Humbly requesting thoughts + answers to some specific questions
Started by longshot1821
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Consider looking at CTSA institutions, several of them have PhDs in Translational Science. At the CTSA meeting, a presenter said that there were ~20 of them. An epidemiology project is likely a good fit for them. See: https://ctsacentral.org/pf/institutions.php
PM me if needed
PM me if needed
Because your GPA isn't the best I'd suggest you consider MD/MPH programs as well. I'm not saying to give up on the MD/PhD dream, but realize that there is more than one path to the career you're thinking about. My school, OHSU, has an MD/MPH program where the MPH is focused on epidemiology and biostatistics.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Wow thanks for this advice, I had no idea CTS programs were in line with what I'm looking for. Will absolutely be checking these out
Absolutely. Most of the program I'm looking at allow students to complete MPHs so I'll be checking this out
I think a bigger red flag is that you have done 7 years of research (majority of which was as a grad student) with only 1 first author publication? The vast vast majority of PhDs are less than 7 years, and in most programs the bare minimum is one first author pub (average at my program is 4-5 yr PhD with 2-3 first author pubs- one usually in high IF journal plus some other co-authorships). My guess would be if you got an interview based on your stats (who knows how relevant your GPA is from 7yrs ago if you argue you are a different person now), then why would a program want to take someone who has already shown they will not be productive during the PhD years based on past graduate-level research?
I still think you should go for it if that is your goal, but be ready to answer that questions IMO.
I still think you should go for it if that is your goal, but be ready to answer that questions IMO.
Thanks for the reply bd4727, definitely an angle worth preparing for. I would contest that the 'majority' of my research experience was as a grad student, it's pretty evenly split between UG/grad/FT (2.5/2/2) but the point stands. I think there's a few ways to approach. The low-hanging fruit is to stress quality over quantity. My first-author publication, based on my grad school research, is a novel analysis that adds substantively to the literature and is in a high IF journal. Secondly, I don't have data for this but I would imagine the bulk of the academic productivity during a student's PhD comes in the latter half, after finishing coursework. Given my graduate degree program was 2 years of classes with no "built-in" research time, I didn't have the same opportunity until after I graduated. Lastly, while my productivity has been pretty good post-grad with co-authorship, the position I'm in isn't one in which I'm able to freely pursue my own projects. My position is explicitly to support faculty-led research [this also partly contributes to why I want to do the MD-PhD]. I work with many different faculty, not 1 lab, so I don't an opportunity to publish first-author research.
Sounds reasonable then. Just have a good story like this that is not making excsuses but just telling it 'how it is.' Agreed the sell will be quality vs quantity, plus you never really had that much dedicated time despite all the years, plus now you have all this experience etc and will hit the ground running and crank out a ton of papers...
