How would you rank these 5 factors in order of importance to MSTPs?

[jlu50]

Hi everyone, I’m trying to narrow down my choices for a gap year lab to join and would like to get advice on this:

How would you rank these 5 factors in order of importance to applying for MSTPs?

• Research independence (ownership of a research project and being the main contributor)
• Understanding of the MD-PhD path (e.g., via choosing a PI who is an MD-PhD, or other clinical exposure)
• Publications
• Strength of letter of recommendation from the lab
• Clinical research vs. basic research (since clinical research is often seen as less desirable than basic science research to MSTPs, I asked a director)

Example: letter >> research independence = publications > understanding = research type (clinical vs. basic)

Also, am I missing anything? Thank you!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[StIGMA]

4=2 depending on letter/scenario/connections & including how you communicate this in your app/interview, then 1 then 3. For 5, it really has to be basic research unless going for rare clinical research path.

 

[AHDCard]

I don't think there's a correct ranking, but my opinions:

For residency applications into PSTP programs, pubs and rec letter are the most important
For future success as a scientist, research independence and pubs are the most important
That being said, I don't think your criteria are independent (greater ownership and more pubs would presumably lead to a better rec letter)

A physician-scientist PI is nice, but not essential (main goal is, can they teach you to do science). That being said, I would pick someone that has an understanding of what MD/PhD entails and doesn't hold on to you for an excessive # of years

If you want to do basic research in the future, then finding a lab that does basic science is essential
If your goal is to do clinical research, I would look for a group that does clinical research (but I think basic science is fine too - it is easier to go from basic to clinical than clinical to basic). I do feel that some PSTPs are biased against training clinical researchers but your goals are your goals.
If you want to do computational/dry work, look for a group that does that (IMO it's harder to learn math / computer science when you get older)

 

[jlu50]

Sorry! I think I wasn’t clear in my original post (now edited for clarity) that I’m just a college grad planning to apply to MSTPs after 2 gap years, and trying to choose a lab to join. Would the ranking be different for an applicant in my position?

 

[StIGMA]

Sorry! I think I wasn’t clear in my original post (now edited for clarity) that I’m just a college grad planning to apply to MSTPs after 2 gap years, and trying to choose a lab to join. Would the ranking be different for an applicant in my position?

Find a good lab, human disease-focused, with happy graduate students and post-docs. Be clear what your goals are- having prior successful md/phd applicants is a plus but not required. Work hard and learn from everyone.

 

[Maebea]

I would rank the factors thusly:

• Clinical research vs. basic research (We do not have a PhD in clinical research, so if it isn't basic we will not offer an interview.)
• Strength of letter of recommendation from the lab (Mentor has to not only say you are among the best, they must cite specific evidence to back up this claim)
• Research independence (It can be difficult to establish independence as an undergrad or postbac, but the greater the independence, the better. You should make significant intellectual contributions to the project.)
• Publications (The majority of accepted applicants do not have publications, and few have 1st-authors. They are nice to have, but they are not expected.)
• Understanding of the MD-PhD path (Pick the lab mentor based on the science and their ability to mentor and support your development as a scientist. You should develop a network of mentors, some of whom can be MD or MD-PhD, but do not compromise on the lab mentor just to get someone who is MD-PhD.)

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Basically the only one of those that really matters is understanding what the path is like from which you will realize there’s a crap ton of failure and external factors that work against you (and occasional for you) that are mainly beyond control and concluding at the end of it… that you still like finding answers to questions and moving the knowledge ball forward.

The rest is mostly irrelevant. Nobody in residency knows or cares who you mentor is, being in a PhD by de facto, generally means you have more publications than non PhDs, you shouldn’t have “research independence” as a trainee, and you’re not getting a PhD to be a clinical research nurse.

So to use your ranking from most to least important, it’s 2…. That’s it.

Edit: whoops, I missed this was applying to MSTP, not once you were in a MSTP. Publications and letters and all the other stuff to get into medical school (ie MCATs, GPA, random BS). Then the rest are irrelevant.