I have a quick question about the mandatory research project required for graduation. I have talked with research mentor and he has a very good research study going on in their research center. It's in the sub-specialty I will apply to for fellowship. It's a big double-blinded randomized study and it's IRB-approved, so all I have to do is to join and do data entry during my research rotations. I definitely see it a plus to have such study in one's CV as the graduation project. However, my concern is that when I apply to fellowship programs they will perceive that it was not my original idea and that would make my profile less competitive. Is that true?
How original should the graduation research project be?
- Thread starter HHH3
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2013
- Messages
- 908
- Reaction score
- 808
My experience in residency was that prospective studies as a resident are fools gold. Enrolling patients, finding patients, getting data, always takes longer than you think it will. There is a high probability that you will not have data to even publish an abstract in time for fellowships. Even if you do, you are likely just a cog in the system, and why would you get to be first author on the abstract/paper?
It is great to participate in this study, but you should also do some retrospective data analysis/meta-analysis/review to get something done/published.
It is great to participate in this study, but you should also do some retrospective data analysis/meta-analysis/review to get something done/published.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2005
- Messages
- 21,372
- Reaction score
- 17,886
Absolutely agree with IM2GI here. Definitely be a part of the PhIII study for future CV material, you probably won't get your name on the paper when it's published, but you might. But if you're trying to do something that will impress a fellowship PD down the road, this ain't it.
It obviously depends on the disease, intervention and endpoints being studied, but under the best of circumstances, 5 years from opening of a study to first presentation of interim results (not final publication mind you) is on the order of 2-3 years for this kind of trial, with another 2-4 years for publication (as a couple of examples, EINSTEIN-PE took 4 years to enroll and another year+ to publish; MPACT in metastatic pancreatic cancer, with a median survival for the control arm of <9 months took 3 years to enroll and another year and a half to publish). And these were trials that met their endpoints. 1/3 or so of PhIII trials are failures.
If you're just trying to check a box on your residency requirement log, this is fine. If you're looking for something to help you in getting a fellowship, look further (not elsewhere mind you, but further).
It obviously depends on the disease, intervention and endpoints being studied, but under the best of circumstances, 5 years from opening of a study to first presentation of interim results (not final publication mind you) is on the order of 2-3 years for this kind of trial, with another 2-4 years for publication (as a couple of examples, EINSTEIN-PE took 4 years to enroll and another year+ to publish; MPACT in metastatic pancreatic cancer, with a median survival for the control arm of <9 months took 3 years to enroll and another year and a half to publish). And these were trials that met their endpoints. 1/3 or so of PhIII trials are failures.
If you're just trying to check a box on your residency requirement log, this is fine. If you're looking for something to help you in getting a fellowship, look further (not elsewhere mind you, but further).
