversity. Plus, you have a better chance of getting your name on a paper or writing a paper if you stay in a lab for a longer period of time. But, based on your current lab experience, if you are not sure that you want to pursue the PhD, then you might consider working in a different lab that is doing work that you consider interesting. The admissions committee just wants to know that you know what you are getting yourself into. You just need to make sure that you are really interested in doing research before you go for the MD/PhD.

As has been said many times in this forum, you can still do research with an MD only. If your heart is not into research, then don't do the PhD because you could be miserable. But, if you enjoy it and research excites you, then go for it - it's great journey that I would not trade.

 

[hawkeey]

I've been told that the number of applicants with publications is about 50%. The more important thing is to work hard and impress your PI to get the good letter of recommendation.

I would focus on one lab, but if there is something that really interests you see if you can negotiate doing a 'rotation' through the other lab. Once you join a lab as a graduate student you don't have anytime to explore your interests. So as an undergraduate, you should make an effort to figure out what you actually like and what really intrigues you. Your work and research will be much better if you find something you are passionate about.

 

[solitude]

I've been told that the number of applicants with publications is about 50%. The more important thing is to work hard and impress your PI to get the good letter of recommendation.

Although the number of applicants with first-author pubs is much lower than 50%, true? I think I've seen that statistic on here but don't recall the exact number.

 

[Maebea]

Based on my observations over the years, the percentage of individuals with their name included on a peer-reviewed publication at the time they submitted the AMCAS is maybe 20%. The percentage with a first-author peer-reviewed manuscript is around 2%. Most applicants have abstracts by the time they apply, but those are not in the same league as peer-reviewed articles.

I agree with Circumflex that research diversity is not a big deal. Programs prefer a two-year slog in one lab over six-month raves in 4 different labs. Personally, I would try to spend time in two different labs just to get another perspective on what the research life is like.

 

[solitude]

Based on my observations over the years, the percentage of individuals with their name included on a peer-reviewed publication at the time they submitted the AMCAS is maybe 20%. The percentage with a first-author peer-reviewed manuscript is around 2%. Most applicants have abstracts by the time they apply, but those are not in the same league as peer-reviewed articles.

I agree with Circumflex that research diversity is not a big deal. Programs prefer a two-year slog in one lab over six-month raves in 4 different labs. Personally, I would try to spend time in two different labs just to get another perspective on what the research life is like.

Thanks!

 

[Green Pirate]

I agree with Circumflex that research diversity is not a big deal. Programs prefer a two-year slog in one lab over six-month raves in 4 different labs. Personally, I would try to spend time in two different labs just to get another perspective on what the research life is like.

yeah that's what I was thinking as well. It might be beneficial to get a taste of different types of research, since all labs use different studies/methods/etc.

Thanks for all your opinions guys