MSTP app invitation - is tis worth considering

[EdLongshanks]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Yes, Yes. I know, this is like asking "Are CC pre-reqs advisable" or "can I have children while in med school" But I have a few specific questions.

Based on my MCAT. I got an invitation from a med school to apply for their MSTP program. I didn't consider my 33 MCAT very impressive, but, oh well.

Firstly, I don't have significant medical research experience. So it's possible that this isn't even an option. Were these emails just blasted out to everyone who got over a 31? I am putting in an application with 8000 other people for 6 spots?

But, assuming that this is a possibility, is it a good idea for a geezer like me?

The MD/PhD program takes longer before the residency begins. How much longer? The website says the degree is 7 to 8 years plus residency. But this isn't the whole story, because am MD/PhD doesn't need a long residency, even if he does the easiest and shortest family practice residency, he is still an attractive employee. I think I read that some MD/PhD's finish their degrees in 5 years. Is this true? If so, then the MD/PhD family practice residency doctor is in a high paying position in 8 to 9 years, which is not bad. I'm a good academic, so I don't think that the study course would be difficult for me.

I'm attracted because I love analysis. The one thing that scares me about medicine is that I have two competing desires. I must serve the needy and I am passionate about analysis. Very passionate. I would exchange bodily fluids with analysis if I could. But the doctor who serves the needy the most (the inner city family doctor) is usually wiping runny noses and dispensing amoxicillin all day long.

It looks to me like the MD/PhD gets to do both. Do I have an unrealistic view here?

I'm likely to decide the course of my life from you all's (a bunch of strangers on the internet) advice. So please be thoughtful in your responses.

 

[Nasrudin]

Ed,

The md/phds that I've come across all like research and could not have envisioned a career without it. Most want to do it for a career. But will end up doing some clinical work with research at an academic medical school setting. And maybe have a faculty appointment as well.

You might very well love this type of thing. The people on this track usually get their tuition paid. At least that's my understanding. So that's a big plus, if accurate.

It's too bad you don't have enough research to make an accurate guess as to whether it might be for you. Give it shot. What the heck! You could talk to a lot of people in the sub-forum here in the meantime to see if it might be worth the jump if you did get a shot at it.

Good luck.

 

[Nasrudin]

You know what else. I think this type of thing you're posting is one of the great benefits of sdn.

Every time I think of a possible career I go right to that sub forum here and read prodigiously.

For instance, I just read everything ever written on sdn pertaining to Emergency Medicine and California. Because that's what I want to do. In so doing you learn all sorts of things about how people have made the journey ahead of you. What obstacles they navigated. And so forth.

Since you are trying to imagine yourself in the career you mention. Try reading widely from the mouths of those in that career.

 

[EdLongshanks]

Ed,

The md/phds that I've come across all like research and could not have envisioned a career without it. Most want to do it for a career. But will end up doing some clinical work with research at an academic medical school setting. And maybe have a faculty appointment as well.

You might very well love this type of thing. The people on this track usually get their tuition paid. At least that's my understanding. So that's a big plus, if accurate.

It's too bad you don't have enough research to make an accurate guess as to whether it might be for you. Give it shot. What the heck! You could talk to a lot of people in the sub-forum here in the meantime to see if it might be worth the jump if you did get a shot at it.

Good luck.

Decisions, decisions. This process really has negative pressure.

 

[NTF]

Ed,

Can you describe the invitation? If it seems at all like a form letter than it's just something that schools send out based purely on numerical MCAT score and isn't based on a holistic evaluation of you as an MSTP candidate. When I applied I got these from every school I applied and some I didn't either. It's something schools do to drum up application numbers for their MSTP programs.

If the letter directly addresses aspects of your specific application or CV then it's more legit.

As far as whether you should do an MSTP I'd advise against it unless you really want to be a physician scientist. While there are some people who can finish in 5 years it's highly unlikely. Most finish in 6-7 years. There's all kinds of extra hassles like being graded on an ABCD scale, having to maintain a B average, and the usual of pain of dealing with a PI. Unless you're passionate about research it'll be pretty awful for you. Don't do it for job prospects. You'll be plenty attractive a job candidate if you do well at a good residency program. Not to mention that you're not getting any younger, and three years that you could be seeing patients comes at a higher premium for guys our age.

 

[EdLongshanks]

Ed,

Can you describe the invitation? If it seems at all like a form letter than it's just something that schools send out based purely on numerical MCAT score and isn't based on a holistic evaluation of you as an MSTP candidate. When I applied I got these from every school I applied and some I didn't either. It's something schools do to drum up application numbers for their MSTP programs.

If the letter directly addresses aspects of your specific application or CV then it's more legit.

As far as whether you should do an MSTP I'd advise against it unless you really want to be a physician scientist. While there are some people who can finish in 5 years it's highly unlikely. Most finish in 6-7 years. There's all kinds of extra hassles like being graded on an ABCD scale, having to maintain a B average, and the usual of pain of dealing with a PI. Unless you're passionate about research it'll be pretty awful for you. Don't do it for job prospects. You'll be plenty attractive a job candidate if you do well at a good residency program. Not to mention that you're not getting any younger, and three years that you could be seeing patients comes at a higher premium for guys our age.

Yeah, I just called, and it was a purely form letter thing. I talked to the director and without a lot of formal medical research, I wouldn't be a competitive applicant.

 

[phltz]

I've been waffling on whether I want to apply to MD only programs or MD/PhD programs. I talked to my PI about it yesterday, and his advice was that if I make it a point to keep doing research, and I got to a top-tier school, it's very possible to do academic research with just an MD. Given that I'm already 30, he said he figures it'd be smarter to just try to move the whole process along as quickly as possible.

The idea of having med school paid for is appealing, yes, but don't forget that you'd be forgoing 3 or 4 extra years of earnings. Financially, I think it's a bit of a wash. You should consider these programs if they really interest you. And don't forget that 7 years of school, plus residency and a postdoc adds up to a long time. I'd like to get a chance to start really working sometime before my mid 40s.

 

[QofQuimica]

But, assuming that this is a possibility, is it a good idea for a geezer like me?

No. You're in your 40s, and you have no research background. Either of these things in and of itself would be a major strike against you. Having both....Ed, I'm all for nontrads breaking the barriers and going where no man has gone before. But doing an MD/PhD combined program is not realistic in your case. Besides, you're not even looking for a biomedical science research career. Why would you *want* to torture yourself that way?

The MD/PhD program takes longer before the residency begins. How much longer?

Eight years is pretty typical. But figure anywhere from 6-10 years, depending on how much serendipity you have in the lab.

But this isn't the whole story, because am MD/PhD doesn't need a long residency, even if he does the easiest and shortest family practice residency, he is still an attractive employee.

Family med is not a research-oriented specialty, and what research is done in FM is almost entirely clinical. For those reasons, very few MD/PhDs go into FM. Internal medicine *is* a very common residency choice for MD/PhDs; however, almost all of them subspecialize and do a fellowship afterward. There are even special research residencies geared toward MD/PhD grads who go into IM.

I think I read that some MD/PhD's finish their degrees in 5 years. Is this true?

No. See above. It would be realistic to get an MD/MS in five years, but you are not going to do an entire PhD in one year.

I'm attracted because I love analysis. The one thing that scares me about medicine is that I have two competing desires. I must serve the needy and I am passionate about analysis. Very passionate. I would exchange bodily fluids with analysis if I could. But the doctor who serves the needy the most (the inner city family doctor) is usually wiping runny noses and dispensing amoxicillin all day long.

As you and I have discussed, I see you in more of a public health type of venue if you decide you want to do research. That would be much more in keeping with your interests. They do plenty of stats in public health, so you could even get your analysis kick. 🙂

Do I have an unrealistic view here?

Just in case I haven't made my opinion clear enough yet, HECK YEAH, you do! 😛

Yeah, I just called, and it was a purely form letter thing. I talked to the director and without a lot of formal medical research, I wouldn't be a competitive applicant.

I'd say I was surprised, but.... 😉

All kidding aside, Ed, if you really want to do a grad degree and get involved in some community research, you should think about an MPH, not a basic science PhD.

 

[EdLongshanks]

All kidding aside, Ed, if you really want to do a grad degree and get involved in some community research, you should think about an MPH, not a basic science PhD.

It was a temporary insanity issue. Quick onset. Took 5 mg SDN. Cured.

 

[Mr Karatepants]

Q gives good advice. I love research, have significant lab experience and publications, and received a great many MSTP application invitations due to my MCAT. Keep in mind, my goal is to be in academic medicine.

I'm not applying to a single M.D./Ph.D. program; if I were trad, I would, but at this point (and I'm really not even that old) I feel like the time pressure would be too much. I want to be free to choose whatever specialty I want - including that 7 year neurosurgery program plus a two year fellowship - and if I were to spend even a fast 7 years doing MSTP I would feel limited to shorter programs.

If it comes to it, I will hit the Ph.D. during residency.

 

[sharmi]

One thing in research is the time commitment. I am not in med school yet but have a couple of friends doing MD/PhD. One is in Duke and he literally spends his days and nights at the lab - takes his little blanket and alarm clock with him. He is not married and can afford to do that, I surely can't. If spending some time with your family is important to you at your age - I would not consider MD/PhD, if it was me.

 

[Scottish Chap]

Yes, Yes. I know, this is like asking "Are CC pre-reqs advisable" or "can I have children while in med school" But I have a few specific questions.

Based on my MCAT. I got an invitation from a med school to apply for their MSTP program. I didn't consider my 33 MCAT very impressive, but, oh well.

Firstly, I don't have significant medical research experience. So it's possible that this isn't even an option. Were these emails just blasted out to everyone who got over a 31? I am putting in an application with 8000 other people for 6 spots?

But, assuming that this is a possibility, is it a good idea for a geezer like me?

The MD/PhD program takes longer before the residency begins. How much longer? The website says the degree is 7 to 8 years plus residency. But this isn't the whole story, because am MD/PhD doesn't need a long residency, even if he does the easiest and shortest family practice residency, he is still an attractive employee. I think I read that some MD/PhD's finish their degrees in 5 years. Is this true? If so, then the MD/PhD family practice residency doctor is in a high paying position in 8 to 9 years, which is not bad. I'm a good academic, so I don't think that the study course would be difficult for me.

I'm attracted because I love analysis. The one thing that scares me about medicine is that I have two competing desires. I must serve the needy and I am passionate about analysis. Very passionate. I would exchange bodily fluids with analysis if I could. But the doctor who serves the needy the most (the inner city family doctor) is usually wiping runny noses and dispensing amoxicillin all day long.

It looks to me like the MD/PhD gets to do both. Do I have an unrealistic view here?

I'm likely to decide the course of my life from you all's (a bunch of strangers on the internet) advice. So please be thoughtful in your responses.

Family practice is not consistent with the goal of MD/PhD programs which aim to create people who will mostly do basic (bench) science. I know people who did MD/PhD and jumped ship to FP, but you want to be candid up-front. Also, no way will you get out of one of those programs in 5 years. If you go MD/PhD, expect a lot more pain, and expect them to want to hear you'll commit to 80% research and 20% clinical medicine. Hope that helps.

 

[Excelsius]

Family practice is not consistent with the goal of MD/PhD programs which aim to create people who will mostly do basic (bench) science. I know people who did MD/PhD and jumped ship to FP, but you want to be candid up-front. Also, no way will you get out of one of those programs in 5 years. If you go MD/PhD, expect a lot more pain, and expect them to want to hear you'll commit to 80% research and 20% clinical medicine. Hope that helps.

I can understand that MD/PhD is pointless for an FP, but I don't understand the strict 80/20 cutoffs you mentioned. If someone wants to go into radiation oncology or neurosurgery and does an MD/PhD, who's to say that after graduation that person must do X% research and Y% clinical? You do whatever you want to do. I am also considering MD/PhD, but I have no idea whether I might eventually get tired of research and go 100% clinical, at which point that decision will be solely up to me.

 

[Scottish Chap]

I can understand that MD/PhD is pointless for an FP, but I don't understand the strict 80/20 cutoffs you mentioned. If someone wants to go into radiation oncology or neurosurgery and does an MD/PhD, who's to say that after graduation that person must do X% research and Y% clinical? You do whatever you want to do. I am also considering MD/PhD, but I have no idea whether I might eventually get tired of research and go 100% clinical, at which point that decision will be solely up to me.

🙂 You are in for a rude awakening, my intrepid friend. Those programs are created for people who are essentially going to be scientists, and clinical medicine is a very small part of your job if you want to be successful. It's hard to do good research if you are distracted by the amazing physical and emotional pressures of being a physician. Don't believe me? Ask any of us that have trained in both separately, or continue to delude yourself. Academia owns you. It's hard to do two jobs very well. If you have grants, your department will ignore you and you'll be scrambling to publish. If you don't have grants, your department will be mean to you and you just might find that your department takes away your research program. Best you know that now. There are some exceptions to this rule but, generally, the MD/PhD program and beyond expects and will constantly push you toward a mostly research career, and punish you if you try to go against the grain. Good luck. I hope you get in if that's what you really want.

 

[Excelsius]

I am not clear on this. Are you saying that after an MD/PhD and a seven year clinical residency in NS, someone is going to control your career choices? How exactly does this work? It seems to me that after completing your training, it is up to you to apply for whatever position you want. I love doing research, but I know that at best it is going to take half of my time, not 80%. Once you become a PI, you barely do any research anyway. You mostly organize what others do for you and then add your name to the paper.

I think what you might be saying is that if I choose to do research and clinical, I will have to devote the majority of my time to research otherwise my research position might be in jeopardy if enough grants aren't produced.

 

[NTF]

I think what you might be saying is that if I choose to do research and clinical, I will have to devote the majority of my time to research otherwise my research position might be in jeopardy if enough grants aren't produced.

That's exactly what I've heard. Academic institutions (ie the places where research would be a significant part of your career) derive an ass ton of money from the structural portion of research grants. The really big grants often expect at least 75% of your time will be spent on research. Plus, all those "Top 500" doctor lists and Top 10 program lists which boost institution profile and can be added to fundraising literature are often determined by NIH funding and the reputation of research. So job security (tenure) is going to go to those who pull in those big "research will dominate your career" grant getters.

A guy who recently gave a talk at our school about academic medicine basically said that a big problem with the physician scientist model is that it isn't very compatible with being a good clinician. From his experience, he'd only met one guy that was both a great researcher and a great clinician. And that guy had been through 3 wives and was estranged from most of his 7 children.

 

[ChemMed]

OP I'm with Q on this one. Research on a whim is a bad idea when you are considering a PhD in it. The MSTP programs are great if you want to dedicate you life to that track, but otherwise be very weary of any invitations to join these programs. If you want later to do research you can do this with just an MD, remember that. If you have a family then MSTP is also not the best choice. Your time is enveloped by your lab and your program. Its just the nature of the beast, slay it if you dare, but if you don't have to then why try in the first place? Good luck on getting into medical school. I don't think you will have a problem. Cheers.

 

[wholeheartedly]

I'm not sure I totally agree with the 80/20 split, at least not everywhere. I'm going to guess even among the top places its going to be specific to the location and even the department. Some of the MD/PhDs here do 50/50, some do 70/30. Now I'd say it's a waste to train as an MD/PhD if you don't want to do at least some research, but I do think there is some flexibility here.

 

[Crelal]

Family practice is not consistent with the goal of MD/PhD programs which aim to create people who will mostly do basic (bench) science. I know people who did MD/PhD and jumped ship to FP, but you want to be candid up-front. Also, no way will you get out of one of those programs in 5 years. If you go MD/PhD, expect a lot more pain, and expect them to want to hear you'll commit to 80% research and 20% clinical medicine. Hope that helps.

After spending most of the summer doing research and hearing talks from MD/PhD and MDs in academic medicine, I have to disagree with the 80/20 split as well. I know of 1 that splits it in that method, of the 20+ docs we have had in our seminars.

Although, maybe they don't allow the rest of those MD/PhD types to interact with us 🙂