Research as an Unofficial Requirement

[Milotic]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi,

MSII here at a not so impressive Allopathic school. After scoping around about research on SDN and talking to every physician I can get the opportunity to talk to, we have to face something. Unless you want to do primary care OR match at a small community hospital for a mid/high competitive specialty in Wyoming, YOU NEED TO DO RESEARCH IN MEDICAL SCHOOL.

This sounds absolute, but everything seems to round up to "You need research to match XYZ". I believe this is because times have changed. Someone who matched UCLA back in 2012 will say they didn't do research, but take a look around, almost every medical student is or is trying to get their hands on research of some sort. It is definitely becoming an unofficial requirement as we are no longer in the days of "They just care about Step 1/clinical grades/LOR's"

Unfortunately as well, a lot of us hate research and people like myself spend most of their time towards passing at a decent class rank and don't have the time to work on research (literally I need to put in 10 hours a day of class material to do as well as I do (Above average). I can't imagine substituting ANY of that time for additional work like research. Some of us just have to put in more time but that is a different discussion altogether).

Facing this new level of competition for us matching in 2018 and beyond, what are the best ways to conquer this requirement? Is it better to take a year off in between MSII and MSIII to do research towards a highly competitive field or is it better to wait until your Step I score comes out and try to shove in research into your third/fourth year? How do PD's generally view this year off of research?

TLDR: I hate research, but it is very arguably becoming a requirement for mid-high competitive specialties or residencies in very desirable regions so I am wondering what is the best way to do research for someone like myself who struggles to stay above average in classes by studying 10+ hours a day and is hesitant to shove research into MSII with boards coming up.

 

[Dave89]

There's a lot of truth in your post. While it's nowhere close to impossible to get top-tier interviews in most specialties with high scores and glowing letters alone, research is becoming all but necessary for the "top five" of any specialty, and already is for the most competitive fields (Rad Onc, Derm, ENT, Ophtho, etc.).

Your boards are (I assume) not until May, at least. You most certainly have a few hours per week to devote to research. You won't realize how much free time you had this year until it's over... doing research in 3rd year is far more difficult.

I don't think a year off should be a default pathway for any specialty; it should be done only if one discovers by the end of third year that one does not have enough research to receive a comfortable number of interviews invitations.

To MS1 students who don't have any idea as to what they want to be when they grow up: get involved in some cancer-related research. It's hard to find fault with that.

 

[operaman]

Don't forget there are many levels of research with vastly different time requirements. It may not take nearly as much time as you think to get a few things on your cv.

But you are right in that it is fast becoming a requirement for many fields and top programs in general. Every program wants the best, most productive residents they can get. Period.

I think a research year is a good idea for many, especially in competitive fields. Many medical schools have mandatory or strongly encouraged research years built into their curriculum, and I know I met many people on the trail who had taken a year. I caution people to seek solid personalized advice for your individual situation when the time comes to see if taking a year is the right move for you.

 

[Dave89]

What a disheartening thread for those who can't force themselves to spend another second of their life doing research and love a competitive field. This unspoken requirement is definitely taking a toll (anxiety/stress) on some of my friends who are are looking at ENT etc. Im glad that I don't like any hyper-competititve fields and am geographically flexible, but even I still feel a bit of pressure to have one pub during med school.

I also wanted to clarify... when people say research is necessary are they referring to an actual pub/abstract/poster or is the experience of doing research enough? Not all research yields results as Im sure many of us are all too familiar with.

The answer to this question is pretty straightforward. Pubs > involvement w/o pubs > nothing.

Apart from Rad Onc and Derm, I'd say that substantial involvement is probably enough to get one's foot in the door.

 

[Psai]

What a disheartening thread for those who can't force themselves to spend another second of their life doing research and love a competitive field. This unspoken requirement is definitely taking a toll (anxiety/stress) on some of my friends who are are looking at ENT etc. Im glad that I don't like any hyper-competititve fields and am geographically flexible, but even I still feel a bit of pressure to have one pub during med school.

I also wanted to clarify... when people say research is necessary are they referring to an actual pub/abstract/poster or is the experience of doing research enough? Not all research yields results as Im sure many of us are all too familiar with.

Some fields have smart people who keep their numbers low which allows for good candidates and ample job prospects. When you have a competitive field, you look at people who offer more because everyone is smart with good grades, work ethic, etc. It's not just doing research for research's sake but that when two people come in with a high step 1, good grades, awesome letters from known people then maybe the thing that pushes one guy over is his 5 papers. It becomes an arms race between applicants. It would make sense for people to apply to just 15 or so of the places they want to go to. But if someone applies to 16, then other people are like hey he's getting an advantage and tell next year's people to apply to 17. This continues until you have people spending an extra year doing research with 8 pubs, 10 posters and applying to 80 programs. There's nothing that says that someone with 10 pubs will be a better resident than someone who hasn't been near a benchtop since organic chemistry lab.

It would be nice for people to be able to do the things that they want to do. It's really a shame.