Nontraditional mstp questions?

[jd221b]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have some questions regarding the MD/PHD route for a nontraditional student. I'm 32 years old and will be 35 at my target matriculation. I can't get the thought of this out of my head despite the obvious obstacles. I'm a researcher at heart. I've often spent 40 hours a week on top of a full work schedule poring over the scientific literature for a given medical issue that has presented itself into my life. I've enjoyed clinical experiences in my life, but i have a nagging fear that I would grow bored once I've learned the ropes completely. I've often said that I would be a very happy person if I went to college for the rest of my life. Amazingly, given all this I never considered the research route my first time around. I don't even know why. Perhaps it was the fact that a positive early experience made me believe that EM was my destiny.

I have the opportunity to correct the fact that I don't have any research experience over the next 3 years. I'm sure all of my questions will be answered along the way, but I'd like some impressions to help me determine where to focus. Here are the questions:

1. Do these programs look down on non-traditionals because of the added length.
2. Are the advantages of these programs over alternative means of achieving research goals worth it for the non-traditional.
3. Given that my stats aren't the most stellar, is it feasible to apply broadly to both MD/PHD programs and MD only. Will duplicate applications at the same school raise a red flag? Is this mainly a financial question?
4. What are some good resources for exploring this option? I've noticed that many resources state that every program is different in it's goals and implementation. I've also noticed that acceptance stats are harder to come by. Is there any resource that summarizes all the particulars of each program, including possible attractors/detractors to each program and acceptance stats?

 

[Pons Asinorum]

(she hates when I point folks her way from SDN, but I can live with that...)

I highly recommend some time reading through Old MD Girl's blog:
http://oldmdgirl.blogspot.com/

She's a non-trad MD/PhD at a great program with thoughts of possibly doing EM in the future. You'll learn a great deal just going through old posts (of which there are many.)

The problem with MD/PhD is that your stats aren't great and the programs are very competitive. Best of luck regardless.

 

[wholeheartedly]

Hey, I'll just add my two cents as well as I'm going to be closer to that age when (hopefully) matriculating as well. I'm also someone who likes that constant intellectual challenge and would be perfectly happy to go to school forever if it wasn't for the fact that I want to care for patients as well.

Since you mention that you don't have any research experience I wanted to point something out. Research seems to cater to a certain type of person. Having a love for the science and enjoying to scour the literature on topics that interest you might not exactly equate a love of research, then again it might do exactly that. You really need to get your feet wet actually doing it first. I know of quite a few people who loved science and academics who wound up hating research when they went to graduate school. They didn't enjoy the reality of what research turned out to be with the frequent trouble shooting, or the grant writing, or some of the other stuff you spend a lot of time on. Personally, I enjoyed it.

My advice would be to definitely get as much experience doing research as you can. The first tip is to pick a good mentor to work under, this is key and can make or break your experience. Find someone who has successfully supervised other students who felt they got a lot out of the experience.

The next tip is to recognize the different types of research you can do in medicine and figure out which ones you're interested in. You can do basic science research, translational research, clinical research, or more epidemiological type research. It's possible to like one of these and hate the rest, so keep that in mind when you're trouble shooting your PCR after spending 2 hours pipetting and 4 hours running it only to find out it didn't work. It's also possible to love working at all of these levels. If you can find a lab to work in that bridges some of these that would be a really great way to figure out what you like.

If you do decide you love research you can try going the MD/PhD route, or you might be able to take advantage of other routes too. There are some programs offering things like an MD/MS in clinical research or MD/MS in epidemiology (or MPH in epi) or translational science. I've got a sneaking suspicion more of these types of programs will pop up by the time we apply too. If you don't have the stats for these going into medical school, some places have these options in place during residency as well. I can't speak to how any of that works, but it's nice to know the options are there.

Hopefully a few of the other posters can pipe in the more info on the rest of your questions.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Also, I'm sure Q will weigh in at some point since this thread is right in his wheelhouse (see what I did there). Will be back at full posting-strength in a few days.

 

[ChemMed]

Also, I'm sure Q will weigh in at some point since this thread is right in his wheelhouse (see what I did there). Will be back at full posting-strength in a few days.

Q is a she. Sorry, I just have to boast for the ladies and its already posted on SDN in another thread. She also has really great advise on this type of question.

As for the OP, research is a mixed bag of worms. You do need to get experience in it to understand the realities of a research life. A previous post here already makes a few good suggestions and I will second the fact that you need to find a good mentor if you want to try doing research.

Also, you do not have to do an MD/PhD to be able to do research. There are MD/MS programs available that offer a great experience in research without the 8 year time commitment. You can also do research in certain fellowship programs after residency. These programs can offer up to two years of research time at the bench. Some residencies also allow you to take research electives, but these are generally only a few months and would not provide a true understanding of what the research world is like.

If you do not have competitive scores for MD/PhD programs then I would suggest that you look into the MD/MS alternative. Also, I would recommend that you think about just doing and MD. There are a few MD only types that I know who do wonderful research and run their own labs. You do not necessarily need to have a PhD to do this. You will have to figure out the best way to get your research training though. Some people do a post-doc and yes you would qualify for this if you only had an MD.

When it comes to finances, I would recommend an MD/MS program that assists with most of the tuition cost. If you do an MD only you most likely will have to pay for it. There are ways to deal with this but if you can avoid it then I suggest you do.

As for what the research world is actually like, I'll tell you but PM me. This answer can take a while. I also suggest that you visit the MD/PhD, DO/PhD etc. research forum as well.

 

[jd221b]

Thanks for all the replies.

Yeah, I do realize that I don't know enough about things like grant writing to know if this is my cup of tea. As far as trouble shooting goes, I think that would be a positive for me.

I do plan on getting my feet wet. Something I know about myself is that I was very happy in the many hours of lab I took while pursuing my degree in Chemistry. When I worked in a quality control lab in the chemical industry I hated it though, as it was pure monotony. So while I like being in the lab, what I really love is learning. What I don't know is if I would be happy in the environment where learning the answer to a single question involves years of monotonous lab work. I do believe the answer is yes if I was in control of what questions I was asking and the incremental development of the research program. If I had to pick a research area right now, it would be either innovative targeted cancer treatments or gene therapy for genetic disease. Of course that will probably change, but those are interests that have stuck with me for ten years.

I'm a little confused over the myriad of answers that my searches have dug up on whether MD/PHD is even the preferred route for research. Hence question number 2.

 

[hopefuldoc97239]

What I don't know is if I would be happy in the environment where learning the answer to a single question involves years of monotonous lab work. I do believe the answer is yes if I was in control of what questions I was asking and the incremental development of the research program.

Not trying to be a buzzkill but I do want to comment on this statement...

It's unlikely that you will ever get complete control over the research that you do. Someone will always be tinkering with your ideas.

As a graduate student you will do what research your mentor wants you to do. Even if they let you choose a project, they'll still alter it, or your committee will add things, take things away, etc.

As a postdoc/fellow you'll do research under other people.

As a PI you'll do research that NIH wants you to do. They send out the RFA asking for research on a given topic, and you create a proposal that meets their agenda.

After 30+ years of highly productive work you might get a grant that allows you more freedom. But that kind of freedom only goes to the top level of researchers, and only after many decades of productivity.

For a very interesting read, check out this article from Medical Hypotheses.

 

[jd221b]

Not trying to be a buzzkill but I do want to comment on this statement...

It's unlikely that you will ever get complete control over the research that you do. Someone will always be tinkering with your ideas.

As a graduate student you will do what research your mentor wants you to do. Even if they let you choose a project, they'll still alter it, or your committee will add things, take things away, etc.

As a postdoc/fellow you'll do research under other people.

As a PI you'll do research that NIH wants you to do. They send out the RFA asking for research on a given topic, and you create a proposal that meets their agenda.

After 30+ years of highly productive work you might get a grant that allows you more freedom. But that kind of freedom only goes to the top level of researchers, and only after many decades of productivity.

For a very interesting read, check out this article from Medical Hypotheses.

Aren't there enough research opportunities that you can choose ones that closely match your interests? Having done so, at what level would one begin to design the research program? I thought this was what being a PI was about, as opposed to being a lab monkey.

 

[QofQuimica]

Q is a she. Sorry, I just have to boast for the ladies and its already posted on SDN in another thread. She also has really great advise on this type of question.

Pons knows I'm a she--he's being silly. It has apparently now become a bit of an inside joke after the whole April Fools thread adventure we went on a month ago.

All kidding aside, I don't have much to add beyond what some of you have said. I can just retire now. 😀

OP, to paraphrase Einstein, research is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. It might seem glamorous from the outside, but the reality of research is that you're going to spend the majority of your grad school time in the lab doing drudgery and manual labor of one type of another, only to realize after six months that you've completely wasted your time and need to go in a totally different direction. It can be very frustrating, with many false starts and stops, more akin to running a maze than going down a straight path like the impression you might get from reading many manuscripts. Basically, if you don't love the process of doing research, being in the lab, writing, doing the actual grunt work, then you won't love doing research at all. The "eureka" moments are few and far between.

 

[Prncssbuttercup]

Q, this is why I dislike my job. I do not like perpetual failure. Working in a research lab means perpetual failure. What is the point of what I do? Nothing because in reality it didn't get us any closer to finding an answer it just told us one of ten thousand ways didn't work... I don't feel like chasing down all ten thousand... and in reality at my (crappy) job, it is MY fault it didn't work because the literature says it should... It drives me crazy!!! Anyway, if you like failing a lot, do it!!! If you like succeeding a lot, DON'T!! 😀

 

[jd221b]

I don't need a plethora of eureka moments or glamor. I'm interested in research because at this point I feel like it has a possibility of engaging my mind in perpetuity. In my experience, once I fully understand something I begin to lose interest and things become monotonous. I would love to be at the forefront of knowledge to where I can be assured of never quite fully understanding. Constantly being challenged and having to rethink things, does not tend to bother me. Being able to master something and not having the freedom to move on does.

 

[jd221b]

For context, what kind of labs do those who have commented work in?

 

[Shakespeare37]

SBB- I feel COMPELLED to jump in. I know that working in a research lab can seem like perpetual failure: before yesterday, I hadn't gotten a SINGLE experiment to work since January. Then yesterday, my PI and I got great stopped-flow data that showed something.... we're still not sure what. But it worked, the way it was supposed to. Every so often, stuff works and you advance the field. Most of the time, you don't. Success in research doesn't mean stuff works all the time, or that you can find the answer all the time. Proving something doesn't work is often as productive as proving something does work.
Don't get me wrong... last week I left the lab in a huff and came straight home to misery b/c I had made some big mistakes. That doesn't mean that research perpetually sucks... just that it's hard and ongoing.
Also, I just realized I overuse the ellipse.... 😀
I work in a Biochemistry lab as a PRA, doing protein-membrane binding studies (kinetics and thermodynamics).

 

[wholeheartedly]

OP, my background so far is some undergrad animal behavioral research in the biology department and some physiological research in the psych. department at my undergrad, then some basic science type research after that doing PCR and a variety of other things. I really love trouble shooting but even I got burned out on it after the 2nd week straight of the same thing not working like it's supposed to.

Currently, I'm working on a master's degree emphasizing epidemiology. This is why I emphasized learning about the different types of research you can do. Some people feel basic science stuff is too much drudgery and not immediately applicable so they prefer some of the clinical or epi type studies where it might feel like you get to the interesting stuff sooner. I liked basic science and bench research but I'm LOVING 😍 epi right now and I'd really like to find something that let's me crossover a bit. There are cool things like molecular epi now so who knows...

 

[QofQuimica]

For context, what kind of labs do those who have commented work in?

In high school, I did a nuclear geochemistry project where we took water samples and looked at the ratios of uranium isotopes at different locations. In college, I did agricultural research studying a bacterial disease that attacks tomatoes and peppers. (This is a huge problem in FL.) I did a couple of grad school rotations in virology (very painful--we had to sequence DNA using gels!) and x-ray crystallography. My first MS and my PhD are both in organic chemistry, mainly synthesis of libraries of compounds with a smattering of computer-assisted drug design. I worked in natural products chemistry for a while, which involved a lot of extraction, separation (mainly chromatography), and characterization (NMR, mass spec, etc.) work. My second MS is in clinical research, looking at ways to improve outcomes after surgery.

These experiences span a period of about 20 years, and I can tell you that all research I have ever been involved with requires a great deal of manual labor. That includes clinical research. But I have to agree with Shakespeare that often, "failures" not only teach you something important, but they actually teach you more important things than successes do. When experiments don't work like they're supposed to, and you're trying to troubleshoot, that's when you are most likely to serendipitously come across something new and cool, if only just because you're looking for it. Finally, I also enjoyed mentoring the younger grad students and undergrads when I was the senior grad student. Regardless of what some might think, research is a team sport, and you shouldn't go into the lab if you don't like working as part of a team.

 

[jd221b]

I'm sorry if I came off as not wanting to be part of a team or anti-manual labor. That is so far removed from me that I was kind of shocked, but going back through my posts I can understand how someone could take my statements about "being bored" or referring to "lab monkeys" that way.

Let me give you a little background.

I have worked in the emergency room (cleaning up poop, drawing blood, doing compressions in a code, and wrapping body's), home construction, worked at a paint resin production plant operating a 20,000 gallon reactor (this job could have literally been on the show dirty jobs), and run my own carpet cleaning business in which I did all of the labor and administration.

The ED job referred to above is still my favorite job/activity that I've ever done. EM is still near the top of the list for specialties under consideration, but I am a little concerned that my happiness in this was partially due to the fact that I was there for one year and there was always something interesting and new and I never stopped learning.

It's the absence of mental stimulation, not the presence of manual labor that turns me off. If research is not mentally stimulating, then by all means tell me. Just don't assume that I can't handle the physically demanding portion of it, or the teamwork (this was one of my favorite parts of the ED). In fact working out in the field for collection or observation will very likely attract me to a research field rather than dissuade me.

 

[QofQuimica]

My last post wasn't necessarily only directed at you, although yes, you did come across kind of anti-drudgery in previous posts. Be that as it may, all the talk in the world won't help you decide anything; if you're wondering whether you'd like to do research, the only way to find out for sure is to go do some. All the rest of your questions are academic until you answer this one. 🙂

Oh, and if you haven't already, definitely come check out the stickies and other threads in the Physician Scientists forum. Lots of good info to be found there, and we've even got a nice nucleus of research-oriented med students and residents who can give you insight on various physician scientist training paths.

 

[jd221b]

My last post wasn't necessarily only directed at you, although yes, you did come across kind of anti-drudgery in previous posts. Be that as it may, all the talk in the world won't help you decide anything; if you're wondering whether you'd like to do research, the only way to find out for sure is to go do some. All the rest of your questions are academic until you answer this one. 🙂

Oh, and if you haven't already, definitely come check out the stickies and other threads in the Physician Scientists forum. Lots of good info to be found there, and we've even got a nice nucleus of research-oriented med students and residents who can give you insight on various physician scientist training paths.

Since you mention it, some of your stickies regarding the various paths in the Physician Scientists forum are broken links, namely the ones regarding the research MD and the MD/MS.

One question that I have that I've had a hard time finding an answer to is: Can a practicing physician in Radiology or EM for example, decide to go into research having had several years of clinical practice separating them from their last research endeavor?

 

[Scottish Chap]

Since you mention it, some of your stickies regarding the various paths in the Physician Scientists forum are broken links, namely the ones regarding the research MD and the MD/MS.

One question that I have that I've had a hard time finding an answer to is: Can a practicing physician in Radiology or EM for example, decide to go into research having had several years of clinical practice separating them from their last research endeavor?

Generally, anything is possible if you want to make it happen, but it's highly unlikely to occur if the person is not already in an academic environment (if they are in private practice).

MSTP programs generally train and aim to retain bench (basic) scientists. Career trajectories are such that some people prefer clinical or translational research, but keep in mind that some specialties (like EM and radiology) are inconsistent with a productive bench science career. It's never a good idea to go against the grain in academia.

 

[ChemMed]

For context, what kind of labs do those who have commented work in?

I started work in an organo-metallic laboratory that specialized in the creation of catalysts the steered the stereo chemistry of the reactions into one stereo selective product.

I then worked at a large pharmaceutical company in their quality control department where my job was reagent prep. This was very boring and I quickly found myself a job in an academic lab as a technician running cell based assays that looked for inhibitors of HIF1 alpha. I was also given my own project over time to discover natural products from marine based organisms that had anti cancer activity. This led to graduate school.

In graduate school I had two advisers and labs. I worked for a natural product chemist for a time as well as an x-ray crystallographer. My job was to crystalize natural product inhibitors in complex with our protein target and then analyze the inhibitor protein interactions.

I currently work in a lab that specializes in diastolic dysfunction and heart failure. I work with mouse models and do a lot of basic molecular biology. That pretty much sums up my work life.


Scottish Chap and Q both have really good advise and sum up anything else I would suggest to you. I really do hope you find what you are looking for. Good luck.

 

[jd221b]

Thank you all for your comments. I know that the obvious next step is to get some research experience. I believe at this stage in the game I will be most interested in clinical/translational research. I'm hoping that I will be able to get into a program at UTSW which is local to me. My advisor at UTD where I will be starting my post-bacc this fall has connections there. I'm wondering, if I should be working to line something up right now or get settled into school first. I'm not sure that I would be that desirable since I haven't been in the lab for the last 6 years. Since I will be putting in my application almost exactly 2 years from now I'd like to get started as soon as possible so I can get significant experience. Any thoughts on my time line?

 

[jd221b]

i'm wondering, if i should be working to line something up right now or get settled into school first. I'm not sure that i would be that desirable since i haven't been in the lab for the last 6 years. Since i will be putting in my application almost exactly 2 years from now i'd like to get started as soon as possible so i can get significant experience. Any thoughts on my time line?

bump

 

[Ombret]

The answer might depend on how likely your med school application is to fly. This will require introspection.

--You are pretty sure you will successfully matriculate-->look for meaningful lab work now.
--You are going to have to crank in post-bac-->don't make great the enemy of good, just focus on your classes.

To determine which arm of this diagram you are on, I can only point at the entire rest of this website... However, I will say, part of me wants to say that you cannot game this process, there are too many variables and your situation is too unusual. No one is going to say, Huh, our last 35 y/o MD/MS applicant started research in June rather than July...

 

[jd221b]

An advisor at my post bacc school spent several years on adcom for UTSW. I met with him, told my story, showed my grades, and laid out my plan. As I went over all of my perceived negatives he dismissed all of them as non-issues or small issues in light of my story and assured me that I have a very good chance. When I was done I asked him if there were any pieces to the puzzle that were not in my plan. He was pretty confident that I had thought of everything, and that I just needed to put legs to it.

At that time I had not begun to ask the questions regarding research as I was just trying to confirm that I wasn’t crazy. I’m sure when I get settled into the program all of my questions will be answered. The main purpose of my question on timing was because I wasn’t sure if these positions go in semester or yearly cycles, or if I could theoretically start up any time.

For the most part I’ve settled in my head that MD/PHD is probably overkill for my situation, and that MD/MS or straight MD make more sense. This doesn’t change the fact that I want to be proactive with getting involved with research ASAP.

The answer might depend on how likely your med school application is to fly. This will require introspection.

--You are pretty sure you will successfully matriculate-->look for meaningful lab work now.
--You are going to have to crank in post-bac-->don't make great the enemy of good, just focus on your classes.

To determine which arm of this diagram you are on, I can only point at the entire rest of this website... However, I will say, part of me wants to say that you cannot game this process, there are too many variables and your situation is too unusual. No one is going to say, Huh, our last 35 y/o MD/MS applicant started research in June rather than July...

 

[Lil Mick]

We have older students in our program. You need to show commitment to research, though. That is probably the single most important part of you application. Grades and MCAT scores need to be within range, though.

That being said, if you decide that you like research but don't want a career in it, you can do an MD/MS or MPH... or even just do research during medical school (summer research programs, research during MS1/2, electives MS4). Also, if you enjoy research in medical school, there are residencies specializing in that specialty's research (tailored towards MD/PhDs, but take other students). I know several MD-onlys who still do a substantial amount of research without the graduate degree and a few who are making head-way in those research residencies. So, you have plenty of options 🙂