Difference in MD and MD/Ph.D.

[deleted202457]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I've heard things about the MD/Ph.D programs but I was wondering how is it really different from the traditional MD path? Are there more opportunities available? Also, I heard that most schools give scholarships for this path...Is that true?

 

[tiedyeddog]

It is a totally different career path. For the most part, it is only recommended for those who love research and forsee research being a large part of their careers. It is MUCH longer. The "scholarship" is variable, depending on if the university has a fully funded MD/PhD program or not. The stipend is not worth doing the program as graduation takes at least 3 more years.

Many people on here will say it is stupid, and yes, it probably is stupid if you don't really enjoy research and think you want to do only private practice.

Do a search for MD/PhD information on here. This question gets asked often. Also, check out the MD/PhD forum on SDN.

 

[Chicagochew]

In my opinion if you aren't truly motivated for a career in research you shouldn't do an MD/PhD. You'll be pretty miserable for a while (probably more than 3 years) if you want to take this career path. From what I've seen of MD/PhD students and the admissions committees (I've talked to a couple) they are interested in research. One committee member told me that the perfect answer to why someone wants to do an MD/PhD is that "they want to do research and use their clinical skills/patients to inform their bench research". I was also told that the overall expectation is that students will engage 80/20 research/clinical practice (if any clinical practice at all) after they attain their degree.
It requires a lot of commitment I think but I'm sure there are some more dual degrees floating around this forum with more insight than I have.

 

[BoneMachine]

Only worth it if you plan to do research in the future. For that matter, if you seriously considering research to that extent, you might just want to save time and get a PhD, instead of a MD.

 

[tiedyeddog]

Only worth it if you plan to do research in the future. For that matter, if you seriously considering research to that extent, you might just want to save time and get a PhD, instead of a MD.

I hate it when people make this statement. There are advantages of going MD/PhD over straight MD or straight PhD and vice versa. It just depends what you're looking for in a career, i.e. some patient contact vs. no patient contact, bench research vs. clinical, etc, etc. The ability to do some clinical work on the side to earn more cash is a "bonus", depending on who you ask.

On another note, the mod neuronix has quoted before that about 20% of all MSTP MD/PhD grads DO go into private practice (another MD/PhD student I personally know said that same thing.)

I believe this issue has been hashed out many times before, do a search. If anyone is really interested in this, I would ask some real MD/PhD students who are at the MSIII, MSIV, or late grad years level about it.

 

[Chicagochew]

I wasn't trying to imply that people with dual degrees only do research. I was just stating what admissions committee members who I have talked to have conveyed to me.

 

[tiedyeddog]

I wasn't trying to imply that people with dual degrees only do research. I was just stating what admissions committee members who I have talked to have conveyed to me.

I was not taking issue with what you said, if you think I did. I think you gave great advice. 👍

 

[BoneMachine]

I hate it when people make this statement. There are advantages of going MD/PhD over straight MD or straight PhD and vice versa. It just depends what you're looking for in a career, i.e. some patient contact vs. no patient contact, bench research vs. clinical, etc, etc. The ability to do some clinical work on the side to earn more cash is a "bonus", depending on who you ask.

On another note, the mod neuronix has quoted before that about 20% of all MSTP MD/PhD grads DO go into private practice (another MD/PhD student I personally know said that same thing.)

I believe this issue has been hashed out many times before, do a search. If anyone is really interested in this, I would ask some real MD/PhD students who are at the MSIII, MSIV, or late grad years level about it.

But the majority of MD/PhD do tend to pursue research. I can't really see the benefit in getting both degrees if you are certain you want to only do research. I think you can do clinical research with only a MD. But if you want to do a lot of bench research, then I'd just as well get a PhD. I can't really see the major benefit in getting both degrees.

 

[theroadtomed]

Another thing to keep in mind is that as an MD/pHD, you generally have your choice of residency positions. Neurosurg in particular tends to be dominated by MD/pHD's. Many competitive residencies, such as dermatology, are much easier to get into as an MD/pHD. To some, this alone might be worth the extra years.

 

[tiedyeddog]

I swear I read somewhere that MD/PhD's have an easier time getting research... Could be wrong.... Can't find the thread or link to the article.

 

[BoneMachine]

I swear I read somewhere that MD/PhD's have an easier time getting research... Could be wrong.... Can't find the thread or link to the article.

Would that be sarcasm?

 

[theroadtomed]

I swear I read somewhere that MD/PhD's have an easier time getting research... Could be wrong.... Can't find the thread or link to the article.

They have a vastly easier time getting funding from things like the NIH. In practice, this translates directly into it being easier to get research. Many plain MDs who pursue research have to spend years proving their worth with steady publications to start pulling grants anywhere near the size of the ones that MD/pHD's can get.

 

[phillySASer08]

Neurosurg in particular tends to be dominated by MD/pHD's.

Good god. Can you imagine doing an MD/Ph.D. (7-8 years) and then a neurosurg residency (6-7 yrs)?! That takes the idea of 'professional student' to a whole new level.

 

[ampersand]

IMO, 3 types of people go the MD/PhD route:

1) Those that KNOW they want to be a clinician AND researcher.
2) Those that are undecided about research or clinical practice, and decide to "leave all doors opened".
3) Those that want to do research but are
a. pressured to OR
b. expected (by parents, others) to OR
c. can't release their "life-long dream" of wanting to

"BE A DOCTOR"

For case 1, the extra 4-5 years of school will be a justified price to pay for what you get out of it. To belong to this category, you should be doing research in undergrad.
For 2 & 3, well, not so much. If you're in category 2 or 3, consider an M.S., which may give you more opportunities for research later on, but doesn't come w/ the overhead of an extra 2-3 yrs. in school plus 2-3 extra publications.

 

[tiedyeddog]

They have a vastly easier time getting funding from things like the NIH. In practice, this translates directly into it being easier to get research. Many plain MDs who pursue research have to spend years proving their worth with steady publications to start pulling grants anywhere near the size of the ones that MD/pHD's can get.

I really was not being sarcastic. The MD/PhD folk proportionally recieve more grant money (for how many of them there are competing for funding, which is about 2% pool.) compared to other degrees. I have read a study (from a real agency) that published the information but cannot find it this instant. (Hope I'm not making this up...)

MD/PhD'ers generally need a "decent" idea of what they want to do. I'm NOT saying that a MD/PhD dual is "better" than a straight PhD degree. Obviously, if the whole "medicine" aspect was just something you didn't like, I would just go straight PhD. The MD/PhD degree is bad in many ways, including that most MD/PhD'ers will do a residency of some kind in order to get licensed. Obviously, this is time wasted, not doing research. Then again, some residencies include a research pathway. Some fields (someone mentioned neurosurgery) have researh years already built into the program.

Some MD/PhD's don't do an internship/and/or residency thus not obtaining license (which is fine, if you don't want to perform any clinical duties) and just do a postdoc.

I would agree that doing the MD/PhD losses some of it's benefits if you KNOW right now that you only want to do bench work. I am really thinking trying the MD/PhD path and I honestly don't know if I would like to do pure bench vs. a mix or clinical/bench work. However, I am positive that I want my career to include doing some bench work or at least clinical research(which could be done with just a straight MD....)

Hope this helps.

 

[URHere]

OP, go check out the MD/PhD forum. There is alot of good information there, and you have the chance to talk to people who are current MD/PhD students (which is far better than speculation when it comes to answering your questions).

 

[UTAPlaya10]

MD/PhD takes two or more years longer. The first two years are spent with the other MD students but instead of going into clincals in your third and fourth year you do research and this can go on for a while. I was thinking about doing something like this because I was considering teaching after I've worked for sometime as a doctor but you don't really need a PhD to teach.

 

[BZB]

Don't doctors have more room for promotion (like becoming a Chief of whatever) and also more earnings if they do their own research or own a lab?

 

[tiedyeddog]

Don't doctors have more room for promotion (like becoming a Chief of whatever) and also more earnings if they do their own research or own a lab?

I don't know what this question is asking...
Chief of the department or what?!

 

[deleted202457]

Someone told me that MD/Ph.D. was only an extra year. I heard that you take a year off after your second year in med school to do your thesis and stuff. This could be completely wrong though...

 

[DrBowtie]

Someone told me that MD/Ph.D. was only an extra year. I heard that you take a year off after your second year in med school to do your thesis and stuff. This could be completely wrong though...

Try 3 more years if you are lucky.

 

[JHopRevisit]

Wow, you guys are more than a bit off on this MD/PhD stuff.

Don't doctors have more room for promotion (like becoming a Chief of whatever) and also more earnings if they do their own research or own a lab?

The first part is not true, in every hospital/school of medicine there are both clinical and basic science departments. PhD's and MD/PhDs are promoted within the basic science departments, and MD's and MD/PhD's are promoted within medical departments, and all of them can become department heads. MD/PhD's tend to be focused more on research and thus work generally in basic science departments with reduced clinical duties (and thus less room for advancement on the clinical front), but there are MD/PhDs who choose to ultimately do clinical stuff or research stuff alone, and they make a name for themselves in their chosen field. Overall, the more clinical work you're doing, the better paid you'll be (that is, pure MD's are the best paid), unless you're doing primary care.

MD's have the option of opening a lab. However, an MD simply does not trian you to do basic science research. Research is actually really, really hard, there's layers and layers you're not even thinking about when you're a pipette monkey in undergrad (or even an advanced grad student). There are plenty of MD's who run labs, but many of them began in a time when research was simpler and grant funding was plentiful, and they struggled for many, many years before they were competent (almost like they went to grad school). As an MD you have better preparation to do clinical research (involves mostly statistics and recruiting patients) or translational research in certain fields (especially stuff like surgeons improving surgical techniques), but that's obviously an entirely different thing than the type of research done in a neuroscience or cell biology department. For that you need more training. And as I said above, for an MD opening a lab is usually a money losing proposition, and is generally (though not always) only open to those in academic, not private or community, practice.

Someone told me that MD/Ph.D. was only an extra year. I heard that you take a year off after your second year in med school to do your thesis and stuff. This could be completely wrong though...

I wish. A basic science PhD for an MD/PhD these days takes 3/4 years or more depending on the school, department, and thesis committee. However, medical schools do absolutely no teaching of laboratory technique or experimental design (and definitiely no specialized enough to embark on a research career in a basic science discipline), so it's worth it to those who want to embark on a research career and a medical career, as well as to find overlaps between the two.

 

[tiedyeddog]

Someone told me that MD/Ph.D. was only an extra year. I heard that you take a year off after your second year in med school to do your thesis and stuff. This could be completely wrong though...

Yeah, put this in the "completely wrong" pile. The time spent in grad years depends on the program. I think 4 years is pretty common for the grad years, while 3 or 5 being uncommon but not unheard of.

 

[Wylde]

I would say it is for people primarily focused on getting a PhD and then decide an MD would augment their education.

Compared to someone who is definitely focused on an MD and thinks a PhD would help their competitiveness/etc.

-It generally takes 4 more years for the PhD
-You make less money than almost any other MD (besides maybe military physicians?)
-A majority (about 80%) of your work is research, the other 20% is seeing patients or clinical
-If it is an MSTP program, your medical and graduate education is completely paid for. But it takes 4 more years (about 800k salary) to obtain the degree and you make about 100k less than most physicians. It is undoubtedly a poor financial decision, if you only care about the money
-Most MD/PhDs become professors/researchers at medical schools
-Research is a lot part of your admissions to the PhD program

Check out the MD/PhD forum on sdn

 

[JHopRevisit]

I would say it is for people primarily focused on getting a PhD and then decide an MD would augment their education.

Pretty true, but I think the medical aspect is less of an afterthought. No one puts themselves through the hell of residency to "augment their education," we really do want to be doctors. We like people, we like taking care of them, it's just not what we want to do all of the time, cause we also like research (this is true for most of my peers, a few don't even like research and want to match into ortho, or just want to augment their education like you said. But it's rarer than you make it seem).

 

[Neuronix]

I would say it is for people primarily focused on getting a PhD and then decide an MD would augment their education.

I was the vice versa. I was focused on getting a MD and decided a PhD would augment my ability to discover and bring new cures to patients as an academic physician (see my blog for more details).

All this stuff has been discussed all over the place in the MD/PhD forum and I recommend anyone interested stop on by.