Want to apply to MD/PhD programs, but have no research experience.

[vsecretangel]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have no significant research experience, but want to apply to MD/PhD programs. What am I supposed to write for a 10,000 character essay about my research experience on the AMCAS app?!

 

[soundnin]

stop trolling.

 

[GlamDoc]

Why in the world would you want to apply MD/PhD withOUT having any research experience?!

Puh-leeze.

 

[vsecretangel]

First of all, I don't know what trolling is. Secondly, I didn't say no research experience; I said no SIGNIFICANT research experience. I've done research, but only when it has been required for a class.

A better question would be: what should I do for my essay if I plan on pursuing independent research after I submit the application (like this or next semester)? Should I express this instead of sharing my lack of good experience or just talk about some lame research I did for AP&P class?

Is that better?

 

[Asyouwereatrio]

First of all, I don't know what trolling is. Secondly, I didn't say no research experience; I said no SIGNIFICANT research experience. I've done research, but only when it has been required for a class.

A better question would be: what should I do for my essay if I plan on pursuing independent research after I submit the application (like this or next semester)? Should I express this instead of sharing my lack of good experience or just talk about some lame research I did for AP&P class?

Is that better?

How do you know that you would like to devote your life to research if you do not have significant research experience to back it up? That's one issue that you may face in interviews.

You should focus your essay on your research experiences that you have and will obtain. Also, are you submitting this cycle, because it's a bit late I think to submit primaries at this point. If you aren't submitting this cycle, get a move on with research opportunities to ensure you truly want to commit yourself to this profession.

 

[vsecretangel]

what are primaries?

 

[web2linc]

No one said you have to use all 10,000 characters. You could just write one or two sentences explaining that you have no research experience and just apply.

 

[111111111111111]

I have no significant research experience, but want to apply to MD/PhD programs. What am I supposed to write for a 10,000 character essay about my research experience on the AMCAS app?!

Doesn't matter what you write because you won't get into a single MD/PhD program regardless.

I really hope you're trolling lol.

 

[Neuronix]

Doesn't matter what you write because you won't get into a single MD/PhD program regardless.

Seconded.

 

[web2linc]

Seconded.

Third

 

[Drexon]

Third

4th

 

[b2sun]

Dont listen to these haters go for it bro

 

[mitl]

I am sorry but med schools are most likely to take you as a student who is looking for a free MD...

if you are really interested in an MD/PhD program you might want to be involved in research for at least a year

research for a class is well... quite frankly not what people refer to when people say research on sdn

-Good Luck 🙂

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Wait a year. Spend that time doing research full time. Next year, you'll have plenty to say and you'll make yourself competitive for MD/PhD programs (assuming your other stuff is in order).

Why would ANYONE take someone for a career in RESEARCH without having significant research experience?

 

[Pons Asinorum]

I am sorry but med schools are most likely to take you as a student who is looking for a free MD...

if you are really interested in an MD/PhD program you might want to be involved in research for at least a year

research for a class is well... quite frankly not what people refer to when people say research on sdn

-Good Luck 🙂

OP - above is the best, most serious advice you could possibly hope to receive here. Take it, hit the "back" button on your browser, and start searching around the forums re: MD/PhD admissions before you make more new threads that are going to get you flamed. You have zero chance at acceptance to any MD/PhD program in the U.S. without (as you said) significant research experience, like first or second author on a basic science paper in a top-flight journal significant. There's way too much competition for those slots from people who both a) want a free MD, and b) are the best applicants that we have on here. Cruise on over to IvyHopeful20's MDApplicants page and read through it. It should give you pause, because that's the state of the art in MD/PhD candidates.

 

[Asyouwereatrio]

what are primaries?

AMCAS Application=Primary; AMCAS=American Medical College Application Service.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

How do you even know that you want a research-focused career if you've never had a significant research experience? Researching for a class (whatever that even means) is not the same as conducting research. Looking up stuff online for a class project, which is the sense I'm getting from you, is not independent research. What you do in a lab is completely different.

At this point, unless you spend a year or two in a lab pursuing independent research (not cleaning dishes), I have to agree with the others that you have absolutely no chance of getting into an MD/PhD program.

 

[brooklynblunder]

you are gonna be interviewing (if you get any) with 6-9+ faculty per school to show your knowledge/interest/commitment to a life of a scientist come physician. good luck with that, but anything can happen

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Cruise on over to IvyHopeful20's MDApplicants page and read through it. It should give you pause, because that's the state of the art in MD/PhD candidates.

Aww.

😍 you too.

 

[vsecretangel]

How do you even know that you want a research-focused career if you've never had a significant research experience? Researching for a class (whatever that even means) is not the same as conducting research. Looking up stuff online for a class project, which is the sense I'm getting from you, is not independent research. What you do in a lab is completely different.

At this point, unless you spend a year or two in a lab pursuing independent research (not cleaning dishes), I have to agree with the others that you have absolutely no chance of getting into an MD/PhD program.

I know the difference; thank you very much. My research did involve conducting data independently, but was lame because I has to be one of the test subjects for the experiement (there were only 3 in total). Yes, I had to write a report and was given the opportunity to present at a symposium, but chose not to because the results weren't significant.

It's not too late to submit primaries! And what the heck is a free MD?

And for everyone that says, "how could you know you want to commit your life to research if you haven't had significant experience with it", I'll ask you:

How do you know you want to commit your life to being a doctor if you've never been one before?

You're basically saying that the fact that I've never been published is enough to forget about PhD, but that those who shadow doctors have the right to say they want to do that for the rest of their life?!

 

[IvyHopeful20]

Wait, you were a test subject and also the one doing the experiment? Your college approved that protocol?

The difference between a doctor and a researcher is that it's not possible to be a doctor before you become one: the best way therefore is to do medical volunteering and shadowing (for at least a year, which is expected). In the same way, it is not possible for you to be a PI on a grant as an undergrad, but it is expected that you would participate in a research project for at least a year, preferably 2+.

Also, you don't have to convince us: you have to convince the MD/PhD programs. Can you think of a reason why they should pick you for a PhD when they have hundreds of candidates with 2+ years of actual research experience?

It's not about the amount of publishes, it's about the length and quality of time spent doing research. There are people who have done research for 2-3 years, and not gotten a publish: that's fine. It's not easy getting a publish and there is some luck involved in terms of picking the right lab. It's a very nice thing to have, but the quality and length of research is what is essential in your application.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

I know the difference; thank you very much. My research did involve conducting data independently, but was lame because I has to be one of the test subjects for the experiement (there were only 3 in total). Yes, I had to write a report and was given the opportunity to present at a symposium, but chose not to because the results weren't significant.

It's not too late to submit primaries! And what the heck is a free MD?

And for everyone that says, "how could you know you want to commit your life to research if you haven't had significant experience with it", I'll ask you:

How do you know you want to commit your life to being a doctor if you've never been one before?

You're basically saying that the fact that I've never been published is enough to forget about PhD, but that those who shadow doctors have the right to say they want to do that for the rest of their life?!

all your whining is of no significance. you're not getting in md/phd. end of story.

 

[coreankim]

:troll:

 

[Pons Asinorum]

And what the heck is a free MD?

Naivete, thy name is vsecretangel...

 

[LizzyM]

Let me rephrase the title of this thread, "I want to apply to a PhD program in medical research but I have no research experience" Why on earth would someone with no research experience come around and say, "please admit me to your program so that I can spend three year (or more) in a lab at your school working so I can ultimately complete a dissertation"?

Spending time in a research lab (not a classroom lab) during undergrad is the equivalent of shadowing for a pre-med; it is an opportunity to see what goes on and to determine if this is how you want to spend your life.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

for md/phd i would have to argue the research experience is even more critical when compared to a straight phd.. i assume the compact timeframe really requires you to hit the ground running

 

[Pons Asinorum]

for md/phd i would have to argue the research experience is even more critical when compared to a straight phd.. i assume the compact timeframe really requires you to hit the ground running

I would agree with this too. In a normal PhD track, if your project gets derailed by unfavorable results or funding falling apart or whatever, well then I guess you're around for another year. It happens. For the MD/PhD student, ever bit of time away from the clinical learning environment is just that little bit extra that your clinical skills atrophy and you fall behind the cohort you'll hit the wards with as an MSIII. Some schools do a great job of trying to keep you up to date with the MSI/II material. Some don't and leave that up to you. Having your project fall through because of an avoidable misstep would seem doubly painful for an MD/PhD candidate in this light.

 

[HealthHare]

what are primaries?

To add insult to injury

 

[vsecretangel]

Excuse me, but the person used it in the context that it was too late to apply so I thought it was something else because it most definitely not too late to apply. Most of you are not very nice. I'm sorry that I apparently have no idea what I'm doing and was looking for some help!

 

[Pons Asinorum]

I'm sorry that I apparently have no idea what I'm doing...

The most accurate assumption you've expressed so far. Best of luck.

 

[Neuronix]

You have zero chance at acceptance to any MD/PhD program in the U.S. without (as you said) significant research experience, like first or second author on a basic science paper in a top-flight journal significant.

This is completely incorrect and is perhaps the biggest myth about MD/PhD programs. One does NOT need to publish to gain acceptance to top MD/PhD programs. It's about spending years doing meaningful research, getting good LORs, writing good essays, and understanding the research well.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

This is completely incorrect and is perhaps the biggest myth about MD/PhD programs. One does NOT need to publish to gain acceptance to top MD/PhD programs. It's about spending years doing meaningful research, getting good LORs, writing good essays, and understanding the research well.

So you think the OP has a good chance of acceptance? Read through the OP's entire question. They specifically said that they have done NO research whatsoever. I'll stand by what I said. They have no chance at acceptance this cycle.

 

[Remuneration]

He doesn't think they have a chance and he already said as much. He's just saying that the importance of a publication is overstated.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

He doesn't think they have a chance and he already said as much. He's just saying that the importance of a publication is overstated.

OK. I guess my question would be in what laboratory are you expected to spend years (plural) doing meaningful research that doesn't lead to publication of any kind? I'll back off my "top flight journal" rhetoric, if you or Neuronix will agree that if you perform meaningful research for years that doesn't lead to publication and attribution of any kind for that work, well, your research just wasn't that meaningful to begin with and won't have a positive impact on your application.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

OK. I guess my question would be in what laboratory are you expected to spend years (plural) doing meaningful research that doesn't lead to publication of any kind? I'll back off my "top flight journal" rhetoric, if you or Neuronix will agree that if you perform meaningful research for years that doesn't lead to publication and attribution of any kind for that work, well, your research just wasn't that meaningful to begin with and won't have a positive impact on your application.

that's a pretty ignorant statement, my lab recently published a big paper that took FIVE years to prepare.

 

[Kaustikos]

OK. I guess my question would be in what laboratory are you expected to spend years (plural) doing meaningful research that doesn't lead to publication of any kind? I'll back off my "top flight journal" rhetoric, if you or Neuronix will agree that if you perform meaningful research for years that doesn't lead to publication and attribution of any kind for that work, well, your research just wasn't that meaningful to begin with and won't have a positive impact on your application.

Considering about 20% of people accepted at my universities MD/PhD (Indiana) have actually published, I'd say it's common. Speaking to the director of the program reaffirmed what was stated - publications help, but not having any won't hurt you. You have to have experience, though, in order to get any chance whatsoever. The OP has little to none.

OP - you really need to try your hand at research for a year and see if it's for you. Working day and night on projects and the failures that ensue, in conjunction with the papers you read will shed a lot of light on whether or not you want to pursue this.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

that's a pretty ignorant statement, my lab recently published a big paper that took FIVE years to prepare.

I doubt that for the combined membership of your lab, from PI to undergrad, not a single one of them has a single thing on their CV in those intervening 5 years. Just because that one paper took five years, which happens plenty, doesn't mean that there were no other publications/posters/presentations that happened and that attributed to the various members of your lab their level of involvement.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

I doubt that for the combined membership of your lab, from PI to undergrad, not a single one of them has a single thing on their CV in those intervening 5 years. Just because that one paper took five years, which happens plenty, doesn't mean that there were no other publications/posters/presentations that happened and that attributed to the various members of your lab their level of involvement.

there were two postdocs on it, one for the entire five, one for the last three, and yes, that's the only thing to their names in that time. but it's made up for the fact that they'll have about 3 papers between them by this time next year. the whole point of my example is that pubs can be real tricky, and especially in the basic sciences a couple years is absolutely nothing in terms of time. just admit you were wrong and move on, dude.

re: presentations, i thought our discussion was specifically restricted to pubs.

 

[URHere]

OK. I guess my question would be in what laboratory are you expected to spend years (plural) doing meaningful research that doesn't lead to publication of any kind?

There are many reasons why someone with many years of experience may not have a publication to his/her name:

1) In many labs, being the one to physically collect data for a project does not automatically guarantee you a spot on a publication. That is up to the judgment of the PI and the postdoc or graduate student in charge of the project. If you are in a lab where a strong intellectual contribution is a requirement for getting your name onto a paper, you could easily burn through a year or so without a piblication record to show for it.

2) If the publication story is multi-faceted, there is a good shot that the work will not be complete and ready for publication before the application cycle rolls around. Thus, even huge contributions to a project may not result in a publication until well after the admissions decisions are made.

3) If the applicant is an undergraduate searching for an independent project...that project isn't often the lab's most promising scientific lead. PIs know that pre-meds (and pre-MD/PhDs) won't be around forever, and they would rather set them on a low-impact, but compact project, than one that is more suited to a graduate thesis.

All of those things combined with the fact that applicants don't always spent 3 years in the SAME lab, can make it pretty difficult for an applicant to guarantee a publication.

As for the OP's situation, you do not need to change the world to be a successful MD/PhD applicant, but you do need experience carrying-out and troubleshooting long-term projects. The point is to show that you still want a career in research even after you have been exposed to failed experiments, dead-ends, and research red tape (grant renewals, often-irrelevant research training, and publication hurdles come to mind). The point is that you aren't likely to experience those things fully through a lab course, and the admissions people need to be sure that you know what you are getting into (and will stick around) before they throw you into graduate school for several years.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

just admit you were wrong and move on, dude.

Ok. I was wrong. Just hasn't been my experience with a PI who publishes frequently and has long coattails. My bad.

 

[Reaction]

If possible try to get at least some research done.. I think that is one of the main things they look for in those programs 😱

 

[DoctaFuture]

skimming through this thread, i'm wondering... is this thread a joke?

 

[111111111111111]

Excuse me, but the person used it in the context that it was too late to apply so I thought it was something else because it most definitely not too late to apply. Most of you are not very nice. I'm sorry that I apparently have no idea what I'm doing and was looking for some help!

Hey, so it looks like you're serious. You didn't really give us much information, but let me try to offer some constructive advice...

First of all, I'm really sorry to tell you so bluntly, but there is really no way you're getting into MSTP or MD/PhD programs unless you have some sort of godlike combination of MCAT (>41), GPA (>3.9), ethnicity (underrepresented minority), and amazing letters of recommendation. Even with those, you probably don't have a shot.

So here's what you can do: you can take a year after college of doing nothing but research and try to get some serious research experience under your belt. You can apply after the first year (meaning you'll have a 2 year gap at least), but it might be prudent to apply to PhD programs instead of MD/PhD ones since they are significantly more difficult to get into. Or, you can apply to med school after your senior year, and say on your application you plan on taking a year off to do research.

I also suggest that you spend a month or so looking through the annals of SDN to familiarize yourself with the application process and what they want.

Also see:
http://www.mdphds.org/guide/admissions.php

"Successful M.D./Ph.D. applicants usually have provided evidence of sustained scientific-based laboratory investigation. Most have at least two years of research experience, often with a leading role on a self-directed long-term project. This means more than simply working with a postdoctoral fellow or graduate student. The level of autonomy given to you in the lab is very important."