- Joined
- Jul 25, 2010
- Messages
- 908
- Reaction score
- 72
I hear all the time about research and how it can make a subpar applicant competitive. Well if someone has all the ECs except research would that make them less competitive?
Inb4usesearchforum.I hear all the time about research and how it can make a subpar applicant competitive. Well if someone has all the ECs except research would that make them less competitive?
Inb4usesearchforum.
No. It is not needed but of course it will make ur app better just like anything else would. An app with community service (all other things equal) will look better than an app without it.
Depending on the school it could possibly hurt an app.
It is not required but highly recommended. You will be doing some research in medical school so its good to have some experience under your belt. A strong publication may even boost your chances considerably.
Hmm interesting. Any examples?
Hmm interesting. Any examples?
Generally, the higher ranked a school, the more they care about research.
But I attend a school in the Top 25, and I did absolutely no research prior to med school. I also got away with doing no research over the summer between first and second year, though I'm out of the norm... about 70% of my class chose to do research this summer.
Just have something else in your application to make up for it.
Top tier schools that are research oriented would definitely want to see some type of research under your belt. schools like Harvard, Hopkins, St. Louis , Upenn and so on.
Top tier schools that are research oriented would definitely want to see some type of research under your belt. schools like Harvard, Hopkins, St. Louis , Upenn and so on.
^ This. When 90%+ of those accepted to a school have done research (97% if we're talking about schools like Harvard and Yale) you can make the assumption that having no research when applying there puts you at a disadvantage.
And I'm sorry I should've clarified I meant that having no research could possibly hurt your app.
So it can be safe to say that the top 20 schools value research whereas schools 30 and down don't sweat it too much?
Well that's not necessarily true either. Take my school for example: It's not a top 20 (and actually doesn't even participate in US News) and ~85% of those accepted had research. Furthermore, research while attending my school is required and during my interview they even admitted that they like to see applicants who have done some type of research.
So it really isn't an easy yes/no matter.
I'm just gonna play it safe and do some research.
It can only help your app.
No, research is not required. It can help your application at some of the more research-oriented schools, but even then, I can't think of a school that has 100% of their matriculants with a research background (with the exception of CCLCM).
If you're interested in research, go for it. If not, focus on something else.
And Utah requires it, too.No, research is not required. It can help your application at some of the more research-oriented schools, but even then, I can't think of a school that has 100% of their matriculants with a research background (with the exception of CCLCM).
If you're interested in research, go for it. If not, focus on something else.
I don't think they require research as a prerequisite for matriculation either, but I don't have an MSAR on hand to confirm.What about schools like Keck, the SUNYs and Texas schools?
I hear all the time about research and how it can make a subpar applicant competitive. Well if someone has all the ECs except research would that make them less competitive?
Dont know about Keck or SUNY but the Texas schools like research. It really ins't required, but some schools like UTSW and Baylor seem to like applicants that have it.What about schools like Keck, the SUNYs and Texas schools?
I don't think they require research as a prerequisite for matriculation either, but I don't have an MSAR on hand to confirm.
Let me ask you two questions: 1) Are you interested in research? and 2) If you're not interested in research, why do you want to apply to schools that really emphasize research/academia? Just curious.
I am interested in research but at the same time I enjoy interaction with people. I am interested in being an academic physician.
Didn't find it when I searched. Thanks for the input though.
I was thinking good amounts of clinical volunteering, shadowing and leadership can make up for it.
Hmm interesting. Any examples?
Depending on the school it could possibly hurt an app.
How so?
I explained above how schools where 90%+ of the applicants have research (usually referred to as the top 20) are examples of when having no research would be a disadvantage. Why? Because those schools are clearly recruiting applicants with research backgrounds.
Take Harvard for example. 97% of those accepted had done research prior to matriculation. Technically you could fall under that small 3% but why risk it?
Taking into account your qualifier of "if not," I highly doubt anywhere near the majority of academic physicians are mudphuds.Two additional comments:
1) Many, if not most, academic physicians are not MD/PhDs. Don't be discouraged from aiming for academia if that's your interest.
2) If you are, in fact, interested in MD/PhD programs, research would be expected prior to interviewing.
Yes please.I think a lot of people only think of research when the word "academia" is tossed around. But that's not entirely true. You can be an academic even without being involved in any research activities. You can be academic physician who focuses solely on teaching and clinical duties, for example. I've encountered quite a few clinical professors who either don't do any research or very little clinical research, but are heavily involved in resident/med student teaching, administrative work, etc.