Getting into research with no valuable experience

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

studentdocftw

M4
7+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
1,374
Reaction score
1,441
Hey folks!

As the title says, how exactly does one contribute in research with no real valuable experience? I was in plenty of labs in undergrad (Biochem 1&2, cell bio, analytical, etc.), but of course with those classes, there were protocols and an adviser looking over your work. I have 0 experience starting my own project, and my lab report writing days are a distant 2 years in the past. I guess my question really is, what is expected of an M1 when it comes to research opportunities? I understand research may or may not be important depending on my chosen field, but as of now I am leaning towards Cardio or EM (one that requires it, and one that really doesn't), so I figured I might as well be proactive about it. Maybe I'm overestimating the extent to which M1s conduct their own research/contribute solely on the project? My school has research opportunities between M1 and M2 that I will definitely take advantage of, but is there anymore on my own that I need to pursue?

Thanks for any advice!
 
Hey folks!

As the title says, how exactly does one contribute in research with no real valuable experience? I was in plenty of labs in undergrad (Biochem 1&2, cell bio, analytical, etc.), but of course with those classes, there were protocols and an adviser looking over your work. I have 0 experience starting my own project, and my lab report writing days are a distant 2 years in the past. I guess my question really is, what is expected of an M1 when it comes to research opportunities? I understand research may or may not be important depending on my chosen field, but as of now I am leaning towards Cardio or EM (one that requires it, and one that really doesn't), so I figured I might as well be proactive about it. Maybe I'm overestimating the extent to which M1s conduct their own research/contribute solely on the project? My school has research opportunities between M1 and M2 that I will definitely take advantage of, but is there anymore on my own that I need to pursue?

Thanks for any advice!


I had this same question!
Do NOT overthink it. Just the signature line of MS-1 will make you attractive enough. Also, when the professors ask to see your CV, I'm not sure what they look at because I've been told I do not have an impressive resume despite not having any substantial experience whatsoever. Jump in!
 
You learn some skills, you are given a question to ask, and then you answer it.

No PI is going to say to you "Pick a project and then start working on it".

In my lab, I'd have you start culturing cells, and then transfecting them with my Favorite Gene, and then do some assays to see how said gene affects the cell's phenotype.


Hey folks!

As the title says, how exactly does one contribute in research with no real valuable experience? I was in plenty of labs in undergrad (Biochem 1&2, cell bio, analytical, etc.), but of course with those classes, there were protocols and an adviser looking over your work. I have 0 experience starting my own project, and my lab report writing days are a distant 2 years in the past. I guess my question really is, what is expected of an M1 when it comes to research opportunities? I understand research may or may not be important depending on my chosen field, but as of now I am leaning towards Cardio or EM (one that requires it, and one that really doesn't), so I figured I might as well be proactive about it. Maybe I'm overestimating the extent to which M1s conduct their own research/contribute solely on the project? My school has research opportunities between M1 and M2 that I will definitely take advantage of, but is there anymore on my own that I need to pursue?

Thanks for any advice!
 
You are overestimating how much responsibility you will be given. Most likely you will be assisting someone else.

Presumably, this is how it will start out correct? How does one transition from following directions to becoming a 1st author? Also, how important is it to get to the point of 1st author? Obviously, any publication is good work, but are PDs expecting you to be the 1st author at some point? Or that you are just an active participant in the research process? I'm going to assume the answer will be: "1st author is distinguishable, but any publications will be helpful" haha.
 
I had this same question!
Do NOT overthink it. Just the signature line of MS-1 will make you attractive enough. Also, when the professors ask to see your CV, I'm not sure what they look at because I've been told I do not have an impressive resume despite not having any substantial experience whatsoever. Jump in!

Wait, you do NOT have an impressive resume despite not having any substantial experience or you DO have an impressive resume? are you yourself participating in research during medical school? Did you do any research in undergrad? You may be my twin.
 
You learn some skills, you are given a question to ask, and then you answer it.

No PI is going to say to you "Pick a project and then start working on it".

In my lab, I'd have you start culturing cells, and then transfecting them with my Favorite Gene, and then do some assays to see how said gene affects the cell's phenotype.

So...when do I start? 😉

Everyone has to start somewhere right? I am just excited to get involved. I assume there must be an allowance for a learning curve?
 
Last edited:
Wait, you do NOT have an impressive resume despite not having any substantial experience or you DO have an impressive resume? are you yourself participating in research during medical school? Did you do any research in undergrad? You may be my twin.

I mean my resume which I basically had to convert into a "CV" was pretty impressive for like having a bunch of diverse experience but in terms of research it was lacking. I still don't have amazing research experience at the moment but I applied and was accepted into competitive programs that the school offers which is why I don't think research experience matters. Just demonstrate a willingness to learn.
 
I mean my resume which I basically had to convert into a "CV" was pretty impressive for like having a bunch of diverse experience but in terms of research it was lacking. I still don't have amazing research experience at the moment but I applied and was accepted into competitive programs that the school offers which is why I don't think research experience matters. Just demonstrate a willingness to learn.

That's definitely reassuring! I guess it's a bit unreasonable to expect every MS-1 to have prior, significant research experience.
 
First author is more impressive, but plenty of people do well in the match without first author papers.

At you stage, do not expect first author responsibilities. As you get further along, gain experience, and get to know the attending/residents in your chosen field, opportunities will arise to take more of a leadership role in a project and hopefully end up with a first author publication.
 
First author is a rather coveted spot for which, depending on the size of the project, several people may want and requires considerable effort and time. For instance, if you work at a project for a year with a PI only (assuming a PI is only going to work with a student... which is rare) and you have a work product with a story, then you could be first author. More likely though, you will find a project with a post-doc, resident, fellow or junior faculty to which you will be able to contribute, but they will do a bulk of the work and be first author. At your stage, you shouldn't expect (nor should someone expect you) to be first author. Getting you name is anything is great.
 
Always. I am very patient with new people in the lab. It's returning kindnesses shown to me by my own mentors.

So...when do I start? 😉

Everyone has to start somewhere right? I am just excited to get involved. I assume there must be an allowance for a learning curve?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't clinical research be a more valuable use of time? I can't imagine learning the bio lab essentials as a med student let alone obtaining a publication.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't clinical research be a more valuable use of time? I can't imagine learning the bio lab essentials as a med student let alone obtaining a publication.

Personally, I agree with you. Clinical research is more likely to produce publications. I think it is also easier for med students to play a significant role.

However, basic science research also has its role. For some students, this is their passion, and that is fine.

It is all a personal decision.
 
Personally, I agree with you. Clinical research is more likely to produce publications. I think it is also easier for med students to play a significant role.

However, basic science research also has its role. For some students, this is their passion, and that is fine.

It is all a personal decision.

Definitely agree. It's also hard to say basic science research isn't your passion if you haven't tried it yet! Definitely recommend doing what is most enjoyable.
 
Basic research is very interesting, but at the same time it's very tedious. Clinical research can be more productive in terms of publishing.
This is not necessarily true. It depends on the scope of the project. Finding a role of a known co-factor in a different signaling cascade is novel, and if chance has it or the scope is meant to be small, publishable without many details (but it would be low impact). On the other hand, multi-center clinical trials, have a very large scope, take years to develop and make produce a negative outcome (but may be high impact depending on the hypothesis tested).
 
Last edited:
Top