What exacly is meant by research experience?

[Illinois2012]

I named and promoted what is now known as the LizzyM score. It is my contribution to pre-meds everywhere.

And we can't thank you enough for it.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[postbacpremed87]

It's okay that I was denied. Your insight, along with a few others, is the most valuable on SDN....thanks for everything. I wouldn't want to bring my job home with me either.

I named and promoted what is now known as the LizzyM score. It is my contribution to pre-meds everywhere.

 

[orangeblossom]

Hey.. Sorry for bumping an old thread, but I had a question about "5. Poster presentation at a student event"
I wrote a thesis (in English), it required a good bit of research and was completed under the supervision of a faculty member. (Also, not sure if this matters... but my thesis wasn't pure literary analysis [the way certain english papers can focus on a semicolon in stanza seven or something]. It proposed a framework of analysis based on historical events of interest, and then delved into literary analysis of a few novels to support but also reinterpret the proposed framework.)
Anyway, if I were to present my thesis at a student conference, would it still be considered a 5 (despite its non-science nature)?

 

[LizzyM]

Hey.. Sorry for bumping an old thread, but I had a question about "5. Poster presentation at a student event"
I wrote a thesis (in English), it required a good bit of research and was completed under the supervision of a faculty member. (Also, not sure if this matters... but my thesis wasn't pure literary analysis [the way certain english papers can focus on a semicolon in stanza seven or something]. It proposed a framework of analysis based on historical events of interest, and then delved into literary analysis of a few novels to support but also reinterpret the proposed framework.)
Anyway, if I were to present my thesis at a student conference, would it still be considered a 5 (despite its non-science nature)?

Have you heard of the scientific method? If what you are doing involves the scientific method, then it might be what the adcom is looking for. If not, it isn't experience that my inform your understanding of the sort of research you might engage in during medical school, residency, fellowship or during a career in academic medicine.

 

[thlaxer]

Unfortunately, I also know a few people that have put in a lot less effort than me and piggybacked others' work for a paper pub, which is much better than an abstract . At the same time, I talk to these people and they can barely tell me what the research was on. Sometimes I wonder which situation I'd rather be in

You'd rather be the person who knows what they're doing. So you're doing it right, don't worry . Publications aren't needed to be accepted to medical school (even the research-heavy ones). The people you described would lose their 'advantage' when interviewers ask about their research.

 

[orangeblossom]

its an English paper, its hard to say that i applied the scientific method per se to my analysis. but if the scientific method is generally understood as a logical progression involving first a hypothesis (proposition) and then experimentation ("literary analysis"), then sure, i did that. its a strained analogy, but the standards of rigor are different in the humanities, for obvious reasons and limitations, what can i say? Anyway, i realize an English paper counting as "research" seems silly to those with science backgrounds, but i really do think i researched and presented my arguments in a logical manner.
i guess what i'm most curious about is where in your rankings something like this (presentation of my thesis) would fall. i am assuming it's got to be better than #11, at least!
And by the way.. thanks for sharing the LizzyM score, it's been a great resource

p.s., Not sure if this will affect your response, but i'm a nontrad taking classes at a school with very (!!) limited research opportunities. I am and will continue to look for science research opportunities, but seeing as that is not likely, I just want to get a sense of what I have so far.

 

[Knocked Up]

When med school adcoms say they would like applicants to have research experience, to what extent do they expect you to have some?

for instance, I will be doing a research elective in a Pharmacokinetics department as an elective next semester. I have not done any research before, and what they would expect me to do is to learn some lab techniques and possibly contribute to solving some problems. So it will last for a semester. After that I can do the same thing in a different department, like Medicinal chemistry or pharmacology.

Is this sufficient for me to brag to adcoms about having research experience that would aid me in getting accepted?!

Publication or Perish is the motto these days, at every level.

 

[CoolWhipp]

I'd rank research experience in this way:


11. Housekeeping and supply ordering.

10. Helping others with projects, serving as a research assistant or technician.

9. Animal surgery.

8. Pilot work prior to writing a proposal for a testable hypothesis.

7. Responsibility for testing a hypothesis.

6. Funding of your project (not your PI's funding)

5. Poster presentation at a student event

4. Podium presentation at a student event

3. Poster presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

2. Podium presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

1. Authorship in a peer reviewed, national publication.

If you are doing a research project on your own funding, that's really respectable, IMO. I think it would be more impressive than number 4 or 5. But hey, I know the list is just a guide and is not meant to be taken too literally. There are a number of different factors that play a role when in comes to these things.

 

[Ismet]

Publication or Perish is the motto these days, at every level.

Uh, no. Not in the admission process. Participating in research isn't even a requirement for acceptance.

 

[Knocked Up]

Uh, no. Not in the admission process. Participating in research isn't even a requirement for acceptance.

So most people have one truly outstanding aspect of their application that they use to push them forward in the application process. This obviously varies at different levels for different tiered schools. This can rage from community service leadership to ethnic / racial heritage to pure numbers and back to research.

If research (with sufficient numbers) is the key to your application, essentially the aspect that you are pushing forth to the adcomms, there is one and only one way to separate yourself at schools like Hopkins, Yale, Harvard, and Stanford. Ask LizzyM how many applications with research experience have presentations at conferences. My guess is that it is pretty common. It won't set an applicant apart, won't make them an "excellent" researcher or candidate. Publications (and first author) is another story and along with a distinguishable award in research I can't imagine anything else setting an applicant apart from from the pack if they are promoting themselves as a research physician.

Just my 2 cents, take it for whats its worth...

 

[kryptonian]

I'd rank research experience in this way:


11. Housekeeping and supply ordering.

10. Helping others with projects, serving as a research assistant or technician.

9. Animal surgery.

8. Pilot work prior to writing a proposal for a testable hypothesis.

7. Responsibility for testing a hypothesis.

6. Funding of your project (not your PI's funding)

5. Poster presentation at a student event

4. Podium presentation at a student event

3. Poster presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

2. Podium presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

1. Authorship in a peer reviewed, national publication.

May I ask if the MD/PhD committee would use the same scale to evaluate MD/PhD applicants' research experience ? If so, is there any chance at all for an applicant to get in an MD/PhD program if that applicant's research experience is equivalent to only #5 ?

 

[1TB4RKSB4CK]

Starting off at 7. Hoping a 5 or 4 by the end of semester. If research is very promising and getting great results I would love to have a 2 or a 1.

 

[MichaelBergen]

I'd rank research experience in this way:


11. Housekeeping and supply ordering.

10. Helping others with projects, serving as a research assistant or technician.

9. Animal surgery.

8. Pilot work prior to writing a proposal for a testable hypothesis.

7. Responsibility for testing a hypothesis.

6. Funding of your project (not your PI's funding)

5. Poster presentation at a student event

4. Podium presentation at a student event

3. Poster presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

2. Podium presentation at a regional or national meeting in your specialty (published abstract)

1. Authorship in a peer reviewed, national publication.

Would presenting at a regional research conference (where there will be presentations from physical/life sciences and social sciences/humanities fields) count as 4 or 2? My abstract will be published as well.

 

[pizza1994]

whats the difference between getting an abstract published vs an actual paper? arent they both equally hard? plus does anyone have any opinions on publishing their research in one of those university affilited magazines or for a course credit?