Want MD/PhD but worried about my research...

[Signifier]

Hi everyone! Allow me to introduce myself as one of those "perpetually confused" folk who doesn't know if they want to pursue an MD, a PhD, one after the other, or (duh duh duh) a combined MD/PhD. I have research experience (loved it!), I have experience in hospital/clinic (and I loved it!).

Anyway, let me talk about my research experience a bit:

One summer at an REU doing fairly intense research in medicinal chemistry (with one publication and a presentation at the American Chemical Society's national meeting)
2.5 years of "in house" college research that resulted in 1 paper. The research was all theoretical, though - mathematical modeling, statistical physics, and quantum chemistry. I never worked with a microscope, a beaker, or anything - I solved equations, thought up strange ideas, and wrote computer programs. Yikes!

So, this isn't stellar - sure, 2 publications, but most of research was all up in my mind - not a lab.

Now, other than research, I have a lot of stuff: years tutoring, years shadowing/volunteering, journeys to other countries, translation in immigrant labor medical outreach programs, leading rural development committees, BA in physics/BS in biochemistry all honors, currently working as a HS biology teacher with Teach for America, etc. GPA: 3.90 in sciences, MCAT 37T.

But I'm worried about my research experience. I don't think it's up to par with many who enter MD/PhD programs and, with all the time I've spent out of the lab, I know that if you dropped me into a biochemistry laboratory tomorrow it would take me a while to get my bearings! I still know that I love research and I want to spent part of my life growing human knowledge - so I'd like to hear any ideas about my chances in MD/Phd programs. Will the non-research experiences I've had compensate at all for the research weakness?

Anyway - I appreciate all comments and biting criticism!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[tortuga87]

theoretical work is also important. are you going into computational bio or engineering?

they may be skeptical if you want to transition directly into wet lab. some schools ask you what field you want to pursue in their secondaries and then ask you to write about how you have prepared for that field

 

[bd4727]

Your research experience is not weak. You would be a good applicant, overall. I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Signifier]

Sorry to be so underinformed - but are there any computational/theoretical research possibilities even available in any MD/PhD or MSTP? My (perhaps naive) view of the MD/PhD programs/MSTP is: "Wet lab only! PCR, Northern blot, microarrays, cadavers or kick it."

But perhaps I'm afield.

 

[dragonbush]

Most places have a wide variety of PhDs possible, including much more theoretical fields. Some schools even have joint MD/PhDs with much more engineering etc oriented schools (Harvard/MIT, USC/CalTech come to mind). I would just look further into it!

 

[URHere]

Sorry to be so underinformed - but are there any computational/theoretical research possibilities even available in any MD/PhD or MSTP? My (perhaps naive) view of the MD/PhD programs/MSTP is: "Wet lab only! PCR, Northern blot, microarrays, cadavers or kick it."

This depends on the school, but there are definitely theoretical options available for MD/PhD students, and I think that more and more schools are making those departments accessible. Over the last two years, I know that my program has included bio-informatics (mostly comprised of computational biology and statistical modeling) under the potential graduate programs available to MD/PhD students, and I don't think that we're alone on that.

If you would like to stay in the computational realm, look at program websites. Most of them will list potential fields of graduate study.

They may be skeptical if you want to transition directly into wet lab. some schools ask you what field you want to pursue in their secondaries and then ask you to write about how you have prepared for that field

I wouldn't be surprised if there is some truth in this. I know that if I was a member of an admissions team, I would want to know that an applicant had at least some experience with the field of research they wanted to pursue (or at least had a fallback option available at the university).

Honestly though, your stats and research record are solid enough that you shouldn't have much of a problem getting into a program if you apply broadly (even if your goal is to switch to wet lab research).

 

[Jorje286]

You have a fantastic record, and if you're bent on a career in computational research you have nothing to be worried about. The most important thing is to explain how would it be useful in a career as a physician-scientist. You have to integrate your interests in the type of research you're into and your clinical interests, which shouldn't be hard to do. Systems and computational biology is on the rise I believe, because we're realizing that reductionist methods can only lead us so far, and we need to integrate the big amount of info we're generating into a bigger picture. Your background will also help you stand out from the crowd, and computational work generally looks more impressive than the blot, rinse and repeat type. Look for departments with strong systems biology departments and apply.

 

[Signifier]

Thank you all; I am literally surprised to hear this talk of computational/theoretical options in MD/PhD programs! Jorje, I agree and I am excited about the dawning of a large-scale, multi-leveled and deeper understanding of biology that is coming.

I will follow the advice given and apply broadly. Thank you all for your help.