Research quantity!

[odddodo]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm currently a junior, and I started research at the beginning of last summer. It seems that many people are worrying about GPA or MCATs here, but what I'm most concerned about is the quantity of research I have (or lack thereof). I know that quality is definitely more important than quantity; however, I have heard from numerous places that the average matriculant has about 1.5-2.5 years of research by application time. At my rate, I'd only have about one year at most, and it would be all in the same lab. In terms of publications, I think I can manage perhaps one with some hard work this semester.

My two concerns are these:
1. Is this lack of years of research going to make a noticeable difference in the outcome of my application?

2. How do you deal with the 5-7 recommendation letters necessary for an MD/PhD when you've only worked in one or two labs at most?

Actually, let me add another issue:
I'm really struggling between deciding between just an MD or an MD/PhD application. After some recent shadowing, I've found that I really enjoy the patient interaction aspect, and I'm not sure I want to spend the rest of my life in a job without that (I've heard that doing both clinical practice and research can get overwhelming). However, I enjoy research, too, and I don't want to just practice for my entire life without helping make some advancements in the field of medical research. How did you guys decide to go the way you did?

 

[deleted120037]

2. How do you deal with the 5-7 recommendation letters necessary for an MD/PhD when you've only worked in one or two labs at most?

Actually...most of the schools I applied to only required 3-4 letters. One from your PI(or each of your PI's if you've worked in more than one lab) talking about your research experience and "potential as a physician-scientist" and then a few addressing your potential for the clinical/med school aspects.

 

[Circumflex]

I would not worry too much about the time aspect. They just want to make sure that you know what you are getting into - it is a big commitment. I would only go for the MSTP if you are absolutely sure that you know it is what you want to do.

There are many MDs that do excellent basic science and translational research. If you decide that you want to do basic science research later, there are many avenues to choose from. There are fast-track residencies that incorporate residency + fellowship + post-doctoral research experience. Most clinicians that do basic science research are specialists for several reasons (relevance to research, limited clinical duties, etc.). You can also take a year off in medical school (typically after 2nd year) and work in a lab or go to the NIH to work in a lab.

I would not change the path I took - I loved my PhD years, but I saw some students who were so miserable that they dropped out in the middle to go back to med school and had to pay back their first 2 years.

Just be sure that the MSTP is right for you. There are many other paths to becoming a physician-scientist. Good luck.

 

[Neuronix]

My two concerns are these:
1. Is this lack of years of research going to make a noticeable difference in the outcome of my application?

Yeah, it will. You'll have difficulty with the top MD/PhD programs for this reason. With good everything else you still stand a decent chance to make it into MSTP. I took a year off just to get more research experience because I started the summer before Junior year.

Well, it wasn't entirely a year in lab. I did alot of skiing and went to Europe 😉

2. How do you deal with the 5-7 recommendation letters necessary for an MD/PhD when you've only worked in one or two labs at most?

It's the usual recommendation packet for MD (3+ letters) and your research letters that sum up to that many. If you've only worked in one or two labs, you can send those letters.

I'm really struggling between deciding between just an MD or an MD/PhD application. After some recent shadowing, I've found that I really enjoy the patient interaction aspect, and I'm not sure I want to spend the rest of my life in a job without that (I've heard that doing both clinical practice and research can get overwhelming). However, I enjoy research, too, and I don't want to just practice for my entire life without helping make some advancements in the field of medical research. How did you guys decide to go the way you did?

Different people have different opinions on this. Many people think that if you're committed to basic science research now you should go to a MD/PhD program. If you're not sure about basic science research, you should get an MD. The thing is you can still do plenty of research with your MD degree, basic, clinical, etc... The MD/PhD is supposed to set people up to do mostly basic science research, the only kind you supposedly "need" a PhD for. Honestly, what percentage of MD/PhDs end up spending most of their time doing research? My guess is less than 1/3, but there's no solid data on this I'm aware of. This worries alot of people because alot of money is being spent to turn us into physician-scientists and not just physicians.

I'm not sure there is a good way to know you want to do this. I can understand the last paragraph's argument because these days there are alot of things pulling people away from research. First, clinical jobs offer higher salaries. In many cases, much higher salaries and more vacation time too. Second, the time training can wear on people eventually. Third, research jobs now have little to no job security. Everything rests on your ability to get grants. The funding rates on the big, career defining grants are typically less than 10% these days. It's a pretty extreme situation right now, but things are not looking much better in the future. In medicine, there are mechanisms in place to make sure doctors and in particular specialists are kept restricted and this helps give us that salary and security. There's no such protection in research, so there's ALOT of competition. So, if you're not a research zealot now, are you going to fall off the track eventually? Or does that not matter?

I decided to go this way because I wanted to know everything about medicine and science. I can't give a better explanation than that. Basically I really like learning and I didn't think I'd be happy just learning about medicine or science. I hoped then and I hope now that knowledge of the two will help me do things that someone trained for either one can't do. Of course, I didn't say that in my interviews. I told them how great basic science research was and about that whole 90/10 split thing and you know... All that stuff they want to hear 😉 It's impossible to really know what you want to do 15 years from now, so you might as well pick something now, set your heart on it, and learn something.

Oh and BTW, if you drop the PhD in any MSTP you do not owe payback for the first two years of med school. Circumflex must have either gone to a non-MSTP MD/PhD program or have completed his program years ago...