JAMA article: Physician-Scientist careers

[77kelly77]

Here is an article that may be of interest:

The Physician-Scientist Career Pipeline in 2005: Build It, and They Will Come

Timothy J. Ley; Leon E. Rosenberg

JAMA 2005;294 1343-1351

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gfunk6]

The bottom line:

MD-PhDs

Seven indicators offer information about this important population. First, the national population of MD-PhD students is remarkably small at fewer than 600 total matriculants in 2005, or approximately 4% of the total medical student population. Over the years, however, MD-PhD graduates have constituted a growing fraction of funded physician-scientists, and that trend continues. They are overrepresented in the pool of K08 applicants, first-time RPG applicants, and R01 applications, clearly indicating the success of this program for producing successful physician-scientists with sustained academic careers.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Music to my ears

 

[Doctor&Geek]

Not all the news is "good": figure 3 shows that MD/PhDs no longer have any better success rate at getting their NIH grants funded, whereas they had a slight advantage before.

 

[scooter31]

Not all the news is "good": figure 3 shows that MD/PhDs no longer have any better success rate at getting their NIH grants funded, whereas they had a slight advantage before.

Thoughts as to why this edge has been (hopefully temporarily) lost? This has to be one of the big draws to becoming a mudphud. At least for some of us. That and the hot chicks you can talk to online...

 

[Thundrstorm]

Thoughts as to why this edge has been (hopefully temporarily) lost? This has to be one of the big draws to becoming a mudphud. At least for some of us. That and the hot chicks you can talk to online...

You're talkin' about me, aren't ya?

 

[scooter31]

You're talkin' about me, aren't ya?

Who else??

 

[dr.z]

That and the hot chicks you can talk to online...

although I would like to talk in person.

 

[scooter31]

although I would like to talk in person.

Sounds kinky.


and with that, I end my off topic postings. On this thread at least

 

[tr]

They are overrepresented in the pool of K08 applicants, first-time RPG applicants, and R01 applications, clearly indicating the success of this program for producing successful physician-scientists with sustained academic careers.

That does not follow. As any good scientist knows, correlation does not imply causation. In this age of credential inflation, it may as well be that people who are motivated to do research are more likely to enter these programs in the first place. That's not to say that they wouldn't have done equally well without the dual degree.

(Not that I necessarily believe that, just pointing out some slipshod claims on the part of the authors.)

 

[tr]

Thoughts as to why this edge has been (hopefully temporarily) lost?

Well, the stat by itself doesn't mean much. MD-only researchers are more likely to be doing clinical research than MD-PhDs (although of course there is a lot of overlap), so the funding pictures for the groups are not directly comparable. I think in general it may be easier to fund clinical than basic research.

 

[mendel121]

Well, the stat by itself doesn't mean much. MD-only researchers are more likely to be doing clinical research than MD-PhDs (although of course there is a lot of overlap), so the funding pictures for the groups are not directly comparable. I think in general it may be easier to fund clinical than basic research.

I think that the percieved advantage is a myth, MD/PhDs have never really been funded at a higher rate, just for more money, for the reason that tr gives here - see my previous post -

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?p=2657555#post2657555

 

[geekgirl]

i have found, as an MD/PhD student (perhaps through sheer luck), i have come across very solid scientists (MDs and PhDs) and now as i transition back to clinical medicine (and residency) I find the MD/PhDs the most like-minded scientifically in the community of medicine. in science those at the top could go head to head - PhD and MD.

the PhD scientists whom i know and admire are succesful because they are rock solid researchers. the MDs who i know and can compete are almost all MD/PhDs. i do think with the MD we are given a more straightforward path to funding. my postdoc/faculty friends in research (straight PhDs) also have opportunities for research and funding, but there is much less structure, guidance, etc for these endeavors than i am being presented with.

these goals are not for every MD, but for focused MD/PhDs, we are directed at funding opportunities much more than our PhD peers are given direction. therein, lies the advantage, at least as far as i've seen. my lab "equals" are now trying to set up labs and become independent academically, while i am applying for residency. these are different processes, but the kinds of residencies i am going for have offered "research funding opportunities" and "likely faculty as well as grant opportunities", while some of my postdoc friends are struggling for academic career slots.

as MD/PhDs we've got structure. and in terms of MD colleagues, a lot of research skills under our belts. so we just fit a different niche. but one i think has a lot of potential. and opportunities compared to my pure research friends. it takes a while, but when we come out, we are pretty set up for the fast track.

but that's just my perspective.....and what i have seen.....