MD/PhD chances?

[TheKemist]

Hey SDN I wanted your opinion on my chances at getting into an MD/PhD program with my stats. I really want to get a good idea so I can prepare my application for June 2015. I appreciate your help so much and you have all contributed to the network that is SDN and has helped me on so many levels! Please let me know your thoughts on my acceptance to any MD/PhD program. I am trying to build my application list. Thank you all!

So here are my stats.


3.3 GPA, Genetics (worked full-time throughout undergrad to support my family)

31 MCAT (10 P 11V 10 B)

100 hours ER volunteering

~1600 hours clinical with direct patient care

President of medical book club

Genetics of Cancer research for 2.5 years volunteer/ paid (same project and I lead a team of 4
undergrads. I have no post-doc or PhD supervising me. Hopefully manuscript submitted by June 2015)

~20 hours MD/PhD shadowing (personally interviewed 2 different MD/PhD faculty at my university

Small Business Owner since 2009 peak business ~$35,000/year

Jazz guitarist with 2 years trio experience

Parent of 2

Award recipient for 2 funded research fellowships (poster presentations, no pub.)

Currently a full-time patient care coordinator

Rec. Letters: 2 PIs (collaborators), health profession advisor, genetics professor, Director of undergraduate studies at my U.


Pending:

Math tutor for underserved minority pop. in inner city

Pub. Review

I have a very big passion for genetics research and I know the industry somewhat now that I have been around for 2 years. I could see myself doing this kind of research at an academic health institution. I also like the idea of reduced patient care for lab time because it makes those patient care interactions even more meaningful. Giving patients an option to be entered in clinical research and trials would be also be very interesting.

I am also a non-traditional african-american (URM) male with disadvantaged status in two categories with regards to my life and up-bringing.

Taking all this in to consideration, what are my chances at an MD/PhD program?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[sat0ri]

Vanishingly small. MD/PhD is general more competitive than MD with averages of 3.8/34.5 (thats not even for top tier). Your research lukewarm, good but not phenomenal. Even MD your shots are only at 40% at placing somewhere; DO you have a chance though your GPA is on the bottom end of what they like to see, but your MCAT is on or slightly above average. All in all though, I'm going to say chances are very bad.

Your redeeming quality that you seem to be aware of is that you have interesting back story, but that really on opens you up to a fluke or a lucky shot that someone just happens to really like your story. Definitely nothing close to a "garuntee" or a "safety", all a very big gamble. The MCAT range of accepted scores for MD/PhD is 22-44, so it's not impossible.

EDIT: Filled in the numbers after looking them up

 

[TheKemist]

Vanishingly small. MD/PhD is general more competitive than MD with averages of 3.8/34.5 (thats not even for top tier). Your research lukewarm, good but not phenomenal. Even MD your shots are only at 40% at placing somewhere; DO you have a chance though your GPA is on the bottom end of what they like to see, but your MCAT is on or slightly above average. All in all though, I'm going to say chances are very bad.

Your redeeming quality that you seem to be aware of is that you have interesting back story, but that really on opens you up to a fluke or a lucky shot that someone just happens to really like your story. Definitely nothing close to a "garuntee" or a "safety", all a very big gamble. The MCAT range of accepted scores for MD/PhD is 22-44, so it's not impossible.

EDIT: Filled in the numbers after looking them up

Hey thanks for the reply. Did you see that I have URM and disadvantaged status? Your numbers for MD acceptance indicate that you missed this little detail when reading my post. I saw numbers for MD acceptance rates for 3.3 GPA/ 31 MCAT for African American applicants at ~ 84 %. The reason I posted in SDN is because I am interested in MD/ PhD only and I'm not sure if these statistics exist.

 

[TheKemist]

I would also appreciate advice from the more experienced people on SDN such as @gyngyn or @LizzyM
I've read a lot of your posts on SDN and they are very informative. This would help me out so much! Thanks!

 

[alt91119]

Do you have any poster presentations from your research? More specifically, did you present anywhere significant (ie a national or international conference, not just at your university)?

The rule for MD/PhD is typically that:

GPA
MCAT
Research

two of the above three have to be stellar.

Even for URM, I feel like your GPA (and to a lesser degree MCAT) are on the low end of acceptable - perhaps okay, but only if paired with an otherwise flawless application. If you have a couple of presentations at important meetings and a damn good letter from you PI, you might be okay overall. If you don't.... not so much. Saying "hopefully manuscript submitted by the time I apply" doesn't do anything for your application because

1) it might not happen
2) if it isn't already partway through the review process, you could have submitted garbage and they wouldn't know

I'd say that if you don't have at least a first-to-third author publication or a couple of national conference presentations at a minimum, you probably have less of a chance of getting in than not. That doesn't mean it's time to give up... it just means it might be advisable to take a gap year (or two) and make sure your research is really damn strong.

Of course I'm just another applicant, so take what I say with a grain of salt...

P.S. You would almost definitely be a very successful applicant to either standalone MD or PhD programs for what it's worth...

 

[TheKemist]

Do you have any poster presentations from your research? More specifically, did you present anywhere significant (ie a national or international conference, not just at your university)?

The rule for MD/PhD is typically that:

GPA
MCAT
Research

two of the above three have to be stellar.

Even for URM, I feel like your GPA (and to a lesser degree MCAT) are on the low end of acceptable - perhaps okay, but only if paired with an otherwise flawless application. If you have a couple of presentations at important meetings and a damn good letter from you PI, you might be okay overall. If you don't.... not so much. Saying "hopefully manuscript submitted by the time I apply" doesn't do anything for your application because

1) it might not happen
2) if it isn't already partway through the review process, you could have submitted garbage and they wouldn't know

I'd say that if you don't have at least a first-to-third author publication or a couple of national conference presentations at a minimum, you probably have less of a chance of getting in than not. That doesn't mean it's time to give up... it just means it might be advisable to take a gap year (or two) and make sure your research is really damn strong.

Of course I'm just another applicant, so take what I say with a grain of salt...

P.S. You would almost definitely be a very successful applicant to either standalone MD or PhD programs for what it's worth...

Hi, thanks for replying. I have only presented at symposiums at my U.

The funny thing about being published is I am basically putting together my entire project from scratch. It's not like I am helping a grad student finish up their thesis so I feel like my research experience is unique or maybe this is the norm for MD/PhD applicants?

Also, funny story, when I came to my U I was in an intro to research course that was req'd by our college. At the end we all got to pick grad students to work with for about 6 months for a project. 2 of my friends picked a grad student in the same lab where I picked a grad student. After six months they had a Nature paper submission and I had nothing. It had nothing to do with the quality of us as researchers because all they did was some cell culture work for 10 and 11 author on a Nature paper. I could have just as easily went with the grad student they chose and then I would have a Nature paper pub. Just something Ive been thinking about in this whole process. I guess on paper they would seem super accomplished while even though I research and derive my own protocols from cell culture to pathology to immunohistochemistry to imaging.

Thanks for listening!

 

[Doug Underhill]

You may be better off getting a MD and then getting a Ph.D. Your stats are pretty good for MD programs but on the low side for MD/Ph.D.

 

[alt91119]

Hi, thanks for replying. I have only presented at symposiums at my U.

The funny thing about being published is I am basically putting together my entire project from scratch. It's not like I am helping a grad student finish up their thesis so I feel like my research experience is unique or maybe this is the norm for MD/PhD applicants?

Also, funny story, when I came to my U I was in an intro to research course that was req'd by our college. At the end we all got to pick grad students to work with for about 6 months for a project. 2 of my friends picked a grad student in the same lab where I picked a grad student. After six months they had a Nature paper submission and I had nothing. It had nothing to do with the quality of us as researchers because all they did was some cell culture work for 10 and 11 author on a Nature paper. I could have just as easily went with the grad student they chose and then I would have a Nature paper pub. Just something Ive been thinking about in this whole process. I guess on paper they would seem super accomplished while even though I research and derive my own protocols from cell culture to pathology to immunohistochemistry to imaging.

Thanks for listening!

That's why I said "1st to 3rd author" on a paper. Admissions committees know that sometimes nepotism or just random chance comes into play as to who gets on a paper and who doesn't. In your friends' cases it was random chance. But they are 10th and 11th author - committees know that this means they probably contributed nothing intellectually to the project and were just extra hands in the lab, so they probably won't really see it as anything all that impressive (ie they will see right through it).

I understand your frustration on doing a lot of really original research in the lab and not being recognized for it yet - I'm in the same boat currently. What you have to keep in mind though is that the only way admissions committees can measure your productivity is by presentations or publications. Sure, you say you are doing really innovative stuff that you are intellectually spearheading, but how do they know you aren't exaggerating? How do they know you didn't spend the whole 2000 hours in the lab learning how to pipet? Without posters and pubs, they really don't.

And for some applicants it isn't quite as important. I had a friend who got into several top-10 MD/PhD programs without any national conferences or publications (he had 6 posters at his undergrad). BUT he had a 3.97 and a 38+ MCAT... so it's much more important for you.

 

[Doug Underhill]

That's why I said "1st to 3rd author" on a paper. Admissions committees know that sometimes nepotism or just random chance comes into play as to who gets on a paper and who doesn't. In your friends' cases it was random chance. But they are 10th and 11th author - committees know that this means they probably contributed nothing intellectually to the project and were just extra hands in the lab, so they probably won't really see it as anything all that impressive (ie they will see right through it).

I disagree. Nobody expects a premed to be first author. Adcoms will be impressed if you can contribute one panel to one figure of one article and be a minor author on a published, peer-reviewed publication. However, beyond that, you need to be able to clearly and coherently explain what you did, and why it's important to the overall conclusions of the article.

 

[LizzyM]

Do you think that you would be a good candidate to be admitted to a PhD program in sciences? If not, why not? Consider that response when determining whether a PhD committee will recommend you for a MD/PhD. They are looking for people who are going to rotate through labs even before med school classes begin. You need to walk in the door with some skills and the desire to build on those skills to the point where you are doing independent, original research toward your dissertation.

Do you want to be a physician who sees patients during 20% of your work week and spends 80% of the work week in the lab or otherwise engaged in research and supervision of research team members? If you would prefer to spend 80% of your time in patient care and 20% protected time in the lab, then you need only the MD and not the MD/PhD.

What kind of support network do you have to hold everything together while you are in school for 7 years? While some MD/PhD programs do pay a stipend and cover tuition, it would be just about impossible to support a family on a doctoral student's stipend. This is not a good choice if it is being made solely to help defray the cost of attendance.

Appropriately targeting your application to MD programs, you have a very high chance of being admitted somewhere. I do believe that given the type of research you've engaged with (outside of an established lab with an established PI to vouch for you) and with lots of things like a small business and family that would suggest that you will not be 24/7 devoted to research while in graduate studies, you have an exceedingly small chance of being selected for an MD/PhD program.

 

[TheKemist]

Do you think that you would be a good candidate to be admitted to a PhD program in sciences? If not, why not? Consider that response when determining whether a PhD committee will recommend you for a MD/PhD. They are looking for people who are going to rotate through labs even before med school classes begin. You need to walk in the door with some skills and the desire to build on those skills to the point where you are doing independent, original research toward your dissertation.

Do you want to be a physician who sees patients during 20% of your work week and spends 80% of the work week in the lab or otherwise engaged in research and supervision of research team members? If you would prefer to spend 80% of your time in patient care and 20% protected time in the lab, then you need only the MD and not the MD/PhD.

What kind of support network do you have to hold everything together while you are in school for 7 years? While some MD/PhD programs do pay a stipend and cover tuition, it would be just about impossible to support a family on a doctoral student's stipend. This is not a good choice if it is being made solely to help defray the cost of attendance.

Appropriately targeting your application to MD programs, you have a very high chance of being admitted somewhere. I do believe that given the type of research you've engaged with (outside of an established lab with an established PI to vouch for you) and with lots of things like a small business and family that would suggest that you will not be 24/7 devoted to research while in graduate studies, you have an exceedingly small chance of being selected for an MD/PhD program.

LizzyM I feel honored to have you weigh in on my post!

I have given a major amount of time to thinking about MD versus PhD after receiving my MCAT score Tuesday. (I was hoping for 35+ but kind of choked)

I know that my PI thinks I have a very promising career as a PhD by observing the way he introduces me to his colleagues, the responsibility and leadership roles he has bestowed upon me and the amount of autonomy he gives me financially in the lab. I think I woud be a good PhD candidate. I have a fairly large research skill set and I am confident in using it. He has been coaching me to take a PhD and I have thought about it deeply. However, I really want to do clinical research too. I was exposed to this idea about 2 years ago when reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. I really liked the idea of George Guy takIng samples from his patients and working on them in the lab, although not his apparent exploitation of Henrietta. I found this to be very intriguing.

Furthermore, I currently see patients full-time as a patient care coordinator at a large academic medical center and I go in to the lab at night to keep up my mouse colony, cell culture, cut tissue slides, staining, etc. After eight hours at the hospital my time at the lab flies by at night. Honestly, the lab doesn't feel like "work". One of my favorite things is just doing cell culture listening to my iPhone, it can be so relaxing. The lab is more Ike a place where I feel at home or my hang out. My current work day is 10-12 hours 5 days a week and 8 hours 2 days a week. I do take some real weekends sometimes.

After interviewing a couple MD/PhD faculty I learned how their schedule is partitioned and I find that kind of time management very appealing. I don't think I would like to spend only 20% of my week in the lab. Research doesn't strike me as something I would only want to do a little on the side, especially when competing with full-time PhD Faculty or the same grant money. This is also why I am a little anxious to take just the MD because I want the training that comes with the PhD such as grant writing.

Our lab is definitely well established and my PI just graduated two PhD students. We are at a top 30 research institution. He also makes it a point to publish in very prestigious journals such as Cell, Nature, etc. He wants me to submit our manuscript to Cell this spring. I guess what I'm trying to show here is that I am in very deep in genetics research with a very reputable PI and lab.

Finally, I am planning on selling my small business when I leave for medical school. I actually only have a couple clients now because I have downsized my operation to prepare for medical school. I would not try to conduct business and do MD/PhD. My fiancée ( mother of my two children) also brings in around 28k as a PCA. I think the program stipend coupled with her income would make for a modest but happy quality of life for our family. There is no way I would put myself through 4 or more years of graduate school for free tuition if I didn't sincerely love research. As far as financial incentives are concerned, I feel that MD would be more attractive due to the income being realized four years earlier then a MD/PhD. As many have told me, and I agree, the tuition for medical school being free is completely negated by the fact that MDs will have appreciated four years in the workforce. My answer is always that I love research.

I am not really ready to give up on this dream. I think I will apply to schools that consider those rejected from MD/PhD for MD spots. Do you think this is a sound strategy?

 

[LizzyM]

I generally discourage applicants from any hope of being considered for just MD if they have applied for MD/PhD. By the time the MD/PhD adcom has discarded your application and transferred it to MD only, there are only a handful of interview slots left and the MD adcom wonders if you really want MD only if you have MD/PhD as an option anywhere else. Why should you get one of the last MD interview slots if you are gunning for MD/PhD?

If you submit a manuscript this spring, you MUST update your application (notify the schools to which you've applied) if you get the manuscript accepted. You must have a PI letter. The way you described it at first with no supervision didn't sound very "professional". With a really strong PI letter you might have a chance. It sounds as if you really have the desire for the physician-scientist life.

 

[TheKemist]

I am sorry that I miscommunicated how my relationship is with my PI. He is around in his office writing grant proposals and such while I stay in the lab and basically do what I need to do to complete figures for our paper. We talk about it once a week or so in a conference room and he makes suggestions but really lets me develop the experiments, research protocols, devise/revise protocols, and manage the other group members. I direct them in techniques I've already learned and act as a mentor. My PI and I have a really strong relationship. I have known him for over two years and have been to talks together, parties, and have had regular drinks on Fruday nights with others from our lab. What I meant by not supervised is I basically act as the grad student for four other undergrads and there is rarely, if ever, a time when my PI will come in the lab and show us a technique. My PI relies strictly on a "no hand holding" mentorship model, at least for me. I feel that he trusts me enough to feel comfortable that I will be productive and produce meaningful data. I know he will write me a stellar rec letter because he has already done so twice. I am working so hard now to get my manuscript submitted in May so I can mention it on my application submitted to AMCAS on June 1. I have no doubt it will be accepted because my PI is known for only submitting very groundbreaking papers.

I should also mention that my second PI is known for publishg in Cell, Cancer Cell, etc. He has already told me that he will write me a rec letter for MD/PhD without my asking. He also has shown me some stuff but is very "hands off". We have all been collaborating on the same project for about two years.

Maybe I could split my list, applying MD to top half and MD/PhD to the bottom half? I mean a can't win if I don't at least place some bets.

 

[LizzyM]

Better you should approach the MD/PhD as you would approach applying to PhD programs. Focus your MD/PhD applications at schools that have more than one lab doing genetics. The MD/PhD programs will judge you based on whether they can see you being a good fit with one of their PIs. Your best shot will be somewhere where someone will be salivating to have you in their lab. If a school isn't doing research you feel you could step into easily, then perhaps those are places you might apply MD only. Do keep in mind that the best PhD programs tend to be at the top schools.

 

[overcoming]

I feel compelled to respond to your post because I was in the same position last year. I was deciding between applying to MD/PhD programs or straight MD.

You are basically a mirror image of me in terms of stats and minority background (in fact your stats are better than mine). I applied straight MD the 2013-2014 cycle even though I was a better candidate for a PhD program than MD. From what I read on sdn, I believed I was not competitive enough to get interviews for MD/PhD programs. I was unsuccessful in obtaining an acceptance for MD programs due to my lack of clinical experience, however I applied again this cycle for MD/PhD programs and have gotten interviews at some good schools.

Everything @LizzyM has mentioned is very true. You have to approach applying to these schools paying very close attention to their PhD programs and what skills/experience you can bring as a PhD student. In addition if you have acceptable stats to get into an MD and are a wonderful candidate for the PhD then I would say go for it and apply.

Even with all this being said and from what I have seen from your posts, I feel you are a good candidate for MD programs, but lukewarm for the PhD side. Honestly, if an individual has enough research experience and are productive there shouldn't be any reason not to have substantial evidence of this in terms of publications in journals and presentations at conferences.

I believe you might get MD/PhD interviews but it may not be from top schools. If you want to become a better candidate, I would recommend focusing on the research side of your application and possible improving your GPA. From what I have read, I don't believe your reasons/experiences are strong enough to pursue the MD/PhD path.

If you have any questions for me, you are welcome to pm.

 

[Doug Underhill]

Alternatively, if you want the Ph.D more, you could also apply to Ph.D only programs. If your career path involves lots and lots of bench work, it's something to consider.

 

[TheKemist]

Better you should approach the MD/PhD as you would approach applying to PhD programs. Focus your MD/PhD applications at schools that have more than one lab doing genetics. The MD/PhD programs will judge you based on whether they can see you being a good fit with one of their PIs. Your best shot will be somewhere where someone will be salivating to have you in their lab. If a school isn't doing research you feel you could step into easily, then perhaps those are places you might apply MD only. Do keep in mind that the best PhD programs tend to be at the top schools.

I feel compelled to respond to your post because I was in the same position last year. I was deciding between applying to MD/PhD programs or straight MD.

You are basically a mirror image of me in terms of stats and minority background (in fact your stats are better than mine). I applied straight MD the 2013-2014 cycle even though I was a better candidate for a PhD program than MD. From what I read on sdn, I believed I was not competitive enough to get interviews for MD/PhD programs. I was unsuccessful in obtaining an acceptance for MD programs due to my lack of clinical experience, however I applied again this cycle for MD/PhD programs and have gotten interviews at some good schools.

Everything @LizzyM has mentioned is very true. You have to approach applying to these schools paying very close attention to their PhD programs and what skills/experience you can bring as a PhD student. In addition if you have acceptable stats to get into an MD and are a wonderful candidate for the PhD then I would say go for it and apply.

Even with all this being said and from what I have seen from your posts, I feel you are a good candidate for MD programs, but lukewarm for the PhD side. Honestly, if an individual has enough research experience and are productive there shouldn't be any reason not to have substantial evidence of this in terms of publications in journals and presentations at conferences.

I believe you might get MD/PhD interviews but it may not be from top schools. If you want to become a better candidate, I would recommend focusing on the research side of your application and possible improving your GPA. From what I have read, I don't believe your reasons/experiences are strong enough to pursue the MD/PhD path.

If you have any questions for me, you are welcome to pm.

Alternatively, if you want the Ph.D more, you could also apply to Ph.D only programs. If your career path involves lots and lots of bench work, it's something to consider.

Thank you LizzyM, Overcoming, and Doug Underhill for replying with very thoughful posts.

I have seriously considered just applying PhD and forgetting MD but I don't want to be restricted from clinical research and I definitely am attracted to the clinical work of a physician that I have read about in several books and observed in the clinic.

I think I will be applying strategically to MD/PhD programs with genetics departments where I believe my skills and experience can contribute significantly. I feel comfortable taking the MD because I can still potentially have a meaningful research career. Although, I would like the training in a PhD program because I want to be able to be competitive for grant money. What are your opinions on applying MD/PhD after my first year of medical school? I know some programs offer this option.

Alternatively, what do you all think about my metrics in regards to a school list? Could you give a hypothetical range for my potential school list?

I appreciate your responses so much!