Personal Statements--to emphasis research or not?

[whatageek]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I’ve written a personal statement that I’m actually proud of. It describes my circuitous path to medicine and explains my desire to be involved in both clinical care and research. Recently I had a conversation with my research mentor, and he suggested that I downplay my desire to be in research and simply list it as an aside.

I’m really hesitant to do this. I’ve spent the last seven years of my life in research, both basic and translational. And, to be perfectly honest, I love research. But I still want to do more. In an ideal world, I’d like a 50/50 split between clinical care and research or a clinical profession that easily blends with research (pathology, oncology, etc.). I just feel like being involved in research and clinical care, simultaneous, is a conversation topic where my true enthusiasm and passion shows. Just talking about one or the other, however, I’m not sure it shines through as much. I realize a lot of time it’s all about spin… but still. My question is a background heavy in research frowned upon? Does this change depending on whether the school is MD or DO? I was under the impression that physician scientists willing to be involved in translational research (as opposed to basic science research) were in dire need. I’ve even noticed some DO programs with combinational degreed. But, then again, what do I know? Any opinions?

 

[munchymanRX]

I’ve written a personal statement that I’m actually proud of. It describes my circuitous path to medicine and explains my desire to be involved in both clinical care and research. Recently I had a conversation with my research mentor, and he suggested that I downplay my desire to be in research and simply list it as an aside.

I’m really hesitant to do this. I’ve spent the last seven years of my life in research, both basic and translational. And, to be perfectly honest, I love research. But I still want to do more. In an ideal world, I’d like a 50/50 split between clinical care and research or a clinical profession that easily blends with research (pathology, oncology, etc.). I just feel like being involved in research and clinical care, simultaneous, is a conversation topic where my true enthusiasm and passion shows. Just talking about one or the other, however, I’m not sure it shines through as much. I realize a lot of time it’s all about spin… but still. My question is a background heavy in research frowned upon? Does this change depending on whether the school is MD or DO? I was under the impression that physician scientists willing to be involved in translational research (as opposed to basic science research) were in dire need. I’ve even noticed some DO programs with combinational degreed. But, then again, what do I know? Any opinions?

Research is not frowned upon in the DO world, but it is not necessarily in tune with the mission of most DO programs, which is to mint apt clinicians.
If you are interested in going into research, I would strongly advise against going DO. It will be more difficult to attain funding and there are very few MSTP programs (DO/PhD) if you want to concentrate on research.

If you love research and have the experience, why not try for a PhD? Why are you going for the MD (not trying to second guess you, just curious).

 

[The Lady Grey]

I’ve written a personal statement that I’m actually proud of. It describes my circuitous path to medicine and explains my desire to be involved in both clinical care and research. Recently I had a conversation with my research mentor, and he suggested that I downplay my desire to be in research and simply list it as an aside.

I’m really hesitant to do this. I’ve spent the last seven years of my life in research, both basic and translational. And, to be perfectly honest, I love research. But I still want to do more. In an ideal world, I’d like a 50/50 split between clinical care and research or a clinical profession that easily blends with research (pathology, oncology, etc.). I just feel like being involved in research and clinical care, simultaneous, is a conversation topic where my true enthusiasm and passion shows. Just talking about one or the other, however, I’m not sure it shines through as much. I realize a lot of time it’s all about spin… but still. My question is a background heavy in research frowned upon? Does this change depending on whether the school is MD or DO? I was under the impression that physician scientists willing to be involved in translational research (as opposed to basic science research) were in dire need. I’ve even noticed some DO programs with combinational degreed. But, then again, what do I know? Any opinions?

I think you might do yourself a favor and research more heavily into an MD/Ph.D. If research is really what turns your crank, if may be a better fit. There are a lot of bonuses to being accepted, i.e., tuition wavers, decent stipends, etc. The programs for D.O/Ph.D are not generally funded, whereas, the MD version is funded through government programs. I was initially considering this, since I have 6 years research experience, but realized when writing my PS that I really want the clinical setting. From my research about the field of physician scientist, they generally have a 20% clinical to 80% research split.

 

[Helen Wheels]

I only applied to one DO school (LECOM) so take this with a grain of salt but I mentioned research and a desire to continue research in some capacity in my PS and was accepted. Now, I didn't talk about just that, there was a lot of other stuff in there, but to ignore the 10+ years I have worked in research would have been silly.

I am sure it varies by school but I suspect many DO schools are hoping to step up to the plate and produce more researchers as they increase enrollment. I am really hoping to work in academic medicine with clinical and research responsibilities some day.

 

[PeachyPhd]

I discussed my research in my PS.

But not in the "I studied Blah blah blah for X year and published X papers" kinda way.

I discussed my research and getting a PhD to highlight some of my qualities and why I would be a good med student and physician and to answer the "why medicine" and explain my own circuitous path.

Bottom line, go with it. Its who you are.

Feel free to PM me for specifics.

Best Wishes

Peaches

 

[Torr]

OP, I totally feel you! I LOVE research. I talked about my research in my PS and I emphasized to programs that I'm definitely trying to do it during med school wherever possible. I was also hesitant about talking about this at first with DO schools but after a while I got really fed up with it and just started being really blatant about it. I brought it up during interviews and to Directors of programs as soon as I met them.

I had about 2 directors tell me straight up "you need to forget about DO and go MD". I was like...huh? I won't say who but lets just say theyre in the midwest somewhere.

However, there are programs that encourage it but maintain that their focus is clinical care and less about research.

I don't believe it will hurt you to talk about this in your PS as long as it is balanced with your interest in clinical care and that patient relationship. I really emphasized how much I loved the relationships I built with patients and the one on one so maybe it overshadowed all the research I kept throwing at them.

Anyway, I don't think you have to do MD/PhD to be happy but if there are programs you're interested in why not?

Good luck !

 

[Kevin Baker]

I strongly, but respectfully, disagree with the advice in this thread so far. Research is HIGHLY desirable among med school applicants. Almost every school is competing for research dollars which directly increases a school's rankings and visibility: DO schools no exception. Many DO schools even offer PhD programs, and many more offer paid summer research positions between M1 and M2.

You may be asked about what you did, so don't embellish and do be able to explain in detail but I'd say research is the most important EC a student can have.

Also, I'd advise against going just for a Ph.D. Get a DO or MD as well as it will open so many more doors/grants than a Ph.D alone. You also don't need a Ph.D to do research in med school or beyond.

 

[whatageek]

Research is not frowned upon in the DO world, but it is not necessarily in tune with the mission of most DO programs, which is to mint apt clinicians.
If you are interested in going into research, I would strongly advise against going DO. It will be more difficult to attain funding and there are very few MSTP programs (DO/PhD) if you want to concentrate on research.

If you love research and have the experience, why not try for a PhD? Why are you going for the MD (not trying to second guess you, just curious).

I already have a PhD. And, like I said, I love research. I really do. But I also want to do clinical care in at least some capacity. I did a little bit of translational work during graduate school and I loved having the mix of patient contact (through getting consents into our study) and research. It opened my eyes as to having the best of both worlds. Ever since then I can't force myself to "settle" for just doing one or the other.

 

[whatageek]

Thanks for all the feedback. It seems there isn't a clear cut answer. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a hasty decision by discussing my research history because it does contribute to my overall story.

One more question though, why would a DO in research have fewer opportunities for grants than a MD. I was under the impression that most federal grants ask for medical physicians rather than a specific degree. Am I wrong?