research

[drstrangelove]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Is it better to have residency-specific research for a specific residency?

It can't be that big of a deal, considering noone figures out what they want to do until 3rd year?

 

[doc05]

it is better to have specialty-specific research if at all possible. especially in competitive fields like ortho, derm, etc.

 

[drstrangelove]

is non-related research almost the same as no research?

 

[johnny_blaze]

Non-related research is better than none at all. But specialty specific research is obviously better than non-related research… it can help shows interest and experience in the field your applying for, like doing elective placements in it, ect.

 

[ptolemy]

is non-related research almost the same as no research?

I think it helps to have (or try to) an idea of what you want to go into when you try to do research. non-related research really doesn't help much (IMHO). It might help show that you like research, but if you don't like it, don't kill yourself for a summer trying to get a project done. do something you like in research or if you don't like it, do something you like that may be medically related(could be loosely).

 

[drstrangelove]

If you don't figure out what you want to specialize in until 3rd year, is there opportunity for pursuing related research then?

 

[tigershark]

Having significant, meaningful research in any field is far better than "checking the box" type research in your residency-specific field.

For research to be advantagous to your application you really need to show that you can plan, conduct, analyze and write up a research project. First-author manuscripts in any field put you head and shoulders over 99% of applicants. Nobody expects you to be innovating the field you are applying too, showing a dedication to academic medicine is enough (obviously though it is even better if your publication is in the field you are applying too, not as much as you might think though.)

Case reports, posters, presentations etc. are nice, but they really just serve to show your interest in a field, they are not in the same league as a first author manuscript.

 

[drstrangelove]

So, basically, get a first author manuscript the summer between 1st and 2nd year. It's the only time you'll have enough time to do so and it's fairly oustanding, even if it ends up in a non-related field.

How helpful is a first author manuscript of a chart review, retrospective study, policy whitepaper, or public health/health outcomes research versus a more basic science?

 

[tigershark]

You're not gonna have time to get a first-author basic science manuscript between first and second year. You'll have to stick with it in your free time during 2nd and 3rd year.

Basic science papers > clinical papers, by a long shot. The standard of publication for basic science is much higher than for clinical research.

 

[Snuka]

You're not gonna have time to get a first-author basic science manuscript between first and second year. You'll have to stick with it in your free time during 2nd and 3rd year.

Basic science papers > clinical papers, by a long shot. The standard of publication for basic science is much higher than for clinical research.

I completely agree w/ this. I went to graduate school b/f medical school and got my degree in a basic science. There is no way that a summer research position will afford you enough time to get a meaningful manuscript submitted to a halfway decent journal. The entire process from putting together the manuscript to submission to revision to publication is almost a year long process, if you're submitting to a respected tier 1 journal (JBC, JCI, etc). To be a 1st author the idea and work has to be completely yours. You're talking a minimum of 4-5 figures. Some people just about have that many publishable figures from their thesis work.

 

[drstrangelove]

So if you want to do research, you can start the summer after first year but you really need to keep doing it throughout 2nd and 3rd year.

This begs the question: is doing one summer of research even worth doing?

 

[Snuka]

So if you want to do research, you can start the summer after first year but you really need to keep doing it throughout 2nd and 3rd year.

This begs the question: is doing one summer of research even worth doing?

Depends on what you want to go into. If you plan on continuing some type of basic science or clinical research after you graduate, then you should pursue it. If you just want to have something else to add to your CV, then research is better option than working a meaningless job over the summer. Most basic science researchers know that 2-3 months isn't enough time to get much accomplished and aren't expecting you to have a groundbreaking publication.

 

[TheRussian]

If you don't figure out what you want to specialize in until 3rd year, is there opportunity for pursuing related research then?

I don't know how flexible your school is about this sort of thing but at my school people that want to go into very competitive specialties often will split their fourth year and do research to improve their application. So if you figure out what you want to do 3rd year then there is still time.

As for being first author in basic science... I sincerly doubt that even half of the people applying for competitive specialties have first authored a paper. The Neurology residency director said that first author is not necessary and that even case studies would put you in a good position. Also straight from the mouth of our director of surgery residency "I am looking for clinical research. I don't care if you can mix a protein in a lab. I want someone that has done relevant research."

 

[drstrangelove]

I don't know how flexible your school is about this sort of thing but at my school people that want to go into very competitive specialties often will split their fourth year and do research to improve their application. So if you figure out what you want to do 3rd year then there is still time.

As for being first author in basic science... I sincerly doubt that even half of the people applying for competitive specialties have first authored a paper. The Neurology residency director said that first author is not necessary and that even case studies would put you in a good position. Also straight from the mouth of our director of surgery residency "I am looking for clinical research. I don't care if you can mix a protein in a lab. I want someone that has done relevant research."

Is 4th year too late to do research before for the match/app/interview process? When does this occur?

When would you author a case report? Any time during 3rd year?

Which surgery director is that? It's curious that everyone else seems to say the opposite. Is that view representative nationally?

 

[TheRussian]

Is 4th year too late to do research before for the match/app/interview process? When does this occur?

When would you author a case report? Any time during 3rd year?

Which surgery director is that? It's curious that everyone else seems to say the opposite. Is that view representative nationally?

4th year is probably too late to do research, interviewing for residencies starts in like september of your 4th year which means you should do your applications over the summer.

As for case reports, I don't know for sure but I would assume it would be when you see interesting cases during your rotations. When else would you have that opportunity.

I don't want to mention his name but suffice to say he is one of the best vascular surgeons in the country.