wet lab vs clinical research

[bel15]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

do ad coms look on one type of experience more favorably than the other, all other things being equal?

 

[Captain Fantastic]

No

 

[ADeadLois]

If you're performing actual clinical research (not doing what pre-meds often misrepresent as clinical research), then it may offer a slight advantage. Otherwise, it doesn't really matter.

 

[bel15]

which begs the question - what is actual clinical research then?

 

[Jolie South]

as i've said many times, it's the critical thinking skills that you develop from research not the actual research that's important.

 

[BigRedPremed]

as i've said many times, it's the critical thinking skills that you develop from research not the actual research that's important.

👍

 

[jon stewart]

as i've said many times, it's the critical thinking skills that you develop from research not the actual research that's important.

haha that is true but try telling pre-meds that. Countless hours of lab rat research because it looks good. 🙄

 

[bel15]

Given the tone of some of the replies, let me clarify a bit. I realize that it's the thought process being taught that is the ultimate goal, but is there a presumption/reality that one is more effective than the other at reaching that goal? And FYI, I did wet lab work back in high school way before I even thought about going pre-med purely out of interest - I'm a post-bacc. And no rats 🙂

 

[Jolie South]

Given the tone of some of the replies, let me clarify a bit. I realize that it's the thought process being taught that is the ultimate goal, but is there a presumption/reality that one is more effective than the other at reaching that goal? And FYI, I did wet lab work back in high school way before I even thought about going pre-med purely out of interest - I'm a post-bacc.

i personally don't think so. i think what does matter is the PI that you get. if they're willing to work with you and give you experiments, then it's a good opportunity. washing glassware, filing papers, or entering data on a large prestigious project will get you nowhere.

 

[bel15]

Great. Thanks for the responses everyone. I guess I'll go with my gut based on the type of experience I think I'll get and my interest in the research.

i personally don't think so. i think what does matter is the PI that you get. if they're willing to work with you and give you experiments, then it's a good opportunity. washing glassware, filing papers, or entering data on a large prestigious project will get you nowhere.

 

[Law2Doc]

do ad coms look on one type of experience more favorably than the other, all other things being equal?

They are both fine. The one caveat is that "clinical research" does not equal "clinical experience" at most schools. So don't think you are killing two birds with one stone. You still have to do the volunteering/shadowing/healthcare employee type stuff.

 

[capn jazz]

They are both fine. The one caveat is that "clinical research" does not equal "clinical experience" at most schools. So don't think you are killing two birds with one stone. You still have to do the volunteering/shadowing/healthcare employee type stuff.

My clinical research job involves reading patient charts to answer a set of questions about them, and interviewing lots of patients about their health. Would that not count as both research and experience? I've literally had 20-minute conversations about their health with hundreds of patients who were hospitalized.

(Of course, I also have lab research and children's hospital volunteering - playing with pediatric patients - so if it doesn't count, it's okay)

 

[drizzt3117]

I would say that basic science research is more valued by some institutions than others. I would agree that what you get out of research is more important, but at certain schools, significant basic science research is almost a requirement.