Curiosity about compensation after graduating

[neuro130]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi All,

First off I'll preface this post by saying I understand the compensation for physician scientists is often less than their pure clinical counterparts, but I never really see any solid figures, and the ones I do are from 2004. I'm interested in pursuing a career in psychiatric research. I'm considering a combined MD/PhD with the PhD in some sort of neuroscience related field. I absolutely love research and from my clinical volunteering I know I would like interacting with and treating patients, so I feel like this career path would be perfect for me.

Salary isn't the reason I want to become a physician scientist, but I need to consider it if I'm going to spend 11+ years of education after I graduate from undergrad. How does compensation work and what ranges can I expect? If it's absolutely atrocious I may need to look elsewhere as I'll likely have a family to support by the time I'm finished.

Thanks

 

[K31]

First, salary data from most public universities (including medical schools) are online, so you can get a good idea from that.

Second, the rule of thumb I use is that you take an approximately $100k/year cut in pay by going into academics. In a specialty like psychiatry, starting salaries for a primarily research (but residency-trained) physician is probably $100-150,000. Not close to what you could make in private practice (where you could easily make at least double that), but hardly in the poorhouse either.

 

[neuro130]

Thanks for the quick reply K31. 100-150k is not too shabby at all. My husband should also be making decent money so we wouldn't be struggling in the least.

I imagine there's some sort of salary advancement as you get further into your career depending on how good your research is and how good you are at securing grants, yes? May seem like a silly question but another career I was considering a while back had a certain cap that was very difficult to break.

 

[Neuronix]

Thanks for the quick reply K31. 100-150k is not too shabby at all. My husband should also be making decent money so we wouldn't be struggling in the least.

Most specialties in most locations will pay at least that for academic MD/PhD attendings. There are a few exceptions in the lower paid specialties (peds, neuro, etc...), especially in the desirable locations. Though you may have to do extended fellowship to get to be a research based academic attending. So figure on about 50-60k year for 6+ years after the MD/PhD program to get to the 100-150k level.

Private practice generally pays 2x-4x that, depending on the circumstances and the specialty.

I imagine there's some sort of salary advancement as you get further into your career depending on how good your research is and how good you are at securing grants, yes? May seem like a silly question but another career I was considering a while back had a certain cap that was very difficult to break.

Pay advancement is based on promotion of course. It's highly variable based on what specialty you are in, how much research you do, how much grant funding you have, how much clinical load you have, where in the country you work (less desirable/more rural = more pay), etc...

The cap in academics is typically somewhere around department chair pay level. Depending on the department that tends to be anywhere from $300k - $750k+. Rarely someone will have a patent, industry appointment, or other private enterprise that nets more than that.

 

[neuro130]

Thanks for the reply Neuronix. Is Psychiatry one of the "lower paid specialties"? I noticed you mentioned Neuro which is kinda sorta similar in a way.

 

[texan2009]

Yes Psychiatry is one of the lower paid fields in academics.

 

[neuro130]

So I should be expecting to start under 100k after my fellowship? I don't mind "lower paid" if that means not 200k+, but I'd like to be able to make at least 100k somewhat early in my career as a full-fledged academic.

 

[Fencer]

2011-12 - All SOMs - Psychiatry - Median Total Salary in thousands of dollars

Instructor // Assistant Professor // Associate Professor // Professor // Chief // Chair
25th: ......140 ........... 150 ........... 168 ........... 193 ........... 197 ........... 305
Median: ..160 ........... 170 ........... 189 ........... 222 ........... 243 ........... 363
75th: .......177 ........... 197 ........... 218 ........... 273 ........... 300 ........... 465

General observations:
There are 2.3 times as many Assistant than Associate and /or Professors
There are only 110 Chairs and 74 Chiefs
Public institutions earn less than Private; this amount is a few thousands in junior positions and increases to tens of thousands at the more senior levels.

Clinician Scientist with primary bench time often start at the 25th, but are more likely to be promoted to higher positions including Departmental Chair.

 

[gbwillner]

More important things to consider:

After fellowship you may not get an Asst. Prof salary- top institutions (the ones that give you the best chance of a successful science career) can get you at Instructor level. This pays roughly 1/2 of the Asst. Professor salary. Time as Instructor is typically 1-3 years. Salary is typically 70-100K. To compare to what Fencer posted- I believe some institutions call "Instructor" the same as non-tenure track or clinical track. There is no way an Instructor, as far as i understand it, pays roughly the same as Asst. Prof. salary. Also, some of those other designations may have different names or not exist at some institutions- "chief vs director", etc.

The better the institution and the more desirable the location- the lower the pay. I would expect UCSF to pay near the 25th percentile at all payscales, whereas University of middle of nowhere would likely pay in the 75th percentile. It's supply and demand.

 

[Fencer]

What I posted is AAMC data from all medical schools. Instructor is the first column with data. I agree that there is a tax for been part of an Ivy-like institution. This is reflected in compensation but also in a reduced start-up package and lab space, often working within a lab of an established senior researcher.
Furthermore, the medians include all people at that position in a cross-sectional manner. That is, you might be a 4th year instructor (being promoted to Assistant in the following fiscal year) but averaged with an instructor in their first month of been appointed.

Data is data... and believe me this is hard and solid data. There were only 221 instructors and 1538 assistant professors. Neurology has similar median numbers but greater spread due to procedural subspecialties.
Median: 121 163 196 236 239 390

 

[gbwillner]

Not doubting your data-

Just pointing out that some institutions use the term "instructor" for non-tenure track faculty, which actually may pay more than asst. Prof. salary. These are then lumped with the science tenure-track wannabe's who are making 75K. Lump them together and you average slightly less than Asst. Prof. That's my guess, anyway, but I know the first two statements above are also true.

Also, don't expect to get increases in pay as instructor above inflation. Instructor position is more like a favorable post-doc. You will have very limited clinical responsibilities and it's basically free time for you to get data and papers to hopefully land a "real" (asst. Prof) job.

 

[Neuronix]

Just pointing out that some institutions use the term "instructor" for non-tenure track faculty, which actually may pay more than asst. Prof. salary. These are then lumped with the science tenure-track wannabe's who are making 75K. Lump them together and you average slightly less than Asst. Prof. That's my guess, anyway, but I know the first two statements above are also true.

This is what I have seen as well. There are a huge range of jobs out there. But, what gbwillner and I are trying to point out is that if you're trying to do serious basic science research, the early career pay is worse than that data would let on.

A lot of people right now are ending up in limbo land between fellowship and professor where they get paid miserably in hopes of getting the first position (often waiting on their own funding like a K08 or more). Also, the assistant prof jobs that give you time to do 50% or more research are the ones that pay well less than even the 25th percentile. Because new mostly research jobs in clinical departments are rare, they are not necessarily accounted for well in the data. Most pre-meds do not realize that most academics out there do mostly clinical work, and that range of salaries being posted is more appropriate for clinicians doing mostly clinical research.

But again, this is so incredibly specialty and career track dependent that pay is highly, highly variable. You don't know what you want when you are a 22 year old MD/PhD applicant, and the market is likely to like very different in 15 years when you're ready for these positions, so going into detail about this for pre-meds is a waste of time for all involved.

 

[gbwillner]

From my experience, mostly at my current institution and where my friends have ended up, the percentile of pay has less to do with your research time and more to do with location/institution.

Of course that may be specialty specific as well. Around here, clinician-scientists make just as much as the clinical only counterparts (provided you still do some clinical work). But if you can't support your salary with grants, you will quickly lose space and time.

 

[goodkarma]

What I posted is AAMC data from all medical schools. Instructor is the first column with data. I agree that there is a tax for been part of an Ivy-like institution. This is reflected in compensation but also in a reduced start-up package and lab space, often working within a lab of an established senior researcher.
Furthermore, the medians include all people at that position in a cross-sectional manner. That is, you might be a 4th year instructor (being promoted to Assistant in the following fiscal year) but averaged with an instructor in their first month of been appointed.

Data is data... and believe me this is hard and solid data. There were only 221 instructors and 1538 assistant professors. Neurology has similar median numbers but greater spread due to procedural subspecialties.
Median: 121 163 196 236 239 390

Would you mind posting a link?

 

[Neuronix]

Of course that may be specialty specific as well. Around here, clinician-scientists make just as much as the clinical only counterparts (provided you still do some clinical work).

Yes, this is specialty specific. Though, this particular nuance varies from institution to institution in the procedural specialties in various ways.

Would you mind posting a link?

That data is from the AAMC academic faculty salary survey. It is not publicly shared.