Gap year Advice - Clinical Research Coordinator vs. Medical Assistant

[markjohnson23]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hello! I am a recent grad in my gap years as I prepare to apply to the June 2026 Cycle. I have minimal clinical volunteer hours at a large hospital near when I went to college, but nothing monumental for my application. That being said - I know I am in need of clinical hours. Up to this point, I have done fairly significant research ( no pubs), leadership in research org on campus, volunteering in local food justice org, food pantry volunteering, mentoring HS students, etc.

I have the option of working as a medical assistant at a clinic I am very interested in, and would have a good LOR from the MD there. I also have the option of working as a clinical research coordinator at a large academic institution, with about 60% of my day-to-day duties being interacting with the patients. Also would be a great opportunity for more significant contributions to papers/abstracts, and I am interested in clinical research for my future career.

I am concerned that the CRC job will not be viewed as clinical enough? Is this a fair concern? Could I supplement the CRC job with extra clinical volunteering in this case? Any and all advice is MUCH appreciated.

 

[saltykiosk]

I've been a CRC for 1.5 years. similar question
First of all CRC positions can be very different, personally I counted all of mine as clinical (although I needed the research hours far more) because my essays and descriptions sounded clinical. some CRCs are very administrative or research focused. But in my job I was seeing patients like 6 hours a day and I did have clinical volunteering + shadowing to back it up. ADCOMS from some research heavy schools consider CRCs a mission fit, while service heavy school adcoms might consider it too administrative.

even then, I have IIs from top service schools and my interviewers spoke highly of my CRC position so I don't think it's an issue

 

[polymerization]

I went out of my way to complete a formal CRC training program at a T20 school, at high cost. I felt duped by the end. The role didn't make it to my final application.

Just using context clues with the job title (and the fact that it attracts so many premeds), you get the impression that a CRC role is the best of both worlds: you get to do clinical work with the potential of research authorship and close relationships with physicians... working with new medications and devices, helping people who previously did not have medical options get their best chance at treatment. What more could you possibly want? Of course I wanted to jump at that opportunity.

Unfortunately, the CRC role is well-circumscribed. It is primarily administrative: your main role is consenting participants and managing the binders and binders of compliance/regulatory information that is required by law. For that reason, most clinical research organizations are forced to hire CRCs... but want more out of them.

What ends up happening is that you end up in a CRC role in title, but are actually doing the work of two people. Some places will tell you that you're a "CRC," but you're actually doing MA work plus managing compliance. That way they can pay you less than they would pay an MA, and claim they have a CRC in their employ for legal reasons (and technically, they do, on paper).

There are a lot of companies that will make these roles sound like they are prestigious internships or pre-med programs. It's a scam.

Choose an MA role where at least the physicians have the audacity to exploit you to your face, ten toes down. If you're going to be played anyway, might as well get played in a way that is legible on an application.

 

[Saturnalia_1]

I am currently a CRC that got in this cycle and the mix of both clinical and research experiences I got from being a CRC I think helped a lotttt. Being a CRC gives you the chance to submit research, win awards, network with faculty, gain meaningful patient exposure, have mentors more involved in academia/admissions, more chances of meeting individuals also pursuing pre-med, have access to a lot more resources than a clinic would have etc. Ultimately, if you're lacking in clinical experiences it might be safer to go be an MA but CRC can fill that gap as well and then some.

 

[uglywesternblot]

I'd recommend MA if you already have substantial research experience. An an MA, you'll gain a strong understanding of how healthcare operates in our current system. There will be monotonous administrative work such as calling/faxing/emailing etc, but you should have plenty of opportunities to interact with patients and develop basic clinical skills. You'll get to work directly with physicians and see what their day to day looks like that might not always seem that apparent (seeing 30+ patients in one day, completing peer to peers, responding to EMR messages etc). I'm in the middle of my interview season right now, but I have had so many meaningful patient and clinic stories that I got to talk about during my interviews. Feel free to dm if you have any specific questions : )

 

[Goro]

MA. That puts you in front of resl patients, not research subjects.

 

[pazzer2]

I'll offer a slightly different perspective. I'm an MD that works in the biopharma industry for the past 25 years in a clinical development role.

If you ever have any interest in choosing a career in academic medicine (clinical research) or the biopharma industry after finishing MD, then I would go for the CRC position. Having 1-2 years experience as a CRC would make you stand out when competing for jobs. Most MDs finishing residency/training generally don't have any clue how to properly conduct clinical trials, and this would be a great differentiator for you. But if you want to stay purely clinical after you finish training, then I agree with the others that a MA role might be a better fit.