Utility of having medical students do research

[Redpancreas]

As I often do, I like to speculate on the state of medical education and how I think things should be done. Now fast forward to 2022, Step 1 is P/F. A lot of medical students are turning to research to differentiate themselves for residency whereas before the focus was classes, Step 1. I just fear there's going to be a lot of BS research pumped out. At the end of the day, the objective is to learn medicine, not find a way to wriggle onto a project where you collect a few variables in an Excel sheet.

Note this isn't targeted to medical students going through this. Ya'll do what you need to do. I'm just questioning the utility of focusing on research in a more general sense. There need to be more ways for one to demonstrate their aptitude for a field early on. Maybe there can be a standardized aptitude test for each specialty (edit just an idea, typing aloud)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Lawpy]

Med student research is generally completely useless with only MD/PhD students being the ones actually publishing good research. There are very few MD only students who truly generate good papers but that is extremely rare and usually involves connections with high powered PIs.

PDs should find other metrics or accept app caps

 

[Dr Meow]

Whilst I think expecting med students to do research isn't fair (mainly because there's not really a good system by which med students can do good research. It comes down to circumstance and connections), I do think MD/DO degree holders are hogging up very important real estate exclusive to them that phD's cannot touch- that is, control over medical research. Therefore, med students should be trained to do proper bench research.

Side note:
----------------------------------------------
This was a frustration I've had working years in a clinical research for 7 years before starting into med school. The phD's there are slaves to the MD's.
And the problem is that many of the phD's are just plain superior in every way when it comes to research.

YET! The MD PI's suppress their potential not out of spite, but simply from lack of foresight, understanding, and skill.
This is one of the reasons, I'm going the MD/DO route instead of phD. Many of the pHD's have voiced their concerns to me on top of having lived it. it's a really frustrating system that you have to see to believe. So, phD's are relegated to basic research and are bogged down by the "publish or die" system so they churn out a lot of useless publications, inhibited from doing deeper long term/risky research, and then are prevented from doing inarguably the most important research of all - applying their abilities in solving REAL problems.

Physicians control the practical/aspects of research that they in general are not adequately trained for.

Anyways this is a n=1 anecdote

 

[Hzreio]

As I often do, I like to speculate on the state of medical education and how I think things should be done. Now fast forward to 2022, Step 1 is P/F. A lot of medical students are turning to research to differentiate themselves for residency whereas before the focus was classes, Step 1. I just fear there's going to be a lot of BS research pumped out. At the end of the day, the objective is to learn medicine, not find a way to wriggle onto a project where you collect a few variables in an Excel sheet.

Note this isn't targeted to medical students going through this. Ya'll do what you need to do. I'm just questioning the utility of focusing on research in a more general sense. There need to be more ways for one to demonstrate their aptitude for a field early on. Maybe there can be a standardized aptitude test for each specialty.

I mean, you give additional mini step for competitive specialties that’s heavily weighted for apps and it’s the same story of who’s best at playing the test taking game rather than who’s best at playing the research game. Not sure how much utility that would serve for measuring aptitude. Basically whatever you say is important is what med students will game with the objective of getting the high score

Also, I disagree that BS research serves no purpose. First, it’s peer reviewed so it’s a valid point at the bare minimum. Second, learning how to do your own basic stats is important and may serve as a foundation for more substantial projects later on.

 

[Hzreio]

Med student research is generally completely useless with only MD/PhD students being the ones actually publishing good research. There are very few MD only students who truly generate good papers but that is extremely rare and usually involves connections with high powered PIs.

PDs should find other metrics or accept app caps

You mean decline free money?

 

[imidazzle92]

Depends on how you define "good research." Small retrospective studies/case reports/case series/systematic reviews that are novel can form the basis for other researchers to do larger prospective studies. Doesn't make sense for some med students to work on larger-scale studies that can take years to publish because it won't help them for ERAS (if residency application is a primary motive). Smaller projects teach them the scientific method and useful data collection/analysis and manuscript writing skills needed to succeed in the future.

If it's in a decent peer-reviewed journal, probably still good research IMO. I will say that I've seen a lot of BS (including my own) make it into conferences.

 

[Ho0v-man]

I think it’s very hard to demonstrate interest in a field that isn’t a core rotation without research. You simply get no exposure until right before apps go out otherwise. You can do an away/audition or whatever. But some fields are just genuinely so far removed from the typical that you can’t do much on those.

Now does that matter? Hard to say. Rads/path/anesthesia all seem to not care too much about research and we learn very little about these fields in medical school. And I really doubt you’d ever be able to prove someone is a better doctor than someone else because they can pump out papers.

I personally think the solution is to let people explore fields they’re interested in earlier. It’s insane that for the most competitive fields you’re supposed to be published several times over before you get to do a single rotation in the field. And if you don’t like it? Oh well, guess you just wasted the last three years of your life. Too bad you couldn’t have shifted gears over a year ago.

 

[Ho0v-man]

Tests specific to a field sounds like a worse idea imo. You go to med school to get the basic knowledge to succeed in intern year. It would be terrible to deal with the med student who is ignoring everything just to study for their ortho test. Not everyone makes it into these competitive fields. Does anyone want to train the IM/FM intern who’s been doing the bare minimum to get through med school and only knows anything about ENT on July 1st?

 

[Dr G Oogle]

As I often do, I like to speculate on the state of medical education and how I think things should be done. Now fast forward to 2022, Step 1 is P/F. A lot of medical students are turning to research to differentiate themselves for residency whereas before the focus was classes, Step 1. I just fear there's going to be a lot of BS research pumped out. At the end of the day, the objective is to learn medicine, not find a way to wriggle onto a project where you collect a few variables in an Excel sheet.

Note this isn't targeted to medical students going through this. Ya'll do what you need to do. I'm just questioning the utility of focusing on research in a more general sense. There need to be more ways for one to demonstrate their aptitude for a field early on. Maybe there can be a standardized aptitude test for each specialty.

I completely agree with you. To add to this the PIs that do do research are now inundated with emails from students with the basic sentiment of “I need a paper published by next week… can you deliver”.

And yes, most med student research is BS, even if it is peer reviewed. Peer review is not really quality control. The majority of peer reviewers are not scientists, they are just doctors, mostly in the community, who think that an odds ratio of 1.11 in a study of 1 million people is a significant result.

I think the residency machine needs to find a different metric to assess students, or there will be a lot of bad science being done

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

I completely agree with you. To add to this the PIs that do do research are now inundated with emails from students with the basic sentiment of “I need a paper published by next week… can you deliver”.

And yes, most med student research is BS, even if it is peer reviewed. Peer review is not really quality control. The majority of peer reviewers are not scientists, they are just doctors, mostly in the community, who think that an odds ratio of 1.11 in a study of 1 million people is a significant result.

I think the residency machine needs to find a different metric to assess students, or there will be a lot of bad science being done

Why not instead have the residency machine critically evaluate the research performed by their applicants and differentiate accordingly in their selection process ? If we want to root out "fluff" research and value more in depth productive research, then the residency programs themselves can do that in their evaluation process. Having doctors that understand how research is conducted, can tell good research from bad research, and can apply new research to their practice seems important to me. Let's reward more rigorous research instead of abandoning it as a metric.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

The step 1 should have never been made pass/fail, just like Ivy League schools shouldn’t have made the SAT/ACT “test optional”

Simple as that. It was a rash, covid-induced decision that ultimately makes medical education (and education more generally) less meritocratic

I interview for my undergrad and saw so many hyper-qualified people get rejected. I doubt I would have gotten in if applying now.

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

The step 1 should have never been made pass/fail, just like Ivy League schools shouldn’t have made the SAT/ACT “test optional”

Simple as that. It was a rash, covid-induced decision that ultimately makes medical education less meritocratic

I interview for my undergrad and saw so many hyper-qualified people get rejected. I doubt I would have gotten in if applying now.

Right, I get it. But Step 1 now is P/F and so if residencies are going to use research as a discriminator they ought to take it seriously. Not just a checkbox, but evaluate the rigor of the research effort and how much the student put into it. If residencies start doing that, the level of research will rise and schools will continue to build dedicated research time into their curriculums (e.g., Virginia Tech, Yale).

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Right, I get it. But Step 1 now is P/F and so if residencies are going to use research as a discriminator they out to take it seriously. Not just a checkbox, but evaluate the rigor of the research effort and how much the student put into it. If residencies start doing that, the level of research will rise and schools will continue to build dedicated research time into their curriculums (e.g., Virginia Tech, Yale).

Wouldn’t that require app-caps? Or maybe some composite research score that multiples volume by impact?

I think it would be difficult for most PD to sift through the research of all applicants.

 

[Lawpy]

I completely agree with you. To add to this the PIs that do do research are now inundated with emails from students with the basic sentiment of “I need a paper published by next week… can you deliver”.

I hate that mindset so much. Like what, students are acting like they are owed something when they offer pretty much little to no value for the team

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

Wouldn’t that require app-caps? Or maybe some composite research score that multiples volume by impact?

I think it would be difficult for most PD to sift through the research of all applicants.

I don't know. But if we want higher quality research then the residency evaluation / selection process is the place to demand it. If you want more quality / rigor then require it ---the schools and students will follow. Yale requires a research thesis / dissertation as part of their curriculum. Virginia Tech has a 3.5 year program with built-in research blocks and recruits heavily for prior research experience.

 

[Med Ed]

Simple as that. It was a rash, covid-induced decision that ultimately makes medical education (and education more generally) less meritocratic

No, it was the culmination of 15+ years of increasing dysfunction in the residency selection process. There is no logical reason why a 280 question exam, designed to evaluate a minimal level of medical knowledge and traditionally administered prior to starting clerkships, took on such an outsized role in shunting people into particular specialties.

In the meantime this new push to funnel more fluff into pay-to-play journals is just a knee-jerk response.

 

[Lawpy]

Wouldn’t that require app-caps? Or maybe some composite research score that multiples volume by impact?

I think it would be difficult for most PD to sift through the research of all applicants.

App caps are unavoidable

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

The step 1 should have never been made pass/fail...

Simple as that. It was a rash, covid-induced decision that ultimately makes medical education (and education more generally) less meritocratic

Step 1 decision to go P/F was announced prior to Covid. It had been debated and decided upon much earlier.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

No, it was the culmination of 15+ years of increasing dysfunction in the residency selection process. There is no logical reason why a 280 question exam, designed to evaluate a minimal level of medical knowledge and traditionally administered prior to starting clerkships, took on such an outsized role in shunting people into particular specialties.

In the meantime this new push to funnel more fluff into pay-to-play journals is just a knee-jerk response.

Step1 was probably just a proxy for work ethic and IQ (like almost all standardized tests). Presumably, these would be good traits for residents to have (moreso being hardworking)

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

App caps are unavoidable

Because ?

 

[Lawpy]

Because ?

Because the pressure of an ever worsening flood of applications will become unsustainable. Step 1 going P/F is the initial casualty. The same factors that drove that change will apply to Step 2 CK and cause that to go P/F. Research is actually linked closely to school prestige (because top schools are the ones with the most grant money to actually do good research). The system then gets saturated by the flood of applications that unless everyone is okay with school prestige being the driving factor on matching into a competitive specialty or program, app caps will end up being the necessary solution

 

[Ho0v-man]

The step 1 should have never been made pass/fail, just like Ivy League schools shouldn’t have made the SAT/ACT “test optional”

Simple as that. It was a rash, covid-induced decision that ultimately makes medical education (and education more generally) less meritocratic

I interview for my undergrad and saw so many hyper-qualified people get rejected. I doubt I would have gotten in if applying now.

Step 1 had to go P/F. We were just a few years out from 240 bring a 50th percentile score. I agree that there should have been something done to help stratify applicants before eliminating it. Now we’ll have med students complaining to their school when they stay past noon because it’s cutting into their step2 study time lmao.

If we use research quality, quantity, or both it still doesn’t matter. It all benefits top schools. As mentioned above, these schools get dedicated research time and the schools actually facilitate it for them. As a lowly DO, I was offered a two week “research elective” in 4th year. It had a ton of online modules and you were required to write a 5+ page paper and two 10+ page papers on what you learned in them. Anything else over the entire 4 years is on you. Who’s gonna have better opportunities?

 

[Hzreio]

I hate that mindset so much. Like what, students are acting like they are owed something when they offer pretty much little to no value for the team

Students aren’t owed anything, and I agree there are more political ways to ask the same question. But at the end of the day, students aren’t going to want to sink time into things with no return. Hate the game etc etc

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Why not instead have the residency machine critically evaluate the research performed by their applicants and differentiate accordingly in their selection process ? If we want to root out "fluff" research and value more in depth productive research, then the residency programs themselves can do that in their evaluation process. Having doctors that understand how research is conducted, can tell good research from bad research, and can apply new research to their practice seems important to me. Let's reward more rigorous research instead of abandoning it as a metric.

Most doctors cannot differentiate good from bad research, unless it’s glaringly obvious. It’s not just medical students churning out 💩, it’s coming from their mentors. Using citations and impact factors is not practical either. Only a small percentage of studies are immediately impactful and unless a student is a first author it’s unlikely they had a very meaningful contribution

 

[GoSpursGo]

. Maybe there can be a standardized aptitude test for each specialty.

This does exist. It’s the shelf exam at the end of your core rotation and unless your school is P/F in clinicals, it presumably plays into your rotation grade. If your school IS P/F in clinical or doesn’t factor that score into your grade then that’s a problem with your school.

None of the potential systems are perfect. the fundamental problem which needs to be fixed is that every school wants to present all their students as perfect rather than offering realistic assessments. Hence the proliferation of P/F schools and homogeneously glowing and useless MSPE statements. Similarly, every student claims to want objective measures to differentiate themselves until it turns out those objective measures don’t support that they are in the top 10%—then suddenly those measures are unfair.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

like sat subject tests (which btw they don’t offer anymore)

 

[MDMechEngr]

Because the pressure of an ever worsening flood of applications will become unsustainable. Step 1 going P/F is the initial casualty. The same factors that drove that change will apply to Step 2 CK and cause that to go P/F. Research is actually linked closely to school prestige (because top schools are the ones with the most grant money to actually do good research). The system then gets saturated by the flood of applications that unless everyone is okay with school prestige being the driving factor on matching into a competitive specialty or program, app caps will end up being the necessary solution

This^^^. However, apps cap will only hurt applicants from the left side of the bell curve or attend a med school on the other side of the railroad tracks.

 

[Lawpy]

This does exist. It’s the shelf exam at the end of your core rotation and unless your school is P/F in clinicals, it presumably plays into your rotation grade. If your school IS P/F in clinical or doesn’t factor that score into your grade then that’s a problem with your school.

None of the potential systems are perfect. the fundamental problem which needs to be fixed is that every school wants to present all their students as perfect rather than offering realistic assessments. Hence the proliferation of P/F schools and homogeneously glowing and useless MSPE statements. Similarly, every student claims to want objective measures to differentiate themselves until it turns out those objective measures don’t support that they are in the top 10%—then suddenly those measures are unfair.

There is one metric that can’t change and that’s school prestige.

 

[GoSpursGo]

There is one metric that can’t change and that’s school prestige.

Indeed

 

[Lawpy]

This^^^. However, apps cap will only hurt applicants from the left side of the bell curve or attend a med school on the other side of the railroad trak.

Yeah, couples matching is also screwed. Unfortunately i don’t know any other solutions.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Yeah, couples matching is also screwed. Unfortunately i don’t know any other solutions.

The ideal solution is that students receive appropriate advising about whether or not to apply to a competitive specialty, or a school withholds their support if they genuinely do not believe that a student will be successful in said application.

Too many applicants for a small number of spots. It's a feel-bad, but not as bad as getting a "you did not match" email.

 

[Lawpy]

The ideal solution is that students receive appropriate advising about whether or not to apply to a competitive specialty, or a school withholds their support if they genuinely do not believe that a student will be successful in said application.

Too many applicants for a small number of spots. It's a feel-bad, but not as bad as getting a "you did not match" email.

Unfortunately, the quality of advising is too highly variable across schools and can generally fall closely in line with school prestige (because top schools want their students to match well because that looks good for them, and i came across some depressing reports from few low tiers/few DO schools not caring at all about their students). It’s a rough environment in any case and honestly i don’t know what would compel these schools to uniformly ensure good advising. It’s hard.

Honestly i think this is where SDN can be helpful, but selectively (i.e. getting the advice from the right people on here - so residents, attendings, PDs who know and work with the process).

 

[housestaffhustle]

At the end of the day, the objective is to learn medicine, not find a way to wriggle onto a project where you collect a few variables in an Excel sheet.

I think this the root of the problem here. Why is "research" the currency we use to judge a medical student's (or resident's) dedication to a particular field?

Most of us spend half the year trying to get onto a project (on a topic often not even of our choosing) waiting to meet with attendings, having those meetings rescheduled, waiting for IRB approvals, etc. Is that really the best use of our time? What if you wanted to do something other than research - volunteer work that might be really impactful, work on a start up idea, or god forbid have other passions? Nah, that's not allowed.

Instead we take our best/brightest and have them mindlessly chart review/data collect for hours upon hours to "prove their commitment" to a certain speciality. For all that effort, as many have said already, most of these papers (if they even make it to publication) provide very little value.

The same can be said for residents applying to fellowship. Should we be encouraging them to learning clinical medicine and spend more time reading about their patients or should we have them data collect? Clearly the latter is more beneficial to society.

Reform in medical education is sorely needed and honestly I'm surprised this ruse has continued for so long. The problem imho is that we don't actually value the education part of training. Academic institutions value research because it brings extra funding/prestige and they want to groom the next generation of physicians who will achieve this for them. But what about education? Aside from anatomy lab most of our preclinical training can be done online and indeed most of it we don't even get from the medical schools (ex. UWorld, First Aid). On clinical rotations we get education out of the goodness of our residents'/attendings' hearts. As residents we're "trained" largely by our peers/immediate seniors. We see our attendings for maybe a few hours a day for brief snippets of teaching while on rounds. Where does all of our tuition money go? I would love to know.

Sigh, ok rant over. I don't know how to fix the system but until our "values" change I think we're stuck with data collecting.


Side note: If research really is your thing though, then go for it. The world would be a better place if only people really passionate about the work and the process were doing it. We all have different talents and passions. We shouldn't all be expected to fit the same mould.

 

[Med Ed]

I think this the root of the problem here. Why is "research" the currency we use to judge a medical student's (or resident's) dedication to a particular field?

Academic inertia. And it's easy to quantify. Number of publications x average impact factor = clean, tidy number that probably means something.

This is the prisoner's dilemma. If everyone abandoned research in unison then it would cease being a factor. But as long as some people are willing to do it to stand out then an arms race is inevitable. The same phenomenon is at play in admission to medical school.

We see our attendings for maybe a few hours a day for brief snippets of teaching while on rounds. Where does all of our tuition money go? I would love to know.

It's an RVU world, we're just living in it.

Say you have a generic attending who works 50 hours per week, his billing brings in $1.05 million. From the department's standpoint an hour of his time is worth $400. If you pay 50K in tuition then you can afford ~125 hours of his time annually, or about 2.5 hours per week.

The real calculations are more involved, but hopefully you get the general idea.

 

[sloop]

Step1 was probably just a proxy for work ethic and IQ (like almost all standardized tests). Presumably, these would be good traits for residents to have (moreso being hardworking)

To be entirely fair, conscientiousness (the personality trait that includes industriousness or “work ethic”) and IQ are about the best psychometric predictors of general success. I suppose one might say that a variety of specific skills might be more valuable in a resident than these, but there is little evidence to suggest that is actually true. By contrast, there is a good deal of evidence that being smart and hardworking is an advantage, and that the smarter, more conscientious individual will outperform their less smart, less conscientious peers.

Also, IQ is actually a better predictor of success than conscientiousness, but not by a great margin. It is also possible that in the range of IQ most doctors exist in, effects of conscientiousness dominate. They are both pretty strong predictors of success, though. In comparison, the other four personality factors have much weaker correlations with success and some of them have no real correlation to speak of. Agreeable people tend to not ask for raises and have lower salaries, but disagreeable people are more likely to get fired. Neuroticism and extroversion probably have more to do with the types of work you’ll like than your ability to succeed. Openness may have a weak positive correlation but that’s probably explained by the fact that it covaries to some extent with IQ.

 

[aldol16]

Med student research is generally completely useless with only MD/PhD students being the ones actually publishing good research. There are very few MD only students who truly generate good papers but that is extremely rare and usually involves connections with high powered PIs.

Not even sure where to begin with this one. You can't seriously believe that the only ones producing good research are MD/PhDs. Many MD/PhD projects are not that impactful. That's because it really takes a lot of time to get a PhD and an MD/PhD tries to compress that time. The reason it takes so long to begin with is because science is hard and science doesn't work a lot of times. A lot of trial and error goes into a PhD - that's why it takes 5-6 years in many basic science disciplines.

Additionally, you're talking about very different research. Most MD/PhDs are doing basic science research. Most MDs are doing clinical research. It's not possible to compare these two. Basic science takes a really long time and a lot of effort. Clinical research can also take a long time and effort but in general projects are shorter than an analogous basic science project with similar impact.

 

[aldol16]

Instead we take our best/brightest and have them mindlessly chart review/data collect for hours upon hours to "prove their commitment" to a certain speciality. For all that effort, as many have said already, most of these papers (if they even make it to publication) provide very little value.

I think what sets apart great med student researchers and those that are only doing it to check a box is how they respond. If you chart review and data collect for hours and that's all you do throughout med school, you'll show that you're committed and tough, but that doesn't show that you're going to be a great academic physician. Now if you start to lead projects and move into more senior roles, then you start to show that independent and analytical side that wins you points on the other side.

 

[Lawpy]

Not even sure where to begin with this one. You can't seriously believe that the only ones producing good research are MD/PhDs. Many MD/PhD projects are not that impactful. That's because it really takes a lot of time to get a PhD and an MD/PhD tries to compress that time. The reason it takes so long to begin with is because science is hard and science doesn't work a lot of times. A lot of trial and error goes into a PhD - that's why it takes 5-6 years in many basic science disciplines.

Additionally, you're talking about very different research. Most MD/PhDs are doing basic science research. Most MDs are doing clinical research. It's not possible to compare these two. Basic science takes a really long time and a lot of effort. Clinical research can also take a long time and effort but in general projects are shorter than an analogous basic science project with similar impact.

Are you talking at a student level? Because MD only students aren’t running clinical trials, prospective studies and high quality retrospective analyses/NEJM-level case studies that drive clinical research forward.

 

[DarkBluMage]

I personally think it’s ridiculous that research is basically a requirement for medical students/residency at this point. I don’t feel it should be so. To expect students to pump out multiple pubs with an already rigorous medical education is ridiculous. What is actually important here? Qualified/motivated medical professionals that care about their patients or research? Instead of spending my summer participating in social or medical programs that benefit the public and what I’m actually interested in when it comes to practicing medicine, I’ll instead spend it in a lab trying to obtain research papers or participate in research for a short period of time that may have no bearing on the specialty I choose. Many people choose to match into different fields than their initial choice coming into medical school. Why are they expected to have their specialty all figured out in their 1st year so they’re able to find the time/energy, and someone willing to let them participate in research, to pump out specialty relevant research just to be considered competitive? It’s ridiculous that medical students are essentially forced to extend their time in school by taking a research year rather than being able to focus solely on excelling in their medical education. Why should students have to spend 5 years in medical school just to satisfy a research requirement because PD’s want something to help differentiate applicants or juggle research during 4 years on top of other responsibilities a med student already has? Where exactly is the utility in that? Why are we doing things that essentially prolongs a rigorous medical education on already burdened students? I honestly think it’s completely asinine. Research should be done by those generally interested in it at their own discretion and not as something to be done just to be considered competitive. 4 years med school + 1 research year + residency years before being able to finally practice as an attending? Not even counting the years spent in undergrad. Ridiculous. What’s next? Adding another research year for more pubs just because Step 1 is P/F? The way Medical education is structured makes little sense to me.
Just my personal rant

 

[imidazzle92]

I personally think it’s ridiculous that research is basically a requirement for medical students/residency at this point. I don’t feel it should be so. To expect students to pump out multiple pubs with an already rigorous medical education is ridiculous. What is actually important here? Qualified/motivated medical professionals that care about their patients or research? Instead of spending my summer participating in social or medical programs that benefit the public and what I’m actually interested in when it comes to practicing medicine, I’ll instead spend it in a lab trying to obtain research papers or participate in research for a short period of time that may have no bearing on the specialty I choose. Many people choose to match into different fields than their initial choice coming into medical school. Why are they expected to have their specialty all figured out in their 1st year so they’re able to find the time/energy, and someone willing to let them participate in research, to pump out specialty relevant research just to be considered competitive? It’s ridiculous that medical students are essentially forced to extend their time in school by taking a research year rather than being able to focus solely on excelling in their medical education. Why should students have to spend 5 years in medical school just to satisfy a research requirement because PD’s want something to help differentiate applicants or juggle research during 4 years on top of other responsibilities a med student already has? Where exactly is the utility in that? Why are we doing things that essentially prolongs a rigorous medical education on already burdened students? I honestly think it’s completely asinine. Research should be done by those generally interested in it at their own discretion and not as something to be done just to be considered competitive. 4 years med school + 1 research year + residency years before being able to finally practice as an attending? Not even counting the years spent in undergrad. Ridiculous. What’s next? Adding another research year for more pubs just because Step 1 is P/F? The way Medical education is structured makes little sense to me.
Just my personal rant

I don't think you need a ton of research to match into most specialties (I think matched derm usually only have 2-3 manuscript articles published - lower at non-academic). "Higher tier" academic programs will probably want more because research is how you move up in academia, and they want to graduate alums who will help move the field forward. Even if you hate research, doing some small projects to get a few posters in 4 years isn't that much work if you work with the right faculty -- and shows you can work through a project.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Maybe research is now the proxy for hard work now that step is gone

Unfortunately, results are easily skewed by luck and connections

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

I personally think it’s ridiculous that research is basically a requirement for medical students/residency at this point. I don’t feel it should be so. To expect students to pump out multiple pubs with an already rigorous medical education is ridiculous. What is actually important here? Qualified/motivated medical professionals that care about their patients or research? Instead of spending my summer participating in social or medical programs that benefit the public and what I’m actually interested in when it comes to practicing medicine, I’ll instead spend it in a lab trying to obtain research papers or participate in research for a short period of time that may have no bearing on the specialty I choose. Many people choose to match into different fields than their initial choice coming into medical school. Why are they expected to have their specialty all figured out in their 1st year so they’re able to find the time/energy, and someone willing to let them participate in research, to pump out specialty relevant research just to be considered competitive? It’s ridiculous that medical students are essentially forced to extend their time in school by taking a research year rather than being able to focus solely on excelling in their medical education. Why should students have to spend 5 years in medical school just to satisfy a research requirement because PD’s want something to help differentiate applicants or juggle research during 4 years on top of other responsibilities a med student already has? Where exactly is the utility in that? Why are we doing things that essentially prolongs a rigorous medical education on already burdened students? I honestly think it’s completely asinine. Research should be done by those generally interested in it at their own discretion and not as something to be done just to be considered competitive. 4 years med school + 1 research year + residency years before being able to finally practice as an attending? Not even counting the years spent in undergrad. Ridiculous. What’s next? Adding another research year for more pubs just because Step 1 is P/F? The way Medical education is structured makes little sense to me.
Just my personal rant

I think a modest amount of research in medical school is healthy. Not an extra year but one project with some dedicated research blocks across the four years seems reasonable. Having doctors that understand how research is conducted, who can maybe better distinguish good research from bad research, and are more willing to apply new research to their eventual practice seems important to me.

 

[DarkBluMage]

Maybe research is now the proxy for hard work now that step is gone

Unfortunately, results are easily skewed by luck and connections

Which I don’t understand. Medical school itself is hard work.

 

[Lawpy]

Which I don’t understand. Medical school itself is hard work.

It should be rotations and aways but those are highly variable across schools and way too many schools have straight up garbage clinical sites and lack home departments

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Which I don’t understand. Medical school itself is hard work.

Because schools are already actively eliminating any differentiators beyond school name (ie pass/fail preclinicals, pass/fail rotations, AOA, steps)

When there are more than twice the # of applicants per spot in a specialty, there needs to be a way to filter.

 

[Lawpy]

Because schools are already actively eliminating any differentiators beyond school name (ie pass/fail preclinicals, pass/fail rotations, AOA, steps)

When there are more than twice the # of applicants per spot in a specialty, there needs to be a way to filter.

What i don’t get is why are low and mid tiers getting rid of grades and AOA? That’s by far the dumbest thing they can do. Top schools can get away with prestige because… they’re literally top schools. Mid and low tiers don’t have that advantage and by getting rid of differentiating factors, they’re sabotaging their own students

 

[Putkernerinthehall]

What i don’t get is why are low and mid tiers getting rid of grades and AOA? That’s by far the dumbest thing they can do. Top schools can get away with prestige because… they’re literally top schools. Mid and low tiers don’t have that advantage and by getting rid of differentiating factors, they’re sabotaging their own students

Are they ? Is that just some selected schools or across the board ? I've seen some schools that were P/F for clinical going to a graded (H, HP, P, F) scheme.

Additionally, some schools are compressing pre-clinical to 18 months, and some even to just 1 year, to allow time for more clinical experience, research, away rotations, etc.

 

[GoSpursGo]

What i don’t get is why are low and mid tiers getting rid of grades and AOA? That’s by far the dumbest thing they can do. Top schools can get away with prestige because… they’re literally top schools. Mid and low tiers don’t have that advantage and by getting rid of differentiating factors, they’re sabotaging their own students

It seems to be what applicants are looking for--i.e., P/F= "less gunner-ish, more laid-back." And as a relative minority of students are gunning for highly competitive residencies, it may indeed be what the majority of students want.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Which I don’t understand. Medical school itself is hard work.

When everyone works hard, no one does 😉

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

It seems to be what applicants are looking for--i.e., P/F= "less gunner-ish, more laid-back." And as a relative minority of students are gunning for highly competitive residencies, it may indeed be what the majority of students want.

Will be interesting to see if applications for competitive specialties begin to uptick now that there is no cutoff.