Ph.Ds are more difficult to earn than MDs!

[tuckman]

I noticed this question appearing amongst a thread in the Allopathic forum and thought it would be an interesting post-finals topic to discuss. It appears that the biggest hurdle for MDs is the initial acceptance to medical school. While it may be difficult to pass courses in medical school, graduate students are forced to continuously prove themselves even after acceptance. This is true even after graduating with a Ph.D degree. In order to survive academia, you must be willing to suffer quite a few set-backs. You must struggle through the criticisms of your major advisor, have your research constantly questioned by peers, and work 60- 80 hours a week on top of accomplishing your school work. You are essentially a slave to the faculty member you are working for. This is especially true for science-related graduate programs. You must write a very well-developed thesis and present it to faculty and peers. After hours of brutal questioning, you may or may not pass. Following graduation, you again work under somebody else as a post-doc (in many situations). You are then forced to find work within the very confined walls of academia where you will face a long road to tenure, which is interrupted several times by meetings challenging your worthiness. (For people who do not know, professors face regular meetings at which they must prove themselves and their value to the university or risk being dismissed). While MDs must pass exams and prove themselves throughout their clinicals, is their road really as intellectually demanding? What do others think? Do Ph.Ds take the more difficult road? Is it truly the most difficult degree to obtain?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[anybutpretty]

I don't know if one is more difficult than the other - they're just so different. MD = absorb absorb absorb; PhD = produce produce produce.

I'm personally more intimidated at the thought of doing a PhD, but the breadth of information MDs/DOs have to know is pretty incredible, too.

I also think it's kind of silly for people to seriously debate about it.

 

[psychwhy]

anybutpretty: I also think it's kind of silly for people to seriously debate about it.

Well, perhaps debating it is silly.
However, trying to seek some sort of confirmation of one's struggle seems a pretty natural exercise in self-preservation.

I know that doctoral students (often after the first year, but certainly at other times through the program), feel the fatigue after the work accomplished, see the seemingly endless road ahead, and entertain thoughts of chucking it all.

I can only imagine that first year med students have similar feelings when they are cramming for those foundation course exams, look ahead to the warm welcome into clerkships where they are at the utter bottom of the medical food chain, and have similiar thoughts.

While the academic journeys do certainly seem to have agonizing parallels, I do understand tuckman's observation of the PhD seeming to never reach the finish line and "spike the ball." Certainly, some of the more involved surgical specialties are exceptions, but for the most part it appears that when an MD finishes residency -- if s/he so chooses -- there are ample career opportunities available which offer a pretty secure future. But, as tuckman points out, the academic PhD has several more years of playing the tenure track game. The clinical PhD has a couple more years of staking a claim, followed by several more years of trying to establish a marginally profitable niche.

Even the residents in the most difficult surgical specialities appear to progress up a pretty regular ladder of authority and compensation. Yes, the road may be long, but the rewards are all but assured at the end.

This is certainly how it seems from a non-medical health care provider's vantage point.

Actually, I am more curious just how many med and graduate students don't make it to the end? You often hear jokes about med students washing out, but do they really? With what frequency? (I understand that med school probably don't like advertising failure rates, but someone must know.)

From the graduate school realm, we all know of the dreaded ABD -- but just how many students end up there? Given how difficult it is for a graduated psych PhD to navigate post-doc supervised experiences and licensure hoops, just does one do as a psych ABD?

Just looking for a little validation!

 

[Beau Geste]

Ph.D. and M.D. are two different animals - one is not "easier" than the other because the contents are so different.

 

[Quynh2007]

to me, going to get a PhD (in clinical Psych) is a little more daunting than getting an M.D. because of the following:

1) in a PhD program, while the courses may be similar to your classmates, your advisor, research projects, and other activites may be drastically different from your peers, thus, making it really hard to have someone besides your advisor to talk to. In medical school, everyone goes through the exact same thing, granted they may have different rotations 3rd and 4th year, but they are basically doing the same thing.

2) it usually takes more than 4 years to complete a program, and like an above poster said, many end up all but dissertation after 6-7 years. While trying to get a residency may be difficult, it is comparable to competing for grants and research/academic jobs (many probably end up doing a post-bacc to become more competitive)

3) there are over 100 medical schools you can choose from, usually only two track, tradition or PBL, so applicants have a broad range of criterias that they can pick. we, on the other hand, usually have to swallow many criterias (such as location, atmosphere, etc) to apply to schools where there is a prof. there doing something you are interested in.

4) M.D. have USMLE board exams and board certification, but PhD have dissertations and exams as well.

5) PhD - money is not gauranteed to be flowing when you are done or even down the road.

oh well.bring it on

 

[Pterion]

My answer would be: depends on the program. There are medical schools that are not quite as rigorous as others. There are doctoral programs that are not as rigorous as others.

I think an MD interventional radiologist from Duke will have undergone a much more difficult road to goal than a PsyD from Nova or a PhD from the Wright Institute. On the other hand, a UCSD PhD has undergone a much more difficult training experience than a DO from Pikeville, KY.

Personally, I have found my medical education to be much more strenous than my PsyD program was. The differences are pretty numerous, but here are some things that were mentioned in this forum so far:

1. My class of ~110 people the first day of first year was accepted with the plan of weeding out the bottom 10% at least. I am halfway through my third year, and can tell you that this program has exceeded its goal. This is not frequently done in doctoral programs. My PsyD class of (too many) lost only one to academic discharge. I think the doctoral model is more of an investment, with slightly to greatly more selectivity.

2. Your peers are going through the same thing, but that is not the same as direct, one-on-one support from your faculty that most experience in PhD programs. Peer support only goes so far - they aren't the ones you are trying to impress. Usually.

3. l generally agree with the range of schools from which to choose.

4. There is a wide range of well-boundaried specialties to choose from for residency. However, the most desirable tend to be very difficult to get into. I am not sure that it is comparable to competing for grants, but it is analogous.

5. With regards to testing, physicians in the US must pass 4 licensure exams during the course of their training. Most specialties require recertification every 5-10 years. Within my lifetime this will be true of all specialties. These are above and beyond the tests taken within your institution, which can not be fairly compared. In psychology there was the EPPP, state oral boards, and ABPP. I had dissertation and master's research requirements in my PsyD program. Some allopathic programs have research requirements - these tend to be in the top-tier schools.

6. Cash flow. So much could be said here. I won't argue that MD's don't make decent money. Right now - averaged across all specialties and practice locations - they do. Primary care MDs in the southeast are struggling to break six figures while working on average 100 hrs a week. Psychiatrists with well established practices in New York state can make half a million or more in 60 hours. Within the next 2-3 years, physicians may see a 15% across the board cut in reimbursement. I won't even touch the debt to income disparities between the fields. Such variablility is also seen in psychology. No one is guaranteed flow for anyone but Rupert Murdoch.


As with all things the real answer is: which is harder for you? If this is a struggle with cognitive dissonance or insecurity, then the answer is: whatever program you are currently in.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

A bit off topic.....

Apples and Oranges....though I really like both fruit. People have commented in other threads about the degree (both) are what you make of it. I was a bit concerned about BOTH profession's future. HMOs are really screwing things up for both, and the traditional routes for both have shifted over the last decarde or so. I think each degree offers a different challenge on the front end, but share many common challenges on the back-end.

-t

 

[Hurricane]

Hi, I'm an MD/PhD so I've done both. I personally found the PhD to be more intellectually challenging while the MD was more physically challenging, if that makes any sense.

My PhD is in neuroscience (basic science stuff) and the most difficult parts for me was the level of independence and self-motivation required. Nobody spoon feeds you in graduate school. Your project belongs to you. It requires creativity, collaboration, and hard work and if you don't have the self-discipline to stay on top of things, it will never get done.

In contrast, you are spoon fed a lot of information in medical school and aren't really required to think about stuff as much as spit it back out, esp in the first 2 years. And as others have said, once you're in, you have to really try to wash out. However, this extreme lack of autonomy has its downside. You have absolutely no control over your own schedule, esp in the clinical years. Your time is not your own. The hours are long, the heirarchy/lack of respect can be demoralizing, and it really sucks to be 30 years old and have to ask permission to go pee.