research vs. clinical tracks

[chirurgino]

Hello,

I'm applying to OHNS residencies from an M.D.-Ph.D. program. I've heard conflicting advice from attendings/residents regarding the research vs. clinical tracks for M.D.-Ph.D.s. On the one hand, some say that programs try to funnel M.D.-Ph.D.s into a research track because they already have research experience and would (in theory at least) be able to get off the ground quickly. On the other hand, others say that the research track isn't appropriate for M.D.-Ph.Ds because they've already spent time doing research, and that the research track is meant for non-Ph.D. residents who are want to do some more in-depth research and stay in academics (I've even heard that at some programs, M.D.-Ph.D.s are ineligible for research track funding because they're already received money from the NIH).

I'm interested in staying in academics and so I wouldn't mind putting in the extra 2 years to learn a new experimental system...although I guess I could also do that during a fellowship, which might make more sense than taking the 2 years off in the middle of residency (??).

Would anybody mind sharing an opinion on this? More specifically, has anyone heard of residents being ranked to match at a given program either for one track or the other? That could complicate matters as I would have to "guess" whether I'd be slotted for one track or the other as outlined above.

Thanks for your help.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[neutropeniaboy]

To the best of my knowledge, most programs do not have a separate track for research. In other words, most programs are 5 years in length with some time (protected or otherwise) for research during those 5 years.

Hmmm...in retrospect, I answered before really reading your post. I'm not sure my answer is helpful at all...damn.

Hello,

I'm applying to OHNS residencies from an M.D.-Ph.D. program. I've heard conflicting advice from attendings/residents regarding the research vs. clinical tracks for M.D.-Ph.D.s. On the one hand, some say that programs try to funnel M.D.-Ph.D.s into a research track because they already have research experience and would (in theory at least) be able to get off the ground quickly. On the other hand, others say that the research track isn't appropriate for M.D.-Ph.Ds because they've already spent time doing research, and that the research track is meant for non-Ph.D. residents who are want to do some more in-depth research and stay in academics (I've even heard that at some programs, M.D.-Ph.D.s are ineligible for research track funding because they're already received money from the NIH).

I'm interested in staying in academics and so I wouldn't mind putting the extra 2 years to learn a new experimental system...although I guess I could also do that during a fellowship, which might make more sense than taking the 2 years off in the middle of residency (??).

Would anybody mind sharing an opinion on this? More specifically, has anyone heard of residents being ranked to match at a given program either for one track or the other? That could complicate matters as I would have to "guess" whether I'd be slotted for one track or the other as outlined above.

Thanks for your help.

 

[resxn]

I don't think you were too far off, Neutropenia, because as far as my school was involved, there was no research "tract." We had 3 months of protected time for research but that's it.

I know of a couple of programs that were 6 years at least for one or two residents with a year of research thrown in. I don't know if they still exist as of this incoming class, but from what I understood, UCSD, UTSMB, and Iowa all had offered that option. I would think a MD/PhD would have an advantage getting into those 6 year programs if they're still around. The Throat might know, having gone to one of the bigger programs.

However, I don't think at a regular institution without one of those specialized programs, an incoming resident is pushed toward one "tract" or other. The RRC has strict requirements for training and one of the metrics they use is to make sure that all residents in a given year have near-equivalent operative experience. If one guy was way low compared to everyone else because admin was pushing him more into the lab, the program could get dinged.

Not sure if that adds anything, but I like to hear myself type.

 

[TheThroat]

Iowa has two tracks: a five year track and a seven year track that is the same as the 5 year but has two years of research after the intern year.

I am not sure of exactly what your question is, but at Iowa, you can rank both of the tracks.

My opinion of the research track at Iowa is that it prepares you very well to be a clinical scientist. Some residents have even gotten grants (K08) during their residency through the research that they started during their research years.

Both tracks also have protected time for research in our 3rd and 4th years (20 weeks total).

 

[Leforte]

I went through the same thought process a few years ago. I chose to not rank 6/7 year programs for the following reasons:

1) Most research years are after internship, before the OTO years - you'd have little exposure to the field and it'd be difficult to decide on what area you'd eventually like to focus your research - Research in H&N CA is great, but doesn't help establish yourself if you later decide on neuro-otology.
2) You already know how to conduct research - the additional years in the lab are great for generating papers, but you can do this without the extra years. Get involved in something as an intern and go hard during your protected research months.
3) If you are interested in a K08 - you can get it without the extra-time involved.
4) I was getting to damn old

If you want the research time - great. But remember that the vast majority of academics did 5 years programs and have made very successful careers.

 

[CRAZYTERP]

I wanted to ask if you guys know the oto programs that are 6/7 years with dedicated research built in? I know of UNC (6), UIowa (7) and WashU (7) but wanted to know if any other programs offer it or will allow residents to pursue a year of research. I realize losing a resident to research for a year puts a huge strain on the resident class but wanted to know if some programs have figured out ways around it.

Thanks mucho,

terp

 

[TheThroat]

I wanted to ask if you guys know the oto programs that are 6/7 years with dedicated research built in? I know of UNC (6), UIowa (7) and WashU (7) but wanted to know if any other programs offer it or will allow residents to pursue a year of research. I realize losing a resident to research for a year puts a huge strain on the resident class but wanted to know if some programs have figured out ways around it.

Thanks mucho,

terp

I know that Hopkins has a research track and am pretty sure that Michigan also have a year or two of research, as well.

If you have two tracks, then you are never "down a resident." For example:

I started my intern year with two "research" oto residents, but after my intern year, they did research for two years. I started my second year with the guys that had done their intern year two years before me and were just finishing their research years. In my fourth year, the guys that I had done my intern year with finished their research and started their second year. Confused yet?

 

[Indiana Jones]

I am a foreign medical graduate applying this year to the ENT MATCH. I graduated on 2001 and have been doing research in the States ever since. To me, the 5 year ENT programs would be more appealing since I have done 5 years of research. I will list the 7 year ENT residency programs that have 5 years of ENTplus 2 years of NIH funded research:

Baylor College of Medicine (started last year 2005)
Johns Hopkins
University of North Carolina
University of Michigan- Ann Arbor
Iowa
UCLA
Universtiy of Washington (Seattle)

Those are the ones I know of. Be sure to know that if you are already an MD, PHD , you are at a disadvantage for being accepted into a 7 year spot. I could think of two reasons why this is the case: 1) The 7 year track is made for people who have not done much of research time and would still want to be in the academics once they are done with their training and 2) the 2 years of research are NIH funded and I have been told that NIH will not fund a person who has already had his PhD for this position.

Best of luck,

 

[CRAZYTERP]

Thanks IJ,

I have been looking for this list for a while. Appreciate your comments.

CT

 

[Indiana Jones]

I remembered one more program that offers the 5 plus 2 year spot. It is at Washington University in Saint Louis. Best of luck to you.