Path Towards Medical Academia

[HCHopeful]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I've just recently discovered a love for teaching. This love, however, still comes second (only barely) to my desire to practice medicine in a clinical environment. I have been trying to gather information regarding how I could incorporate these two desires into one profession and have found that medical academia may suit me well. I have found that obtaining an MD/PhD would put me on the path needed for medical academia but that it is a very competitive process.

I understand that the MD/PhD option is meant for those people who would like an 80/20 split regarding research/clinic, and I don't believe this is where my interests lie. For me, I'd favor more of a 50/50 split or possibly 60/40. In an ideal world, this would all be fine and dandy, but from what I've researched, it's just not a likely scenario. I also realize that people wanting that sort of research/clinic style should pursue an MD only, but I'm worried that this wouldn't get me to where I'd like to be in the long term.

Applying MD/PhD directly this June isn't a likely option for me, as my MCAT is on the low side. My in-state school is UNMC, and their average MCAT for the MD/PhD program is a 32 and a 3.71 GPA. I have a 3.91 GPA and a 31 MCAT. More importantly than stats, though, I believe I need to thoroughly address what my interests truly are. I have 520 hours of research with no pubs, but I will be working at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center this summer into next year, and I have been told I will have the opportunity to co-author two manuscripts to be sent in for publishing in 2016 and 2017. This will allow me to explore research a bit more as well as enhance the PhD side of my application, if that is what I decide to do.

Don't get me wrong people, I DO realize I shouldn't be applying broadly MD/PhD! My stats are nowhere near as competitive as they should be. I GET THAT. If I do apply, it would be after my first or second year of medical school (UNMC allows this). My plan is to apply early decision to UNMC (sorry SDN, I know you're going to yell at me for this) and then explore research a bit more.

I guess the real question is this: Is there any better way to find oneself in medical academia rather than pursuing an MD/PhD? I really do enjoy teaching others, but I also know my true love is treating the human body through science.

tl;dr: I want to teach others and treat patients, I don't know if heavy research is something I love. Is there any better way to find oneself in medical academia than through an MD/PhD?

 

[Lawpy]

I honestly don't recommend MD/PhD unless you're really interested in basic science research as a career, managing the research grants, etc. I'm happy you're aware that it's an 80-20 research-clinic split, and while you do have good research experience, it's important to note that you can enjoy academia as an MD. I know several MDs who are incredibly active in research (basic science, translational, and clinical etc.). You don't need a PhD to be in academia, or enjoy research. And since you seem to like teaching more, MD is your best bet.

 

[HCHopeful]

I honestly don't recommend MD/PhD unless you're really interested in basic science research as a career, managing the research grants, etc. I'm happy you're aware that it's an 80-20 research-clinic split, and while you do have good research experience, it's important to note that you can enjoy academia as an MD. I know several MDs who are incredibly active in research (basic science, translational, and clinical etc.). You don't need a PhD to be in academia, or enjoy research. And since you seem to like teaching more, MD is your best bet.

Thanks for the response! I think what I'm most worried about is the increased difficulty of finding myself in academia with only an MD. Is this a realistic fear? Or am I overstating the significance the added PhD will have?

 

[Lawpy]

Thanks for the response! I think what I'm most worried about is the increased difficulty of finding myself in academia with only an MD. Is this a realistic fear? Or am I overstating the significance the added PhD will have?

You'll be fine as an MD only. The PhD, if anything, is just an accessory with possibly some extra value of acquiring more research funding.

Think about it this way, the MD is a much more versatile degree than a PhD. Not only you can participate in teaching from undergrad to medical school/residency/fellowship level, but you get to treat patients (and support families), pretty much do any type of research you want, work in industry, participate in healthcare consulting, be another Dr. Oz, etc. The PhD by itself is fairly limited in scope, which means adding a PhD to an MD really doesn't help you much in the long run.

This is why personally I think an MD > MD/PhD in most, if not all, aspects.

 

[HCHopeful]

You'll be fine as an MD only. The PhD, if anything, is just an accessory with possibly some extra value of acquiring more research funding.

Think about it this way, the MD is a much more versatile degree than a PhD. Not only you can participate in teaching from undergrad to medical school/residency/fellowship level, but you get to treat patients (and support families), pretty much do any type of research you want, work in industry, participate in healthcare consulting, be another Dr. Oz, etc. The PhD by itself is fairly limited in scope, which means adding a PhD to an MD really doesn't help you much in the long run.

This is why personally I think an MD > MD/PhD in most, if not all, aspects.

Really appreciate your insight! Very much appreciated.

 

[NeuResurgens]

There are plenty of medical school faculty who hold MDs without a PhD. As Lawper said, I don't believe you need an MD/PhD in order to get into academia. Those programs are more geared toward those who wish to conduct intensive research pertaining to the science of medicine. MDs conduct research and teach students, but their research will typically be more clinically oriented and a smaller percentage of their time will be devoted to it.

I am also interested in research and academics, but I am mostly going into medicine to get the opportunity for clinical practice and hopefully do some research along the way, not the other way around. So after some searching I found that the MD only path is more suited to my interests.

 

[eye love lamp]

I honestly don't recommend MD/PhD unless you're really interested in basic science research as a career, managing the research grants, etc. I'm happy you're aware that it's an 80-20 research-clinic split, and while you do have good research experience, it's important to note that you can enjoy academia as an MD. I know several MDs who are incredibly active in research (basic science, translational, and clinical etc.). You don't need a PhD to be in academia, or enjoy research. And since you seem to like teaching more, MD is your best bet.

I agree.

Academic jobs aren't impossible to come by because they typically pay less than private practice gigs. You don't need an MD/PhD to teach or do research.

 

[NickNaylor]

As mentioned previously, it isn't necessary to go the MD/PhD route just to teach. You really don't even have to work for a medical center if your interest is in teaching students in a clinical setting. I also have a strong interest in teaching but have absolutely no interest in academics other than teaching. Depending upon your institution, it isn't unheard of to serve as an adjunct professor for an institution while working elsewhere (e.g., your own practice). You might also be involved in didactics at the resident level. I'm less familiar with teaching at the pre-clinical level, but I imagine that would more or less require you have a formal position at the institution you're hoping to teach at, but I really don't know for sure.

 

[LizzyM]

I have worked with dozens of academic physicians over the years who do not have PhDs.

Here's how physicians teach: There are some faculty who serve on the curriculum committee determining what subject matter is taught and how students are evaluated. Each student has a physician-mentor who is more of a coach than a teacher. Subject matter is broken down and has a course director or two for each module. The course director selects faculty members to give specific lectures (or gives the lectures personally) and each lecturer is responsible for writing questions related to their lecture. The medical education office administers the exams and reports results to the students. So, for the most part, a physician's teaching role may be to give a lecture or a few lectures per year on their area of special interest and/or develop the series of lectures on a topic (such as all the lectures on the gastrointestinal system) and recruit fellow faculty members to lecture on topics based on their area of expertise. There are also faculty who teach students to take a history and do a physical exam. Sometimes this can be taught in a clinical setting while the doctor is seeing patients... no PhD needed. Problem-based learning which provides students with cases to work through to better understand basic science in clinical context usually means that a team of faculty members have written a case often based on a real situation in their specialty area (so there might be dozens of faculty who have contributed a case or two) and other faculty work through the case material (written descriptions, lab results, photographs, radiographs, etc) with small groups of students.

In many cases, physicians on the faculty of the medical school support themselves through patient care; teaching is something they do to contribute to the medical school in exchange for having a faculty appointment and admitting privileges at the academic medical center. This might include 10 sessions per year with students in their first two years and/or 2 hours of lecture per year and 2 months "on service" supervising trainees at all levels from third year medical students through fellows.

After 1 1/2-2 years of "pre-clinical", most of which takes place in lecture halls, small group discussion and preceptorship with someone teaching you exam skills, a student begins the clinical years. Physicians teach medical students, residents and fellows by supervising the care they provide as a team and reviewing with them the evidence for a particular approach to testing and treatment. Faculty are asked to assess the skills of the students assigned to them and to provide feedback to students about their performance. Faculty receive training on how to assess and communicate effectively in these settings.

Teaching is different in medical school than in college where a professor owns an entire course and takes responsibility for the syllabus and the exams.

 

[jsquared91]

I've just recently discovered a love for teaching. This love, however, still comes second (only barely) to my desire to practice medicine in a clinical environment. I have been trying to gather information regarding how I could incorporate these two desires into one profession and have found that medical academia may suit me well. I have found that obtaining an MD/PhD would put me on the path needed for medical academia but that it is a very competitive process.

I understand that the MD/PhD option is meant for those people who would like an 80/20 split regarding research/clinic, and I don't believe this is where my interests lie. For me, I'd favor more of a 50/50 split or possibly 60/40. In an ideal world, this would all be fine and dandy, but from what I've researched, it's just not a likely scenario. I also realize that people wanting that sort of research/clinic style should pursue an MD only, but I'm worried that this wouldn't get me to where I'd like to be in the long term.

Applying MD/PhD directly this June isn't a likely option for me, as my MCAT is on the low side. My in-state school is UNMC, and their average MCAT for the MD/PhD program is a 32 and a 3.71 GPA. I have a 3.91 GPA and a 31 MCAT. More importantly than stats, though, I believe I need to thoroughly address what my interests truly are. I have 520 hours of research with no pubs, but I will be working at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center this summer into next year, and I have been told I will have the opportunity to co-author two manuscripts to be sent in for publishing in 2016 and 2017. This will allow me to explore research a bit more as well as enhance the PhD side of my application, if that is what I decide to do.

Don't get me wrong people, I DO realize I shouldn't be applying broadly MD/PhD! My stats are nowhere near as competitive as they should be. I GET THAT. If I do apply, it would be after my first or second year of medical school (UNMC allows this). My plan is to apply early decision to UNMC (sorry SDN, I know you're going to yell at me for this) and then explore research a bit more.

I guess the real question is this: Is there any better way to find oneself in medical academia rather than pursuing an MD/PhD? I really do enjoy teaching others, but I also know my true love is treating the human body through science.

tl;dr: I want to teach others and treat patients, I don't know if heavy research is something I love. Is there any better way to find oneself in medical academia than through an MD/PhD?

What about a school with a medical education pathway like Rochester?
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/education/md/admissions/elective-pathway.cfm
I feel like I saw another school with a similar elective pathway, but I can't remember it.

 

[LizzyM]

What about a school with a medical education pathway like Rochester?
https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/education/md/admissions/elective-pathway.cfm
I feel like I saw another school with a similar elective pathway, but I can't remember it.

Interesting... much of this training is also available as "continuing education" to physicians in practice and to non-physician faculty members who teach.

 

[IlDestriero]

Here's something I wrote for another thread about academic tracks.

Many medical schools, including all that I looked at for a job, and the two where I have been on the faculty, offered three distinct academic pathways. They are separate and have different promotion requirements. What they are called may differ from university to university.
1. Tenure- Essentially a serious researcher who does limited clinical work as well. Usually 75% or more protected non clinical time. These guys earn their clinical time off by paying their salaries with grants, etc. Grant support and significant academic productivity is required for retention and promotion. An MD PhD would be useful for this track. Research has shown that academic career success in this track is significantly higher at >80% protected time, which makes sense.
2. The academic-clinicians, primarily clinical people who have 20-50% protected nonclinical time to engage in research. ~50% of our faculty are on this path. The department/hospital supports their time off, some have small grants, a couple are significant, and some are quite successful convincing manufacturers to donate their equipment, etc. for their projects. Some get money (time) from the university or hospital to devote significant time to important committees or projects, patient safety, quality improvement, etc. Research is required for promotion and Up or Out applies, though much less than for the tenure track.
3. The clinical-educator path. This represents a growing percentage of the appointments at the medical school. They teach residents and fellows and others rotating through the department, not usually lecturing to the medical students though. Promotion requires zero research commitment/productivity. Though many, myself included, have lectured at meetings, written chapters in textbooks, participated in clinical research, mentored fellows chart reviews, case reports, etc. The purpose of this track is to generate outstanding clinicians and superior educators for the residents and fellows. The other benefit is to have more people on the ground every day getting the clinical work done in the trenches. It also unloads some administrative burden off the research faculty. We've had the non research track for more than a decade. By report the university is very happy with it's success and the number of appointments into this track is increasing. The medical school has 3 goals. Excellence in research, education, and clinical work. The non research path recognizes that one can excel in the area of resident education and be clinically outstanding, without being a research leader. Clearly an asset to a demanding academic department. I do know that some other departments at the university do not have many/any non research track faculty. The individual department chairs have to decide what they want from their faculty, and mine places a very high value on trainee education and the reputation of it's graduates as well as clinical excellence and hires a significant amount of non research faculty. Promotion requires evidence of clinical excellence as well as higher teaching scores than the other tracks. Up or out does not apply. (here)
The reason I am in academic medicine is that I have a desire to participate in resident and fellow education, and I'm good at it. Also, I thrive on the constant supply of interesting and challenging cases available at a world class academic referral center. As an anesthesiologist, it's also fascinating to participate in cutting edge techniques that few facilities/surgeons in the world offer.
Anesthesia is a bit unique as it requires a lot of boots on the ground every day. You don't just have one call and back up person covering an entire service for a week at a time while all the other faculty have 1-2 clinic days and 3-4 research days, you need 20+ faculty every day, working the whole time. If everyone had a tenure track or 50% protected non clinical time we would have a lot of problems with the clinical load and we would make a lot less money because we would have to hire so many more faculty.

 

[22031 Alum]

Academic faculty here. I teach residents as well as medical students on clerkships. I am not involved in any pre-clinical courses. Neither I nor any of my clinical faculty colleagues have PhDs- we're all MDs and DOs. Other people above have done a better job of explaining why an MD/PhD isn't necessary for academics; I just wanted to give myself as another example.

 

[Goro]

Agree 100% with my learned colleagues here. At the places where I've been, MD/PhDs are PIs first, and educators second. A very distant second.

At my school, our clinical Faculty have differing clinical responsibilities. Of those that see patients, some only teach to the 3rd and 4th year students; others teach in all years, and still others teach more to the 1st and 2nd years.

In addition, we have a few clinicians who decided that seeing patients wasn't for them, or have retired from clinical practice, and so only teach.

I must add that I am SO jealous that LizzyM's school has a distinct department to administer tests!!! At my school, this burden falls upon poor course coordinators.

 

[HCHopeful]

Really appreciate the replies from all of you. It's always great gaining wisdom from those who have already accomplished what I wish to pursue.

 

[IlDestriero]

I agree.

Academic jobs aren't impossible to come by because they typically pay less than private practice gigs. You don't need an MD/PhD to teach or do research.

Income at academic jobs can vary quite a bit and is often deceiving, of course being self employed has other advantages including write offs and different retirement income rules which also can complicate things. You really have to look at the whole offer, and what the total package is worth to you.
I'll give a couple real examples from anesthesia.
Recent surveys report average anesthesia income between around 360 and 410, depending on who you believe.
Job 1. Big Shot PP guy. Works 7-5, one call a week, covers 3 rooms always sometimes 4 supervising CRNAs. He makes mid 500s with his call and partner bonuses. Takes 8 weeks vaca. His group pays decent benefits out of the partner income. Good job. On the decline, btw.
Job 2. Solo Saul. He works on his own, and gets paid 1099 as a private contractor affiliated with a group that organizes a bunch of anesthesiologists in a big city. He is happy to make above average at around 425. He does all his own cases, working hard, and his hours vary from 7-12 to 7-7p and are unpredictable. He takes 2 calls a month. He has to pay all his own benefits and retirement and takes a lot of deductions.
Job 3. Anesthesia management company stooge. A very fast growing category. They used to be like job one or 2 above, but sold out or lost the contract to a management company. It's all about skimming the profits and providing hospital coverage so the AMC and the hospital is happy now. This guy covers 3 rooms all the time, occasionally 4 always supervising CRNAs. 7-5 grinding cases every day. One call a week. He gets 6 weeks vacation and minimal benefits including a 401k and malpractice and they offer a fairly expensive to him, but decent health plan. He's lucky to make 360. Which they assure him is great as it is "the national average".
Job 4. Academic Andy. It looks a little like my job. He looked around hard and was a strong candidate and was able to score a very good, better than average but not 95th percentile, academic job with fair pay. He works 7-3 most days, till around 5 a few days a month, and around noon a couple days a month, only taking about one call a month. There are 6-7 weeks vacation and ~2 more weeks of academic time off for teaching and administration activities. The schedule is predictable, coming out 8 weeks in advance. He never covers more than 2 rooms, sometimes one on one, and sometimes doing his own cases. Let's say he only makes about 350 with bonuses, but gets a Cadillac benefits package that is worth (with retirement, taxes, expense acct, insurance, perks, etc) over $100k/yr.
So how is the academic guy really doing?
(To be continued)

 

[Rainbow Zebra]

Income at academic jobs can vary quite a bit and is often deceiving, of course being self employed has other advantages including write offs and different retirement income rules which also can complicate things. You really have to look at the whole offer, and what the total package is worth to you.
I'll give a couple real examples from anesthesia.
Recent surveys report average anesthesia income between around 360 and 410, depending on who you believe.
Job 1. Big Shot PP guy. Works 7-5, one call a week, covers 3 rooms always sometimes 4 supervising CRNAs. He makes mid 500s with his call and partner bonuses. Takes 8 weeks vaca. His group pays decent benefits out of the partner income. Good job. On the decline, btw.
Job 2. Solo Saul. He works on his own, and gets paid 1099 as a private contractor affiliated with a group that organizes a bunch of anesthesiologists in a big city. He is happy to make above average at around 425. He does all his own cases, working hard, and his hours vary from 7-12 to 7-7p and are unpredictable. He takes 2 calls a month. He has to pay all his own benefits and retirement and takes a lot of deductions.
Job 3. Anesthesia management company stooge. A very fast growing category. They used to be like job one or 2 above, but sold out or lost the contract to a management company. It's all about skimming the profits and providing hospital coverage so the AMC and the hospital is happy now. This guy covers 3 rooms all the time, occasionally 4 always supervising CRNAs. 7-5 grinding cases every day. One call a week. He gets 6 weeks vacation and minimal benefits including a 401k and malpractice and they offer a fairly expensive to him, but decent health plan. He's lucky to make 360. Which they assure him is great as it is "the national average".
Job 4. Academic Andy. It looks a little like my job. He looked around hard and was a strong candidate and was able to score a very good, better than average but not 95th percentile, academic job with fair pay. He works 7-3 most days, till around 5 a few days a month, and around noon a couple days a month, only taking about one call a month. There are 6-7 weeks vacation and ~2 more weeks of academic time off for teaching and administration activities. The schedule is predictable, coming out 8 weeks in advance. He never covers more than 2 rooms, sometimes one on one, and sometimes doing his own cases. Let's say he only makes about 350 with bonuses, but gets a Cadillac benefits package that is worth (with retirement, taxes, expense acct, insurance, perks, etc) over $100k/yr.
So how is the academic guy really doing?
(To be continued)

Guess my dad is an academic Andy an MD/PhD. Has his "thinking day" once a week and boatloads of vacation time and a retirement match he is constantly bragging about. Pay is at the 50th percentile, but his lifestyle is an envy. Now hat he jumped off the research track (Grant grubbing was getting brutal), he is a very happy camper, feeling like taking care of patients is more worthwhile than writing grants that only get funded 15% of the time. He discouraged my brother and me from MD/PhD but academics without the PhD can be pretty sweet.

 

[IlDestriero]

Let's look at this with some broad generalizations.
1 is the gold standard making a very solid 5-600, but working hard for it. A great job desired by many but harder and harder to find.

2 thinks he hit the jackpot, BUT he works almost as hard as everyone else and if he wants the same benefits as #4 he will have to pay out about $100k. So he's equivalent salary would only be about 325. But, big but, he is self employed and has nice deductions and perks, and of course does his own cases. This is many people's dream job also.

3 just sucks. In 10 years, most jobs will probably like this or employed by the hospital. That's the future for most. If you are lucky you make more $$ and or have good benefits.

Let's examine that good academic job a bit more closely and make it equivalent to the other jobs, specifically how does it compare to #1?
They all have about the same time off, 1 is the best.
Let's call the academic salary 350. But the hours are light and working until 5 every day would be 10-20 percent more than getting out between 3 and 4 most days.
So adding 15% to the income means it would be an equivalent to about 400k.
Now let's look at call. It's worth at least $1500 a night. Joe PP takes a lot more call. Let's say he takes 40 a year. Academic dude takes 15. Difference is 25 calls. Value them at $1500 and that's about $40k more. So academic equivalent is now approaching $450.
What about benefits? 2 and 3 have no benefits or crap benefits. They work for the man and may have little control of their schedule. Not so nice. Good benefits like own occupation disability are expensive and coming out of their pocket.
So the academic guy would make much more than 2 and 3 and a lot closer to PP guy. Let's not forget he's also only covering 1:2, sometimes 1:1 and not 1:3 or 1:4. You can't really value that, but the PP guy is busting his hump to earn that extra $100-150k running all day every day.
And let's not forget that not all partnerships are banking over 500 bones.
That good but not even great academic gig sounds pretty awesome doesn't it.
Maybe that's why it's hard as hell to get a job here.
We make less, but we work less, much less than some of my PP buddies and it's a hell of a lot better than the AMC stooge jobs that a couple of my friends have.

 

[IlDestriero]

Though many academic jobs suck and are a joke. Shop around and find out what's really available for you. I have a couple ENT friends in academia. One works like a dog 7-7, tons of call, but banks almost 1M. The other probably looks unemployed to his neighbors, home early all the time, several rounds of golf at the club every week, but he only makes about 1/3 of baller #1. Both have their dream job in the same city at different hospitals.

 

[HCHopeful]

Let's look at this with some broad generalizations.
1 is the gold standard making a very solid 5-600, but working hard for it. A great job desired by many but harder and harder to find.

2 thinks he hit the jackpot, BUT he works almost as hard as everyone else and if he wants the same benefits as #4 he will have to pay out about $100k. So he's equivalent salary would only be about 325. But, big but, he is self employed and has nice deductions and perks, and of course does his own cases. This is many people's dream job also.

3 just sucks. In 10 years, most jobs will probably like this or employed by the hospital. That's the future for most. If you are lucky you make more $$ and or have good benefits.

Let's examine that good academic job a bit more closely and make it equivalent to the other jobs, specifically how does it compare to #1?
They all have about the same time off, 1 is the best.
Let's call the academic salary 350. But the hours are light and working until 5 every day would be 10-20 percent more than getting out between 3 and 4 most days.
So adding 15% to the income means it would be an equivalent to about 400k.
Now let's look at call. It's worth at least $1500 a night. Joe PP takes a lot more call. Let's say he takes 40 a year. Academic dude takes 15. Difference is 25 calls. Value them at $1500 and that's about $40k more. So academic equivalent is now approaching $450.
What about benefits? 2 and 3 have no benefits or crap benefits. They work for the man and may have little control of their schedule. Not so nice. Good benefits like own occupation disability are expensive and coming out of their pocket.
So the academic guy would make much more than 2 and 3 and a lot closer to PP guy. Let's not forget he's also only covering 1:2, sometimes 1:1 and not 1:3 or 1:4. You can't really value that, but the PP guy is busting his hump to earn that extra $100-150k running all day every day.
And let's not forget that not all partnerships are banking over 500 bones.
That good but not even great academic gig sounds pretty awesome doesn't it.
Maybe that's why it's hard as hell to get a job here.
We make less, but we work less, much less than some of my PP buddies and it's a hell of a lot better than the AMC stooge jobs that a couple of my friends have.

This is a classic uninformed pre-med question, but the more I think about academic medicine, the more I'm intrigued.

Is there a specific track I should be on during medical school to set myself up as well as I can for academic medicine? Does one generally work a bit after residency and then try to find an academic spot? Or is it just right after residency searching for that perfect place? At this point in my life, I'd love nothing more than to do that, but I'm a little confused about the best way to go about it. I do know step #1 is actually getting accepted to medical school 😉

 

[IlDestriero]

Every academic job is different. Many want high flying researchers and you will need to be involved in research in medical school and be involved in research in residency, possibly doing a research fellowship year(s). Academia is very very conscious of one's pedigree and a superior medical school will help land a superior residency and/or fellowship and that will set you up for a good academic job. Most of our faculty graduated from top 40 medical schools, many top 10, and are from a handful of highly regarded residencies and fellowships. It's also very incestious, if you want to work at MGH or Boston Children's you will have a better chance if you trained there.

 

[IlDestriero]

One guy in the anesthesia forum just posted he takes 10 calls a month and no guaranteed post call day off. 10/month!!! I'd do that... for 7 figures.
The likelihood he's making 7 figures is zero. But he MAY get 500. I'll take my 1.2 calls a month and about 4 bills, that's just fine. Plenty of uninterrupted time with the family and for a glass of red or single malt.

 

[LizzyM]

This is a classic uninformed pre-med question, but the more I think about academic medicine, the more I'm intrigued.

Is there a specific track I should be on during medical school to set myself up as well as I can for academic medicine? Does one generally work a bit after residency and then try to find an academic spot? Or is it just right after residency searching for that perfect place? At this point in my life, I'd love nothing more than to do that, but I'm a little confused about the best way to go about it. I do know step #1 is actually getting accepted to medical school 😉

Getting into medical school is the first step. From there, getting into an excellent residency at an academic medical center (not a community hospital), academic medical center fellowship, on to a job offer at an academic medical center as an assistant professor in the clinical track. As I said, I've seen plenty of academics who started in a public medical school but who went on to excellent post-graduate training facilities. Academics doesn't pay well but as @IlDestriero points out, what you miss in money you make up in time to do as you please.

 

[Goro]

Just watch out for committee work!!

Getting into medical school is the first step. From there, getting into an excellent residency at an academic medical center (not a community hospital), academic medical center fellowship, on to a job offer at an academic medical center as an assistant professor in the clinical track. As I said, I've seen plenty of academics who started in a public medical school but who went on to excellent post-graduate training facilities. Academics doesn't pay well but as @IlDestriero points out, what you miss in money you make up in time to do as you please.