What specialties would be still open to me if I choose to do 0 research?

[LuluLovesMe]

I really don't like doing research, but I don't know if choosing not to do any research is a viable option for me.

Say I pass all of my classes (my school is true pass/fail with no ranking), score around 240's on step 1 and step 2 and just pass/high pass all my rotations.

What specialties would I still have a good shot at assuming I want to go to a half decent (non-malignant, won't limit my job prospects) program in the field?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Brorthopedic]

Unless you're gunning for Derm or NSG, having zero research doesn't really null your chances of matching in whatever specialty you want

 

[Foot Fetish]

I really don't like doing research, but I don't know if choosing not to do any research is a viable option for me.

Say I pass all of my classes (my school is true pass/fail with no ranking), score around 240's on step 1 and step 2 and just pass/high pass all my rotations.

What specialties would I still have a good shot at assuming I want to go to a half decent (non-malignant, won't limit my job prospects) program in the field?

You can match in pretty much anything except Derm, Neurosurgery, Plastic Surgery, and Rad Onc....You probably want to do some research for ENT and Ortho too, but it's not as crucial.

Source: http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf

 

[LuluLovesMe]

You can match in pretty much anything except Derm, Neurosurgery, Plastic Surgery, and Rad Onc....You probably want to do some research for ENT and Ortho too, but it's not as crucial.

Source: http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Charting-Outcomes-2014-Final.pdf

I feel like no research for something like radiology would put me in the lowest tier of programs.

 

[OnePunchBiopsy]

I feel like no research for something like radiology would put me in the lowest tier of programs.

"Lowest-Tier" becomes kind of relative if you are not interested in research. If the academic clout of the program you are applying for is not a concern, I think you don't have much to worry about in terms of the quality of training you will receive. It will all depend on your interests such as location, rapport with residents/attendings, etc, which you will not find out until your interviews or acting-internships (aways).

 

[LuluLovesMe]

"Lowest-Tier" becomes kind of relative if you are not interested in research. If the academic clout of the program you are applying for is not a concern, I think you don't have much to worry about in terms of the quality of training you will receive. It will all depend on your interests such as location, rapport with residents/attendings, etc, which you will not find out until your interviews or acting-internships (aways).

So a low tier residency wouldn't limit my job prospects to certain geographical regions? That's what concerns me.

 

[Foot Fetish]

I feel like no research for something like radiology would put me in the lowest tier of programs.

Well, you're feelings are unsubstantiated by the data...Look at # of research projects done by unmatched applicants in radiology. There is NO trend. It's clear that they're not weeding people out for not doing research. It seems like a situation where people are only doing research if they want to. I'm also interested in radiology btw, and I don't plan on doing research. You won't get into a top program, but I feel like a mid tier rad program is totally doable even with zero research.

 

[OnePunchBiopsy]

So a low tier residency wouldn't limit my job prospects to certain geographical regions? That's what concerns me.

Since you don't like research, lack-there-of will not be relevant because places that do lots of research and expect residents to do tons of research LOOK for past research experience. See what I mean? Why apply to a "top-tier" program that has tons of research if you don't like it?

Tons of OTHER things could limit your job prospects as well, and I'm not going to say the program you trained at WON'T affect your future job. There are just too many variables to say that WHERE YOU TRAINED, in itself will be the main factor.

Example 1: You apply for a position in a radiology practice with 3 guys who all went to XYZ University and you went to ABC University. ABC is a higher-tier program but a guy who also went to XYZ gets the job because they are alma matter.
Example 2: Radiology Residency turns you into a mean person (may not be possible, but stay with me) and you don't interview well for the job.

Worry about med school first. Get good grades, don't worry about research if you don't like it.

 

[NWwildcat2013]

I think it is pretty much required for ENT. On the spectrum of research requirements Id agree with the previous poster that NSG, plastic, and Derm require it, but I'd add ENT to that list from what I can tell. I think you could swing ortho without research if you had an awesome board score, AOA, honors, and good letters.

 

[PhillyMed777]

Summarize it up, fields that definitely require research, preferably in the field itself:
ENT, plastics, Derm, nsgy, rad-onc

 

[Ismet]

FYI everyone has to do research in residency, at the very least a QI project.
Also if you plan on doing a fellowship, you'll be doing research.

 

[giantswing]

You must do research if you want to do ortho.

 

[failedatlife]

Reality: most meds students don't have numerous publications. Most do a summer and present a poster. The real moochers get their names on papers in the middle after kiss-a**ing the department.

The reality of that reality: those with high scores match really well regardless of the reality.

So in sum: the reality is that you really don't need much research to check the box of research if you don't really care. Because in reality, you don't need to stand out in research if you have a really high Step I score.