Derm Chances?

[drcoffeecoffee]

So I'm a MS3 and I've recently become interested in dermatology. I have a 268 on step 1 and I've honored all my third year rotations so far. However, I have no research in derm and only one publication in a different field. I don't really want to do a research year so I'm wondering what the chances of matching derm with good stats but limited research? I'm planning to try to get involved with research asap. But I'm not sure what all I could published in the next 6-12 months.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[frenchyn]

So I'm a MS3 and I've recently become interested in dermatology. I have a 268 on step 1 and I've honored all my third year rotations so far. However, I have no research in derm and only one publication in a different field. I don't really want to do a research year so I'm wondering what the chances of matching derm with good stats but limited research? I'm planning to try to get involved with research asap. But I'm not sure what all I could published in the next 6-12 months.

Not in derm, but applying in a surgical subspecialty...you have great step score and academic achievement obviously...so at the end what matters is 1. How fast can you publish...obviously despite all your achievements applying without research will be a risk. You technically only have 9-10 more months to get some research 2. How likable person you are...your chance of mind blowing people at your home program and subI 3. That leads to subI...if it does not return obviously will add to another disadvantage 4. What is your goal, does it matter where you match? Withiut research your chance at top program is very low

 

[Banco]

You know what your weakness is - do research and do some networking. Then come back when you're about to apply.


Your step 1 is bonkers good.

 

[Redpancreas]

So I'm a MS3 and I've recently become interested in dermatology. I have a 268 on step 1 and I've honored all my third year rotations so far. However, I have no research in derm and only one publication in a different field. I don't really want to do a research year so I'm wondering what the chances of matching derm with good stats but limited research? I'm planning to try to get involved with research asap. But I'm not sure what all I could published in the next 6-12 months.

No one can tell you because no one knows how much research you'll find. Research takes time so you'll have to get lucky to do much more than a few case reports and maybe an abstract. I don't know the timeline for common dermatology conferences/journals though, but definitely something to know. I'd venture that your chances are poor but let's let a derm person weigh in because I know nothing about the specifics of dermatology applications. From what I hear interest in the field is a major factor.

You have the numbers to get dermatology besides the research year. If you don't want to do that apply for IM/Anesthesia/EM/Gen Surg or whatever else appeals to you that you don't need to be super research heavy for and apply to Dermatology as a reach. I recommend taking a step back and assessing why you're interested in Dermatology if you're not even willing to put in a gap year to have a solid application. One year when all is said and done is nothing compared to doing what you want to do in medicine.

All the best.

 

[Dr. Doctor MD]

So I'm a MS3 and I've recently become interested in dermatology. I have a 268 on step 1 and I've honored all my third year rotations so far. However, I have no research in derm and only one publication in a different field. I don't really want to do a research year so I'm wondering what the chances of matching derm with good stats but limited research? I'm planning to try to get involved with research asap. But I'm not sure what all I could published in the next 6-12 months.

With a research year you would be about as solid of an applicant as possible, but I understand that you want to avoid this route.

Without a research year you would need to be extraordinarily productive in the next 9 months, which is possible if you are able to network like crazy and your home program supports you in pumping out research. Additionally, doing a home Sub-I and 3 away rotations will drastically increase your chances even with less than average research, but you will still need some research.

My recommendation is to start focusing on research immediately and if you have made good progress by ~ April/May/June, keep it up and then apply regularly. If you're nowhere near getting several pubs/posters/presentations by then, then I would look into research years ASAP or plan on dual applying. Dermatology is unfortunately so competitive that not even a 268 can make up for an application lacking in other areas, but it certainly does allow for some extra wiggle room.

 

[PhillyMed777]

Dermatology is unfortunately so competitive that not even a 268 can make up for an application lacking in other areas

Quite true

 

[Lawpy]

Honestly this research obsession is disturbing. I get showing interest but i think Sub Is and aways to get good letters do a far better job that spamming CV/ERAS with school posters presented many times and some case reports.

Someone with a super high Step 1 and straight honoring M3 being forced to play the research game and pump out fluff is sad and also degrades true research quality

 

[frenchyn]

Honestly this research obsession is disturbing. I get showing interest but i think Sub Is and aways to get good letters do a far better job that spamming CV/ERAS with school posters presented many times and some case reports.

Someone with a super high Step 1 and straight honoring M3 being forced to play the research game and pump out fluff is sad and also degrades true research quality

What you say is true...but it is under the assumption that OP will out shine other applicants on subI...plus like I mentioned it depends on where OP want to end up. Without research, chance at top or academic programs is low....do you really want to apply to a competitive specialty that place high emphasis on research batting on one factor (shine on subI)?

 

[Lawpy]

What you say is true...but it is under the assumption that OP will out shine other applicants on subI...plus like I mentioned it depends on where OP want to end up. Without research, chance at top or academic programs is low....do you really want to apply to a competitive specialty that place high emphasis on research batting on one factor (shine on subI)?

What about just matching derm at any program? I get the top tiers want research but it's absurd if derm research is necessary for any program. The system is completely broken if specialties are encouraging MS4s to severely abuse the flawed ERAS research count to make it as high as possible.

 

[PhillyMed777]

Honestly this research obsession is disturbing. I get showing interest but i think Sub Is and aways to get good letters do a far better job that spamming CV/ERAS with school posters presented many times and some case reports.

Someone with a super high Step 1 and straight honoring M3 being forced to play the research game and pump out fluff is sad and also degrades true research quality

We are aware of this.
We don’t just look at quantity of what you published but the quality and impact of the journal/article. You can’t publish garbage cases in no name journals and think it’s equivalent to high quality research.

research is almost essential regardless of the program
Derm is undergoing a huge surge in research/therapies/understanding and we want to try to recruit as many as possible. Sometimes if you are forced into research it may get you interested. Other times you just helped out to check a box.

in many programs while research is not required, you are probably looked down as a “lesser being” if you don’t publish during residency. Derm is a very academic residency and that should reflect there.

 

[Lawpy]

We are aware of this.
We don’t just look at what you published but the quality and impact of the journal/article. You can’t publish garbage cases in no name journals and think it’s equivalent to high quality research.

... are you looking for applicants applying for a tenure track position? Because i don't see how stuff like article quality and journal impact factors has any bearing on how good a resident they'll be?

Having good research helps as a hook sure. It's just making it required that's a problem. There needs to be better non-research metrics.

 

[PhillyMed777]

... are you looking for applicants applying for a tenure track position? Because i don't see how stuff like article quality and journal impact factors has any bearing on how good a resident they'll be?

Having good research helps as a hook sure. It's just making it required that's a problem. There needs to be better non-research metrics.

When did i say research makes them a good resident, on the most basic of clinical levels? We expect stellar scores all throughout clinical rotations and excellent performance on Derm rotation. All should be reflected in letters of recommendation. And actually yes, we are looking for future academicians if possible (though certainly not required).

An overall strong resident in Dermatology is strong in research too , plain and simple. We expect it all, nothing less. We will antagonize research constantly in derm residency, and it is important. I like to know you know a lot about research, and can bring a project from start to finish. This helps you really dissect research articles and apply them clinically. Applicants don't need to inflate the research numbers for this purpose if they are not ultimately interested in research. Particularly strong applicants as above.

This importance is critical for derm, much more than say Internal medicine residency ( i know because I did an internship in IM). IM is about coordination, paperwork, orders, calling people, so YES, research is much less applicable to the job. Derm residency is very academic by its nature.

 

[Lawpy]

When did i say research makes them a good resident, on the most basic of clinical levels? We expect stellar scores all throughout clinical rotations and excellent performance on Derm rotation. All should be reflected in letters of recommendation. And actually yes, we are looking for future academicians if possible (though certainly not required).

An overall strong resident in Dermatology is strong in research too , plain and simple. We expect it all, nothing less. We will antagonize research constantly in derm residency, and it is important. I like to know you know a lot about research, and can bring a project from start to finish. This helps you really dissect research articles and apply them clinically. Applicants don't need to inflate the research numbers for this purpose if they are not ultimately interested in research. Particularly strong applicants as above.

This importance is critical for derm, much more than say Internal medicine residency ( i know because I did an internship in IM). IM is about coordination, paperwork, orders, calling people, so YES, research is much less applicable to the job. Derm residency is very academic by its nature.

So to clarify, there's actually a research expectation from the specialty (i.e. not just in your program which btw sounds like a top tier)?

I get the importance of having few good papers and showing solid understanding of research since that's the clear way of showing interest in derm vs hedging everything on aways/sub Is.

But for a lot of schools without derm home programs and weak faculty connections, pumping out solid (or any?) derm research is next to impossible. To make derm completely inaccessible for those applicants is a bit harsh.

 

[PhillyMed777]

So to clarify, there's actually a research expectation from the specialty (i.e. not just in your program which btw sounds like a top tier)?

I get the importance of having few good papers and showing solid understanding of research since that's the clear way of showing interest in derm vs hedging everything on aways/sub Is.

But for a lot of schools without derm home programs and weak faculty connections, pumping out solid (or any?) derm research is next to impossible. To make derm completely inaccessible for those applicants is a bit harsh.

1) There is the expectation you understand derm research. To prove it, please do a few projects. Doing so also reinforces actual interest and gets you to work with faculty one-on-one. We hope you like research as well but know you may not end up liking it. We know if they were high impact or low impact projects and arn't just looking at "pub numbers." I am NOT at a top tier derm program. I went to a top tier internship. Most programs follow the above. Top tier like high-quality, and high pub count. Top tier also like top med schools and research years.
2) Yes, but also remember research is a daily part of academic derm clinic. They go hand in hand. We will always be talking research pubs and how they relate to a case at hand constantly.
3) Long term planning helps prevent this. Score well in undergrad and avoid slacking for four years there to get into a half way decent med school. Even med schools ranked 80-90 on USNEWS have derm programs. If not, you can 1) try applying with strong stats and a few soft projects or 2) take a research year. 50% of people do a research year, so no this is not harsh at all.

The OP can likely match derm w/o research yr. A few pubs are probably needed.

 

[Dr. Doctor MD]

So to clarify, there's actually a research expectation from the specialty (i.e. not just in your program which btw sounds like a top tier)?

I get the importance of having few good papers and showing solid understanding of research since that's the clear way of showing interest in derm vs hedging everything on aways/sub Is.

But for a lot of schools without derm home programs and weak faculty connections, pumping out solid (or any?) derm research is next to impossible. To make derm completely inaccessible for those applicants is a bit harsh.

It's harsh, but unfortunately what you say is very true. I wouldn't say "inaccessable" but rather "disadvantaged". Hence the high prevalence of research years (I think 30-40% across the board) and these applicants without home programs end up significantly disadvanted compared to their peers (both loss of networking/safety of home program and lack of research opportunities).

And essentially all derm programs require research including all the mid-low tiers. There really aren't many non-academic derm programs, almost every single one is attached to a major teaching/research institution. There are select handful of previous DO or very low tier programs that truly don't care an iota about research, but this is a small handful, and even then they get great applicants. It's not like IM where you have 100s of community programs that do literally 0 research, and a few elite program publish prolifically. 90% of derm programs are doing some level of research and expect some level of resident involvement. Research in dermatology residencies is ubiquitous and relatively homogenous (there are a few research tracks that even take this to the extreme).

 

[frenchyn]

So to clarify, there's actually a research expectation from the specialty (i.e. not just in your program which btw sounds like a top tier)?

I get the importance of having few good papers and showing solid understanding of research since that's the clear way of showing interest in derm vs hedging everything on aways/sub Is.

But for a lot of schools without derm home programs and weak faculty connections, pumping out solid (or any?) derm research is next to impossible. To make derm completely inaccessible for those applicants is a bit harsh.

Just curious...which specialty are you applying to? You seem to hate the research requirement idea. I am not applying to derm, but a surgical subspecialty...When you apply to a competitive specialty that have more applicants than spots, it is unfortunately a game students have to play. If a student comes from a ****ty to no home program, sometimes they have to take a research year somewhere else. Do students with little to no research match? Sure...but are they taking a big risk to do that? Yes...

 

[Lawpy]

Just curious...which specialty are you applying to? You seem to hate the research requirement idea. I am not applying to derm, but a surgical subspecialty...When you apply to a competitive specialty that have more applicants than spots, it is unfortunately a game students have to play. If a student comes from a ****ty to no home program, sometimes they have to take a research year somewhere else. Do students with little to no research match? Sure...but are they taking a big risk to do that? Yes...

I hate the research requirement idea mainly because of the huge flood of crap that gets pumped out regularly. Seeing that programs are smart to actually know what good research actually is helps but still doesn't really prevent the ERAS research count from being inflated. There's a paper linked in an ortho AMA thread stating the median number of papers is actually... 1 with a lot of crappy posters thrown onto it.

Idk what the derm median research stats are but hopefully it's actually a lot better than that if they're aiming to be an academically oriented specialty.

If ERAS is smart enough to stop grouping papers and posters into a single category that gets gamed with stupid crap being spammed, i wouldn't be as frustrated.

FWIW i like research and publishing papers. I just really hate this game of churning out crappy posters to bump up the ERAS count. The derm model of high stats + good grades + good letters + actual good research makes sense and i can understand why research is important

 

[frenchyn]

I hate the research requirement idea mainly because of the huge flood of crap that gets pumped out regularly. Seeing that programs are smart to actually know what good research actually is helps but still doesn't really prevent the ERAS research count from being inflated. There's a paper linked in an ortho AMA thread stating the median number of papers is actually... 1 with a lot of crappy posters thrown onto it.

Idk what the derm median research stats are but hopefully it's actually a lot better than that if they're aiming to be an academically oriented specialty.

If ERAS is smart enough to stop grouping papers and posters into a single category that gets gamed with stupid crap being spammed, i wouldn't be as frustrated.

FWIW i like research and publishing papers. I just really hate this game of churning out crappy posters to bump up the ERAS count. The derm model of high stats + good grades + good letters + actual good research makes sense and i can understand why research is important

Don't forget research business is shady as hell. The author factory, hierarchy, and doing each other favor...only end up putting applicants from top home programs/connections at more disadvantage.

 

[Dr. Doctor MD]

I hate the research requirement idea mainly because of the huge flood of crap that gets pumped out regularly. Seeing that programs are smart to actually know what good research actually is helps but still doesn't really prevent the ERAS research count from being inflated. There's a paper linked in an ortho AMA thread stating the median number of papers is actually... 1 with a lot of crappy posters thrown onto it.

Idk what the derm median research stats are but hopefully it's actually a lot better than that if they're aiming to be an academically oriented specialty.

If ERAS is smart enough to stop grouping papers and posters into a single category that gets gamed with stupid crap being spammed, i wouldn't be as frustrated.

FWIW i like research and publishing papers. I just really hate this game of churning out crappy posters to bump up the ERAS count. The derm model of high stats + good grades + good letters + actual good research makes sense and i can understand why research is important

Seriously, the amount of poor derm "research" put out by many applicants is astounding. Whether it's ridiculous case reports in paid fake journals that publish anything for $500 or students submitting posters to conferences with 100% acceptance rates (Like: "A Case of Acne presenting in a Teenager" or "BCC presenting on the cheek of a 78 year old farmer" FYI: I am being facetious but have seen posters almost this bad) which inflate the count, things have gotten out of control. However, this is almost always easily seen through by just quickly perusing the list that ERAS populates. I really do think that the number of peer reviewed publications matters far more than whatever absurd aggregate number the Charting Outcomes data shows. Programs would rather see 1-2 actual meaningful research papers in good journals than 15 posters all submitted to Alaska Society of Dermatology Meeting q3months (obv made up example). One paper in JAAD or JAMA is worth infinity local derm posters or 10 case reports in throwaway journals.

 

[Deecee2DO]

Seriously, the amount of poor derm "research" put out by many applicants is astounding. Whether it's ridiculous case reports in paid fake journals that publish anything for $500 or students submitting posters to conferences with 100% acceptance rates (Like: "A Case of Acne presenting in a Teenager" or "BCC presenting on the cheek of a 78 year old farmer" FYI: I am being facetious but have seen posters almost this bad) which inflate the count, things have gotten out of control. However, this is almost always easily seen through by just quickly perusing the list that ERAS populates. I really do think that the number of peer reviewed publications matters far more than whatever absurd aggregate number the Charting Outcomes data shows. Programs would rather see 1-2 actual meaningful research papers in good journals than 15 posters all submitted to Alaska Society of Dermatology Meeting q3months (obv made up example). One paper in JAAD or JAMA is worth infinity local derm posters or 10 case reports in throwaway journals.

Any advice on how to get research just to get research? I know thats looked down upon but i need something to check the box off. Im DO applying mid-tier academic/uni IM and I have zero research despite straight honoring M3, strong evals and mid 250s step score. IM isnt research heavy but as you get towards the higher tier academic programs research starts to matter and so i need literally something to put on ERAS. Sorry for robbing the thread dont mean to get off topic im just desperate at this point to get my name on something

 

[Lawpy]

Any advice on how to get research just to get research? I know thats looked down upon but i need something to check the box off. Im DO applying mid-tier academic/uni IM and I have zero research despite straight honoring M3, strong evals and mid 250s step score. IM isnt research heavy but as you get towards the higher tier academic programs research starts to matter and so i need literally something to put on ERAS. Sorry for robbing the thread dont mean to get off topic im just desperate at this point to get my name on something

Not dr. Doctor MD, but have you tried asking around IM sub attendings for research? Getting something in cards or GI or heme/onc or really literally anything can help.

I still think 250/straight honors will help a lot for mid tier IM

 

[Dr. Doctor MD]

Any advice on how to get research just to get research? I know thats looked down upon but i need something to check the box off. Im DO applying mid-tier academic/uni IM and I have zero research despite straight honoring M3, strong evals and mid 250s step score. IM isnt research heavy but as you get towards the higher tier academic programs research starts to matter and so i need literally something to put on ERAS. Sorry for robbing the thread dont mean to get off topic im just desperate at this point to get my name on something

Agree with Lawpy as above!

I think the best way to get involved in research is to just find faculty and residents that you are close with and have impressed on rotations and ask to get on existing projects. If you're new to research and in M3 you will likely not be successful in forging your own project, but if you have a good work ethic you can easily do some chart review, data gathering, or participate in a meaningful way in someone else's ongoing research. There's usually always some leg-work that needs to be done on many projects that attendings and residents don't want to do themselves and are willing to add a medical student to their posters/presentations/publications in exchange for their help. I would ask your faculty/residents if they have anything or if they know anyone else in the department or institution in need of some help.

Also when evaluating projects always think timing!! Do not get on a 3-5 year clinical trial or anything long term. These projects won't result in papers until long after you are a resident and maybe even an attending. Ideally, you should be looking for projects near completion or ones that just need some more grunt work to get moved along. Just my 2 cents!

 

[Deecee2DO]

@Dr. Doctor MD and @Lawpy thank you!!!!

 

[Deecee2DO]

Not dr. Doctor MD, but have you tried asking around IM sub attendings for research? Getting something in cards or GI or heme/onc or really literally anything can help.

I still think 250/straight honors will help a lot for mid tier IM

I have tried asking around but no one has anything for me right now. it stinks. All the residents said they would lmk if anything pops up but im rotating at a comm hospital with no fellowships and its a new IM program (2 years old). As a DO student these poor rotation sites continue to present more hurdles. I will keep asking around though like you mentioned!

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

So to clarify, there's actually a research expectation from the specialty (i.e. not just in your program which btw sounds like a top tier)?

Not interested in derm so take this with a grain of second hand salt, but I've been told that the program at my school essentially requires applicants to take a research year. Based on how many aspiring derm folks here have taken research years (compared to other specialties), I totally believe it. I don't know where our institution falls in terms of derm residency tiers but we're not a "top tier" medical school

 

[carolp]

About half the applicants take research years at my programs Med school. You can always do one after intern year if you don’t get it but then it’s 2 years instead of 1. If you go to a top 25 Med school I think you will probably get in with minimal research if you get AOA which I’m guessing you will. If you are at a no name school or you don’t have a Derm program you will have a tough time but it’s worth a shot. This and next year are likely to be very difficult for people to match at outside programs without away rotations. I would email the residents at your program or close programs and ask if you can help with writing case reports. Pubs are what are discussed on the interview, if you have nothing you will have a very difficult time standing out, especially if it remains Zoom/remote. People don’t particularly care about step 1 other than above ~250. Derm cares so much about research because there is such a huge demand for spots so many programs can pick exclusively AOA, 245+ applicants that also have research. Obviously people that aren’t AOA or have below 240 scores get in but they have connections and or impressive pubs or a good story.

 

[Redpancreas]

What you say is true...but it is under the assumption that OP will out shine other applicants on subI...plus like I mentioned it depends on where OP want to end up. Without research, chance at top or academic programs is low....do you really want to apply to a competitive specialty that place high emphasis on research batting on one factor (shine on subI)?

It's harsh, but unfortunately what you say is very true. I wouldn't say "inaccessable" but rather "disadvantaged". Hence the high prevalence of research years (I think 30-40% across the board) and these applicants without home programs end up significantly disadvanted compared to their peers (both loss of networking/safety of home program and lack of research opportunities).

And essentially all derm programs require research including all the mid-low tiers. There really aren't many non-academic derm programs, almost every single one is attached to a major teaching/research institution. There are select handful of previous DO or very low tier programs that truly don't care an iota about research, but this is a small handful, and even then they get great applicants. It's not like IM where you have 100s of community programs that do literally 0 research, and a few elite program publish prolifically. 90% of derm programs are doing some level of research and expect some level of resident involvement. Research in dermatology residencies is ubiquitous and relatively homogenous (there are a few research tracks that even take this to the extreme).

Not disputing that this is the expectation of Derm as I am not in this area and from my experience it seems that extensive research is a requirement. For those who know more, I would like to ask what about Dermatology's essence makes it such a research heavy field compared to other fields. In IM, I know infectious disease is a field with new pathogens every day and rheumatology is rapidly evolving systemic therapies analogous to the topical therapies prescribed by Dermatologists. Why does entry to dermatology residency require significant research as opposed to one of those fields that most IM residents are able to obtain with much less research? Asked in another way, why is Dermatology such an academic field? I can understand why compared to EM per se, but Neurology and Internal Medicine subspecialties seem equally as cerebral and in need of research.

 

[frenchyn]

Not disputing that this is the expectation of Derm as I am not in this area and from my experience it seems that extensive research is a requirement. For those who know more, I would like to ask what about Dermatology's essence makes it such a research heavy field compared to other fields. In IM, I know infectious disease is a field with new pathogens every day and rheumatology is rapidly evolving systemic therapies analogous to the topical therapies prescribed by Dermatologists. Why does entry to dermatology residency require significant research as opposed to one of those fields that most IM residents are able to obtain with much less research? Asked in another way, why is Dermatology such an academic field? I can understand why compared to EM per se, but Neurology and Internal Medicine subspecialties seem equally as cerebral and in need of research.

Which surgical subspecialty is not research oriented? I think part of it is the competitive nature...they need something else to filter out applicants...plus skin cancer is pretty hot topic...and people love to look pretty hahahah...Idk lol...but these are enough reasons for me to see why derm is so research oriented.

 

[Redpancreas]

Which surgical subspecialty is not research oriented? I think part of it is the competitive nature...they need something else to filter out applicants...plus skin cancer is pretty hot topic...and people love to look pretty hahahah...Idk lol...but these are enough reasons for me to see why derm is so research oriented.

I suspect this is it which I get. I am just confused when people say that in order to practice Dermatology you need to be acquainted with all the research and have experience and that its critical to Dermatology residency. I think the research requirement is because of the competitiveness. Now, if like new treatment are being developed daily and there's way more research out there and its somehow critical for each Dermatologist to be doing research then that would be something else.

 

[frenchyn]

I suspect this is it which I get. I am just confused when people say that in order to practice Dermatology you need to be acquainted with all the research and have experience and that its critical to Dermatology residency. I think the research requirement is because of the competitiveness. Now, if like new treatment are being developed daily and there's way more research out there and its somehow critical for each Dermatologist to be doing research then that would be something else.

Idt people meant to say you have to do research to practice derm as an attending....though any physician should be able to read a research study...it is expected as a resident to do some research but tbh, it really depends on the program...again I am not doing derm...but another surgical subspecialty...but once you get your foot in the door, some programs don't really have the research requirement...just be nice to your co-workers and they will put your name on a study even though you do nothing hahahah...

 

[rexcouver11]

Not to hijack the thread, but as an M1 heavily interested in derm (have some experience in undergrad, will be doing derm research this summer that should lead to pub), how difficult is it to match out of my home program? I go to a mid-tier school in the south and want to do residency in/near Boston (fiancée is in MD/PhD program and stuck there for next 6 years) but I did not realize how insanely competitive derm was :/ I know it’s very early to even be thinking about this but I already feel like I have no shot lol

 

[FindersFee5]

Not to hijack the thread, but as an M1 heavily interested in derm (have some experience in undergrad, will be doing derm research this summer that should lead to pub), how difficult is it to match out of my home program? I go to a mid-tier school in the south and want to do residency in/near Boston (fiancée is in MD/PhD program and stuck there for next 6 years) but I did not realize how insanely competitive derm was :/ I know it’s very early to even be thinking about this but I already feel like I have no shot lol

Matching out of your area is doable, but matching to a specific area is very difficult. I'm applying to a small surgical subspecialty and have a specific location of interest, where there are <10 total spots in this area. Even as a pretty good candidate, it's a bit of a crapshoot for me.

 

[Redpancreas]

Idt people meant to say you have to do research to practice derm as an attending....though any physician should be able to read a research study...it is expected as a resident to do some research but tbh, it really depends on the program...again I am not doing derm...but another surgical subspecialty...but once you get your foot in the door, some programs don't really have the research requirement...just be nice to your co-workers and they will put your name on a study even though you do nothing hahahah...

I actually do feel like that's the notion some ?derm applicants/trainees in this thread are suggesting.

"This importance is critical for derm, much more than say Internal medicine residency ( i know because I did an internship in IM). IM is about coordination, paperwork, orders, calling people, so YES, research is much less applicable to the job. Derm residency is very academic by its nature."

Is it a "game you have to play" for competitive specialties like you put out there or is there a more substantial reason for why there's such a high emphasis on research because I would think Dermatology is definitely not unique in constant technical updates to the field (Neurology, Pathology come to mind immediately), but I could be wrong so I thought I'd ask.

 

[Dr. Doctor MD]

I actually do feel like that's the notion some ?derm applicants/trainees in this thread are suggesting.

"This importance is critical for derm, much more than say Internal medicine residency ( i know because I did an internship in IM). IM is about coordination, paperwork, orders, calling people, so YES, research is much less applicable to the job. Derm residency is very academic by its nature."

Is it a "game you have to play" for competitive specialties like you put out there or is there a more substantial reason for why there's such a high emphasis on research because I would think Dermatology is definitely not unique in constant technical updates to the field (Neurology, Pathology come to mind immediately), but I could be wrong so I thought I'd ask.

I think you're overall correct, and you don't need to be actively conducting research (in residency or practice) to be a good dermatologist. In fact I think that a resident who does 0 research in dermatology residency after getting in, and instead focuses on studying and getting high volumes of patients will, be the same or better than one who prioritizes research over these other areas. A lot of dermatology residents will just do the minimum requirements set out by their program for research and still go on to be great physcians. But it's near impossible to finish dermatology residency without doing at least a small amount of research. At my medical school's dermatology program, quite literally every single resident was doing multiple posters and case reports with several different medical students, and some residents were even doing more extensive projects as well.

Ultimately, I think it mostly stems from the fact that dermatology is so competitive that they need to create even more hoops to cull the applicant pool, and (in faculty's minds) what better hoop is there to jump through than research, which is ubiquitous in dermatology departments and needs constant manpower. Sure having a research understanding is very important, but the explosion in quantity and importance of research has skyrocketed in the last few years and I don't think will end up producing better dermatologists than 5 or 10 years ago. I'm sure research is just as valued in neurology, pathology, rheumatology as well, but these specialties just can't force their applicants to dedicate 1000+ hours to research prior to applying as dermatology does.

Personally I think being willing and able to study and read constantly, combined with high clinical volume, is the optimal path to training the best dermatologists. Understanding research methods and being able to evaluate literature are critically important in dermatology (and other fields as well), but actually conducting the research yourself isn't going to make or break you as a dermatologist.

tldr; The research requirement is because dermatology is competitive, not because you need to conduct research to be a good dermatologist.

 

[ChordaEpiphany]

Research will always be a boon to academic residencies, but they're far more worried about taking a dud resident who will cause problems than they are about maximizing overhead grant money by taking research-competent trainees. When you already have all the top students vying for your field, and your field is less prone to accidentally killing people, you start making these distinctions.

If it were based on research need in the field, subspecialties like nephro, which are painfully lacking in decent physician-scientists, would be the ones asking for research. In practice we see that nephro is mostly just praying for Americans of any variety.

 

[Redpancreas]

I think you're overall correct, and you don't need to be actively conducting research (in residency or practice) to be a good dermatologist. In fact I think that a resident who does 0 research in dermatology residency after getting in, and instead focuses on studying and getting high volumes of patients will, be the same or better than one who prioritizes research over these other areas. A lot of dermatology residents will just do the minimum requirements set out by their program for research and still go on to be great physcians. But it's near impossible to finish dermatology residency without doing at least a small amount of research. At my medical school's dermatology program, quite literally every single resident was doing multiple posters and case reports with several different medical students, and some residents were even doing more extensive projects as well.

Ultimately, I think it mostly stems from the fact that dermatology is so competitive that they need to create even more hoops to cull the applicant pool, and (in faculty's minds) what better hoop is there to jump through than research, which is ubiquitous in dermatology departments and needs constant manpower. Sure having a research understanding is very important, but the explosion in quantity and importance of research has skyrocketed in the last few years and I don't think will end up producing better dermatologists than 5 or 10 years ago. I'm sure research is just as valued in neurology, pathology, rheumatology as well, but these specialties just can't force their applicants to dedicate 1000+ hours to research prior to applying as dermatology does.

Personally I think being willing and able to study and read constantly, combined with high clinical volume, is the optimal path to training the best dermatologists. Understanding research methods and being able to evaluate literature are critically important in dermatology (and other fields as well), but actually conducting the research yourself isn't going to make or break you as a dermatologist.

tldr; The research requirement is because dermatology is competitive, not because you need to conduct research to be a good dermatologist.

Right, that's what I thought.

 

[Dave1980]

Honestly this research obsession is disturbing. I get showing interest but i think Sub Is and aways to get good letters do a far better job that spamming CV/ERAS with school posters presented many times and some case reports.

Someone with a super high Step 1 and straight honoring M3 being forced to play the research game and pump out fluff is sad and also degrades true research quality

All med student research is fluff dude. Are you in the medical field?

 

[Lawpy]

All med student research is fluff dude. Are you in the medical field?

I am and i disagree. There's a lot of good research done by med students when they're actually interested and know the right people. Once research is made required, crap starts to get flooded

 

[Dave1980]

I am and i disagree. There's a lot of good research done by med students when they're actually interested and know the right people. Once research is made required, crap starts to get flooded

You may feel differently when you are no longer a med student lol

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

All med student research is fluff dude. Are you in the medical field?

I am and i disagree. There's a lot of good research done by med students when they're actually interested and know the right people. Once research is made required, crap starts to get flooded

I will be the first to go on a very long rant about how a huge amount of med student research is fluff (and some of it actively detrimental to research progress) but there are definitely some students doing serious work of actual substance. I've seen some really cool and interesting stuff put out by students. A lot of it though is the stuff that's off the beaten med school track, and definitely helps to know the right people. And it's usually in combination with a productive team that has good mentors involved.