How do you handle being out of the lab between PhD and residency?

[someqsaboutstuff]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Given the increasing rate of change in most basic science areas, I am a bit surprised that anyone can come back to research after 4+ years away from the lab. I suppose you can keep up with literature by regularly reading papers, but that is only a small part of being a productive researcher. Beyond specialties where residency may be more well aligned with certain research directions, I'm a bit surprised that MD/PhDs are able to come back to research and compete with PhDs for funding. If any computational MD/PhDs can comment on how they jumped back in, that would be great.

 

[soundnin]

that's why those gunning for research after the md/phd will try to land a pstp to get some sort of protected time during residency. most clinical fellowships have significant research time allocated. then some will go on to do a dedicated 1-3 year T32 research fellowship on top of that to secure a K or R award.

 

[agp4]

Yes, it can be a struggle returning after leaving the lab for so long. Even if you get into a research residency (I didn't choose this option), you won't be doing research day-to-day for at least 3 years.

My advice is to use the years in clinical training as an opportunity to find questions that are interesting or neglected in your clinical discipline. Because you're going to be starting from (nearly) scratch when you return, it's a great opportunity to pivot and take what skills you learned in grad school and apply them to a new field.

The good news is that computational biology translates into many fields, and you're going to be well poised as a clinician with computational experience. You'll have a few years in fellowship to build technical skills and generate preliminary data before getting pressure to secure funding. Many folks start with small foundation grants and work their way up. Some academic departments also have "instructor" level positions (attending on the clinical side, mentored postdoc on the research side) to bridge you to a K and an independent lab.

 

[dl2dp2]

It seems rare these days where people's PhD field is directly related to people's field after residency. So in that sense this concern is moot.

OTOH, compared to translational/applied research, basic science seems to move really really slowly. I frankly don't think you'll have a problem catching up if you take a break for 5 years in terms of the content of the science--I read papers posted on Twitter in basic science journals and they look very similar to papers that were written 10 years ago. As to whether what you do generate grants, seems that the part that's "impact" is all about how the research is applied to clinically relevant questions (so hopefully your MD training will be more applicable), and the part about "innovation" is mainly reviewed by people who are unfamiliar with the field at the level of detail to adjudicate the actual innovation. With basic science, you get grants by working with a famous mentor. Your concerns are not really relevant.

The real concern to drop out is when you are in your mid 30s and as a mostly clinician you'll make 3-5x $$$ vs. your basic science colleague. I'd estimate at least 50-80% of drop out at any of the transition points are due to this. IMO once you get to postdoc stage, if you REALLY want a job doing 50%+ research you'll be able to get it--you'll essentially just do it for free until you get grants (the school pays you a low salary that gets covered by clinical revenue). This effect is amplifying as grants are not inflation adjusted.

 

[Palaver87]

FYI computational people generally don't have years of no research because they can do research wherever clinical duties are done. This means they continue to do research even in PGY1 and PGY2.

It is one of the many advantages of not waiting for rodents. You wake up and slide to the left. Congratulations! You are now in lab because you are in front of your laptop.