Schools that most value research experience

[Bovary]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I've heard of certain schools, typically highly ranked programs, that especially value research. Stanford and Harvard, for example (Stanford asks about publications in their secondary; Harvard explicitly wants to see a LOR from every PI you've had).

What other schools are known for placing exceptional weight on the research portion of applicants' resumes?

More importantly, how do we know? I've seen a lot of "School XYZ loves to see research because they're a research powerhouse in US News", but this isn't convincing enough. Are there admissions pages that explicitly outline the importance of research?

In general I see a lot of talk, but too little evidence, to support the (believable) argument that undergrad publications significantly help admissions to certain schools.

 

[NickNaylor]

It definitely helps if you want to go to a school that has an emphasis on research as you said. The way to figure this out is to simply look at how many grant dollars they bring in each year. I'm pretty sure this is available in the USNWR data. More dollars = more research = more emphasis. That doesn't mean that those strong research programs only want future researchers, but that is their tradition, and it's important to be aware of that.

I think it's still helpful at other schools because it demonstrates some things about yourself that are appealing as a future physician, particularly if you had the opportunity to engage in relatively independent research. It demonstrates that you have the ability to ask a scientific question, develop a plan to answer that question, obtain data, and interpret it in a scientific way. These are all skills that have utility as a clinician: you have to be able to identify your potential problem, gather data, and interpret it correctly in order to come up with a reasonable treatment plan for your patient.

The AAMC gathers data on how many research projects the average applicant and matriculant have. You should check that out if you want data. Just keep in mind that "research activities" is a pretty broad term which includes everything from abstracts and posters to first author publications.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[aspirantmed]

Also, the MSAR gives you the percent of accepted students who have been engaged in scholarly research. Not a great measure because it doesn't capture depth of involvement, but worth noting anyway.

 

[Catalystik]

Also, the MSAR gives you the percent of accepted students who have been engaged in scholarly research. Not a great measure because it doesn't capture depth of involvement, but worth noting anyway.

The MSAR is reporting the number of acceptees that listed something in the Research/Lab category. It doesn't include those used the Employment category to discuss their paid research. It does include those who washed glassware in a lab, fed rats, or ran gels and were otherwise uninvolved in the research process. But I agree, it's worth noting anyway.

 

[phunky]

The MSAR is reporting the number of acceptees that listed something in the Research/Lab category. It doesn't include those used the Employment category to discuss their paid research. It does include those who washed glassware in a lab, fed rats, or ran gels and were otherwise uninvolved in the research process. But I agree, it's worth noting anyway.

Seems like even at the lower ranked MD schools, the % doing research is at least in the high 80s, which I found surprising.

 

[Catalystik]

Last time I looked (in my admittedly older paper copy of the MSAR) there were some schools in the mid-40s.

 

[Bovary]

The MSAR is reporting the number of acceptees that listed something in the Research/Lab category. It doesn't include those used the Employment category to discuss their paid research. It does include those who washed glassware in a lab, fed rats, or ran gels and were otherwise uninvolved in the research process. But I agree, it's worth noting anyway.

If all my research experience is via paid summer internships, should I label it as work? Will it matter then that nothing is labeled as purely research?

 

[Catalystik]

If all my research experience is via paid summer internships, should I label it as work? Will it matter then that nothing is labeled as purely research?

IMO, you should designate it as Research (as you certainly don't want your involvement to be missed by a skimmer). Your title can include the word Internship, and the stipend you received could be included in the narrative or listed in an Awards space if it was competitive.

It is your description of the activity that makes clear what about the Experience makes you the type of candidate a given school is looking for. But it might make it easier for non-adcomm staffers to appreciate what you've been involved in if you choose the more relevant designation.

 

[Ismet]

Pitt highly values research. 94% of the class of 2017 had research experience. We have a required longitudinal scholarly research project, so it's kind of important to have some experience in research before committing to a school where you will be required to conduct research. While there are definitely people who get in here without research (~6% of the student body), those people typically have something else that makes up for it.

As for your summer internships, definitely list those as research.

 

[Espadaleader]

You should proceed with the understanding that every school requires

research.