MD/PhD -- Does my research seem ok?

[lorenzomicron]

Hi guys,

I just wanted to figure out whether my research would let me be competitive for a MD/PhD or MSTP application, this upcoming cycle, assuming that all other things are ok.

So, I'm posting my research summary profile below, and hopefully, I'd like some feedback as to initial thoughts about it. Too much different fields? Too weak? Not enough? I spent a year in a lab, but left it because things didnt work out and I didnt feel like I was in a good environment, in addition to going abroad. Abroad, I did small projects in two labs. Afterwards, I worked a summer in a lab near home, and started working in a new lab at school which I'm going to continue with for the rest of my years (now a junior). It seems a bit scattered but perhaps people can tell me what they think? And how to present it? I have no publications.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Signal Processing Lab; spring- fall 2009
Initially, my research partner and I worked on designing a stand-alone portable EKG device to attempt to improve the common EKG design. I used circuit design theory and analog filter implementation to complete a prototype for this project which I presented in a poster at the local science symposium at Trinity.
For the summer and fall, I committed myself to working on designing a digital apnea monitor. With no prior programming experience, I applied signal processing theory with MatLab, including Fourier and Autoregression analysis, to develop a system which could detect apnea, even from a signal filled with motion artifact. I presented this project at the local summer science symposium in a ten minute talk and a poster detailing the accuracy of this adaptive method. During the fall, I refined the system to be as general as possible; testing it on signals I collected myself of simulated apnea situations.

Department of Health Sciences; spring 2010
I initialized a study on research recruitment and retention for public health intervention trials run by pharmacists and nurses. In order to develop new ways of recruiting patients and providers into medium-scale clinical trials, I designed research questions and recruitment methods that would be tested in future studies.

Department of Electrical Engineering; spring 2010
I explored a method to reduce acoustic noise using a spectral subtraction method with a reduced delay convolution and adaptive averaging. In particular, I developed a sigmoid-type function for the weight of the spectral averaging, while testing for the improvement of signals based on various parameters of these functions.

Biomechanics and Bioengineering Lab; summer 2010
I investigated the pathological biomechanics of the Intervertebral disc (IVD) in a rat model. I designed a novel Ilizarov fixation device which could statically compress two IVD with an adjustable calibrated stress and force, using principles of material mechanics and anatomy. This device will be used to study the dual effects of inflammation and physical stress on the IVD, in the context of pathogenesis and histogenesis. I also helped in a study using mesenchymal stem cells used for IVD regeneration, discovering that the severity of the injury limits therapeutic potential. This work will be presented at the 2011 Orthopedic Research Society conference.

Electric Fish Lab; fall 2010 and ongoing
I am investigating the ethology and neurogenesis of the electric fish Apteronotus leptorhynchus by studying its electrical signal. I completed a small project studying the effects of Ru486 on the movement patterns of the fish and am now helping another student to test his novelty hypothesis (that novelty but not complexity stimulates neurogenesis) through the use of sequential and complex signals recorded from fish and synthesized in silico. I am currently planning a project in which fish will be played signals constructed artificially to mimic the signals of the electric fish and then study whether it stimulates neurogenesis and behavioral response. In doing so, it will be possible to isolate specific signal features and social factors causing fish neurogenesis and ethology.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[obscurehero]

I'm not sure if I'm completely qualified to comment on whether you have the "right" experience for an MD/PhD application, however I'll give it a go.

I have a varied background myself moving from organic chemistry to inorganic chemistry to biochemistry and molecular biology to genetics and cancer biology...your own research experience seems "similar".

The important thing for me during my interviews was to weave my personal and professional development together with my own research narrative. For example, my first project was my first crack at doing research on my own. From that experience, I learned more about what research looks like day-to-day than anything else, and that's the important thing I took away from that experience.

The harder thing for you, however, will be to communicate your research to your interviewer both on paper and in person. This is harder for us, as we have many projects to talk about. You should talk about what you discovered, what kind of research questions you developed, and how your own involvement helped shaped the research. Not having any long-term investment in a lab can hurt you, though. The longer you're on a project, the more likely you are to really have a wonderful research narrative to lead your reader/interviewer through. The most frustrating thing for me was that I was never on a project long enough to see real progress. So, I took two years to do research in cancer biology to really follow a project for a year and half before I interviewed. I also needed to get some maturity, I felt, before I headed off to something as involved as an MD/PhD.

I can't really judge your experiences from one paragraph except to say that you might want to polish the summaries up a bit more for anything more formal. It seems very interesting, and it seems like you like research that is mathematical and electrical...that's all I got.

 

[lorenzomicron]

Hi obscuehero, thank you so much for your advise.

When you referred to development and research narrative, what would you say was a good way to brainstorm and start writing about this?

Also, you speak of maturity, do you think taking time off before MD/PhD worked well to your advantage? Do you mean maturity in science and personal life, or just personal?

Hah, yea, I did a lot of electrical stuff, but I decided I liked bio-mechanical stuff more, so I really am trying to shift into that....it looks like PhD stuff will be totally different than my undergrad stuff...but that should be fine right?

Anyone have anymore advise for me?

 

[SaltySqueegee]

One large extensive project shows perseverance. Multiple smaller projects is okay, demonstrates your interest in research, but cannot demonstrate in the same way your ability to overcome challenges you will experience during a PhD. That is the biggest weakness I see at the moment in your research CV. Try not to focus on having a publication, but instead focus on a single research project from here on out. Keep in mind that a publication does not make you any more appealing (in my eyes) for a PhD program. For me it comes down to the following when I'm interviewing MD/PhD candidates:

Can they phrase a hypothesis?

Can they test a hypothesis?

Can they troubleshoot (i.e. come up with alternative hypotheses/explanations) challenges during the course of a research design?

Do they understand the limitations and appropriate applications of the methodological approaches they are using during their research project?

Passion for research... (you'll see it in the interviewees eyes and the tone of their voice when discussing their research project)

-also-

Does this person have a life outside of research/school (i.e. are they a pod person)? This last one is just my pet peeve (but I don't make it a make or break type of thing during the interviews).

 

[obscurehero]

Hi obscuehero, thank you so much for your advise.

When you referred to development and research narrative, what would you say was a good way to brainstorm and start writing about this?

Also, you speak of maturity, do you think taking time off before MD/PhD worked well to your advantage? Do you mean maturity in science and personal life, or just personal?

Hah, yea, I did a lot of electrical stuff, but I decided I liked bio-mechanical stuff more, so I really am trying to shift into that....it looks like PhD stuff will be totally different than my undergrad stuff...but that should be fine right?

Anyone have anymore advise for me?

I'd echo @salty's point that a longer term project really demonstrates perseverance. One of the hardest things that I had to overcome, when deciding if a PhD was for me, was the slow times and stuck times that research tends to throw you. Some people are fortunate enough to really have no actual "negative" or "dead-end" results, but when you do get these it can be very demoralizing.

As for my own personal situation, I had interest in medicine and basic science research (specifically, oncology), but I hadn't ever really gotten my hand's dirty in translation oncology research. I wanted to have a protected time to really probe my own interests as well as "test drive" some research. As for maturity, I wanted to have time to mature as a scientist. I had academic knowledge and undergrad experience, but for me I never really had an extended time to work long-term on a project. I tried to find a lab that would let me, as a technician, operate semi-independently. I was able to expose myself to a plethora of protocols, instruments, and techniques for exploring hypotheses in molecular biology. I trained as a biochemist, so I didn't have as much experience in this area. Maybe its just my lab, but it seems so many protocols these days are very "kit"-like. People just do step A, B, C and never really process what exactly is going on. For me, I think that understanding the 'why' is so incredibly helpful. Much of science is thinking on your feet. Understanding principles has really given me a lot of flexibility, whereas the 'kit' mindset is much more rigid. This, I think, is one of the many things I was able to pick up in my 'gap' years. Suffice it to say, I needed a time to percolate over what I had learned during my undergrad. I've known people that do this quite well in their undergrad while they're still taking classes, and I've known others who went on to their PhD's without really 'maturing'. The latter are doing quite well despite it, because grad school is for further training after all! Anyway, for me, I wanted to make sure it was what I REALLY wanted to do before I sank a good junk of my life into it.

I can't tell you what the best option for you is. However, for me, two years of research was a perfect time to really stoke my passion, gain perspective, and mature as a budding scientist.