Different types of clincal research???

[Dr. Anonymouss]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I am new to the research field, but from what it seems in terms of improving residency applications is that results are what ultimately matters (pubs) and not necessarily the effort put in. I got offered a research assistant position where I will be collecting data from patients during their post-operative follow up visit with their surgeon. I think this sounds interesting as I will be contributing to the collection of data rather than the interpretation of data that was collected by other individuals. My only concern is that this seems like a very lengthy process that can't possibly result in quick publications. Are there many different types of clinical research, are some regarded as more favorable than others, is it really publications or bust??? Help a brotha out, I am in need of guidance.

 

[longhaul3]

You're essentially correct about the timelines. If you want to crank out the pubs you need to be working on data that other people have collected. It doesn't even necessarily need to be proprietary data—there are a lot of databases that are publicly available with zillions of patients.

However, it's generally considered a more worthy contribution to interpret the data than to gather it. The people who interpret the data are the ones who have a question, come up with a hypothesis, think of a way to test it, and then see what the data say. For instance, unless you've been trusted with the whole project, surely someone above you will be using the very data you collect to write a paper on which he/she will be the first author.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

You're essentially correct about the timelines. If you want to crank out the pubs you need to be working on data that other people have collected. It doesn't even necessarily need to be proprietary data—there are a lot of databases that are publicly available with zillions of patients.

However, it's generally considered a more worthy contribution to interpret the data than to gather it. The people who interpret the data are the ones who have a question, come up with a hypothesis, think of a way to test it, and then see what the data say. For instance, unless you've been trusted with the whole project, surely someone above you will be using the very data you collect to write a paper on which he/she will be the first author.

Seeing as I don't have prior research experience would you say this is a fitting position for someone like me? I am really just looking to get my foot in the door in order to network and build my resume with the hopes of getting some pubs. It is a bit off putting the way you described my contribution and how I will ultimately be recognized, but I imagine someone always has to do the "scut" work lol

 

[Sephirakra]

I am new to the research field, but from what it seems in terms of improving residency applications is that results are what ultimately matters (pubs) and not necessarily the effort put in. I got offered a research assistant position where I will be collecting data from patients during their post-operative follow up visit with their surgeon. I think this sounds interesting as I will be contributing to the collection of data rather than the interpretation of data that was collected by other individuals. My only concern is that this seems like a very lengthy process that can't possibly result in quick publications. Are there many different types of clinical research, are some regarded as more favorable than others, is it really publications or bust??? Help a brotha out, I am in need of guidance.

If the study is already approved, the protocol should give an idea of how long the data collection period will be. That should give you an idea of the timeline you're working under. Preliminary data could be published before the end of the study, but it's best not to count on that.

 

[longhaul3]

Seeing as I don't have prior research experience would you say this is a fitting position for someone like me? I am really just looking to get my foot in the door in order to network and build my resume with the hopes of getting some pubs. It is a bit off putting the way you described my contribution and how I will ultimately be recognized, but I imagine someone always has to do the "scut" work lol

Yeah, that's the rub. Research requires time and money, and nobody is going to trust you with those resources until you have some experience and have put in some work, so you're exactly right that this is the way to get your foot in the door.

I assume you're just starting med school. This type of work is typical and what you should be expecting to do in your first research experience. Work your butt off, enroll as many patients as you can, and try to push things through quickly. Show initiative and see if you can get involved in the data analysis and maybe the manuscript, and you'll work your way up. The hardest part about research in med school is that it takes time, and residency applications sneak up on you before you know it. You'll be at a big advantage if you can stick with it from the get-go.

If you were a third- or fourth-year applying in a competitive specialty it would be too late to start out with a project like this, and you'd have to try to do some chart reviews or whatever to just crank out some publications.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

I appreciate the insight, you've been very helpful. Yes I am just starting medical school in August so I wanted to get a jump on research. I was fortunate enough to find some faculty that were interested in having me join their research early on. At the very least, this will give me insight into how clinical research works and how I ultimately want to contribute.

 

[GoSpursGo]

This seems like a decent way to get your foot in the door, but after you have a handle on your primary role in collecting this data don't be shy about asking about whether there are any other projects you could help out on.

 

[OnePunchBiopsy]

Keeping things VERY general, In terms of academic impact:

Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial > Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial >> Prospective Matched Trial (Both Retro and Prospective)

Systematic Review with Meta-analysis > Systematic Review

Retrospective Cohort Study>>>>> Case Series (no stats, just characterizing things) >>>>>>>>>>Case Reports

Regarding time, for prospective studies I've found the things taking the most time are IRB approval (my hospital takes forever), and patient recruitment. For retrospective studies, the amount of time needed depends on the number of patients (charts) to review and the number of variables in question.

Before doing ANY research, do a power analysis and a literature review. No sense in wasting your time if the topic is published ad nauseam or the number of patients needed to find a significant result is >10,000.

Don't waste your time on case reports.

@Newyear , feel free to PM me if you have questions. Currently on a clinical research year in residency.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

Keeping things VERY general, In terms of academic impact:

Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial > Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial >> Prospective Matched Trial (Both Retro and Prospective)

Systematic Review with Meta-analysis > Systematic Review

Retrospective Cohort Study>>>>> Case Series (no stats, just characterizing things) >>>>>>>>>>Case Reports

Regarding time, for prospective studies I've found the things taking the most time are IRB approval (my hospital takes forever), and patient recruitment. For retrospective studies, the amount of time needed depends on the number of patients (charts) to review and the number of variables in question.

Before doing ANY research, do a power analysis and a literature review. No sense in wasting your time if the topic is published ad nauseam or the number of patients needed to find a significant result is >10,000.

Don't waste your time on case reports.

@Newyear , feel free to PM me if you have questions. Currently on a clinical research year in residency.

Do you think my contributions to data collection will be lead to my name being included in the paper? As I mentioned, this is my first research position and the last thing I want to do is step out of place by asking to be included. I am interested in some sort of surgical career so building up pubs is the obvious goal, but I also understand the importance of networking and establishing myself in the field first before asking for more responsibly in the projects. I am just not sure who all gets recognition and if I would have the ability to use this on my resume in the future.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Do you think my contributions to data collection will be lead to my name being included in the paper? As I mentioned, this is my first research position and the last thing I want to do is step out of place by asking to be included. I am interested in some sort of surgical career so building up pubs is the obvious goal, but I also understand the importance of networking and establishing myself in the field first before asking for more responsibly in the projects. I am just not sure who all gets recognition and if I would have the ability to use this on my resume in the future.

Authorship generally goes to people who have some part in the formulation of the study, analysis of the data, or writing of the publication; merely collecting the data is probably not going to get you that kind of recognition.

That said, it would be totally fair for you to ask that up-front before accepting the position, and if the answer is no you could reasonably ask whether there would be an opportunity for you to potentially contribute to the data analysis.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

Authorship generally goes to people who have some part in the formulation of the study, analysis of the data, or writing of the publication; merely collecting the data is probably not going to get you that kind of recognition.

That said, it would be totally fair for you to ask that up-front before accepting the position, and if the answer is no you could reasonably ask whether there would be an opportunity for you to potentially contribute to the data analysis.

Thanks a lot, I will ask if there is an opportunity for me to contribute with the analysis of the data in order to further contribute to the study

 

[longhaul3]

Thanks a lot, I will ask if there is an opportunity for me to contribute with the analysis of the data in order to further contribute to the study

Good advice given above. I will add that if you're not going to be an author on the group's work, you should politely excuse yourself and find another lab. There's no reason a med student should be working on projects without authorship—you need lines on your CV. Like you said in your OP, leave that to the undergrads who do research for the "experience."

However, it's very common for bigger, factory-style labs to just crank out pubs and put everyone's name on all of them, so there are a lot of labs that would put your name on the paper for collecting the data. It's an unfortunate practice, but it's definitely beneficial to the med students.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

Good advice given above. I will add that if you're not going to be an author on the group's work, you should politely excuse yourself and find another lab. There's no reason a med student should be working on projects without authorship—you need lines on your CV. Like you said in your OP, leave that to the undergrads who do research for the "experience."

However, it's very common for bigger, factory-style labs to just crank out pubs and put everyone's name on all of them, so there are a lot of labs that would put your name on the paper for collecting the data. It's an unfortunate practice, but it's definitely beneficial to the med students.

when I spoke to the PI he said he expects the data collection to be a couple months. It would just be unfortunate to invest all this time and energy with no returns.

 

[longhaul3]

when I spoke to the PI he said he expects the data collection to be a couple months. It would just be unfortunate to invest all this time and energy with no returns.

I hear you. It's hard to negotiate these situations. The PI wants you to stay on because you're free labor and there's no incentive to be anything but vague. If you want to show your commitment and boost your standing in the lab, you can read up on some related topics and offer to do a quick lit review or case report. (Though it'll be hard as a pre-clinical med student to write a compelling case report.)

Honestly it's not the worst thing in the world if you waste a few months on this given how early you're getting involved. If you're not getting anywhere, try talking to the residents in your field of interest and asking them about their research, how you could get involved, etc.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

I’ll keep y’all updated and we will see where this goes.

 

[OnePunchBiopsy]

when I spoke to the PI he said he expects the data collection to be a couple months. It would just be unfortunate to invest all this time and energy with no returns.

Unfortunately research is based on luck much of the time. Collecting all the data should, in a proper world, land you an authorship depending on the findings. Data gathering counts as a significant contribution for authorship for many journals.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Unfortunately research is based on luck much of the time. Collecting all the data should, in a proper world, land you an authorship depending on the findings. Data gathering counts as a significant contribution for authorship for many journals.

I think it depends on the research. For large, institution-level clinical trials or studies, you'd better believe that they aren't putting every research nurse who collected the data on the patients on the publication--which it sounds like this research assistant position is somewhat akin to. But they ARE probably putting everyone in the division who treated the patients on the paper as a middle author, and then whichever resident or med student(s) does the majority of the legwork in analyzing the data will get to be first and/or second authors. While a journal may list collection of data as sufficient for authorship, in practice they aren't going to put 20 authors on a paper, and the people who collect the data are the first to get bumped from author to "acknowledgement."

Again... none of this is necessarily bad! It can still be a meaningful "research experience" that you talk about on the interview trail. But if you're gunning for a competitive specialty where you need to count the number of publications, then you should either try to position yourself to contribute in a way that gets authorship or make it clear that you'd like to be considered for other projects that could lead to authorship. Even if they don't let you be on the publication here, they might let you take a piece of it that's related to the data you're collecting and present it as a poster. Honestly having these kinds of conversations up-front about what you are hoping to get from an experience are vital and an important part of a mature mentor/mentee relationship--if you have a good PI/mentor, it helps them to ensure that they are guiding you into roles that will help you get what you're looking for, and avoid hurt feelings and disappointment at the end of the line.

 

[tri99]

As an incoming OMS-1 without research experience, would a scenario like OPs be the best way to get my foot in the door of research?
My main concern is that my school does not having any faculty members with research in my field of interest. There are a couple of research heavy institutions close to my campus but I’d imagine it would be more difficult to get involved at those.

 

[GoSpursGo]

As an incoming OMS-1 without research experience, would a scenario like OPs be the best way to get my foot in the door of research?
My main concern is that my school does not having any faculty members with research in my field of interest. There are a couple of research heavy institutions close to my campus but I’d imagine it would be more difficult to get involved at those.

Frankly, as a pre first year you can’t be 100% sure what you want to give into, and with no research experience trying to reach out and work with someone who isn’t even at your institution seems ambitious.

At your level, I recommend taking the approach that research is research. Find a mentor at your institution who will allow you to get your feet wet with literally anything, and see where that takes you. If after 1st year you remain convinced that some competitive specialty is the one and only way you can be happy in medicine and you think you’ll be competitive for it, then you can try to pivot to research in that field with some basic experience under your belt.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

Just wanted to update everyone. The PI stated I will get authorship on both of the current studies. He was also open to me contributing more than solely just data collection. Thanks for all the words of wisdom!

 

[tri99]

Frankly, as a pre first year you can’t be 100% sure what you want to give into, and with no research experience trying to reach out and work with someone who isn’t even at your institution seems ambitious.

At your level, I recommend taking the approach that research is research. Find a mentor at your institution who will allow you to get your feet wet with literally anything, and see where that takes you. If after 1st year you remain convinced that some competitive specialty is the one and only way you can be happy in medicine and you think you’ll be competitive for it, then you can try to pivot to research in that field with some basic experience under your belt.

Thank you for the advice!

On a side note, would research in the field of exercise physiology be "devalued". I have some background in this field so naturally outside of primary care I tend to gravitate towards the science of cardiology and ortho.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thank you for the advice!

On a side note, would research in the field of exercise physiology be "devalued". I have some background in this field so naturally outside of primary care I tend to gravitate towards the science of cardiology and ortho.

Research is research. Everything is helpful, and anything that led to presentation or publication of results is particularly notable for the reasons I listed above.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Thank you for the advice!

On a side note, would research in the field of exercise physiology be "devalued". I have some background in this field so naturally outside of primary care I tend to gravitate towards the science of cardiology and ortho.

No!
I once wrote a paper looking at urine metabolites and used a lot of excercise physiology citations. Exercise physiology = physiology = highly relevant to any field of medicine

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

So I’m just starting to get my feet wet, but so far I like what I am doing with the clinical research. The doctor I work for has asked me to video some of his shoulder surgeries in addition to the research. I would be recording them in the OR, editing them, and then uploadloading them to a medical teaching website. I think this sounds really interesting, but I also work full time and will be devoting 16 hours a week to the clinical research. Does anyone think this could potentially help my residency app in the future if pursuing orthopaedics? I think the opportunity sounds unique and interesting and would jump on it if my schedule was more open, I just don’t want to burn myself out with too many different things knowing there wasn’t a return on my investment.

 

[longhaul3]

So I’m just starting to get my feet wet, but so far I like what I am doing with the clinical research. The doctor I work for has asked me to video some of his shoulder surgeries in addition to the research. I would be recording them in the OR, editing them, and then uploadloading them to a medical teaching website. I think this sounds really interesting, but I also work full time and will be devoting 16 hours a week to the clinical research. Does anyone think this could potentially help my residency app in the future if pursuing orthopaedics? I think the opportunity sounds unique and interesting and would jump on it if my schedule was more open, I just don’t want to burn myself out with too many different things knowing there wasn’t a return on my investment.

This sounds like a good way to build a good relationship with this guy and is probably worth doing, but at the end of the day you need pubs.

 

[Dr. Anonymouss]

This sounds like a good way to build a good relationship with this guy and is probably worth doing, but at the end of the day you need pubs.

thats what I figured. It seems like pubs > everything

 

[longhaul3]

thats what I figured. It seems like pubs > everything

Yeah, basically, but there is a lot of value in cultivating those relationships, especially if you want to stay for residency. If this is a high-profile guy, his blessing could be invaluable to you in a few years given the new step 1 situation.

 

[deleted936268]

Keeping things VERY general, In terms of academic impact:

Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial > Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial >> Prospective Matched Trial (Both Retro and Prospective)

Systematic Review with Meta-analysis > Systematic Review

Retrospective Cohort Study>>>>> Case Series (no stats, just characterizing things) >>>>>>>>>>Case Reports

Regarding time, for prospective studies I've found the things taking the most time are IRB approval (my hospital takes forever), and patient recruitment. For retrospective studies, the amount of time needed depends on the number of patients (charts) to review and the number of variables in question.

Before doing ANY research, do a power analysis and a literature review. No sense in wasting your time if the topic is published ad nauseam or the number of patients needed to find a significant result is >10,000.

Don't waste your time on case reports.

@Newyear , feel free to PM me if you have questions. Currently on a clinical research year in residency.

As someone trying to learn about getting into clinical research and the different pubs there (and how the game is played) - could you explain those different types of pubs? I get case reports but couldn't really find an intro to what a Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial is.

TIA.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

As someone trying to learn about getting into clinical research and the different pubs there (and how the game is played) - could you explain those different types of pubs? I get case reports but couldn't really find an intro to what a Prospective Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial is.

TIA.

Blinding is whether the people involved in the study know what treatment they are getting/giving. So single blind means study participants don’t know if they are getting drug vs placebo. If it’s double blind, the researchers giving it don’t know either.

Prospective vs. retrospective is about whether you’re collecting data about stuff that will happen in the future after the study begins (prospective) or looking at data about things that have already happened (retrospective)

Controlled: is there a control group in the study (one that is not receiving the experimental treatment)

 

[deleted936268]

View attachment 353132

Blinding is whether the people involved in the study know what treatment they are getting/giving. So single blind means study participants don’t know if they are getting drug vs placebo. If it’s double blind, the researchers giving it don’t know either.

Prospective vs. retrospective is about whether you’re collecting data about stuff that will happen in the future after the study begins (prospective) or looking at data about things that have already happened (retrospective)

Controlled: is there a control group in the study (one that is not receiving the experimental treatment)

I see, appreciate it. When looking for clinical research in med school and obviously looking for a high output lab, does every type of clinical lab work on all those pubs or only some? And do students going after comp specialties find a lab that allows them to pub the highest value pubs, or does that happen once you already are in a lab? Idk if there's a guide to "the game of med school clinical research for people going after comp specialties" since it seems to be really different than what I've been used to with undergrad (needing only 1-2 basic pubs and a **** ton of hrs).

Thanks!

 

[Dr G Oogle]

I see, appreciate it. When looking for clinical research in med school and obviously looking for a high output lab, does every type of clinical lab work on all those pubs or only some? And do students going after comp specialties find a lab that allows them to pub the highest value pubs, or does that happen once you already are in a lab? Idk if there's a guide to "the game of med school clinical research for people going after comp specialties" since it seems to be really different than what I've been used to with undergrad (needing only 1-2 basic pubs and a **** ton of hrs).

Thanks!

Joining a lab is only going to get you basic science research, and it’s not likely to net you a first author pub. For clinical research you’d need to find a mentor to help you conduct a clinical trial. The most likely “clinical trial” that a med student will complete is a single institution retrospective cohort, i.e. a chart review. It is highly unlikely that a student has sufficient statistical prowess to conduct a big data study, or enough knowledge/time to conduct prospective studies (these can take months if not years to complete). You could hop on to a prospective project, students are very helpful with patient recruitment and following up with patients to administer surveys and assess treatment response. I would recommend shooting for the latter (hopping on prospective trials) this is meaningfully helpful work that is often difficult for investigator initiated study teams to complete and will get you co-author.

First authorship is in my opinion difficult for a student to achieve in a short time.

 

[Darrow O'Lykos]

As someone with extensive clinical research experience, one thing I'll tell you to keep in mind is that if you do get in on a prospective clinical trial, take whatever the projected duration is from start to publication and double it.

And then double it again.

Reality will be somewhere closer to the latter rather than the former.

Retrospective analyses are a great way to get your feet wet and actually accomplish something publication worthy within the short time you have between now and when you apply to residency. Plus it'll open other doors to other projects going on in the department.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

Joining a lab is only going to get you basic science research, and it’s not likely to net you a first author pub. For clinical research you’d need to find a mentor to help you conduct a clinical trial. The most likely “clinical trial” that a med student will complete is a single institution retrospective cohort, i.e. a chart review. It is highly unlikely that a student has sufficient statistical prowess to conduct a big data study, or enough knowledge/time to conduct prospective studies (these can take months if not years to complete). You could hop on to a prospective project, students are very helpful with patient recruitment and following up with patients to administer surveys and assess treatment response. I would recommend shooting for the latter (hopping on prospective trials) this is meaningfully helpful work that is often difficult for investigator initiated study teams to complete and will get you co-author.

First authorship is in my opinion difficult for a student to achieve in a short time.

I’ve heard a lot of people refer to clinical research teams as “labs” even if they aren’t actually doing any wet lab work so that might be what they meant, rather than basic science labs

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

I see, appreciate it. When looking for clinical research in med school and obviously looking for a high output lab, does every type of clinical lab work on all those pubs or only some? And do students going after comp specialties find a lab that allows them to pub the highest value pubs, or does that happen once you already are in a lab? Idk if there's a guide to "the game of med school clinical research for people going after comp specialties" since it seems to be really different than what I've been used to with undergrad (needing only 1-2 basic pubs and a **** ton of hrs).

Thanks!

Rather than approaching it by study type, start from your topic/specialty of interest and look for a mentor who works in that field. Then see if they have a project you can join. If you’re trying to start a study from scratch, you would begin with identifying your research question, and choosing the study design most appropriate for it. It’s unlikely that a single lab/team would do every type of study design - different designs are better suited to answering different questions, and people develop expertise in certain types of studies.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

Also I think you may be misinterpreting “highest value” a bit here. A double blinded randomized RCT is high value for the overal scientific endeavor in terms of your ability to produce high quality data that answers certain types of questions. But “high value” for a residency application means that regardless of the study design, you are participating in the project in a truly meaningful way (ie 1st author on a cross sectional survey, rather than 18th author on an RCT)

 

[aldol16]

Quality of evidence and strength of paper does not matter to you as a medical student. You care only about getting your name on papers. Go for the quantity. Quality does matter to an extent but quantity makes your resume look better.

In terms of strategy, I wouldn't do only case reports or only reviews. I would aim for prospective or retrospective cohort studies using data that has already been collected. That way, you're doing the data analysis and write-up, which can be a quick project. Rinse and repeat.

If you can, get involved in a higher quality trial but recognize that these take a lot of time and may not even be submitted for publication by the time you apply to residency.

 

[aldol16]

Joining a lab is only going to get you basic science research, and it’s not likely to net you a first author pub. For clinical research you’d need to find a mentor to help you conduct a clinical trial. The most likely “clinical trial” that a med student will complete is a single institution retrospective cohort, i.e. a chart review. It is highly unlikely that a student has sufficient statistical prowess to conduct a big data study, or enough knowledge/time to conduct prospective studies (these can take months if not years to complete). You could hop on to a prospective project, students are very helpful with patient recruitment and following up with patients to administer surveys and assess treatment response. I would recommend shooting for the latter (hopping on prospective trials) this is meaningfully helpful work that is often difficult for investigator initiated study teams to complete and will get you co-author.

First authorship is in my opinion difficult for a student to achieve in a short time.

First authorship not hard at all if you are driven and have the technical skills. In today's day and age, many medical students do know some statistical programming and if they don't, they can learn enough to design and conduct studies.

If a med student just wants to be added on to other people's projects, then they should not expect a first authorship to come out of it. Sometimes it happens. Those are the exceptions and not the rule.

If a med student wants to be first author on something, that med student should acquire the requisite skills to perform the majority of the data analysis and come up with interesting research questions to answer using data that has already been collected, or large administrative databases.

If done right, these projects can take 1-3 months of moderate dedication and work.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

First authorship not hard at all if you are driven and have the technical skills.

In my experience with this is seriously lacking, it may be that most of the students I work with want to go into obgyn and in the past the field has not been competitive enough or prioritized research so I get a lot of people with 0 experience and technical skill with regard to research and statistical analysis. You’re right, the ones that do can get it done relatively quickly.

But quality research is not going to get done in 1-3 months with moderate dedication, you might get a paper out of it but it will be mostly drek. I suspect with research becoming much more emphasized on applications many people will see through crummy research for the sake of applying.

 

[deleted936268]

@Dr G Oogle @aldol16 @TelemarketingEnigma @Darrow O'Lykos - I appreciate the help.

My questions stem from being a year out from matriculating to an MD program but trying to figure out the game early since want comp specialty.

Many of these terms are new for me, so apologies in advance if I slip here and there but wanted to follow up with these questions.

1. What's the research game for getting into top academic competitive specialties? I see many people talking about just padding cv as much as possible + 2-3 first author pubs being enough to win on that side of your residency app.

2. Is there a guide or somewhere in MD people learn all about different clinical research pubs and how to know which labs are offering what / likelihood of pubbing. Like I said, my xp is super limited to just undergrad basic science labs and it's my understanding the game is played completely different in MD.

3. What skills do I need for clinical research to drop in and be successful day 1? Currently I know R and Python data analysis (scitkit learn stuff) and some ML stuff. Is there anything else I should get a head start on? I know people talk about learning IRB but idk the best place to do that.

4. How many hours/week or hours total are the most competitive MD students doing research? Let's say to get to 20+ pubs and 1-2 first author.

Basically, I just want to learn the whole game for MD to comp residency (or at least the research side for now).

Thanks!

 

[Darrow O'Lykos]

1. What's the research game for getting into top academic competitive specialties? I see many people talking about just padding cv as much as possible + 2-3 first author pubs being enough to win on that side of your residency app.

Getting into the top academic residency programs should be your aim if you want to pursue a highly academic career. If you really don't have much interest in practicing medicine at an academic center and crank out research all the time, then don't feel pressure that you have to land one of those residencies. There are plenty of programs that are not research-heavy that produce stellar doctors that provide excellent care to their patients.

2. Is there a guide or somewhere in MD people learn all about different clinical research pubs and how to know which labs are offering what / likelihood of pubbing. Like I said, my xp is super limited to just undergrad basic science labs and it's my understanding the game is played completely different in MD.

Your school will likely have some sort of research interest group that will be composed of students trying to learn the basics of research. They'll also likely be able to educate you on some of the research happening on campus. You'll also learn about what research your faculty are doing as you progress through your curriculum. If you are interested in pursuing a competitive field, I'd suggest getting in on something your first year, then connecting with a mentor to do a dedicated project the summer after your first year. That's more than a good starting point. You may make these sorts of connections via interest groups you join, professors teaching your courses, or even in the anatomy lab as you go through dissections. You'll get even further exposure your third year to cases in the hospital during your rotations which will likely offer up multiple opportunities for interesting case reports. Work with your peers on multiple projects and have them help you with yours.

3. What skills do I need for clinical research to drop in and be successful day 1? Currently I know R and Python data analysis (scitkit learn stuff) and some ML stuff. Is there anything else I should get a head start on? I know people talk about learning IRB but idk the best place to do that.

You don't need to be worried about research and being successful day 1. You don't know what you want yet, and that's okay (you shouldn't). Knowing those skills may help, but there's nothing you need to do to get a head start. Your success in the classroom should be your primary focus going into school. You'll learn about research along the way from mentors you meet and relationships you develop.

4. How many hours/week or hours total are the most competitive MD students doing research? Let's say to get to 20+ pubs and 1-2 first author.

You can look up the NRMP match data and see what the average number of publications and presentations are for successfully matched applicants by speciality. 20 is probably in the top 2% of matched applicants and is quite high, and unnecessary for most successful applicants.

In regards to how much time it takes per week, that is highly variable and depends on the projects you work on.

 

[TelemarketingEnigma]

Before you plan all this research stuff out - do you actually enjoy research? What kind of questions do you like thinking about? Are you good at numbers, computers, qualitative stuff? What is your specialty of interest? Thinking about those things and finding a mentor at your future school will all be important.

2. Is there a guide or somewhere in MD people learn all about different clinical research pubs and how to know which labs are offering what / likelihood of pubbing. Like I said, my xp is super limited to just undergrad basic science labs and it's my understanding the game is played completely different in MD.

If you just want to know about what large clinical trials are happening at an institution there’s things like clinicaltrials.gov, but that’s not really meant for finding student research opportunities at an institution. Otherwise it’s mostly about contacting people in your specialty of interest to see if they have any projects they need help with. Sometimes they’ll have info online you can read, or you can look at previous pubs, but often as an MD student it’s just about cold emails and recommendations from mentors (your school may have a research office that can help as well)

In terms of learning about study design, you will learn at least a little about it in med school (it’s required for boards) but pretty minimal. If you do anything like an MPH or take an undergrad course in bio stats, research methods, etc then you’ll learn a lot more about it.

3. What skills do I need for clinical research to drop in and be successful day 1? Currently I know R and Python data analysis (scitkit learn stuff) and some ML stuff. Is there anything else I should get a head start on? I know people talk about learning IRB but idk the best place to do that.

Those skills would be helpful, a lot more can be learned on the job. Just depends what you want to do. IRB isn’t something you “learn”, it’s an Institutional Review Board. Leading the IRB for a project means you filled out a lot of paperwork, essentially.

4. How many hours/week or hours total are the most competitive MD students doing research? Let's say to get to 20+ pubs and 1-2 first author.

First of all, vast vast majority of med students will not have anywhere near that number of quality pubs unless they take a research year. Try not to get ahead of yourself too much - first get into med school (unless you’re already in and deferred?), then make sure you can handle the course load, then figure out if you even like research! To get the number you’re aiming for will definitely be a lot of work and hours, but you can get a perfectly reasonable number of pubs with less work. It’s cool you’re excited an interested but it’s too long of a road ahead of you to get hung up on all the details right now

 

[aldol16]

1. What's the research game for getting into top academic competitive specialties? I see many people talking about just padding cv as much as possible + 2-3 first author pubs being enough to win on that side of your residency app.

Quantity over quality over nothing. Quantity does matter. Ideally you would have the quantity with a few high quality pubs in high quality journals that you can emphasize and talk about during interviews.

2. Is there a guide or somewhere in MD people learn all about different clinical research pubs and how to know which labs are offering what / likelihood of pubbing. Like I said, my xp is super limited to just undergrad basic science labs and it's my understanding the game is played completely different in MD.

Depends on the school. There's a chance you have an internal site about which projects are being done by which PIs that need med student help but low chance you find information on chance of publishing. Everyone wants to publish and that's the end goal for all research but not all research projects pan out. Whether they do is dependent on your ability to task shift and pivot as challenges arise.

3. What skills do I need for clinical research to drop in and be successful day 1? Currently I know R and Python data analysis (scitkit learn stuff) and some ML stuff. Is there anything else I should get a head start on? I know people talk about learning IRB but idk the best place to do that.

Those will be plenty. Brush up on your R and how it's used for data science specifically. Data cleaning and knowing how to run models will make you a valuable asset to any lab.

4. How many hours/week or hours total are the most competitive MD students doing research? Let's say to get to 20+ pubs and 1-2 first author.

# of pubs is dependent not only on effort but also luck. So no one can tell you for sure. The best thing you can do is to find a PI who is younger and hungry to publish and has a track record of publishing with medical students. You can look up anyone's research record on PubMed.

 

[aldol16]

In my experience with this is seriously lacking, it may be that most of the students I work with want to go into obgyn and in the past the field has not been competitive enough or prioritized research so I get a lot of people with 0 experience and technical skill with regard to research and statistical analysis. You’re right, the ones that do can get it done relatively quickly.

Yeah, definitely field dependent. Also probably school dependent. Hard to work with people with 0 experience and no willingness to learn new techniques. Like they're still in the mindset of "I just put in X hours a week in the 'lab' and I get something out of it." That's not how clinical research works. You need hard skills to succeed.

But quality research is not going to get done in 1-3 months with moderate dedication, you might get a paper out of it but it will be mostly drek. I suspect with research becoming much more emphasized on applications many people will see through crummy research for the sake of applying.

Hard disagree. You may not get high quality prospective studies done in 1-3 months but I would argue that if in your field large databases/registries exist, you can do well designed studies in those in 1-3 months that are high quality. People are just beginning to apply more advanced statistical and machine learning techniques to many fields as databases get larger and we can draw very powerful inferences from them.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Hard disagree. You may not get high quality prospective studies done in 1-3 months but I would argue that if in your field large databases/registries exist, you can do well designed studies in those in 1-3 months that are high quality. People are just beginning to apply more advanced statistical and machine learning techniques to many fields as databases get larger and we can draw very powerful inferences from them.

Hard disagree^2. It is possible to do a big data study in 1-3 months, I’ve done it myself. But seldom are projects done by a med stud alone, let alone someone who has advanced stats knowledge (who can actually get it done themselves). Most people including students, are not working on just one thing, and between getting stats done, writing a paper, having all edits done by PI and other co-I who are usually very busy, and then getting it published (which depending on journal and if it gets accepted on first pass, not including revisions, can taken 3-4 months itself) it will take much longer than 3 months to get a project from start to finish.

 

[effectedtag]

Question. I did computational chemistry research as an undergrad. It has led to a lot of publications and I can use the skills in a number of different aspects to publish papers in a few months. Think about papers like these: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c00708 , https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152946

Would this type of research be worth continuing in medical school?

 

[aldol16]

Hard disagree^2. It is possible to do a big data study in 1-3 months, I’ve done it myself. But seldom are projects done by a med stud alone, let alone someone who has advanced stats knowledge (who can actually get it done themselves). Most people including students, are not working on just one thing, and between getting stats done, writing a paper, having all edits done by PI and other co-I who are usually very busy, and then getting it published (which depending on journal and if it gets accepted on first pass, not including revisions, can taken 3-4 months itself) it will take much longer than 3 months to get a project from start to finish.

Depends on what field you're in. None of the big data studies I've done have taken more than 3-4 months to actually do. I am not referring to the submission and review process. I am referring to ideation through to completion of data analysis right up to submission. Sometimes PI is busier than others and might take longer but clock never ran past 4 months. Doesn't take advanced stats knowledge, just will to learn how to do basic stats and learning specific statistical methods as the need arises. I've run mixed models, econometric models, etc. which were learned during the course of the projects. Oh and I was first author on all of those.

Submitting and getting it published is on another timeline altogether. There are journals that take 4 weeks for first round of review and others that take 4-6 months (got really ridiculous during COVID).

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Question. I did computational chemistry research as an undergrad. It has led to a lot of publications and I can use the skills in a number of different aspects to publish papers in a few months. Think about papers like these: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c00708 , https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152946

Would this type of research be worth continuing in medical school?

Yup, you just need to find the right PI to let you use those skills

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Depends on what field you're in. None of the big data studies I've done have taken more than 3-4 months to actually do. I am not referring to the submission and review process. I am referring to ideation through to completion of data analysis right up to submission. Sometimes PI is busier than others and might take longer but clock never ran past 4 months. Doesn't take advanced stats knowledge, just will to learn how to do basic stats and learning specific statistical methods as the need arises. I've run mixed models, econometric models, etc. which were learned during the course of the projects. Oh and I was first author on all of those.

Submitting and getting it published is on another timeline altogether. There are journals that take 4 weeks for first round of review and others that take 4-6 months (got really ridiculous during COVID).

I would then say you are the exception not the rule to what I’ve experienced with students. Certainly what you did is possible but it requires a level of work and commitment I’ve not seen in 90% of students who come across my desk. It could be that most of them are going into OB which hasn’t traditionally valued research, those applying to urology are more motivated but I haven’t seen anyone with your level of motivation other than myself.

 

[aldol16]

I would then say you are the exception not the rule to what I’ve experienced with students. Certainly what you did is possible but it requires a level of work and commitment I’ve not seen in 90% of students who come across my desk. It could be that most of them are going into OB which hasn’t traditionally valued research, those applying to urology are more motivated but I haven’t seen anyone with your level of motivation other than myself.

Is research required for OB nowadays? I'm in a competitive surgical subspecialty where research is required and so we tend to have students who are very motivated and will learn what they need to learn to get the projects across the finish line.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Is research required for OB nowadays? I'm in a competitive surgical subspecialty where research is required and so we tend to have students who are very motivated and will learn what they need to learn to get the projects across the finish line.

I think more and more, it seems to be one of the more competitive specialties now and with step 1 being pass fail I imagine it will be more important.