I need a clear-cut answer. ADCOMS only, please.

[ILOVEMED123]

What is considered "clinical experience"?

There's this constant debate of what clinical experience is considered.

Some say its shadowing a Dr.

Others argue that shadowing a Dr, is not clinical experience, because there is no patient contact involved.

Some say its volunteering in an ER.

Others argue that volunteering in an ER is not clinical experience bec you are not really dealing directly with patients either (bec ur not authorized to do so).

PLEASE someone clarify this for me. I hear time and time again of pple getting rejected bec they did not have enough clinical experience.

I am in a time-crunch and need to make sure I have this done. Please, someone WHO KNOWS WHAT THEIR TALKING ABOUT please list acceptable (and not debatable) clinical experiences liked by medical schools.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[claduva94]

There are two main types. Both of which are pretty important and you should aim for both.
1. You need to learn what a doctor's job is like. This can be accomplished through shadowing for example.
2. You need to know what it is like to be around patients/sick people and demonstrate that you are ok with working with them for your career. This can be accomplished through clinical volunteering. The key part here is you must work with patients. Stocking ER rooms does not count. I argue this type of experience is the more important of the two. But that's just the opinion of an accepted applicant.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

There are two main types. Both of which are pretty important and you should aim for both.
1. You need to learn what a doctor's job is like. This can be accomplished through shadowing for example.
2. You need to know what it is like to be around patients/sick people and demonstrate that you are ok with working with them for your career. This can be accomplished through clinical volunteering. The key part here is you must work with patients. Stocking ER rooms does not count. I argue this type of experience is the more important of the two. But that's just the opinion of an accepted applicant.

For Option 2, would working in a day-hab with developmentally delayed individuals suffice? There may not be doctors around, but that is accomplished with Option 1. And it is dealing DIRECTLY with these individuals, and assisting them with basic daily tasks.

 

[claduva94]

For Option 2, would working in a day-hab with developmentally delayed individuals suffice? There may not be doctors around, but that is accomplished with Option 1. And it is dealing DIRECTLY with these individuals, and assisting them with basic daily tasks.

I would argue yes but that would almost certainly get contention. Common example adcoms give are hospitals, nursing homes, Planned Parenthood, etc.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

I would argue yes but that would almost certainly get contention. Common example adcoms give are hospitals, nursing homes, Planned Parenthood, etc.

I heard that nursing homes is also in the gray zone bec then theres the whole argument of whether the residents are considered to be "patients" or not.
If anything, developmentally disabled individuals are considered to be more of a "patient" than an 80 year old with alzheimers. No?
This whole thing is giving me a headache. I just want to do the right type of volunteering, and I only have a limited time to commit so I can't be doing the wrong thing.

 

[Make Or Break]

I volunteered in a nursing home doing various activities and listed it as clinical experience. I was not questioned about it in any of my interviews.

 

[claduva94]

I heard that nursing homes is also in the gray zone bec then theres the whole argument of whether the residents are considered to be "patients" or not.
If anything, developmentally disabled individuals are considered to be more of a "patient" than an 80 year old with alzheimers. No?
This whole thing is giving me a headache. I just want to do the right type of volunteering, and I only have a limited time to commit so I can't be doing the wrong thing.

I agree. There is a lot of gray area. Try a hospital or free clinic if you can. I have found volunteering in a free clinic to be a fantastic experience.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

I agree. There is a lot of gray area. Try a hospital or free clinic if you can. I have found volunteering in a free clinic to be a fantastic experience.

What do you mean by a free clinic? How are you allowed to directly deal with patients in a free clinic?
-If I do this day-hab thing, will I be criticized by schools if I list this as clinical experience?
In my experience, I have stopped by hospitals and clinics and they all tell me I'm not authorized to deal with patients.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

I volunteered in a nursing home playing bingo, singing songs, and doing other various activities and listed it as clinical experience. I was not questioned about it in any of my interviews.

I've done this as well. But it was a while ago, and I still need more clinical experience that is closer to my time of application. But good to know its clinical experience.

 

[claduva94]

What do you mean by a free clinic? How are you allowed to directly deal with patients in a free clinic?
-If I do this day-hab thing, will I be criticized by schools if I list this as clinical experience?
In my experience, I have stopped by hospitals and clinics and they all tell me I'm not authorized to deal with patients.

I personally do exit interviewing, which I find much better than waiting to be needed in the hospital. Normally you can find positions through volunteer coordinators. Mine was through my university.

But I can't answer that question. It will vary by person and school. I doubt you would be criticized but there would be individuals that don't consider it clinical experience.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

I personally do exit interviewing, which I find much better than waiting to be needed in the hospital. Normally you can find positions through volunteer coordinators. Mine was through my university.

But I can't answer that question. It will vary by person and school. I doubt you would be criticized but there would be individuals that don't consider it clinical experience.

Well, this is the position that is local to me right now and works with my schedule.
There aren't always millions of clinics around to just hook up with, its not that easy to find one that works with your schedule and is local.
What about if I have previously worked in a nursing home and a dialysis center? That way, if some schools will see the "dayhab" as questionable clinical experience (even though I doubt it, bec how can they frown upon someone volunteering their time to help someone defecate) , I have those that are definite clinical experiences to fall back on.

 

[mimelim]

What is considered "clinical experience"?

There's this constant debate of what clinical experience is considered.

Some say its shadowing a Dr.

Others argue that shadowing a Dr, is not clinical experience, because there is no patient contact involved.

Some say its volunteering in an ER.

Others argue that volunteering in an ER is not clinical experience bec you are not really dealing directly with patients either (bec ur not authorized to do so).

PLEASE someone clarify this for me. I hear time and time again of pple getting rejected bec they did not have enough clinical experience.

I am in a time-crunch and need to make sure I have this done. Please, someone WHO KNOWS WHAT THEIR TALKING ABOUT please list acceptable (and not debatable) clinical experiences liked by medical schools.

The fundamental problem that you are having is that you are treating medical school admissions as a checklist and this as a check box that you need to tick off. This is blinding you and making you an inferior applicant. As with everything on a medical school application, there is a reason why certain things are valued by admissions committees. Understanding those reasons are what make smart and strong applicants. Blindly looking to tick something off of a list is how you end up lost, confused and without an acceptance.

Clinical experience is not about the hours put in. It isn't about learning medicine. It isn't something that is compared between applicants. Nobody ever says during a committee meeting, "This guy has more clinical experience, therefore he is a better applicant, lets take him. Clinical experience is all about avoiding this. It is a disaster on every level when someone reaches MS3 and can not fathom practicing medicine. It is bad for the student, the school and a lot of times the residency that the student ends up at. It is inevitable that some of the wrong people get into medical school. Clinical experience is about convincing admissions committees that you are credible when you say, "Medicine is the right field for me, I know that I'm dedicating the next 7-11 years of my life to this and it is going to be long and hard." That is it. It is very simple. For the mature applicant, something as simple as a couple dozen shadowing hours and a solid interview is enough to convince us. For the stereotypical traditional, immature, box-checker, it may be impossible because they may be incapable at that point in their life of figuring out if medicine is a high probability of success for them.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of pre-meds still have no idea what they are getting themselves into and it is impossible for us to check up on what "working at a nursing home" or "volunteering in the ER" means because it is too time consuming. It is an imperfect process and some people bypass the intended purpose of looking for clinical experience. But, for the vast majority of applicants, clinical experience is about protecting everyone from naivete of pre-meds.

It is heart-breaking to have to tell a student, this just isn't working out. You are miserable and are unlikely to succeed in this, in large part because you had no clue what you were doing when you applied to medical school and we didn't catch that. I've seen it in person and it can all be traced back to THIS.

 

[jb94mg]

The fundamental problem that you are having is that you are treating medical school admissions as a checklist and this as a check box that you need to tick off. This is blinding you and making you an inferior applicant. As with everything on a medical school application, there is a reason why certain things are valued by admissions committees. Understanding those reasons are what make smart and strong applicants. Blindly looking to tick something off of a list is how you end up lost, confused and without an acceptance.

Clinical experience is not about the hours put in. It isn't about learning medicine. It isn't something that is compared between applicants. Nobody ever says during a committee meeting, "This guy has more clinical experience, therefore he is a better applicant, lets take him. Clinical experience is all about avoiding this. It is a disaster on every level when someone reaches MS3 and can not fathom practicing medicine. It is bad for the student, the school and a lot of times the residency that the student ends up at. It is inevitable that some of the wrong people get into medical school. Clinical experience is about convincing admissions committees that you are credible when you say, "Medicine is the right field for me, I know that I'm dedicating the next 7-11 years of my life to this and it is going to be long and hard." That is it. It is very simple. For the mature applicant, something as simple as a couple dozen shadowing hours and a solid interview is enough to convince us. For the stereotypical traditional, immature, box-checker, it may be impossible because they may be incapable at that point in their life of figuring out if medicine is a high probability of success for them.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of pre-meds still have no idea what they are getting themselves into and it is impossible for us to check up on what "working at a nursing home" or "volunteering in the ER" means because it is too time consuming. It is an imperfect process and some people bypass the intended purpose of looking for clinical experience. But, for the vast majority of applicants, clinical experience is about protecting everyone from naivete of pre-meds.

It is heart-breaking to have to tell a student, this just isn't working out. You are miserable and are unlikely to succeed in this, in large part because you had no clue what you were doing when you applied to medical school and we didn't catch that. I've seen it in person and it can all be traced back to THIS.

So instead of seeing it as a case where you're checking off an item on a list of things you need to have, you should approach clinical experience with the mindset of "I want to find out if this is something in which I'm truly interested"? And you should do that consistently enough to where you're confident that your desiring a career in the field isn't just some sort of transitory desire?

 

[ILOVEMED123]

The fundamental problem that you are having is that you are treating medical school admissions as a checklist and this as a check box that you need to tick off. This is blinding you and making you an inferior applicant. As with everything on a medical school application, there is a reason why certain things are valued by admissions committees. Understanding those reasons are what make smart and strong applicants. Blindly looking to tick something off of a list is how you end up lost, confused and without an acceptance.

Clinical experience is not about the hours put in. It isn't about learning medicine. It isn't something that is compared between applicants. Nobody ever says during a committee meeting, "This guy has more clinical experience, therefore he is a better applicant, lets take him. Clinical experience is all about avoiding this. It is a disaster on every level when someone reaches MS3 and can not fathom practicing medicine. It is bad for the student, the school and a lot of times the residency that the student ends up at. It is inevitable that some of the wrong people get into medical school. Clinical experience is about convincing admissions committees that you are credible when you say, "Medicine is the right field for me, I know that I'm dedicating the next 7-11 years of my life to this and it is going to be long and hard." That is it. It is very simple. For the mature applicant, something as simple as a couple dozen shadowing hours and a solid interview is enough to convince us. For the stereotypical traditional, immature, box-checker, it may be impossible because they may be incapable at that point in their life of figuring out if medicine is a high probability of success for them.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of pre-meds still have no idea what they are getting themselves into and it is impossible for us to check up on what "working at a nursing home" or "volunteering in the ER" means because it is too time consuming. It is an imperfect process and some people bypass the intended purpose of looking for clinical experience. But, for the vast majority of applicants, clinical experience is about protecting everyone from naivete of pre-meds.

It is heart-breaking to have to tell a student, this just isn't working out. You are miserable and are unlikely to succeed in this, in large part because you had no clue what you were doing when you applied to medical school and we didn't catch that. I've seen it in person and it can all be traced back to THIS.

I respectfully disagree and I think you misunderstood my brief post.
I actually do understand the reasoning behind clinical experience.
But there is something called "covering your bases". And I HAVE heard of many students recently who have gotten rejected bec, they were told, they did not have enough clinical experience.
Personally, I feel like I have reached a point of medical-related experiences (both clinical and non) to solidify my decision for medicine.
But when it comes to applying, and the application costs, I want to be sure that I have covered everything and that there is no room for a critique by a med school in terms of clinical experiences.
So, yes - for the purposes of "making sure everything is just right: by the time I apply" it does become a checklist.
But just because its a checklist, it doesn't take away from the integrity of the items on my list.

 

[ProudMD]

@LizzyM

"If you can smell patients...it is clinical experience"

 

[mimelim]

I respectfully disagree and I think you misunderstood my brief post.
I actually do understand the reasoning behind clinical experience.
But there is something called "covering your bases". And I HAVE heard of many students recently who have gotten rejected bec, they were told, they did not have enough clinical experience.
Personally, I feel like I have reached a point of medical-related experiences (both clinical and non) to solidify my decision for medicine.
But when it comes to applying, and the application costs, I want to be sure that I have covered everything and that there is no room for a critique by a med school in terms of clinical experiences.
So, yes - for the purposes of "making sure everything is just right: by the time I apply" it does become a checklist.
But just because its a checklist, it doesn't take away from the integrity of the items on my list.

If you can effectively write a personal statement attesting to your desire and commitment to medicine and medical training and convince a reasonable person (ie. admissions committee members) that medicine is the right path, then you have enough clinical experience. If you can't do that, then you are a liability to a medical school and you are increasing your own chances of ending up in a very bad position. When people are told, "you don't have enough clinical experience" it means one of two things. #1 You haven't convinced us that you are ready for medical school and you are too high a risk for us to use one of our limited spots on or #2 Overall your application isn't strong enough, but people will keep bugging us unless we give them a discreet reason. I don't like it when we tell people #2, but it happens.

Fluffing an application (as you advocate) under the guise of 'covering bases' is very transparent. We see it all the time and yes, it does reflect very poorly on the applicant.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

If you can effectively write a personal statement attesting to your desire and commitment to medicine and medical training and convince a reasonable person (ie. admissions committee members) that medicine is the right path, then you have enough clinical experience. If you can't do that, then you are a liability to a medical school and you are increasing your own chances of ending up in a very bad position. When people are told, "you don't have enough clinical experience" it means one of two things. #1 You haven't convinced us that you are ready for medical school and you are too high a risk for us to use one of our limited spots on or #2 Overall your application isn't strong enough, but people will keep bugging us unless we give them a discreet reason. I don't like it when we tell people #2, but it happens.

Fluffing an application (as you advocate) under the guise of 'covering bases' is very transparent. We see it all the time and yes, it does reflect very poorly on the applicant.

Interesting, OK.
I did not know that telling this to rejects was not always accurate - this is news to me.
Ok, I hear. When it comes down to it, its using your head. If you "feel you have enough" or feel one particular experience is "right for you" that probably is the way to go.
Its more or less a logical process of requirements.
But ya - the checklist idea is bec I have heard of rejects saying this, so again, just want to cover my bases, but not in the mechanical, "I really just want to check off a list but I secretly do not care" kind of way
Hope that makes sense

 

[efle]

The fundamental problem that you are having is that you are treating medical school admissions as a checklist and this as a check box that you need to tick off. This is blinding you and making you an inferior applicant. As with everything on a medical school application, there is a reason why certain things are valued by admissions committees. Understanding those reasons are what make smart and strong applicants. Blindly looking to tick something off of a list is how you end up lost, confused and without an acceptance.

Clinical experience is not about the hours put in. It isn't about learning medicine. It isn't something that is compared between applicants. Nobody ever says during a committee meeting, "This guy has more clinical experience, therefore he is a better applicant, lets take him. Clinical experience is all about avoiding this. It is a disaster on every level when someone reaches MS3 and can not fathom practicing medicine. It is bad for the student, the school and a lot of times the residency that the student ends up at. It is inevitable that some of the wrong people get into medical school. Clinical experience is about convincing admissions committees that you are credible when you say, "Medicine is the right field for me, I know that I'm dedicating the next 7-11 years of my life to this and it is going to be long and hard." That is it. It is very simple. For the mature applicant, something as simple as a couple dozen shadowing hours and a solid interview is enough to convince us. For the stereotypical traditional, immature, box-checker, it may be impossible because they may be incapable at that point in their life of figuring out if medicine is a high probability of success for them.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of pre-meds still have no idea what they are getting themselves into and it is impossible for us to check up on what "working at a nursing home" or "volunteering in the ER" means because it is too time consuming. It is an imperfect process and some people bypass the intended purpose of looking for clinical experience. But, for the vast majority of applicants, clinical experience is about protecting everyone from naivete of pre-meds.

It is heart-breaking to have to tell a student, this just isn't working out. You are miserable and are unlikely to succeed in this, in large part because you had no clue what you were doing when you applied to medical school and we didn't catch that. I've seen it in person and it can all be traced back to THIS.

I find this very interesting. One of my friends thinks her hundreds of hours across 3-4 years of clinical volunteering is making her application extremely strong despite pretty mediocre MCAT, and a different buddy who was a little late to the premed party is worried about only having ~100 hours of clinical volunteering in the past two semesters, not because he doesn't love it but because he thinks it will look like he's just checking off a box last minute. Are they both wrong, 500 hours and 100 hours won't really be compared because in either case they've smelled some patients and that's all adcoms look for?

 

[natti101]

I find this very interesting. One of my friends thinks her hundreds of hours across 3-4 years of clinical volunteering is making her application extremely strong despite pretty mediocre MCAT, and a different buddy who was a little late to the premed party is worried about only having ~100 hours of clinical volunteering in the past two semesters, not because he doesn't love it but because he thinks it will look like he's just checking off a box last minute. Are they both wrong, 500 hours and 100 hours won't really be compared because in either case they've smelled some patients and that's all adcoms look for?

It seems like a case of diminishing returns to me, if you're purely looking at numbers.

As has been discussed in this thread, you need to have enough clinical experience to solidify that this is something you really want to do. Beyond establishing that, the numbers don't really mean anything in and of themselves. So it may be that your friend's clinical experience is what is redeeming or strengthening her app, but it's not the number of hours that's doing that, it is her conveyance of what she gained from it and how she grew. Typically, when someone spends 500+ hours on something, that activity was important and worthy for them. If you spend 500+ hours doing something and have gained nothing from the activity, I feel like that's glaringly obvious and does nothing for your application (or personal growth). Do you kind of see the difference there?

Also beyond what was already said, clinical experience serves to expose you to patients...you don't have to "deal" with them, but most places will allow you to simply talk to patients about their day, learn the kind of person they are. Moreover, it's important to be exposed to actual sickness (and realize it's not as glamorous as Grey's Anatomy), to be exposed to the understanding that sometimes efforts are futile, and that death is a real possibility.

 

[efle]

It seems like a case of diminishing returns to me, if you're purely looking at numbers.

As has been discussed in this thread, you need to have enough clinical experience to solidify that this is something you really want to do. Beyond establishing that, the numbers don't really mean anything in and of themselves. So it may be that your friend's clinical experience is what is redeeming or strengthening her app, but it's not the number of hours that's doing that, it is her conveyance of what she gained from it and how she grew. Typically, when someone spends 500+ hours on something, that activity was important and worthy for them. If you spend 500+ hours doing something and have gained nothing from the activity, I feel like that's glaringly obvious and does nothing for your application (or personal growth). Do you kind of see the difference there?

Also beyond what was already said, clinical experience serves to expose you to patients...you don't have to "deal" with them, but most places will allow you to simply talk to patients about their day, learn the kind of person they are. Moreover, it's important to be exposed to actual sickness (and realize it's not as glamorous as Grey's Anatomy), to be exposed to the understanding that sometimes efforts are futile, and that death is a real possibility.

Yeah she has a good volunteering spot going around to pediatric patients bedsides to tutor them and keep them up to grade level during big periods of missed school. I feel really bad for the other people volunteering at the same hospital who are mostly just fetching stuff and running around like headless chickens. I can see how what you're getting out of it in terms of patient contact matters a lot more than how long you do it for to try to prove you're a good caring person like I think many premeds misconceive

 

[ridethecliche]

If you can effectively write a personal statement attesting to your desire and commitment to medicine and medical training and convince a reasonable person (ie. admissions committee members) that medicine is the right path, then you have enough clinical experience. If you can't do that, then you are a liability to a medical school and you are increasing your own chances of ending up in a very bad position. When people are told, "you don't have enough clinical experience" it means one of two things. #1 You haven't convinced us that you are ready for medical school and you are too high a risk for us to use one of our limited spots on or #2 Overall your application isn't strong enough, but people will keep bugging us unless we give them a discreet reason. I don't like it when we tell people #2, but it happens.

Fluffing an application (as you advocate) under the guise of 'covering bases' is very transparent. We see it all the time and yes, it does reflect very poorly on the applicant.

Honestly, I'm not sure this is entirely true. If you can articulate the desire etc. don't you want to see that person back it up with some sort of experience?

Or am I misunderstanding and you're actually saying that yes it's necessary, but putting a total amount of hours to it is silly.

 

[efle]

Or am I misunderstanding and you're actually saying that yes it's necessary, but putting a total amount of hours to it is silly.

Probably this, since differences in how early on people get interested in it, or how much patient contact is involved in the volunteer position, could make raw hours a lot less useful than hearing about what the person learned

 

[mimelim]

Honestly, I'm not sure this is entirely true. If you can articulate the desire etc. don't you want to see that person back it up with some sort of experience?

Or am I misunderstanding and you're actually saying that yes it's necessary, but putting a total amount of hours to it is silly.

You have to convince us that you know what you are talking about which definitely neccesitates experience.

 

[natti101]

Yeah she has a good volunteering spot going around to pediatric patients bedsides to tutor them and keep them up to grade level during big periods of missed school. I feel really bad for the other people volunteering at the same hospital who are mostly just fetching stuff and running around like headless chickens. I can see how what you're getting out of it in terms of patient contact matters a lot more than how long you do it for to try to prove you're a good caring person like I think many premeds misconceive

Also, didn't see the adcoms only request - didn't mean to intrude.

 

[Doug Underhill]

One adcom on SDN claims that you need to show an "altruistic side". The volunteering is supposed to be one way to do this.

Clinical volunteering often involves a lot of sitting and waiting quietly. My hospital actually has a disclaimer that you shouldn't apply if you constantly require tasks to be assigned to you to remain interested.

 

[deleted480308]

to quote LizzyM from my past memory, "if you can smell the patient, it's clinical"

 

[Goro]

This is part of the experience, but not the sole thing we're looking for. Shadowing is to let us know that you understand what a doctor's day is like and how different doctors (say a dermatologist vs a vascular surgeon) do their jobs.

Some say its shadowing a Dr.

Others argue that shadowing a Dr, is not clinical experience, because there is no patient contact involved.

Volunteering where there are patients...hospital, clinic, medical office, Planned Parenthood, hospice, suicide hotlines, and/or nursing homes.
Some say its volunteering in an ER.

Disagree.
Others argue that volunteering in an ER is not clinical experience bec you are not really dealing directly with patients either (bec ur not authorized to do so).

Yup! At my school, we've rejected 4.0 high MCAT people for this very reason.
I hear time and time again of pple getting rejected bec they did not have enough clinical experience.

 

[Rogert]

Fluffing an application (as you advocate) under the guise of 'covering bases' is very transparent. We see it all the time and yes, it does reflect very poorly on the applicant.

Yup! At my school, we've rejected 4.0 high MCAT people for this very reason.
I hear time and time again of pple getting rejected bec they did not have enough clinical experience.

So I'm going to get rejected without clinical experience, but now that I know this I'm going to look bad because it's going to look like box checking. Is this not confusing to anyone else?

And yes, "how do we know you're ready" etc. I've talked with plenty of people about this and apparently the only people who don't seem convinced I belong in medicine are adcoms.

 

[candbgirl]

Unfortunately for you it's the Adcoms that you have to convince.

 

[Lucca]

So I'm going to get rejected without clinical experience, but now that I know this I'm going to look bad because it's going to look like box checking. Is this not confusing to anyone else?

And yes, "how do we know you're ready" etc. I've talked with plenty of people about this and apparently the only people who don't seem convinced I belong in medicine are adcoms.

I think they are just trying to say: Get enough clinical experience to back up the statement "I want to do medicine". The number itself is not important if your defense of wanting to do medicine is credible (i.e, your PS, interview.

It is very nebulous, I agree

 

[mimelim]

So I'm going to get rejected without clinical experience, but now that I know this I'm going to look bad because it's going to look like box checking. Is this not confusing to anyone else?

And yes, "how do we know you're ready" etc. I've talked with plenty of people about this and apparently the only people who don't seem convinced I belong in medicine are adcoms.

@Goro can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the two of us are completely on the same page on this topic. By my reading, we don't say anything contradictory.

There are two things that you need. #1 You need to say that you want to medicine and have some good reasons why. #2 You have to have credibility in the eyes of admissions committees. #1 is all about your personal statement and your interviews. #2 is all about your experiences, having a physician parent, how you grew up, where you grew up, shadowing, working in an ER, being an EMT, the list goes on and on. Typically when people are told outright, "You don't have enough clinical experience," there is a problem with #1. There is something worrisome about what they are saying. It is all about pattern recognition. After you review a couple hundred (or in the case of many faculty adcoms, thousands) of applications and correlate them with how students do, you see the red flags.

21 year olds are naive. Pre-meds live in a bubble. Very broad statements and yes, stereotypes. But, hold true for the vast majority of applicants and are dangerous for both a school's and a student's future. This isn't a slight on pre-meds or 21 year olds. My point is, when someone is told that they don't have enough clinical experience, they are not being directly compared to other applicants in terms of what their experiences were or the number of hours. It is about combining those two with the overall maturity and experience of the applicant. For example, the non-traditional applicant that can say, I worked a 9-5 for 3 years, I dealt with management, I dealt with insurance companies, I did XYZ at the hospital and with a physician I know and I see a lot of similar things, but, experiences ABC showed me something that I can't get from my previous profession is not going to take a lot of convincing that I know that they know what they are talking about. Their risk profile is completely different than the 21 year old who's entire exposure to 'medicine' is playing bingo and singing songs at a nursing home. I am NOT saying that you can't get in with that type of 'experience', clearly people do. But, my concern when I see that type of application is that they will come back 3 years from now and write this.

 

[Goro]

My learned colleague's words are gold, pure gold.

OP, yes, if you don't have enough clinical experience, you will get rejected. My student interviewers are particularly harsh on applicants with this hole in their apps and eat them them alive.

If necessary, take a gap year. Would you buy a new car without test driving it? Buy a new suit without trying it on? You need to show us that you really want to be around sick and injured people for the next 30-40 years, and that you know what you're getting into.

A career in Medicine is a privilege, not a reward for being a good student or getting good garde. Do you want to be a doctor? Then earn it.

@Goro can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the two of us are completely on the same page on this topic. By my reading, we don't say anything contradictory.

There are two things that you need. #1 You need to say that you want to medicine and have some good reasons why. #2 You have to have credibility in the eyes of admissions committees. #1 is all about your personal statement and your interviews. #2 is all about your experiences, having a physician parent, how you grew up, where you grew up, shadowing, working in an ER, being an EMT, the list goes on and on. Typically when people are told outright, "You don't have enough clinical experience," there is a problem with #1. There is something worrisome about what they are saying. It is all about pattern recognition. After you review a couple hundred (or in the case of many faculty adcoms, thousands) of applications and correlate them with how students do, you see the red flags.

21 year olds are naive. Pre-meds live in a bubble. Very broad statements and yes, stereotypes. But, hold true for the vast majority of applicants and are dangerous for both a school's and a student's future. This isn't a slight on pre-meds or 21 year olds. My point is, when someone is told that they don't have enough clinical experience, they are not being directly compared to other applicants in terms of what their experiences were or the number of hours. It is about combining those two with the overall maturity and experience of the applicant. For example, the non-traditional applicant that can say, I worked a 9-5 for 3 years, I dealt with management, I dealt with insurance companies, I did XYZ at the hospital and with a physician I know and I see a lot of similar things, but, experiences ABC showed me something that I can't get from my previous profession is not going to take a lot of convincing that I know that they know what they are talking about. Their risk profile is completely different than the 21 year old who's entire exposure to 'medicine' is playing bingo and singing songs at a nursing home. I am NOT saying that you can't get in with that type of 'experience', clearly people do. But, my concern when I see that type of application is that they will come back 3 years from now and write this.

 

[Rogert]

21 year olds are naive. Pre-meds live in a bubble. Very broad statements and yes, stereotypes. But, hold true for the vast majority of applicants and are dangerous for both a school's and a student's future. This isn't a slight on pre-meds or 21 year olds. My point is, when someone is told that they don't have enough clinical experience, they are not being directly compared to other applicants in terms of what their experiences were or the number of hours. It is about combining those two with the overall maturity and experience of the applicant. For example, the non-traditional applicant that can say, I worked a 9-5 for 3 years, I dealt with management, I dealt with insurance companies, I did XYZ at the hospital and with a physician I know and I see a lot of similar things, but, experiences ABC showed me something that I can't get from my previous profession is not going to take a lot of convincing that I know that they know what they are talking about. Their risk profile is completely different than the 21 year old who's entire exposure to 'medicine' is playing bingo and singing songs at a nursing home. I am NOT saying that you can't get in with that type of 'experience', clearly people do. But, my concern when I see that type of application is that they will come back 3 years from now and write this.

OK. So it sounds like non-trads do get some sort of break on this then. I wasn't a premed in college and and I'm trying to get into medicine because my current career path isn't going where I wanted. I've been in the work force for four years now and I work in a hospital, I just can't "smell the patients." I already work, go to school, and have a family so the prospect of having to devote another chunk of my day to something makes my stomach drop. It would be the definition of box checking and I don't want to do that.

And, mimelim, to me, it does sound like you and Goro have differing opinions on the subject. Your answer came across as "The value of clinical experience depends on the person." Goro's response above indicates that he thinks no clinical experience = no acceptance.

 

[mimelim]

OK. So it sounds like non-trads do get some sort of break on this then. I wasn't a premed in college and and I'm trying to get into medicine because my current career path isn't going where I wanted. I've been in the work force for four years now and I work in a hospital, I just can't "smell the patients." I already work, go to school, and have a family so the prospect of having to devote another chunk of my day to something makes my stomach drop. It would be the definition of box checking and I don't want to do that.

And, mimelim, to me, it does sound like you and Goro have differing opinions on the subject. Your answer came across as "The value of clinical experience depends on the person." Goro's response above indicates that he thinks no clinical experience = no acceptance.

I would refer you to this post that I made:

@Goro can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the two of us are completely on the same page on this topic. By my reading, we don't say anything contradictory.

There are two things that you need. #1 You need to say that you want to medicine and have some good reasons why. #2 You have to have credibility in the eyes of admissions committees. #1 is all about your personal statement and your interviews. #2 is all about your experiences, having a physician parent, how you grew up, where you grew up, shadowing, working in an ER, being an EMT, the list goes on and on. Typically when people are told outright, "You don't have enough clinical experience," there is a problem with #1. There is something worrisome about what they are saying. It is all about pattern recognition. After you review a couple hundred (or in the case of many faculty adcoms, thousands) of applications and correlate them with how students do, you see the red flags.

21 year olds are naive. Pre-meds live in a bubble. Very broad statements and yes, stereotypes. But, hold true for the vast majority of applicants and are dangerous for both a school's and a student's future. This isn't a slight on pre-meds or 21 year olds. My point is, when someone is told that they don't have enough clinical experience, they are not being directly compared to other applicants in terms of what their experiences were or the number of hours. It is about combining those two with the overall maturity and experience of the applicant. For example, the non-traditional applicant that can say, I worked a 9-5 for 3 years, I dealt with management, I dealt with insurance companies, I did XYZ at the hospital and with a physician I know and I see a lot of similar things, but, experiences ABC showed me something that I can't get from my previous profession is not going to take a lot of convincing that I know that they know what they are talking about. Their risk profile is completely different than the 21 year old who's entire exposure to 'medicine' is playing bingo and singing songs at a nursing home. I am NOT saying that you can't get in with that type of 'experience', clearly people do. But, my concern when I see that type of application is that they will come back 3 years from now and write this.

It is hard for me to fathom any applicant, trad or non-trad who could convince me or any adcom that they know what they are talking about without some sort of clinical experience.

 

[Rogert]

I would refer you to this post that I made:
It is hard for me to fathom any applicant, trad or non-trad who could convince me or any adcom that they know what they are talking about without some sort of clinical experience.

Hm. That is the post I was referring to so I don't think I'm understanding something in your post. My interpretation was that clinical experience was important for premeds because it's basically the only way they can demonstrate they know what they're getting into. The nontrad in your example seemed like they were substituting actual life experience and conscious career decisions for that clinical experience.

And apparently there are some adcoms who don't consider clinical experience absolutely neccesary. No one I know who went to med school straight out of the military academies had any clinical experience but it doesn't seem like it gave them any problems whatsoever.

 

[ridethecliche]

Hm. That is the post I was referring to so I don't think I'm understanding something in your post. My interpretation was that clinical experience was important for premeds because it's basically the only way they can demonstrate they know what they're getting into. The nontrad in your example seemed like they were substituting actual life experience and conscious career decisions for that clinical experience.

And apparently there are some adcoms who don't consider clinical experience absolutely neccesary. No one I know who went to med school straight out of the military academies had any clinical experience but it doesn't seem like it gave them any problems whatsoever.

Because of health issues, I don't have a lot of volunteer stuff on my app after college. I work full time in a clinical settings, often directly with patients for research. I've counted this as a clinical experience, as I obviously worked with patients. I have lot of hours of clinical volunteer and internships through college, but not that much for the last few years after I graduated due to some life stuff and a current interest in research that I'm working on at the moment.

I've had interviews. Non-trads that don't work in medically related things have to show that they have an idea what they're getting into. I have a feeling I haven't heard back from some schools because of the lack of recent volunteering. That's okay, I guess. Every school has its own mission.

 

[LizzyM]

OK. So it sounds like non-trads do get some sort of break on this then. I wasn't a premed in college and and I'm trying to get into medicine because my current career path isn't going where I wanted. I've been in the work force for four years now and I work in a hospital, I just can't "smell the patients." I already work, go to school, and have a family so the prospect of having to devote another chunk of my day to something makes my stomach drop. It would be the definition of box checking and I don't want to do that.

And, mimelim, to me, it does sound like you and Goro have differing opinions on the subject. Your answer came across as "The value of clinical experience depends on the person." Goro's response above indicates that he thinks no clinical experience = no acceptance.

"If you are close enough to smell patients, then it is a clinical experience." Do you work in an area of the hospital where you see patients? Are you close enough to them as they pass in the hallways or ride the elevators? If you are in some administrative bubble or the dishwashing room, then maybe you aren't having a clinical experience. As expressed here, how do you know that you want to spend about six years or more in training, spend (or borrow) thousands of dollars, and forego thousands of dollars in lost wages to join a profession that will require you to work in an environment you have no first hand knowledge of?

 

[Rogert]

"If you are close enough to smell patients, then it is a clinical experience." Do you work in an area of the hospital where you see patients? Are you close enough to them as they pass in the hallways or ride the elevators? If you are in some administrative bubble or the dishwashing room, then maybe you aren't having a clinical experience. As expressed here, how do you know that you want to spend about six years or more in training, spend (or borrow) thousands of dollars, and forego thousands of dollars in lost wages to join a profession that will require you to work in an environment you have no first hand knowledge of?

Individuals on here have made it abundantly clear my experience does not qualify as "clinical experience." That is not a point I would try and defend. But I do spend my day interacting with doctors and the work they do. Just because I can't smell the patient firsthand doesn't mean I can't smell the fumes coming off of others. Frankly, making people work in a hospital is probably the best way to dissuade people, particularly sheltered premeds, from going into medicine. The people who are the most cynical about the patients are the ones who work closest with them.

I know I want to work with patients for the same reason I joined the Army and tried to go into clinical psych: I get off on feeling like I'm helping others and don't care if it's a thankless job (this is not the language I use in interviews, but forgive me if the subject makes me a bit snappy). But apparently my life's worth of experience doesn't count for anything unless I've played bingo at the old folks home.

 

[claduva94]

Individuals on here have made it abundantly clear my experience does not qualify as "clinical experience." That is not a point I would try and defend. But I do spend my day interacting with doctors and the work they do. Just because I can't smell the patient firsthand doesn't mean I can't smell the fumes coming off of others. Frankly, making people work in a hospital is probably the best way to dissuade people, particularly sheltered premeds, from going into medicine. The people who are the most cynical about the patients are the ones who work closest with them.

I know I want to work with patients for the same reason I joined the Army and tried to go into clinical psych: I get off on feeling like I'm helping others and don't care if it's a thankless job (this is not the language I use in interviews, but forgive me if the subject makes me a bit snappy). But apparently my life's worth of experience doesn't count for anything unless I've played bingo at the old folks home.

Now you are putting words in our mouths. And the bolded is the exact point. If someone is going to be dissuaded simply by working in a hospital how are they supposed to handle an entire career working in hospitals? Medicine is not for everyone. It takes a specific type of person. And clinical experience is intended specifically for selecting those specific people.

 

[Rogert]

Now you are putting words in our mouths. And the bolded is the exact point. If someone is going to be dissuaded simply by working in a hospital how are they supposed to handle an entire career working in hospitals? Medicine is not for everyone. It takes a specific type of person. And clinical experience is intended specifically for selecting those specific people.

No need to be defensive. I'm not attacking you personally. I would like to know where I put words in someone's mouth though. Everything there is either my own viewpoint or a quote/paraphrase from an adcom on here.

Just because someone is dissuaded does not mean they would be bad at the job. Most people, when surrounded by negative emotions, are going to associate negative emotions with the experience. Not everyone is going to go in with a cynic's mindset and expect everything to be awful. All it does is scare off people who aren't accustomed to dysfunction. Your viewpoint also doesn't account for people who do hate every minute of it, but still have the plan of fake it til they make for whatever motivation.

Additionally, not every doctor works in a hospital. I keep track of ~250 providers in our system and only about half work in one of our hospitals. That number doesn't include all of our independent contractors, locums, and private practice types whose names I never even hear.

 

[ILOVEMED123]

My learned colleague's words are gold, pure gold.

OP, yes, if you don't have enough clinical experience, you will get rejected. My student interviewers are particularly harsh on applicants with this hole in their apps and eat them them alive.

If necessary, take a gap year. Would you buy a new car without test driving it? Buy a new suit without trying it on? You need to show us that you really want to be around sick and injured people for the next 30-40 years, and that you know what you're getting into.

A career in Medicine is a privilege, not a reward for being a good student or getting good garde. Do you want to be a doctor? Then earn it.

Would the day-hab I explained above be considered a MEANINGFUL clinical experience approved by most med schools?

 

[claduva94]

No need to be defensive. I'm not attacking you personally. I would like to know where I put words in someone's mouth though. Everything there is either my own viewpoint or a quote/paraphrase from an adcom on here.

Just because someone is dissuaded does not mean they would be bad at the job. Most people, when surrounded by negative emotions, are going to associate negative emotions with the experience. Not everyone is going to go in with a cynic's mindset and expect everything to be awful. All it does is scare off people who aren't accustomed to dysfunction. Additionally, not every doctor works in a hospital. I keep track of ~250 providers in our system and only about half work in one of our hospitals. That number doesn't include all of our independent contractors, locums, and private practice types whose names I never even hear.

Oh I know. But no one said your experiences wouldn't count and that they aren't meaningful. They are and they definitely improve your application. Definitions of "clinical experience" is all very subjective. But what many people on here fail to recognize is that interacting with doctors and patients are very different things. And you almost always need to do both to be a physician.

There is no denying that either. I didn't say they would be bad. I suggested that it probably isn't the best career for them though. The point is you have to be able to deal with it for decades. You need to actually interact with patients to show you are altruistic and enjoy directly working with sick people. Otherwise you could just do administration or another upper level job. Does that make sense?

 

[mehc012]

Everyone applying needs some sort of clinical experience.
Whether or not one had enough clinical experience varies by the individual. The question is not whether you meet some arbitrary 'hours worked' cutoff, but rather whether you have had enough exposure that you personally gained the perspective that you need from the experience. This will vary person by person and seems as if it would be one of the more difficult things for adcoms to assess. However, where it is assessed is not necessarily your hours sheet (unless your hours are zero), but in your attitude, writing, and responses to questions.


Then again, what do I know? I'm probably going to catch flak when I apply for looking like the standard, box-checking, 'zero-to-Mother-Teresa' type (despite my frequent vehement debates with Plane2Doc on the subject of participating in any volunteer or clinical experience which you find uninteresting!) because I crammed everything in within 2yrs of deciding to go to med school.

 

[efle]

I crammed everything in within 2yrs of deciding to go to med school.

Same here, didn't do my first shadowing until sophomore to confirm premed, so I'll be quite lacking compared to some of my class mates who have been building their resume since the summer before college. Here's to smelling patients as much as possible in a short time span!

 

[mehc012]

Same here, didn't do my first shadowing until sophomore to confirm premed, so I'll be quite lacking compared to some of my class mates who have been building their resume since the summer before college. Here's to smelling patients as much as possible in a short time span!

Oh, I won't be lacking (other than sleep over the past 2yrs, lol) I'll just look like a maniacal box checker. Ah, well...I enjoyed the hell out of the process, and it may even work out in the end, so what else matters?

 

[Rogert]

Oh I know. But no one said your experiences wouldn't count and that they aren't meaningful. They are and they definitely improve your application. Definitions of "clinical experience" is all very subjective. But what many people on here fail to recognize is that interacting with doctors and patients are very different things. And you almost always need to do both to be a physician.
There is no denying that either. I didn't say they would be bad. I suggested that it probably isn't the best career for them though. The point is you have to be able to deal with it for decades. You need to actually interact with patients to show you are altruistic and enjoy directly working with sick people. Otherwise you could just do administration or another upper level job. Does that make sense?

I had actually asked Goro and gyngyn about my experiences a few months ago. They told me it didn't count.

No one likes all aspects of any job and things don't change unless there is discontent. If I were interviewing someone for any job, not just medicine, I'm more likely to take the person who thought everything was miserable but still wants the job than the pollyanna.

I suppose I also don't understand why people think working patients is the only way to display altruism (and I also find the altruistic motives behind working with patients, especially from premeds, who are basically forced into it, questionable at best.) Just as a couple of examples, soldiers and school teachers are both jobs that require way more altruism than any doctor I've seen ever display. And the ability to interact with patients is just ability to interact with people. They don't stop being people just because they put on a gown and complain of chest pain. The more I think about it, the more it reminds of a retail customer service desk. Everyone needs something, some of them are sad, some are mad, some just want to get the heck out of there and you need to accommodate all of them and do it professionally.

 

[LizzyM]

No need to be defensive. I'm not attacking you personally. I would like to know where I put words in someone's mouth though. Everything there is either my own viewpoint or a quote/paraphrase from an adcom on here.

Just because someone is dissuaded does not mean they would be bad at the job. Most people, when surrounded by negative emotions, are going to associate negative emotions with the experience. Not everyone is going to go in with a cynic's mindset and expect everything to be awful. All it does is scare off people who aren't accustomed to dysfunction. Your viewpoint also doesn't account for people who do hate every minute of it, but still have the plan of fake it til they make for whatever motivation.

Additionally, not every doctor works in a hospital. I keep track of ~250 providers in our system and only about half work in one of our hospitals. That number doesn't include all of our independent contractors, locums, and private practice types whose names I never even hear.

Not all patients are in hospitals and hospitals are not the only place to gain clinical experience. Ambulatory care is a large portion of clinical care these days and many students have very good experiences in outpatient settings including family planning clinics, suitcase clinics and private practice offices.

No one says you have to play bingo with nursing home residents and I, for one, have caused some consternation by arguing that folks living in nursing homes are RESIDENTS, not patients, just as babysitting is not a type of clinical pediatrics.

Can you stand being around sick and /or injured people and/or people seeing preventive services? If you haven't been around them, how can you say in all honesty that you want to spend your career around them? You are in the application cycle, if I understand correctly, and it is either going to work out for you or it isn't. If it does not, you may need to bite the bullet and find some patients to spend time with.

 

[eatandpoop]

@LizzyM, what are your thoughts on hospices? Are these placed in the same category as nursing homes, even though all of the hospice patients are receiving end-of-life care and they are generally very, very sick?

 

[claduva94]

I had actually asked Goro and gyngyn about my experiences a few months ago. They told me it didn't count.

No one likes all aspects of any job and things don't change unless there is discontent. If I were interviewing someone for any job, not just medicine, I'm more likely to take the person who thought everything was miserable but still wants the job than the pollyanna.

I suppose I also don't understand why people think working patients is the only way to display altruism (and I also find the altruistic motives behind working with patients, especially from premeds, who are basically forced into it, questionable at best.) Just as a couple of examples, soldiers and school teachers are both jobs that require way more altruism than any doctor I've seen ever display. And the ability to interact with patients is just ability to interact with people. They don't stop being people just because they put on a gown and complain of chest pain. The more I think about it, the more it reminds of a retail customer service desk. Everyone needs something, some of them are sad, some are mad, some just want to get the heck out of there and you need to accommodate all of them and do it professionally.

Yes but why would you take someone who hasn't experienced it at all, and therefore can't craft an opinion? That is the point we are making. You HAVE to work with patients to accomplish that.

It isn't the only place you can show altruism. No one said that. But it is the place where you can show altruism AND work with patients. Working with patients is not exactly the same as working with people and you have to be aware of that. Customer service is not at all indicative. They are two very different environments. There is a difference between a customer and a person with terminal cancer who has been in the hospital for months. I know this because I've worked with both.

 

[LizzyM]

@LizzyM, what are your thoughts on hospices? Are these placed in the same category as nursing homes, even though all of the hospice patients are receiving end-of-life care and they are generally very, very sick?

A hospice patient is, by definition, a patient. Services you would provide at the bedside of a dying patient would count in my book just as services you might provide to patients in the emergency department would count (an extra blanket? hand me something out of my reach, turn something so I can see it, turn something on or off, etc).