How to choose PI

[gjgjrhcka]

Hi All,

I have been very fortunate this application cycle, and currently been receiving several acceptance offers.
As a prospective student, I think the most important factor for successful MD PhD training is finding right research mentor. I know I will do lab rotations in few labs, but I don't think lab rotations will give me enough opportunity to make final decision. I made the list of criteria according to priority. I would really appreciate any advice.

1) Funding status from NIH report.

2) Feedback from students or lab members: Once I narrow down potential mentors, I am thinking to arrange several meetings with current lab members or students to see how PI really cares about training, not just outputs. I really would like to work with a mentor who is very willing to teach me science, grant writing, and career development.

3) History of former lab members: I think it is important to know former trainees history (where they are now, how long they took to finish PhD, etc)

4) Clinical background: Perhaps this is the one I am not really sure about. I am sure I should get excellent training from good PI with no clinical background, but I still personally think it is important to choose physician scientist as my PI. As I am serious about both clinic and science, I would like to work on the clinically relevant project, learning how to ask good scientific questions based on clinical significance.

5) Availability in the lab: Everyone would have different opinion about this, but I prefer to work with a mentor who is accessible, yet also support independent work without micromanaging.

6) publication output

7) lab size: I prefer medium size (about 5 to 7 members)

8) research field: I will do molecular medicine using both in-vitro and in-vivo studies, but I am pretty much opened to various fields- neurology, pharmacology, cardiology, pulmonology, and physiology. I put this as lowest priority as I think finding right PI is more important than pursuing PhD training based on my research interest.

Thank you very much for reading this long post, but any advice (other factors to consider, possible changes in terms of priority, realistic viewpoint) will be greatly appreciated.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gbwillner]

All the above are important, you seem to have figured out the one thing that trips up most new students- that #8 is relatively of little importance in the grand scheme of things. I would emphasize #5; rather, I would reclassify it as appropriate mentorship style for you. This is very important, and you will learn about it from#2 and #3. It has to be a good fit for you- some people want room to breathe and develop their own ideas, others want a project handed to them. There is no right answer, it depends on your personality. I would argue #4 is not at all important.

Good luck

 

[URHere]

These are a few things I tell the new students in our program to consider when choosing a mentor:

1) Do they have funding? If so, which projects does that funding apply to, how many separate funding grants are there, and when are they scheduled to run out? Do not rotate in a lab without funding because if your program has any sense they won't let you join that lab anyway.

2) What does the lab's publication record look like? Is there one topic that is high profile while other lab projects go to low-tier journals or remain unpublished? You want your work to be tied to something workable and publishable, so find out what the good projects/techniques are and see if you can be involved with them early on (of course you'll have your own project, but you need a starting point and high-profile is a good place to start). This is also a good time to ask how often student/post-docs publish and present at meetings.

3) What is the time to graduation? This goes along with: has the PI trained an MD/PhD student before? A track record of pure PhD students being done in 4-5 years is good. If everyone (MD/PhD students included) is done in 6+ years...run.

Once you know that there is funding, a potential for publication, and a reasonable time to graduation, then you can start thinking about things like fit. Good things to consider:

1) How big is the group? Are there lots of post-docs who could train/work with you? Are there other graduate students (and do you want to work with other students)?
2) How hands-on is the mentor? Is this a good fit for you?
3) Do you like everyone else in the group? Is there drama?
4) Is there enough equipment/space for everyone?

As long as you don't hate the research field, I don't think topic is all that important although you do ideally want it to match your clinical interests in some way. I would also say that you should consider both MDs, PhDs, and MD/PhDs as mentors. Their clinical training won't make or break you as a graduate student. A big name researcher may help you down the line, but don't overlook important things just to work your way into a big name lab.

 

[L72521]

Don't just talk to members of the lab. Talk to as many graduate students in the department as possible. You will find people who did trial rotations in the lab and who decided to go into a different lab--they may be able to provide valuable information. There are a few malignant labs at my institution that are always able to put on a good face and dupe grad students into joining. The grad students are then miserable, but may not be fully honest with rotating grad students because that lab's productiveness depends on getting new members.

 

[bd4727]

1) Figure out whats most important to you (hours spent in lab, likelihood of high impact pubs, culture of lab, etc)

2) Be very direct with PIs you talk to about joining their lab regarding the things of 1 that are most important to you and listen to their answers closely

3) Choose people who you think are being honest with you about 1 based on your gut feeling w/ them and interviews with others

Its not hard

 

[Chansey]

1) Figure out whats most important to you (hours spent in lab, likelihood of high impact pubs, culture of lab, etc)

2) Be very direct with PIs you talk to about joining their lab regarding the things of 1 that are most important to you and listen to their answers closely

3) Choose people who you think are being honest with you about 1 based on your gut feeling w/ them and interviews with others

Its not hard

Is there a fine line between directness and rudeness? How upfront can I be during these interviews? For example, would it be too bold if I expressed to a potential PI that I wanted a max 4 year (preferably 3 year) PhD with at least 1 first author pub?

 

[bd4727]

I'm sure some people would think so. But I did that with the point being I couldn't work for someone who wasn't going to be direct....

 

[StilgarMD]

Is there a fine line between directness and rudeness? How upfront can I be during these interviews? For example, would it be too bold if I expressed to a potential PI that I wanted a max 4 year (preferably 3 year) PhD with at least 1 first author pub?

I approached the topic respectfully. "I'm an MD PhD student, and the training is long. Do you think your lab is in a place where I could have a project, aim to finish in 3 years, and do 4 if needed?" as was just said, being direct isn't a problem. Just do it right.

 

[StIGMA]

bold if I expressed to a potential PI that I wanted a max 4 year (preferably 3 year) PhD with at least 1 first author pub?

That's what I did. The expectation is that you actually get the pub by that time. Really, you need a PI that knows you have time constraints and is fine with 1 paper. It is up to you to get that paper.