switching to md/phd?

[vanillabear55]

---

Members do not see this ad.

HI.

Pending my future mcat scores, I might be competitive for MD-PhD programs (lol I know...just an mcat score).

but hear me out! - I've been a research assistant at a top 20 medical school the last ~6 months and am enjoying the type of clinical research I do (psychiatric), nothing overly bio/chem intensive. Co-author on several submitted manuscripts/soon to be submitted. I know I can do research without the -PhD part in the future. I just only started considering this option in the last week, if I wind up being remotely competitive, so I'm just trying to learn as much as I can in the next 2 months.

So this this brings me to my questions- what is different about the MD-PhD process?
I have several LORs on file at my college, will they need to be updated?
Can I apply to half MD/half MD-PhD or whatever combo I want?
What would you say the typical mcat for someone accepted into this type of thing?
What programs have -PhD parts that are public health/bioethics/etc. focused? ( I found a list on the internet, but it doesn't seem too accurate, so I guess what I'm asking is which programs actually do this.)

I've been trying to read anything that I could get my hands on today, but a lot of threads seem outdated...any advice is greatly appreciated!

 

[Member011]

See the stickies in the Physician Scientists forum: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/forums/physician-scientists.32/ for some of the answers you're looking for. Your best bet for a list of schools is unfortunately going to be actually checking each school's website to be certain they have not only an MD/PhD program in your field, but also several investigators you are interested in.

 

[Prion13]

Are you planning to apply this year? Be aware that you really need at least two solid years of research (ideally bench research) to be competitive at any MD/PhD program (and you would be competing against people with much, much more), and there are awfully few slots for PhDs in public health areas (even at the few schools that allow you to pursue one programs aim to only have one or two or so). Looking into schools that offer MD/masters is a good alternative if you want to get more in depth experience in clinical research beyond what you would get in medical school alone. Most will pay for a fifth year to pursue one if you want, and a few highly competitive ones will even pay for your medical school like a MD/PhD program.

 

[mcloaf]

If you apply MD/PhD with 6 months of clinical research they may be too busy laughing to remember to email your rejection. Do you have more experience than you've listed here?

 

[vanillabear55]

See the stickies in the Physician Scientists forum: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/forums/physician-scientists.32/ for some of the answers you're looking for. Your best bet for a list of schools is unfortunately going to be actually checking each school's website to be certain they have not only an MD/PhD program in your field, but also several investigators you are interested in.

Thanks!

Are you planning to apply this year? Be aware that you really need at least two solid years of research (ideally bench research) to be competitive at any MD/PhD program (and you would be competing against people with much, much more), and there are awfully few slots for PhDs in public health areas (even at the few schools that allow you to pursue one programs aim to only have one or two or so). Looking into schools that offer MD/masters is a good alternative if you want to get more in depth experience in clinical research beyond what you would get in medical school alone. Most will pay for a fifth year to pursue one if you want, and a few highly competitive ones will even pay for your medical school like a MD/PhD program.

Interesting- I'll look into the MD/masters, did you have any specific programs in mind?
I really don't want to pursue bench research, which is why I was looking more into the area of public health.
yes, I am planning on applying this year.

If you apply MD/PhD with 6 months of clinical research they may be too busy laughing to remember to email your rejection. Do you have more experience than you've listed here?

Haha, I do, (but its not really clinical/bench)- I've been doing independent psychology research through my college for over 2 years now, that has continued since I've graduated (started it for my thesis). Still have RAs collecting more data but my adviser and I are aiming to submit a manuscript sometime this summer.

 

[SN12357]

HI.

Pending my future mcat scores, I might be competitive for MD-PhD programs (lol I know...just an mcat score).

but hear me out! - I've been a research assistant at a top 20 medical school the last ~6 months and am enjoying the type of clinical research I do (psychiatric), nothing overly bio/chem intensive. Co-author on several submitted manuscripts/soon to be submitted. I know I can do research without the -PhD part in the future. I just only started considering this option in the last week, if I wind up being remotely competitive, so I'm just trying to learn as much as I can in the next 2 months.

So this this brings me to my questions- what is different about the MD-PhD process?
I have several LORs on file at my college, will they need to be updated?
Can I apply to half MD/half MD-PhD or whatever combo I want?
What would you say the typical mcat for someone accepted into this type of thing?
What programs have -PhD parts that are public health/bioethics/etc. focused? ( I found a list on the internet, but it doesn't seem too accurate, so I guess what I'm asking is which programs actually do this.)

I've been trying to read anything that I could get my hands on today, but a lot of threads seem outdated...any advice is greatly appreciated!

If you're doing clinical research, you like clinical research, and you see yourself doing clinical research in the future you probably shouldn't bother with MD-PhD. Just go straight MD and pick up a masters along the way if you feel like it.

Remember that MD-PhD, despite the fact tuition is covered, is not actually a 'deal' given the number of years you lose of a doctor's full salary.

If your main interest is bench research then sure, consider MD-PhD, but what you've described as your research experience would not make you a great candidate.

 

[vanillabear55]

If you're doing clinical research, you like clinical research, and you see yourself doing clinical research in the future you probably shouldn't bother with MD-PhD. Just go straight MD and pick up a masters along the way if you feel like it.

Remember that MD-PhD, despite the fact tuition is covered, is not actually a 'deal' given the number of years you lose of a doctor's full salary.

If your main interest is bench research then sure, consider MD-PhD, but what you've described as your research experience would not make you a great candidate.

Even if I applied to programs where the -PhD part wasn't focused in bench research? I wasn't entertaining the idea of aiming for places where they don't have a -PhD option in areas like bioethics, clinical investigation, public health, etc.

The straight MD route and possible masters along the way/eventually was my original plan, just checking my options. Thanks!

 

[SN12357]

Even if I applied to programs where the -PhD part wasn't focused in bench research? I wasn't entertaining the idea of aiming for places where they don't have a -PhD option in areas like bioethics, clinical investigation, public health, etc.

The straight MD route and possible masters along the way/eventually was my original plan, just checking my options. Thanks!

Those programs are very few and far between and often have tenuous funding. If you find one you like, go for it, but they can't be your only (or main) plan. If you go for them you would still need to apply straight MD to a bunch of places.

 

[Keladry]

Have you thought about MD/MPH programs? They tend to have a greater focus on public health, and would probably be easier than MD/PhD.

 

[Patros]

First, some answers to your questions:
1) You will certainly need LORs for the type of graduate research you are pursuing. So that would be 2 or more letters from your PI or research supervisors.
2) I think it is smart to apply to both MD/PhD and MD. I applied to 9 and 7 respectively, and got acceptances to both. It is good to have a safety net, just in case you misjudged your chances at MD/PhD. Technically many schools forward your application for MD-only consideration, but your forwarded application is almost certainly doomed for failure, in my experience.
3) Average MCAT for accepted MD/PhD applicants is ~35. Not sure if there is a difference for social science PhDs, but many programs expect the GRE if you're not going to biomedical research.
4) I believe most programs, MSTPs included, will consider a social science or humanities applicant on a case-by-case basis. Some programs that actually encourage non-science research are Harvard (yeah right), U-Illinois Urbana-Champaign (all kinds of humanities), and U-Rochester (epidemiology). Albert Einstein has a PhD in "clinical investigation" which I am sure is compatible with psychiatry.

All that being said, I do not think MD/PhD is right for you. You need to be certain that writing grants and running a lab are something you want to do for the rest of your career. Medical school is more than sufficient for clinical research, as most MD students get involved in some kind of number-crunching or cohort studies hosted by their medical schools. There are also various external fellowships by the NIH, HHMI, Doris Duke, and so on, that will allow you to do clinical research. Also note that almost all academic physicians do clinical research, so you certainly don't need the PhD for that (don't even need a MS honestly).

You might see some MD/PhD graduates matching into neurology and psychiatry, but almost all of these folks did neurobiology or electrophysiology research, which is not the same as what you are interested in.

 

[vanillabear55]

First, some answers to your questions:
1) You will certainly need LORs for the type of graduate research you are pursuing. So that would be 2 or more letters from your PI or research supervisors.
2) I think it is smart to apply to both MD/PhD and MD. I applied to 9 and 7 respectively, and got acceptances to both. It is good to have a safety net, just in case you misjudged your chances at MD/PhD. Technically many schools forward your application for MD-only consideration, but your forwarded application is almost certainly doomed for failure, in my experience.
3) Average MCAT for accepted MD/PhD applicants is ~35. Not sure if there is a difference for social science PhDs, but many programs expect the GRE if you're not going to biomedical research.
4) I believe most programs, MSTPs included, will consider a social science or humanities applicant on a case-by-case basis. Some programs that actually encourage non-science research are Harvard (yeah right), U-Illinois Urbana-Champaign (all kinds of humanities), and U-Rochester (epidemiology). Albert Einstein has a PhD in "clinical investigation" which I am sure is compatible with psychiatry.

All that being said, I do not think MD/PhD is right for you. You need to be certain that writing grants and running a lab are something you want to do for the rest of your career. Medical school is more than sufficient for clinical research, as most MD students get involved in some kind of number-crunching or cohort studies hosted by their medical schools. There are also various external fellowships by the NIH, HHMI, Doris Duke, and so on, that will allow you to do clinical research. Also note that almost all academic physicians do clinical research, so you certainly don't need the PhD for that (don't even need a MS honestly).

You might see some MD/PhD graduates matching into neurology and psychiatry, but almost all of these folks did neurobiology or electrophysiology research, which is not the same as what you are interested in.

Do you mind me asking your stats/research experience at the time you applied?

Yeah, the more I've thought about this, the less I think it is for me. Will have a look at U-Rochester though. Do MD-PhD's exclusively wind up in academia? I am not certain I want to write grants and run a lab, but I could see myself wanting to do clinical work mainly and research on the side.

Thanks again.

 

[La Presse]

I think the ratio of responsibilities for an md phd is 80 percent research and 20 percent clinical. I could be wrong though.

An outstanding md phd candidate will have papers, talks at conferences and meetings, research over several summers and during the school year, topped off with letters from the people you've worked with.

Edit - You'll also need to meet the standard MD requirements as well. It is worth noting that the average for MSTP - MD/PhD matriculants is around a 35.

 

[quebaldy]

Yeah, the more I've thought about this, the less I think it is for me. Will have a look at U-Rochester though. Do MD-PhD's exclusively wind up in academia? I am not certain I want to write grants and run a lab, but I could see myself wanting to do clinical work mainly and research on the side.
Thanks again.

The goal of MD-PhD training is to prepare graduates for academic positions where they will occupy ~80% of their time with research responsibilities, i.e. running a lab. In reality, a fairly significant portion of MD-PhD graduates end up pursuing careers in mostly clinical medicine for a variety of personal/professional reasons. From what I've read, many of those that end up in majority clinical practice may feel that their PhD was a waste of time, but YMMV. Many if not most of the MD-PhD's I've known that stuck with research eventually gave up on maintaining a clinical practice.

With very few exceptions, MD-PhD students are focused on basic science research and pursue PhD's in basic science subjects. If you are only interested in clinical research and don't plan on running a lab then I wholeheartedly recommend just pursuing an MD. Also, if you only have clinical research experience, you'd have very poor luck with the MD-PhD application process anyway (barring you apply for a social science MD-PhD program, but those are few and far between and idk how they work specifically).

Good luck in making your decision!

 

[vanillabear55]

The goal of MD-PhD training is to prepare graduates for academic positions where they will occupy ~80% of their time with research responsibilities, i.e. running a lab. In reality, a fairly significant portion of MD-PhD graduates end up pursuing careers in mostly clinical medicine for a variety of personal/professional reasons. From what I've read, many of those that end up in majority clinical practice may feel that their PhD was a waste of time, but YMMV. Many if not most of the MD-PhD's I've known that stuck with research eventually gave up on maintaining a clinical practice.

With very few exceptions, MD-PhD students are focused on basic science research and pursue PhD's in basic science subjects. If you are only interested in clinical research and don't plan on running a lab then I wholeheartedly recommend just pursuing an MD. Also, if you only have clinical research experience, you'd have very poor luck with the MD-PhD application process anyway (barring you apply for a social science MD-PhD program, but those are few and far between and idk how they work specifically).

Good luck in making your decision!

Since it's been mentioned twice, just out of curiosity, where is the 80% estimate coming from??

That's pretty much the exact opposite ratio I'm aiming for one day though haha.

 

[Reckoner]

Since it's been mentioned twice, just out of curiosity, where is the 80% estimate coming from??

That's pretty much the exact opposite ratio I'm aiming for one day though haha.

Talk to a practicing physician scientist. 80-20 is typically the split they settle on if they want to make it as a scientist. In other words, four days per week in lab, one day in clinic. Though generally these people are doing basic science.

 

[SN12357]

Talk to a practicing physician scientist. 80-20 is typically the split they settle on if they want to make it as a scientist. In other words, four days per week in lab, one day in clinic. Though generally these people are doing basic science.

Yes. If you want to make it as a successful academic researcher you have to spend most of your time on research activities. This includes both the actual science, writing up the science, and writing grants to pay for the science. Publish or perish is real. "Get grants or you won't have a job here anymore" is real. The funding environment is very, very difficult and competitive and so these research activities demand the majority of a clinician-researcher's time.

I worked in clinical research and the young faculty might do something more like 60/40 research/clinical for a while but if you want to climb the academic ladder your proportion of clinical time is going to steadily decrease.

 

[URHere]

A few general points:

1) There is very little benefit in obtaining a PhD to pursue clinical research. If you are interested in public health, you should look into MD/MPH programs which are generally 4 years of medical school + 1 year of MPH training.

2) If you are interested in a social science PhD, be aware that relatively few schools offer them, and the ones that do may require you to take the GRE and may not cover your tuition/living expenses the same way that most natural science MD/PhD programs will. These programs can be quite competitive simply because there are so few of them. Do your research carefully.

3) As for time distribution as a practicing MD/PhD - the 80/20 figure is generally quoted because if you plan to be the PI of a functioning research lab, you will need to spend the majority of your time in that role to keep up with the literature, write grants/papers, mentor students, serve on study sections, etc. Some academic positions do offer 50/50 commitments, but everyone I have talked to in this situation has found it very difficult to secure grants and keep labs running with so little protected research time. However, not all MD/PhD graduates take the 80/20 path. Some do full-time clinical work, other do full-time research, and some even end up in industry. Until you've gone through it, you really can't plan things out.

In summary…figure out how you want to spend the next 5-10 years of your life. Talk to MD/PhDs and MD/MPHs if you can and get some perspective on the things you're considering.

 

[Patros]

Since it's been mentioned twice, just out of curiosity, where is the 80% estimate coming from??

That's pretty much the exact opposite ratio I'm aiming for one day though haha.

You can't be an independent scientific researcher with the opposite ratio. Just imagine directing a research effort, in a lab or not, with just 1 day per week. It sounds like you much prefer clinical work, and want to do research on the side. Many, if not most, academic physicians (MD only) do clinical research or conduct clinical trials, as required by their medical institutions. At the same time, they spend vast majority of their time dealing with patients or training residents.

Other academic physicians write, publish and speak on bioethics and medical humanities. I've met ethicists who are MD only, some with additional master's degrees, and basically all have humanities backgrounds. These folks usually work in the centers for bioethics, palliative medicine, patient advocacy, etc etc that can be found in medical centers.

Honestly I have no idea what the use of a PhD in social science or humanities is, but I don't think it is a good idea. In short, don't bother with MD/PhD, it's not appropriate for you. If you are interested in public health, look to MD/MPH or global health fellowships. For clinical research, MD/MS or research fellowships. For bioethics, consider MD/MA. All of these options are 5 years instead of the 8 expected by MD/PhD programs. You could also skip the 1 year masters degree or fellowships and squeeze in internships during the summers.

 

[phunky]

Since it's been mentioned twice, just out of curiosity, where is the 80% estimate coming from??

That's pretty much the exact opposite ratio I'm aiming for one day though haha.

MD/PHD is not for you then. Even regular MDs who are professors at academic institutions often only spend ~20% of their time seeing patients (ex. my boss).