LOR question

Started by lateophthoapp
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
L

lateophthoapp

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Hi sorry to post another one of these...

MS4 with late interest in ophtho....PhD in unrelated field. Was planning on using letter from dissertation mentor (who is a PhD very well-known in his field but completely non-clinical) along with 2 ophtho letters. An ophtho attending today suggested 3 ophtho letters or 2 ophtho/1 from medicine or surgery. Only qualm I have is that I worked for 3 years with my mentor and I feel that I had a productive PhD, though attending is saying that most ophtho reviewers won't give a crap about a non-clinician ("it's all name recognition"). From my understanding, most programs won't review supplemental material...

Any suggestions/thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Also, I have a 250+ step1, but really bad pre=clinical grades at a no-name state school (no failures, but probably <50th percentile). Clerkship grades are a mix of honors/high sats (including HS in medicine, surgery). For my "chances", 1 attending tells me I'm a below-average applicant, another says I'm above-average, and the 3rd says I'm average. All tell me to apply to 50-60 schools. Any comments about this would be appreciated as well.

Thanks.
 
I was in almost exactly the same boat last year.... 50 to 60 sounds about right and you'd be surprised how far the PhD will get you - it really sets you apart in a field of very distinguished applicants (and don't worry if its in an unrelated field, however, you do have to craft a narrative about how it led you to a career in Ophthalmology). One important point that I learned on the trail last year, I'd recommend against applying to programs that have absolutely no research - many will look at your Step 1 score and commitment to research and assume you have no real interest in going there. Conversely, you'd be surprised at how many "top-ranked" research program will overlook some deficiencies in your application (especially preclinical grades which are pretty much meaningless in light of your Step 1 score). I'd still submit three clinical letters (2 ophtho, 1 surgery/med) via SFMatch with the knowledge that many of the research-heavy programs will welcome additional letters to bolster your application.

Good luck!
 
I didn't have a phd but had a research background. with your step 1 score and research bearded giraffe is right you will get top interviews. He's also right that you will spend 700 bux to be somewhere and the pd or chairman will question your desire to match there if they have no research to offer you. It sucks.

Your preclinical grades are MEANINGLESS. They can help people who had a mediocre or below average step 1 prove that they actually are good at mastering material but had a bad day. You don't need them and many people can't make heads or tails of them.

Best of luck.
 
If you aren't interested in actually doing research heavily anymore, let the programs where you're interviewing know. Some of them may think you're looking for a lot of research when you may not in fact be looking for that anymore. Just be honest with places. I think having a PhD is definitely an advantage rather than a negative. It helps set you apart.

The SFMatch instructions during my application year specifically said that they recommended 2 Ophthalmology and 1 "Core Rotation" letter. I used 2 ophtho and a Pediatric attending letter. I'm not at all interested in Pediatric Ophthalmology, I just got along really well with that attending. During my interviews most people commented little about my biggest 'name' Ophtho letter. They commented about the other two because that Pediatrician and the other Ophthalmologist knew me well and took the time to write really good, personal letters for me. I got a lot of comments about all the things they said in those two letters. I think the other letter writer said that I was quiet or 'reserved' but very motivated, or something to that effect, and I even got comments during interviews that I didn't seem to be too quiet and that the other two letters mentioned that I was outgoing and interacted well with patients. This was likely because that one letter writer, although more known in Ophthalmology, didn't really get to know me very well in the limited time I had with them. The other two made a bigger impact.

All that to say - It may not be totally going with the flow, but I think fitting your PhD mentor's letter in there instead of a core rotation letter may be worth it, because I assume they have gotten to know you far better than any surgery or IMED attending did during your third year.
 
Good advice above.

About your supplemental information statement...I didn't know this until it pretty late, but a number of programs allow you to add an additional LOR when you are offered an interview. So, if you get the chance to work with a big wig and believe you'll get a good letter, even if it is in August or September, ask for a letter and contact programs to see if they'll let you add the letter to your application. It helps a ton during interviews if your interviewer knows your letter writer. Only a minority of programs do this, but that minority includes some of the big names.
 
thanks ophthope & peter2013. i think i have my game plan worked out...just waiting to get the letters in hand. will be glad to get those apps in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.