Deciding between MD and MD/PhD

[pchemhbar]

Edited, thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted1144897]

You CAN do basic science research as an MD.

Do you think you'd want, or benefit from, the extra PhD training?

 

[Doctor-S]

Hey,

As I approach the upcoming cycle, I'm quite conflicted in deciding between MD and MD/PhD.

Just for starters: I have a 520/4.0, several hundred hours of clinical paid/volunteering and a few hundred hours of non-clinical volunteering. Probably the proudest activity I've done though is my computational bio research, which I've been doing since starting undergrad, because of the progress I've made and the effort I put in -- my research is something I've always taken the initiative on to progress further and I've really enjoyed doing it. I have won Goldwater + 1 mid-author pub and bunch of posters/presentations + a first-author pub in the works, but won't be submitted by app time.

That isn't to say I don't cherish clinical work -- I've enjoyed interacting with patients and being involved in their care, something I find quite fulfilling. However, research has simply been my most consistent and longitudinal experience thus far -- so I have seen the fruits of my labor more so than any other experience.

So, I am conflicted between applying MD-only and MD/PhD.

I definitely don't want to let go of research once I leave undergrad, and I am aware that my research skills can be applied outside the basic science realm to clinical research, which is an option to continue research with an MD-only degree. But I am not sure which direction to go in.

I'd appreciate any and all advice on making this decision.

Thank you!!

Edit: I don't know many MD/PhD's. The only one I know is in radiology and is pretty much 100% clinical.

Which type of professional career do you intend to pursue in the future?

For instance, here is a potential MD/PhD program timeline:

Six-to-eight years MD/PhD program; followed by 3-6 years of residency (depending on your specialty); plus 3-6 years of a postdoctoral fellowship (depending on your field of study), to become a "physician-scientist" who is passionate about science and medicine.

Do you want to become a physician-scientist?

Or, do you want to go into clinical practice and become a practicing "physician" after completion of the 4-year MD program?

If your answer is yes to the above question, you've probably begun to answer your own queries concerning MD/PhD versus MD only, or PhD only.

Of course, only you can answer these important questions.

BTW, you can still be involved in research with an MD degree, and you can earn income as a licensed MD, and interact with patients and be involved in their patient care. You can also become an adjunct clinical instructor at a medical school, and become involved in research, as well as teaching, as a physician at different medical schools/academic medical centers.

Wishing you the best of success! 🙂

 

[VaultArmitage]

Feel free to PM me. I'm an MD/PhD student doing comp bio research.

 

[deleted1141182]

I have heard that MD/PhDs are more like PhDs with MDs attached than the other way around. Based on my research, unless you want to run a lab, MDs can essentially do everything MD/PhDs can do. Sure, you'll get paid to go to school, but you will also spend almost a decade of your life in school before you can even apply to residency.

 

[pcm810]

I would ask if you want the benefit of having done a PhD. As previously mentioned, finances end up being the same, and as far as running a lab, MD and MD/PhDs get their first R01 grant around the same age. But actually having done the training of a PhD is something that is often overlooked- this is protected time to engage in rigorous research with more hands on mentorship than you will get as a postdoc. It is where you learn to think as a scientist, and is valuable in it's own right. If you know you want to go into academic medicine, I think MD/PhD is a good option.
My best resource when making this decision was asking my PI or admin for introductions to MD-PhDs working at my institution, and seeing if they'd be willing to chat about their career trajectory. This was really helpful when deciding if that was a good fit.
However, this is a big decision, and it's a bit late if you are considering applying this upcoming cycle. MD-PhD applicants have two additional essays on top of the personal statement.

 

[pierty]

If you intend on becoming a physician scientist, the training you receive throughout the PhD is invaluable. You can receive this training after completing an MD, but it is more difficult, more circuitous, and results in roughly the same timeline to independence.

Which type of professional career do you intend to pursue in the future?

For instance, here is a potential MD/PhD program timeline:

Six-to-eight years MD/PhD program; followed by 3-6 years of residency (depending on your specialty); plus 3-6 years of a postdoctoral fellowship (depending on your field of study), to become a "physician-scientist" who is passionate about science and medicine.

A combined PSTP (residency + post-doc in approximately 6 years total) is becoming the "classical" pathway (though specialty + program dependent).

I would ask if you want the benefit of having done a PhD. As previously mentioned, finances end up being the same, and as far as running a lab, MD and MD/PhDs get their first R01 grant around the same age. But actually having done the training of a PhD is something that is often overlooked- this is protected time to engage in rigorous research with more hands on mentorship than you will get as a postdoc. It is where you learn to think as a scientist, and is valuable in it's own right. If you know you want to go into academic medicine, I think MD/PhD is a good option.

Yes.

However, this is a big decision, and it's a bit late if you are considering applying this upcoming cycle. MD-PhD applicants have two additional essays on top of the personal statement.

It is not late.