md/phd social sciences track questions

[qtpai]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I am a student at UT Austin. I will have 3 degrees in Biochemistry, Neurobiology and Anthropology when I am done (I am graduating in 3 semesters). I am very interested in academic psychiatry. My heart has an overwhelming proclivity for the social sciences and humanities, so I am either going to pursue public health or medical anthropology as a graduate degree.

So, two questions:

1) How similar are the MCAT VR and GRE VR sections? Will there be substantial crossover between the two? What has been the experience of those here who have taken both in studying for the two simultaneously? I consider myself a good test taker, but the issue is time investment. I have a great many other commitments, and I am worried about this.

2) If I pursue public health with the intent of pursuing an academic career, should I not pursue a PhD, or would it be sufficient to pursue an MPH? My concern is that I wouldn't be able to explore my areas of interest as extensively if I only earned the MPH, as such yielding a less fruitful intellectual development. Thoughts?

I know this is a "Physician Scientist" forum, with "Scientist" implying the natural sciences. However, I am hoping someone here has experience as one of those rare social science track MD/PhD students.

 

[fantasty]

As others will point out, there are some MSTP's (and non MSTP MD/PhD programs) that allow for some "non-traditional" graduate programs (epidemiology being one of the more acceptable, but others like health policy, community & behavioral health, and even things like psychology, economics, medical ethics, anthropology, etc being options).

I cannot speak to the VR sections since I only took the MCAT. But, my hunch is that the GRE *may* be easier (the MCAT is timed and the time limits usually are the major stressor for the exam; plus the MCAT is scaled to 15 per section, whereas the GRE allows more variation). Either way, though - I think the construct that the two exams are trying to measure is similar and preparation for either exam should be similar.

As for the MPH vs PhD question, are you asking this in the context of a dual degree (with an MD or a DO, etc)? If you want to stay in academics, a solo MPH is not sufficient. The MPH is an applied professional degree, as opposed to a research (and more rigorous) academic degree. In PH, though, the MS is usually considered a stepping stone to the terminal PhD. (Although, in my MSTP, I'm just getting the the MD / PhD, even though I could have done one extra thesis or practicum and gotten the master's as I went, since the curriculum requirements for the MS are fully encompassed in the PhD requirements).

One big debatable point that you must decide on your own is the time commitment (getting the MPH, with the MD, adds perhaps 1 year or 2 at the most, and you can even get an MPH during residency or fellowship if you don't pursue them simultaneously). However, getting a PhD will probably add at least 3 or 4 years to the medical training. The MPH can give you a broad overview of public health and enough tools to do basic clinical research (or public health practice and/or research). Also, many faculty positions I've seen (especially in PH programs) say that you need a PhD, but consider an MD with MPH to be equivalent. But, looking back, I feel that my PhD has given my a lot more tools to start a research career (and although taught me more about the life of academics, including considerations of finding funding and forming a research program, etc). Methodologic tools and theory are very important for conducting the best quality research, and an MPH simply can't go into the detail needed to get this expertise. I think this is similar to the basic sciences - you can quickly learn some basics of research and have that be a small aspect of your career. But, if you actually want to devote a substantial amount of your career to research, you should probably have the protected time to learn and be mentored before you try to be an independant investigator.

 

[silkworm]

1) How similar are the MCAT VR and GRE VR sections? Will there be substantial crossover between the two? What has been the experience of those here who have taken both in studying for the two simultaneously? I consider myself a good test taker, but the issue is time investment. I have a great many other commitments, and I am worried about this.

They are pretty different. MCAT verbal is definitely much harder than GRE verbal. I found that by memorizing a lot of vocabulary and having decent reading comprehension ability, one can do very well on GRE, but this isn't enough on MCAT.

 

[qtpai]

As others will point out, there are some MSTP's (and non MSTP MD/PhD programs) that allow for some "non-traditional" graduate programs (epidemiology being one of the more acceptable, but others like health policy, community & behavioral health, and even things like psychology, economics, medical ethics, anthropology, etc being options).

I cannot speak to the VR sections since I only took the MCAT. But, my hunch is that the GRE *may* be easier (the MCAT is timed and the time limits usually are the major stressor for the exam; plus the MCAT is scaled to 15 per section, whereas the GRE allows more variation). Either way, though - I think the construct that the two exams are trying to measure is similar and preparation for either exam should be similar.

As for the MPH vs PhD question, are you asking this in the context of a dual degree (with an MD or a DO, etc)? If you want to stay in academics, a solo MPH is not sufficient. The MPH is an applied professional degree, as opposed to a research (and more rigorous) academic degree. In PH, though, the MS is usually considered a stepping stone to the terminal PhD. (Although, in my MSTP, I'm just getting the the MD / PhD, even though I could have done one extra thesis or practicum and gotten the master's as I went, since the curriculum requirements for the MS are fully encompassed in the PhD requirements).

One big debatable point that you must decide on your own is the time commitment (getting the MPH, with the MD, adds perhaps 1 year or 2 at the most, and you can even get an MPH during residency or fellowship if you don't pursue them simultaneously). However, getting a PhD will probably add at least 3 or 4 years to the medical training. The MPH can give you a broad overview of public health and enough tools to do basic clinical research (or public health practice and/or research). Also, many faculty positions I've seen (especially in PH programs) say that you need a PhD, but consider an MD with MPH to be equivalent. But, looking back, I feel that my PhD has given my a lot more tools to start a research career (and although taught me more about the life of academics, including considerations of finding funding and forming a research program, etc). Methodologic tools and theory are very important for conducting the best quality research, and an MPH simply can't go into the detail needed to get this expertise. I think this is similar to the basic sciences - you can quickly learn some basics of research and have that be a small aspect of your career. But, if you actually want to devote a substantial amount of your career to research, you should probably have the protected time to learn and be mentored before you try to be an independant investigator.

Thank you. I really appreciate the advice.

One more thing: I read that you're doing a PhD in Epidemiology? Are most MD/PhD PH programs similar to yours, insofar as only MCAT is necessary? From the few schools I have looked at, most have GRE listed as optional, but I am wondering whether or not it will actually help me to take the GRE. Thanks again.

 

[fantasty]

Most of the programs I know of take the MCAT (and I don't know of any med school programs that will accept the GRE in lieu of the MCAT). If you're sure you want to go to med school, I wouldn't bother with the GRE. (Of course, I was always a better standardized test person, though - my MCAT was a lot stronger than my grades, so maybe taking the GRE and scoring well (in addition to the MCAT) could be a positive thing). I also don't know this first hand, but several folks on here mentioned that many public health programs will accept the MCAT.

 

[qtpai]

Most of the programs I know of take the MCAT (and I don't know of any med school programs that will accept the GRE in lieu of the MCAT). If you're sure you want to go to med school, I wouldn't bother with the GRE. (Of course, I was always a better standardized test person, though - my MCAT was a lot stronger than my grades, so maybe taking the GRE and scoring well (in addition to the MCAT) could be a positive thing). I also don't know this first hand, but several folks on here mentioned that many public health programs will accept the MCAT.

Thank you so much. I think I will just stick with the MCAT, then (if I do, after all, decide to go the PH route). This makes things much more convenient for me.