does masters degree help on the match?

[cbc]

we've all heard md/phd helps in the match, and most get their #1 choice residency. is this true? and does the same apply to students who got a masters (mba, mph, ms, ma, etc).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ny skindoc]

If an Masters degree is related to the specialty applied to it can be a help.Such as an applicant to Radiation Oncology with a masters degree in physics,otherwise I dont think it will matter much.A MD/phd will be a big boost in residency application.It does not guarantee a first choice by any means.That would depend on the specific program and specialty.Some hospitals receive a good number of such applicants.

 

[Kalel]

Yup, having a PhD when applying to prestigious academic residency programs is like making AOA. Academic PD's *love* to have large numbers of MD/PhD's in their program, it supposedly adds prestige to the program and it ensures that they are training true academicians. As the previous poster indicated, a masters in the sciences or research in the field that you are going into will help your application as well. A masters in something like English lit will be meaningless though.

 

[cbc]

Is there a place to see and compare the matchlist of md/phd students? Everytime I see matchlists, they dont denote md/phd, so I cannot tell who's md and who's md/phd. Sorry, this is not a md/phd post, but one about extra degrees and how they fare in the internal med match.

 

[banannie]

What about a master's degree in something like public health, medical anthropology, health policy, or medical ethics? Would that be more or less helpful than doing a year of research and getting a publication?

 

[cbc]

bump

 

[cbc]

Does everyone in here agree with this?

Originally posted by Kalel
Yup, having a PhD when applying to prestigious academic residency programs is like making AOA. Academic PD's *love* to have large numbers of MD/PhD's in their program, it supposedly adds prestige to the program and it ensures that they are training true academicians. As the previous poster indicated, a masters in the sciences or research in the field that you are going into will help your application as well. A masters in something like English lit will be meaningless though.

 

[cbc]

Does no one else care about this issue? I'm sure most of you got MS or PhD before or during medical school. From your knowledge, how much does it influence residency selection?

 

[fun8stuff]

i am very interested....

 

[lurkerboy]

This thread sounds like the blind leading the blind. Here are my two cents anyway.

I think all of these things mean nothing out of context. If on your interview, you have a great explanation for why you pursued the degree, it will help. If you say you got your MA in english because you had nothing else to do that year, I doubt they'd care. If you say you want to be a medical writer, I bet you it would help. Same goes for anything you put on your application.

 

[VentdependenT]

Originally posted by cbc
Does no one else care about this issue? I'm sure most of you got MS or PhD before or during medical school. From your knowledge, how much does it influence residency selection?

Most people do not have masters degress or phd's prior to entering medical school.

Addressing your original question, having a masters degree won't make any difference if the rest of your CV/clinical gades/board scores are below average for your field of interest. If you have well above average in all of the prior mentioned selection criteria then posessing masters degree still will have little or no play in your ability to land solid interviews. My thoughts.

It is something nice to talk about during interviews though. At least I would imagine.

 

[cbc]

I've seen my PD get pretty excited about an applicant's master degree though. Are you sure about this?

I'm sure masters in english would help...but wouldnt it help more if you are going for derm and your masters thesis discovered a vaccine against HPV? I think that's everyone's point there lurkerboy.

Originally posted by VentdependenT
Most people do not have masters degress or phd's prior to entering medical school.

Addressing your original question, having a masters degree won't make any difference if the rest of your CV/clinical gades/board scores are below average for your field of interest. If you have well above average in all of the prior mentioned selection criteria then posessing masters degree still will have little or no play in your ability to land solid interviews. My thoughts.

It is something nice to talk about during interviews though. At least I would imagine.

 

[lurkerboy]

Originally posted by cbc
I've seen my PD get pretty excited about an applicant's master degree though. Are you sure about this?

I'm sure masters in english would help...but wouldnt it help more if you are going for derm and your masters thesis discovered a vaccine against HPV? I think that's everyone's point there lurkerboy.

I completely agree with you. My point is that it all depends on how you "sell" it.

 

[brats800]

big bump...anyone have some perspective on this? i'm specifically wondering what getting a masters in bioethics would do for me (other than it just being interesting)

 

[Clemson Doc]

I have an M.S. in Physiology. Shouldn't that help for the Internal Medicine match, since physio is so important?

 

[mig26x]

A MPH in Epi, Biostats or International health has to help!! If its an Master in a science related field, its gonna help!!

 

[DoctorSax]

This thread sounds like the blind leading the blind. Here are my two cents anyway.

I think all of these things mean nothing out of context. If on your interview, you have a great explanation for why you pursued the degree, it will help. If you say you got your MA in english because you had nothing else to do that year, I doubt they'd care. If you say you want to be a medical writer, I bet you it would help. Same goes for anything you put on your application.

Well put. I have a masters in international development studies that I got between my 2nd and 3rd years of med school. Did it help my residency application? Maybe. I'm interested in doing something in the global arena at some point in my career, so I figured that it behooved me to get the degree. It certainly made coming back for 3rd year difficult--lots of catching up to do.

Just make sure that you do the masters for the academic experiences it affords you and not just to beef up the CV. Every program that I interviewed at asked a great deal about what I was doing during that year off, why I did it then, and what I plan to do with the degree. At times it felt like I was having to justify taking time off med school.

Hope that helps! CBC, feel free to pm me if you have any other questions.

DS

 

[Benzo4every1]

Does no one else care about this issue? I'm sure most of you got MS or PhD before or during medical school. From your knowledge, how much does it influence residency selection?

um, no. i just have a BS LOL and I still got my #1

 

[medoc]

Believe me, I would love to think that it made a difference (I have several MS degrees and a PhD); however, from the perspective of a PD, why would it matter? ...I can't see how anyone would get very excited about the fact that someone has an advanced degree. I think you could even make a case that it shows that the applicant's true interests are not in medicine!

It really depends upon where you wish to do your training. If your desire is to train at a leading academic program, then I can't disagree with you more. Program directors at competitive programs assess for measures of general competence, but they also look overwhelmingly at how an applicant can expand upon their institutions reputation of academic excellence. Any bodunk program can teach a person the nuts and bolts of practicing medicine and then to make money in relative obscurity in private practice. Selection committees at academically oriented programs are looking for future leaders in teaching, patient care, original research, and policy. Any credentials that can solidify the impression of an applicant's dedication to these goals will improve his/her chances, be they life experiences, advanced degrees, special circumstances, or whatever. Irrespective of what type of degree, it is more important for an applicant to be able to synthesize his/her experiences into a nice package that affirms a trajectory to advance medicine in the academic arena. I have participated in the interview process at my cardiology fellowship program, and I typically try to look for evidence to support an applicant's dedication to academics.

Good luck!

 

[mig26x]

It really depends upon where you wish to do your training. If your desire is to train at a leading academic program, then I can't disagree with you more. Program directors at competitive programs assess for measures of general competence, but they also look overwhelmingly at how an applicant can expand upon their institutions' reputations of academic excellence. Any bodunk program can teach a person the nuts and bolts of practicing medicine and then to make money in relative obscurity in private practice. Selection committees at academically oriented programs are looking for future leaders in teaching, patient care, original research, and policy. Any credentials that can solidify the impression of an applicant's dedication to these goals will improve his/her chances, be they life experiences, advanced degrees, special circumstances, or whatever. Irrespective of what type of degree, it is more important for an applicant to be able to synthesize his/her experiences into a nice package that affirms a trajectory to advance medicine in the academic arena. I have participated in the interview process at my cardiology fellowship program, and I typically try to look for evidence to support an applicant's dedication to academics.

Good luck!

thank you for the post medoc!!

 

[Adcadet]

I'm curious about this as well given my background. I have been told by two different faculty members that I trust that having an advanced degree is nice, but showing that you've can actually use it makes a big difference. Who cares if you have a dozen different advanced degrees if you just practice clinical medicine like the rest of the masses? But if you have a publication record or some great extra experiences related to medicine that you could do because of your advanced degree, then you look more impressive. Of course, if you have a nice publication record and/or have done all sorts of cool things related to medicine even though you don't have an advanced degree, I'm sure you still look great. Now of course, one of these people also stressed that PDs are first and foremost looking for people who will be able to take care of sick patients and be pleasant to work with.

 

[inositide]

I don't have a PhD or a MA/MS for that matter.

However, I would say that having a PhD certainly trumps being AOA.

Someone wrote above that having a PhD is like being AOA. I would say that having a PhD in a related science is much more helpful than AOA and is definitely much more of an accomplishment than AOA.

Getting a PhD and then going on to get an MD or doing a MD/PhD requires a tremendous amount of hardwork, dedication, and years from your life and wage earning career.

Getting into a PhD program is not necessarily difficult, but the amount of life years that a PhD requires is very substantial.

 

[novacek88]

No, it doesn't help. A PhD helps a lot. The difference is that it is much more difficult to achieve a PhD. Masters degrees are subjective depending on the program, course director etc. You can achieve some Masters degrees very easily with little if any research. And a Masters degree can be achieved in as little as a year but PhD's can take anywhere from 4-8 years in a science-related field therefore a PhD suggests a significant amount of research has been completed to earn this degree.

Program directors want students who are comfortable with research since many fellowships are heavily research oriented. Program directors want to avoid students who will try to avoid doing research or do the least possible once admitted to a program. A PhD basically tells a PD that this person can handle research and doesn't mind it.

I agree with Nyskindoc though that a masters degree in a particular field that directly correlates to the field you are interested could help a little. But that's extremely hard to secure. A PhD in epidemiology or literature isn't going to do anything for you.

If you really want to impress people, forget getting an advanced degree and simply try to get published in the field you are interested in. Getting publications is far more impressive. There are ton of people with masters degreeswho have no publications and that won't help them at all. But every year there are medical students who spent additional time doing research during medical school or complete previous research that led to a publication.

Moral of the Story = Publications not Masters

 

[medoc]

...also, PhD work is often very different from ward type work. Being good in a lab or in statistical analysis doesn't necessarily mean that one will do well in the more chaotic environment of ward work. I think I would look more for indicators of excellence in whatever line of work one comes from. Thus, for clinical work, I suspect I might be more impressed with someone who had been a top performing salesperson than a run of the mill PhD. For the most part, I would want to be sure that a candidate will perform well on the wards and I don't think research is a particularly good indicator of that....

Flindophile, you stated correctly that the practices of original research and clinical care are very different. Most competitive academically oriented programs seek to populate their ranks with not only superior clinicians, but also prolific participants in the enterprise of scientific innovation and education. One objective indication of potential in academics is a past track record of the same, be it publications, dissertational work, research, etc. As a physician-scientist, my personal confession is that the undertaking of original research has been far more challenging than being a competent physician. Given the OP's question, I assume that the participants in this thread are interested in applying for coveted positions in competitive training programs. Modern medical training requires a multiplicity of skills that appear very schizophrenic, but the succesful synthesis of science with the humanistic demands of patient care separates the appealing applicant from the rest. My advice is to concentrate on the following traits (in no particular order): diligence, integrity, enthusiasm, compassion, and humility. As for career planning, ask yourself the right questions. What are your personal and intellectual goals, and what have you done to make these goals come to life? This discussion about advanced degrees is completely superfluous outside of this context.

Good luck!

 

[novacek88]

Flindophile, you stated correctly that the practices of original research and clinical care are very different. Most competitive academically oriented programs seek to populate their ranks with not only superior clinicians, but also prolific participants in the enterprise of scientific innovation and education. One objective indication of potential in academics is a past track record of the same, be it publications, dissertational work, research, etc. As a physician-scientist, my personal confession is that the undertaking of original research has been far more challenging than being a competent physician. Given the OP's question, I assume that the participants in this thread are interested in applying for coveted positions in competitive training programs. Modern medical training requires a multiplicity of skills that appear very schizophrenic, but the succesful synthesis of science with the humanistic demands of patient care separates the appealing applicant from the rest. My advice is to concentrate on the following traits (in no particular order): diligence, integrity, enthusiasm, compassion, and humility. As for career planning, ask yourself the right questions. What are your personal and intellectual goals, and what have you done to make these goals come to life? This discussion about advanced degrees is completely superfluous outside of this context.

Good luck!

Having a PhD will give you an edge but it by no means trumps AOA. This isn't even debateable. This is just old school "checklist" mentality. Everything starts with board scores and GPA/Class Rank/AOA. Those are the basics. Anything else like a PhD is just gravy but do not think that a PhD is superior to AOA. That is very wrong. If you want to argue and respond with a 3 page thesis, go ahead. Normally, I would respond in kind but this isn't even debateable. Anyone who suggests a PhD means more than AOA doesn't know the application process very well. I'm sure there are exceptions. If Program Director has a PhD and is very research driven then yes, a PhD would trump AOA but not in most cases.

 

[medoc]

Having a PhD will give you an edge but it by no means trumps AOA. This isn't even debateable. This is just old school "checklist" mentality. Everything starts with board scores and GPA/Class Rank/AOA. Those are the basics. Anything else like a PhD is just gravy but do not think that a PhD is superior to AOA. That is very wrong. If you want to argue and respond with a 3 page thesis, go ahead. Normally, I would respond in kind but this isn't even debateable...

I apologize for any misunderstanding or poor communication on my part. My primary point was that this discussion about advanced degrees is pointless outside of the context of personal intellectual and professional goals. I did not make any reference for making research a surrogate to the traditional criteria used in assessing general competence, i.e grades, honors, rank, board scores, AOA, etc. I do not think we are in disagreement in this regard, but comparing a PhD to AOA is nonsense. Apples to oranges is it not? I did my cardiology fellowship at the Brigham, and I am familiar with the admissions proceudres at many of the top programs in the country. On top of being competitive in most traditional criteria, desirable applicants will absolutely have to have a coherent and cohesive strategy for a succesful career in academics. No competitive university program will want to expend their time and resources into grooming a physician for private practice. Anyone can go to any accredited program to learn the nuts and bolts of practicing cardiology. You go to specific program A, B, or C because that particular program provides you with the resources to satisfy YOUR intellectual goals (i.e certain patient populations, certain mentors, labs, protocols, equipment, research groups, etc.). All this talk about additional graduate degrees (in it of itself) is really off the mark. This will be my last post.

Good luck to you.