Schools with MD/Phd but not MSTP funded? what does it mean

[Nafis64]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Does anyone if the admission process works differently or if it considered less difficult or more difficult to get into programs that are not MSTP funded and what I mean by that is this:

http://www.aamc.org/students/considering/research/mdphd/faqtable.pdf

According to this table some schools are fully funded, but some are funded by MSTP which is the government. Any takes on those?

I am considering applying to some MD/PHd programs in epi/clinical science to "lower ranked" schools as my mcat/gpa are not hot, but I do have significant research and I am going for my MPH this year at JHU. I will be a reapplicant as I am currently on the waiting list this year for 3 MD programs (where I only interviewed).

 

[Build]

The MSTP just means that the school has won institutional grants from the NIH to support MD/PhD students. In reality, these grants often make up ~15% of total program expenditures. While it's a non-trivial amount of money, my program director gave me the impression that the +100 pg application and documentation process is treated more as a mark of prestige than anything else. Practically speaking, schools that are MSTP funded will typically be schools with more NIH funding in general and probably more difficult to get an acceptance at.

 

[nomogram3]

There are many good, fully funded programs that do not have MSTP funding. Many of these institutions have very well-funded PIs that are leaders in their respective fields. The same criteria for assessing MSTP programs apply, ie make sure that the institutions that you are applying to have the research that you are interested in. I just graduated from a non-MSTP program and was very happy in the lab where I finished my Ph.D. I will say though that the choices in terms of acceptable labs were more limited than say at the institution where I have matched for residency. It is very possible to achieve your career goals at a non-MSTP school, and I wouldn't advise anyone to overlook them.

 

[Ariodant]

Programs with MSTP status have to meet certain standards and comply with certain rules to get the grant. For example, MSTPs can't ask you to pay back tuition if you drop out/withdraw from the program, but non-NIH MD/PhD programs often make you pay back. MSTPs also usually pay a higher stipend (I think). Most MSTPs are well established within their institutions and somewhat well integrated, while MD/PhD programs are smaller, often less well organized, but can be more flexible towards your individual needs.

 

[echod]

PFor example, MSTPs can't ask you to pay back tuition if you drop out/withdraw from the program, but non-NIH MD/PhD programs often make you pay back.

When it comes to pay back policy for dropping out, do MSTP programs make a distinction between students that are funded by the MSTP grant versus ones that are internally funded?

 

[Ariodant]

Everyone is MSTP funded in my school, so I don't have the answer. If schools are allowed to treat internally funded spots differently then those students probably will sign a different contract? I find that a bit odd...

 

[Build]

Again, from listening to my program director talk about funding, my understanding is that at my program people will spend typically <2 yrs of their training funded by MSTP institutional grants and then get shuffled around. While I haven't been told this explicitly, my understanding is that how you get funded (i.e. institutional grants vs internal funding) has no effect on your ability to quit the program without paying back. I think the allocation of seats in the institutional grants is done without consideration of the individual's merit, but the fact that the program is accepting NIH MSTP seats means they have to treat all the MD/PhD students the same.

 

[MDPhDyeah]

I'm going to try and not repeat what others have said. bottom line: don't be fooled into thinking that non-mstp MD/PhD programs are substandard. Just make sure they are fully funded spots! (I cannot believe I wasted $x applying to Georgetown)
MSTPs simply tend to be the better and larger programs out there. One glaring example to me during interviews was UT Houston's program. If you're dead set on clinical cancer research, their affiliation with MD Anderson is probably nearly unmatched- part of the reason they are not an MSTP is that they are hell bound on allowing their students to complete 3 years of medical school before beginning graduate school work (MSTP's must currently do the 2-4-2 structure).
Wake Forest is apparently amazing for tissue engineering.... and I cannot imagine that Dartmouth's program is half bad either.