Do I need more variety in my research?

[bee17]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Today I met with my ugrad's pre-health advisor, and she told me that not having more diversity in my research would be a weak point in my application, as I have only researched with one P.I. Should I be concerned about this? Please see details below:

I am planning to apply to M.D./Ph.D. programs in the upcoming cycle (2015-2016). I have been researching with the same P.I. since summer 2013 (2 years at the time of application). This research has resulted in 4 posters (1 at international conference), 1 presentation, and I am currently writing it up for a 1st author pub, which will be submitted by the time of application. Because this project is wrapping up and my P.I. is taking a sabbatical soon, I plan on joining a new lab my senior year.

Along the same vein, my advisor said that while straight M.D. applicants try to get around 4-5 LOR, I should be shooting for closer to 10 for M.D./Ph.D.! This really worried me because right now I have 5-6 strong letters, and I think any others would be weak by comparison.

My school only has one or two M.D./Ph.D. applicants per year, so I'm wondering if my advisor is misinformed (or if I am). 🙁

 

[tndlkar]

Not sure about the diversity of research; I was in two labs in undergrad. I don't think it hurts to be only in one lab unless it is unproductive research. About the second question, I received interviews and acceptances at top 20 schools with 3 LORs (two from the PIs I did research with and one science thesis/major advisor) plus 1 LOR I sent to half the schools from a humanities instructor who knew me well.* I would say go with the 4-5 very strong ones, but make sure you have 2-3 scientists in there.

*Edit: If it helps you decide, I was never told during my interviews that I only had 3 letters. Instead, interviewers remarked that my letter writers wrote very strong letters in support of me.

 

[gutonc]

Most college pre-health advisors are only modestly useful in advising for the bulk of the standard pre-meds. The ones that have any clue about pre-MSTP are pretty much non-existent.

A single productive research experience (which you appear to have) is way more useful for MSTP admissions than 3 or 4 different experiences that get you nothing other than a LOR.

 

[Fencer]

Agree with above. In terms of research experiences and LORs, it appears that you are doing very well. Hopefully, you also have the academic achievements barriers (GPA, MCAT) to be competitive. Good luck!

 

[VitaminVater]

@bee17

I'm an applicant this cycle who had ~2 yrs in the same lab with similar output as you (posters/orals and pubs). At the time of application I was off on a summer research internship which I also got a LOR for.

I can say from experience on interviews that being in a single lab for a long time is a huge plus if not what they're expecting. It shows dedication and growth as a scientist, reflected both by your results as well as what you'll write/talk about for secondaries/interviews and in the LOR from your PI.

Also, run away from your pre-med advisor. No school will take more than 7 letters. Most will tell you not to send more than 5-6.

If you need any help with the cycle, pm me whenever.

 

[bee17]

Thank you everyone for the replies! I feel much better now. 🙂 My advisor is generally helpful, but I guess I will take her M.D./Ph.D. advice with a grain of salt.

@Fencer, my GPA is strong, so the next challenge is to score competitively on the May 22nd MCAT (not that anyone knows exactly what a competitive score will be 😕).

@VitaminVater, thanks for the offer! I may take you up on that.