Enough Research for top schools?

[polyploidy516]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

hi all,

I would really like to know what the general consensus is for research experience for top schools? Would roughly 1-1.5 years be enough ( with pubs, abstracts enough) in clinical research?

your thoughts would be appreciated. Thank you!

 

[Pacna]

How many pubs? Was yours the first or second name on any? What did you do specifically to contribute?

It's hard to tell if you already did this or if you're asking for future plans.

 

[Lucca]

There is no such thing as the general consensus. Don't do research if you don't like it. Do it if you like it. Stop worrying about school prestige right now.

 

[Pacna]

Stop worrying about school prestige right now.

This isn't exactly great advice. Prestige matters. Not as much as other things, but it does.

 

[polyploidy516]

i appreciate the clarification: I actually have 2 pubs in this research that i have been doing for the past 1ish years. I actually thoroughly enjoy the research and hope to continue it in med school.

Do you think this would be considered good for schools that are research heavy ( Columbia, Stanford, etc)?

 

[Lucca]

This isn't exactly great advice. Prestige matters. Not as much as other things, but it does.

It's one thing to try to get into the best school you possibly can. It's another thing to meticulously arrange your life so that you can get into those schools. It's just pointless and depressing.

 

[Lucca]

i appreciate the clarification: I actually have 2 pubs in this research that i have been doing for the past 1ish years. I actually thoroughly enjoy the research and hope to continue it in med school.

Do you think this would be considered good for schools that are research heavy ( Columbia, Stanford, etc)?

Yes, 2 publications is very good for research heavy schools.

 

[Espadaleader]

Research is required for these schools. There is no "like" option. You do research whether you like it or not. Don't risk being the 10-20% of the 4% of applicants that get in that don't have research. If the school has a scholarly requirement this is even more real.

 

[mmmcdowe]

Assuming you are 3rd author or higher, yeah that's actually a great research accomplishment. If you are like 8th, then it is still good but not as exceptional (most students at top schools do not have pubs going in).

 

[phunky]

Research is required for these schools. There is no "like" option. You do research whether you like it or not. Don't risk being the 10-20% of the 4% of applicants that get in that don't have research. If the school has a scholarly requirement this is even more real.

But why would you go to a school who's main focus is research if you don't like research?

 

[MalachiteGreen]

Depends on how much involvement you had on the research and how well you are able to speak of that involvement. Sounds like you've got great experience.

 

[bearded frog]

​

 

[Espadaleader]

But why would you go to a school who's main focus is research if you don't like research?

Research is huge at most schools. Not having it is a detriment. It is very hard to find a school that does not "require research". Just look at the MSAR. Even Morehouse and UW are over 75% research for incoming students and those schools have research. Over 50% of Morehouse grads do primary care btw.

http://www.myajc.com/gallery/lifestyles/photos-morehouse-school-medicines-match-day/g8Zy/

You just do research. If you like it make it a career. If not, its just something you do in undergrad or medical school.