Want to research autism--what is the right path for me?

[ReInventor]

Here's my story. I switched to a major in psychology as a sophomore after working with children with autism for a summer. Since then, I have known that I want my career to focus around researching autism and working with affected children and families.

Originally, I thought a PhD in Clinical Psychology was the way to go, but it seems like the field of autism research might be more of a medical field? Also I had a long conversation with a professor who emphasized that a career as a PhD might not result in much actual contact with children (which is important to me).

What do you think? I have done very well as a undergraduate and have a shot at PhD programs, but if an MD degree is the way to go to accomplish my goals I am willing to apply to post baccalaureate premedical programs. Or is there some other degree that would be more appropriate?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[raltima07]

I am not sure which degree would be best, but have you tried research? I would do that first and see if it is what you like

 

[ReInventor]

Yes, I've done a good amount of psychology research, both independent projects and as a research assistant. I enjoy research but I also enjoy direct interaction with children, and I was given the impression that a pure PhD research career might limit that.

I guess I should be more clear. With an MD, I would also like to conduct research. But I suppose with a PhD it would be more behavioral research, while research with an MD might be more (obviously) medical, like clinical trials? I am not 100% clear on this which is why I am seeking advice.

 

[DoctwoB]

Yes, I've done a good amount of psychology research, both independent projects and as a research assistant. I enjoy research but I also enjoy direct interaction with children, and I was given the impression that a pure PhD research career might limit that.

I guess I should be more clear. With an MD, I would also like to conduct research. But I suppose with a PhD it would be more behavioral research, while research with an MD might be more (obviously) medical, like clinical trials? I am not 100% clear on this which is why I am seeking advice.

MD-PhD would be more useful if you wanted to run a lab that studies the causes of autism or the molecules involved while also treating patients. MD-type research would be more running retrospective studies (or teaming up with big pharm for clinical trials) about which drugs/therapies work best.

 

[BiopsychStudent]

A clinical psychology PhD is considered an applied degree; the training involved includes psychotherapy and assessment, in addition to research research skills - I don't think it would prevent you from working with children at all. In the case of a purely academic PhD in development psychology or something, it might.

 

[ReInventor]

Thank you for the responses. MD-PhD is intriguing to me but I am actually not pre-medr right now, so that seems like it would be a looong road, if I was even eligible.

When I spoke to my professor about Clin. Psych., she told me that a lot of programs might not even provide therapy training? Additionally she explained that a PhD is too "expensive" to be hired to perform therapy (compared to PsyD's or people with MA's), so PhD = research/professor career. This is only one person's opinion, but I have also heard that a clinical psych PhD is not the way to go for directly treating people (I have heard MSW recommended instead, etc.).

What about fields in medicine that incorporate psychology? What might my career look like in behavioral-developmental pediatrics, child and adolescent psychiatry, etc.?

I think the problem is that I want too many things, maybe? I want to research and make discoveries about the disorder, but at the same time treat kids, advise their parents, recommend behavioral interventions, advise teachers and schools...I just want to do everything, and don't want to have to choose one!

 

[LEUNIT]

Also I had a long conversation with a professor who emphasized that a career as a PhD might not result in much actual contact with children (which is important to me).

You mean like, physical contact?

 

[ReInventor]

Umm...as in, actually talking to children, not just analyzing data collected by the undergraduate research assistants who were the ones who observed the kids.

 

[Ignatius M.D.]

One of my neuro classes is only guest speakers from the med center/psych department. There was a really good physician that came to talk about autism that was MD-PhD and then completed a psychiatry residency and child psych sub-specialty. I think you're talking about exactly what he's doing. The researcher's name is VanderWeele. He's got some important stuff that you should look up if interested.

 

[ReInventor]

Ooh thank you, I will Google that name right now...it gives me hope that I am not totally scatter brained if other people have done what I am thinking about!

 

[ReInventor]

Would applying to MD/PhD programs as someone who earned their premed credit through a post-baccalaureate premedical program put me at a huge disadvantage? I know those programs are very competitive (but I don't know much beyond that, although I am intrigued...)

 

[SilentSoldier]

Well it just so happens that my current job is actually dealing with autistic children. Right now all of my supervisors and managers in my current office are actually MAs and MSWs. They do the hands on stuff as well as write reports and send the information to the specific schools and our main office (that houses the PhDs in the field of clinical psych and developmental psych so I'm not too sure if they actually get any hands on experience). This is something that I'm also interested in, but I would also like to get in on the more medical side of things and try to find ways to prevent autism or other methods of treatment so I'm trying to pursue the MD route in that respect. In the meantime, I'm having a blast in this job, maybe its something that you should look into as well.

 

[Druggernaut]

When I spoke to my professor about Clin. Psych., she told me that a lot of programs might not even provide therapy training? Additionally she explained that a PhD is too "expensive" to be hired to perform therapy (compared to PsyD's or people with MA's), so PhD = research/professor career. This is only one person's opinion, but I have also heard that a clinical psych PhD is not the way to go for directly treating people (I have heard MSW recommended instead, etc.).

Was this professor a clinical psychologist? PhD's and PsyD's would bill the same. I'd imagine that clinical psych programs that didn't offer training in some method of therapy would be the minority, if not nonexistant. The research lab I worked in handled both basic and applied research experiments in the PI's area of interest, and he did therapy too, not just his graduate students. It's been my understanding that many patients enrolled in therapy see a psychiatrist for medications, and also see a doctorate-level psychologist for therapy (since they're less expensive than psychiatrists). Those with masters degrees would more likely be pigeon-holed into a more limited role.

For autism specifically, you could also look into programs offering some sort of eligibility for applying to be an applied behavior analyst. Are you interested in the biology, pharmacological treatment, or therapy-based treatment? I think you need to decide what path you'd most like to go down in order to figure out the most appropriate degree.

 

[URHere]

You can't answer this question until you know what type of research you want to conduct.

Here are some broad categories of autism research, and the type of training that is most relevant to them:

1) Biological basis of autism - These researchers ask questions like: "Do any known toxins, parasites, inflammatory processes, etc contribute to autism?". This type of research would involve animal (not human) subjects, and is solidly in the PhD realm.

2) Environmental and or social techniques for improving outcomes in autism - This would involve working directly with autistic children and a range of non-medicinal therapies. I would say that a MSW or clinical psych degree would be most useful here.

3) Tracking autism correlations, outcomes, etc - This is mostly database work that deals with humans, but very few actual "patients". This is closest to epidemiology and public health, although many MDs conduct this type of research also.

4) Clinical trial work - This could relate to any trials pharmacological therapies, or it could deal with clinical trials for treatment of co-morbid conditions like seizure disorders. This would be where you would want an MD.

So...which of these interests you? At the end of the day, there is no reason to get an MD or a PhD if you won't end up using it, so know what you want before you decide which degree to pursue.

 

[the duck]

I have a family friend who is an MD, and works exclusively with autistic/ADHD kids, and has published books on the topic. Though, he doesn't do research. I'd imagen that an MD is probably the better way to go as far as actual contact with kids go. However, I don't think doing research in general will really give you much contact with kids. But I'd think its easier to do autism research, and see patients in a clinical setting as an MD, since most academic setting require their MDs to do a certain amount of clinical time.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

you should do vaccine research, that's definitely the hot field in autism right now. and if you fail you might at least get to mack on a certain ms. mccarthy

 

[neurogenesis]

You can't answer this question until you know what type of research you want to conduct.

Here are some broad categories of autism research, and the type of training that is most relevant to them:

1) Biological basis of autism - These researchers ask questions like: "Do any known toxins, parasites, inflammatory processes, etc contribute to autism?". This type of research would involve animal (not human) subjects, and is solidly in the PhD realm.

2) Environmental and or social techniques for improving outcomes in autism - This would involve working directly with autistic children and a range of non-medicinal therapies. I would say that a MSW or clinical psych degree would be most useful here.

3) Tracking autism correlations, outcomes, etc - This is mostly database work that deals with humans, but very few actual "patients". This is closest to epidemiology and public health, although many MDs conduct this type of research also.

4) Clinical trial work - This could relate to any trials pharmacological therapies, or it could deal with clinical trials for treatment of co-morbid conditions like seizure disorders. This would be where you would want an MD.

So...which of these interests you? At the end of the day, there is no reason to get an MD or a PhD if you won't end up using it, so know what you want before you decide which degree to pursue.

OP- you mentioned wanting to work with autistic children and their families, in addition to this list is under treatment would be behavioral therapies, and a PhD in a field of psychology such as behavior analysis theory would be helpful to you (ABA therapy is big, as I am sure you know)

Sounds like you need to do some soul searching about your specific research interest. Wouldn't be a bad idea to take a job as a paid research assistant somewhere post graduation before jumping into a post-bacc program and ironing out what you want to do. You may be able to find one in the autism realm, which would allow you access to the ins-and-outs of the field right now. I know many people who have taken that route (not specifically with autism) but in other feilds with different degree options. And then if you do decide to go pre-med, you've got more research experience for you app

 

[phonyreal98]

I work in a lab that almost exclusively studies autism. The PI is a PhD and there are two postdocs, one is an MD and the other is a PhD. The undegrads in the lab seem to be a mixture of pre-MD and pre-PhD.

 

[Law2Doc]

you should do vaccine research, that's definitely the hot field in autism right now. and if you fail you might at least get to mack on a certain ms. mccarthy

Um no. That's the absolute wrong place to look for a link to autism. The only person who ever found a link was recently found to have fabricated his data, got it published in a major publication and has become the laughing stock of the field. Per the IOM and most people whose published research hasn't been discredited, there is no link between autism and vaccines. So wasting your time researching that is really just barking up the wrong tree. The reason vaccines get blamed is because of timing -- you get childhood vaccines at about the same time a lot of these childhood issues get noticed.

So to the non-scientist (or someone with the IQ of a playboy playmate, as evidenced by Ms McCarthy) it seems to make sense that when their kid started acting different right about the time his childhood vaccine was due, the vaccine must be the culprit. Someone with more scientific knowledge would realize this is perhaps really a "true, true and unrelated" concept, which is what all the non-discredited data has shown to date. Trying to find a link to vaccines may be about as likely as trying to find an alligator in Antarctica. Plenty of people waste their lives on fruitless research. The dude who made up his data on autism probably realized he was on this path.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Um no. That's the absolute wrong place to look for a link to autism. The only person who ever found a link was recently found to have fabricated his data, got it published in a major publication and has become the laughing stock of the field.

Apparently sarcasm goes right over someone's head

 

[IHeartNerds]

Apparently sarcasm goes right over someone's head

50% of L2D's replies could be erased if a proper sarcasm meter was installed in him/her.

 

[cheesier]

50% of L2D's replies could be erased if a proper sarcasm meter was installed in him/her.

Well the OP asked a genuine question. I don't know why Bleargh needs to troll every single thread.

 

[Kevin Baker]

Get the MD/DO. There is just so much more you can do research wise with the medical license alone than with a plain PhD. Add a PhD on top of the medical license if you like. But it'll be infinitely easier to secure grants and run your own lab with the medical license.

bonus: It takes a lot less time to finish a MD/PhD program than to finish a clinical psych PhD program.

I had a prof with a clinical (neuro)psych PhD and she did get to work hands on with people. Clinical work is definitely possible with a PhD and not a PsyD. She ran her own lab too which was sort of cool.

 

[URHere]

bonus: It takes a lot less time to finish a MD/PhD program than to finish a clinical psych PhD program.

I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. MD/PhD programs take about 8 years on average. And, after graduation, there is still residency and fellowship to worry about (assuming that you want to be a licensed clinician with a shot at running your own research lab). In some cases, there may even be additional postdoc years until a faculty position opens up. So you are looking at at least 12-15 years before your training is complete.

I don't know much about clinical psych programs, but I can't imagine 12-15 years being substantially shorter than their graduation time.

 

[Law2Doc]

Apparently sarcasm goes right over someone's head

Nah - I reread the prior poster's post and still am not sure that sarcasm was meant; it reads like many simply uninformed posts on here. So I don't accept blame for responding genuinely on this particular one. When something is legitimately sarcastic and I miss the joke, I'm happy to say mea culpa.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Well the OP asked a genuine question. I don't know why Bleargh needs to troll every single thread.

Nah - I reread the prior poster's post and still am not sure that sarcasm was meant; it reads like many simply uninformed posts on here. So I don't accept blame for responding genuinely on this particular one. When something is legitimately sarcastic and I miss the joke, I'm happy to say mea culpa.

yes i totally seriously brought up jenny mccarthy

 

[the duck]

yes i totally seriously brought up jenny mccarthy

You do realize people use this forum to gain actual advice, right? Some of us have lives in real life, and don't feel like coming through here to wade through tons of stupid posts and pictures when we want legit information. Please go find somewhere else to fool around.

If you have nothing constructive to say. Shut up!

 

[RogueUnicorn]

You do realize people use this forum to gain actual advice, right? Some of us have lives in real life, and don't feel like coming through here to wade through tons of stupid posts and pictures when we want legit information. Please go find somewhere else to fool around.

If you have nothing constructive to say. Shut up!

you do realize some people use this forum to waste time and procrastinate, right? get over yourself.

 

[the duck]

you do realize some people use this forum to waste time and procrastinate, right? get over yourself.

Thats exactly what I use it for. However their a time and place for fooling around. Theres all-students, the doctors lounge as well as countless threads that are either troll-worthy, or not very serious.

However, when someone, like the OP asks a completely legit question, and spent the time to type out a coherent fairly long post, they deserve serious replies, and shouldn't be spammed with pointless comments.

There are plenty of not-so-serious threads to goof around in.

 

[Law2Doc]

you do realize some people use this forum to waste time and procrastinate, right? get over yourself.

As the above user mentioned, there are threads where the questions are sincere and serious and those which really aren't, and are better fodder for the sarcasm.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Thats exactly what I use it for. However their a time and place for fooling around. Theres all-students, the doctors lounge as well as countless threads that are either troll-worthy, or not very serious.

However, when someone, like the OP asks a completely legit question, and spent the time to type out a coherent fairly long post, they deserve serious replies, and shouldn't be spammed with pointless comments.

There are plenty of not-so-serious threads to goof around in.

it's a one-liner dude, no need to hyperventilate

 

[LEUNIT]

Thats exactly what I use it for. However their a time and place for fooling around. Theres all-students, the doctors lounge as well as countless threads that are either troll-worthy, or not very serious.

However, when someone, like the OP asks a completely legit question, and spent the time to type out a coherent fairly long post, they deserve serious replies, and shouldn't be spammed with pointless comments.

There are plenty of not-so-serious threads to goof around in.

 

[BigRedBeta]

I think the problem is that I want too many things, maybe? I want to research and make discoveries about the disorder, but at the same time treat kids, advise their parents, recommend behavioral interventions, advise teachers and schools...I just want to do everything, and don't want to have to choose one!

If you want to treat patients in the manner you've described, you'll need an MD. For most people, doing MD/PhD is usually not the best choice.

If you decide to go for the MD, your best choices for working primarily with autistic children are goign to be either Child and Adolescent Psychiatry or Developmental Pediatrics. However Medical Genetics or Pediatric Neurology also are possibilities, depending on your focus/interests and how you want to approach these children.

 

[ReInventor]

OP- you mentioned wanting to work with autistic children and their families, in addition to this list is under treatment would be behavioral therapies, and a PhD in a field of psychology such as behavior analysis theory would be helpful to you (ABA therapy is big, as I am sure you know)

Sounds like you need to do some soul searching about your specific research interest. Wouldn't be a bad idea to take a job as a paid research assistant somewhere post graduation before jumping into a post-bacc program and ironing out what you want to do. You may be able to find one in the autism realm, which would allow you access to the ins-and-outs of the field right now. I know many people who have taken that route (not specifically with autism) but in other feilds with different degree options. And then if you do decide to go pre-med, you've got more research experience for you app

Trying to find an RA position is definitely something I am considering, especially if I don't have a better grasp on my plans by the fall of my senior year.

Above post: Thanks for that info, I figured those two fields were the ones I should be looking at.

Thanks for all the helpful info! (I am going to ignore the mild thread derail )

 

[Brachyury]

Would applying to MD/PhD programs as someone who earned their premed credit through a post-baccalaureate premedical program put me at a huge disadvantage? I know those programs are very competitive (but I don't know much beyond that, although I am intrigued...)

Probably not, the reality is that you need research, and when I say research I do not mean 'I did psychology research on how people react to stress', I mean biomedical research (http://psych.ucsf.edu/bclab/mission1.htm)

It's worth doing a search in the MD, PhD forum about how much research one actually needs (about two years is a good number). Will you need pubs? No, but it certainly helps