How much research can I do without a PhD?

[numbersloth]

I'm interested in research but not looking to get a PhD. I would be interested in at most a masters, possibly focusing on clinical research and clinical trials. Is it possible to publish papers with only an MD? How much research experience do I need in undergrad?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

I've seen plenty of research papers done by people with an MS. In fact, I'd recommend it over a PhD as a career move these days. Get the MS, get into a lab, and become a lab manager.

You do NOT need a PhD or MD/PhD to either do research or publish.

How much experience? Enough to demonstrate that you have learned something about the scientific method. Typical SDNers have hundreds to 1000s of hrs in the lab. A publication is good, but not required. It's hard enough for PhDs to get a paper!

I'm interested in research but not looking to get a PhD. I would be interested in at most a masters, possibly focusing on clinical research and clinical trials. Is it possible to publish papers with only an MD? How much research experience do I need in undergrad?

 

[Lucca]

What my mentors and people ahead of me have told me is essentially this: you can do research with an MD, a PhD or both but in all three cases you need training. Training in how to do science, in a particular field's body of knowledge and in grant writing / lab managing. You can get this through a PhD, a post-doc, maybe you don't want to run a lab but want to contribute to bench science as a part of your career and get an MS and cooperate with PhDs at your institution, etc. Maybe you want to do clinical research and none of the degrees are necessary. Maybe what you actually need is the statistics background of an MPH or something. Maybe what you are interested in doing is so specialized that a PhD or a very targeted post doc is the only way to go (brain devices or something).

The way I'm approaching the question of how to get a research / medical career is this: what do I want to do? What training do I need? How do I get it? I think if you can think about those questions a bit it might help elucidate which path is best for you.

 

[eteshoe]

You can certainly publish papers as an MD. What you have to ask yourself is what types of publications would you like to get out? - basic science? translational? clinical trial outcomes? Certain types of publications may require additional training like @Lucca had mentioned. Also it's unlikely that your undergrad research will result in a publication so don't stress yourself out. There will most likely be opportunities for you to get involved in research during med school.

 

[trini818]

Getting a masters is fine, especially if you are going to med school. Like Goro said, becoming a lab manager or a research assistant will get you involved in many aspects of the research process and will get you publications. A committee member suggested to me that I quit and get my masters because he knew I wanted to go to med school, but I wanted my PhD. You don't need the PhD and in fact there is probably more funding/ easier to get funding for MDs. Example- My boss is a thoracic surgeon with only an MD and we do lung cancer research with mostly donor funding.

 

[Shirafune]

Read about something in an NIH report about the current state of physician scientists that mentioned a decline in physician scientist funding. In proportion to PhD only counterparts, MDs and MD/PhDs have been receiving a smaller and smaller fraction of NIH money. It isn't clear whether that's due to lack of interest in becoming physician scientists, PhDs being more competitive in receiving grants, training issues, or etc. Still, MDs are getting a smaller and smaller fraction of the NIH pot.

 

[LizzyM]

Read about something in an NIH report about the current state of physician scientists that mentioned a decline in physician scientist funding. In proportion to PhD only counterparts, MDs and MD/PhDs have been receiving a smaller and smaller fraction of NIH money. It isn't clear whether that's due to lack of interest in becoming physician scientists, PhDs being more competitive in receiving grants, training issues, or etc. Still, MDs are getting a smaller and smaller fraction of the NIH pot.

And the size of the pie is stagnant while the number trying to get a piece of it is growing such that fewer and fewer grants are being funded. The financial support provided by MSTP programs is nice but it does cost you several years of your life.

There are opportunities to earn a masters degree, during a fellowship program so that you can immediately apply what you are learning to your first R01 grant proposal. Most of the big research universities have Master of Science in Clinical Investigation degree programs geared specifically to that audience.

 

[trini818]

The above posters are correct, there is an overall decline in available money because NIH funding is less than 10%, but MDs as I stated before, have access to donor funds that PhDs do not have as readily. I think there was also decline in physician scientists numbers during this funding dry period because many had to increase their patient hours to support themselves. My boss does not have an established lab, meaning his lab is only 2 1/2 years old, and he still has a large amount of funding and none of it is from the NIH. There are challenges, as always. This is informative:
https://report.nih.gov/workforce/psw/index.aspx