Judging Strength of MSTP Research Department

[EsseQuamVideri]

Please distinguish yourselves as: applicant, reapp, current MSTP/MDPhD, graduate if possible:

How did you mudphuds investigate the strength of the research programs to which you were applying? Number of top-notch faculty? Lots of high IF pubs? NIH dollars? etc.

I'm trying to whittle down my MSTP school list before i finally click submit (19 schools now) and I'd like to evaluate the research programs a little more systematically as opposed to my current "browse/impressions" approach.

As always, wisdom is appreciated. Speculation will be met with skepticism. Criticism will be disregarded entirely

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[delirium81]

I'm a current MSTP student. I didn't evaluate the overall research of the institutions to which I applied because I already had an area of interest. I looked specifically to see if there were multiple faculty members in that area that looked promising. Different institutions have strengths and weaknesses in different areas. Even those schools that receive the most overall NIH funding and have the most overall R01-funded PIs will be weaker in certain areas.

If you do have specific area(s) of interest, I recommend looking at the faculty available at each institution in those areas. Make a note of how many are doing work that interests you and what their publication record looks like. If a school only has a couple faculty that look promising to you then yeah, knock it off the list. If you don't have a specific area of interest yet, then look at the overall NIH funding the school receives and the amount of NIH dollars/PI etc. etc.

Anyway, that's what I did. But perhaps you'd like to come up with a more systematic solution? If so, more power to you.

 

[Ombret]

MSTP graduate and not of the most recent vintage. I think any systematic effort is bound to fail; you will miss the forest for the trees. Find faculty members whose opinion you trust and ask them about your list. Especially look for people who have moved around in their career; they will have less tunnel vision. The top 19 or (all the more) top 10 places are all in the same league by definition. So I would think other factors should get more weight in your decision than overall brute research firepower.

 

[Neuronix]

So I would think other factors should get more weight in your decision than overall brute research firepower.

I took Ombret's approach and got the worst list of schools ever. In the end the list of schools I applied to was completely nonsensical, and to this day I wonder wtf I was thinking. There's a few factors there, mostly relating to the fact that PhD faculty almost all do have tunnel vision and only know their own tiny little niche. Also, just because a school is strong in your area of research, if their MD/PhD is weak you'd probably not want to go there. What area is it you're interested in? We might be able to give better advice, but you have to watch for the cheerleader phenomenon. i.e. Someone reads this thread and plugs the school they attend or really want to attend and completely ignores schools better than theirs in that area out of ignorance or a different kind of tunnel vision.

If you have a strong application, I'm a fan of just applying to the top 20 programs and picking based off where you interview. In retrospect I had a definite clinical and research idea of what I wanted as a pre-med and I was completely wrong. All the big name people in that field at my MSTP ended up either not taking students, not taking MD/PhD students, being denied by the MD/PhD program, being a huge *******, and one even raped a student and got fired. So even if I wanted to work in that department, I don't think it would have worked out. So being at a research powerhouse lets you switch fields and explore more in general.

Thread summary: there's no good way of doing this

 

[soundnin]

Thread summary: there's no good way of doing this

how reassuring haha!

but looking at my list of 23 schools - i feel it's quite nonsensical too. loosely there is some geographical bias, but even that doesn't tie all my schools together in any way.

 

[Lil Mick]

I'm a current student who only applied once.

I was somewhat limited by my non-biology area of interest, but I ranked my picks by how many faculty members were in that area of interest at those schools, how many MD/PhD students had gone through that area/those research groups, and the geography (Southern girl here). I also made sure that the program was established for a few years (had students who'd graduated already). Hope that helps

 

[EsseQuamVideri]

Thanks for the perspective, ladies and gents. I do feel somewhat reassured by that. Most of my list picking was in the order of: numbers, region, program strength, and then taking subjective information on research strength into consideration.

For advice related to moi-même:

MCAT: 33O (VR9/PS11/BS13)
GPA: 3.73cum 3.7sci
Strong HS committee letter, strong PI letter, outstanding non-sci letter
lots of international experience
4.5 years research
gap year
2 HHMI fellowships (1 international)
Charming

I'm trying to avoid the "special snowflake syndrome" and not over apply to top-heavies because i'm in the MSTP "who-the-f**k-knows" zone with GPA/MCAT.

 

[PfNO22]

HS committee letter

??

 

[MasterK]

i'm in the MSTP "who-the-f**k-knows" zone with GPA/MCAT.

I'm with you there. I'm applying MD/PhD with 33Q, ug cGPA 3.4, grad cGPA 4.0, lots of research. I don't know if I stand a chance, and with lower than average stats, I've been told to just apply broadly with a nice range of MSTP and non-MSTP. So, I myself haven't spent much time sorting through the schools except by their amount of funding.

I know for PhD programs, people contact PIs they're interested in before applying to find out if they're taking students. Does anyone know if that works for MD/PhD?

 

[EsseQuamVideri]

??

HS = health sciences (pre-med) committee. Sorry for the unexpd. abbrev.

I'm with you there. I'm applying MD/PhD with 33Q, ug cGPA 3.4, grad cGPA 4.0, lots of research. I don't know if I stand a chance, and with lower than average stats, I've been told to just apply broadly with a nice range of MSTP and non-MSTP. So, I myself haven't spent much time sorting through the schools except by their amount of funding.

I know for PhD programs, people contact PIs they're interested in before applying to find out if they're taking students. Does anyone know if that works for MD/PhD?

Good question. I had a friend who applied to several Ph.D programs specifically hoping to work with one PI or another only to find out during the interview day that they weren't taking any students. Anyone know of this in MSTP?

 

[Lil Mick]

Some schools had specifically asked me to provide a list of potential research mentors at the school; some just asked me during the interview if I had looked at potential mentors at the school. I think it depends on the program.

 

[pharmerchick]

I know for PhD programs, people contact PIs they're interested in before applying to find out if they're taking students. Does anyone know if that works for MD/PhD?

Question: I'm interested in working with one prof whose work i've read about on PubMed serrendipidously (spelling is not a strong suit). the field itself is very narrow and only a handful of schools internationally actually have faculty working in it. this prof is the only one at his school. But because i've been interested in his work, his school is looking very appealing to me. should I contact him first to see if he takes mudphuds before i even apply there?

 

[Lil Mick]

One thing to consider is whether you would enjoy being at this school even if that PI changed schools or moved out of country (has happened at my school to students in the PhD). If you would enjoy it, I'd say to ask the professor if he's taking students (either before applying or before your interview).

I had to do some serious research on schools myself, as my area of study isn't available at many schools (math), and it was helpful to ask before applying/interviewing...