What to pursue for gap year job if targeting top-tier schools?

[seryner]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Phoebus Apollo]

Honestly my advice is to get a research position and do clinical volunteering on the side (potentially even at the same institution!)

But I personally found research during my gap really fun, so that informs my advice somewhat.

Do you have adequate non-clin volunteering right now?

 

[seryner]

Honestly my advice is to get a research position and do clinical volunteering on the side (potentially even at the same institution!)

But I personally found research during my gap really fun, so that informs my advice somewhat.

Do you have adequate non-clin volunteering right now?

Thanks for your advice. I have ~500 hours of non-clinical volunteer, not really sure what's considered adequate bc I have had more time than others so I feel the bar may be higher.

 

[DokterMom]

I'm confused about what you've been doing for the past few years. Have you just been in undergrad full time? Or out working? Or working a 'real' job part time while doing a DIY post-bac? And what's your GPA like? From what caliber school? You've got a strong MCAT and presumably a pretty strong GPA if you've got a LizzyM 80. -- If that GPA is from HYPS you're in a stronger position than if it's from Podunk State College.

I'd formulate two plans -- One for Top 5 and one for upper-mid-tier. If you can beef up your volunteering and service to others while also getting a bit more research, that would be ideal. Personally, I think the "service to others" aspect would be more valuable for you...

If you've held 'real' career-track jobs previously, dropping back now to something that's visibly temporary and geared only toward preparing you for medical school might not get you the result you want. Kind of a "prepping for the test" versus learning for the sake of knowledge.

What kinds of jobs have you held previously?

 

[seryner]

..

 

[Planes2Doc]

Think super outside-the-box for non-clinical volunteering. Maybe even start a non-profit?

 

[efle]

Clinical research gig. Combines research exposure + tons of time with patients and docs. Most likely nets you a few middle authorships too, always nice for the ERAS a few years later if not in time to affect the cycle itself.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Clinical research gig. Combines research exposure + tons of time with patients and docs. Most likely nets you a few middle authorships too, always nice for the ERAS a few years later if not in time to affect the cycle itself.

What do you mean by a clinical research gig and how does one go about finding one? I hear the term clinical research coordinator thrown around a lot. I assume you mean something different.

 

[efle]

What do you mean by a clinical research gig and how does one go about finding one? I hear the term clinical research coordinator thrown around a lot. I assume you mean something different.

Nope that's exactly the kind of thing I mean. Coordinator, research assistant, whatever they want to call it, as long as the job puts you in patient rooms and gets your name on stuff. I did a year running projects for a floor at a big academic center and got tons of time with patients (explaining studies and getting consent) and tons of time seeing what the daily life as that kind of specialist was like (observing hundreds of procedures to gather data during them). Got my name thrown onto 4 or 5 papers and far more posters/abstracts at the national conference even though my time spent per each was often not that much.

In contrast, my basic science paper took over a year from originally noticing the interesting phenomenon to getting a paper accepted. Took full time work for months and part time for many more months. It was a first author instead of middle, but relatively speaking, the clinical time was much more "high yield" in my opinion for someone trying to build up a good research resume. Unfortunately in this game we've chosen to play, both for medical admissions and residency application, it tends to be quantity over quality.

As for finding it, I got my gig handed off to me from someone a year older that had done the exact same thing and used it as a gap year job. They were interviewing people to replace me at the end, and lo and behold, it was more premeds also interested in using it as a gap year. Your best bet is knowing someone that can hook you up, after that try your prehealth office and/or career office.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Nope that's exactly the kind of thing I mean. Coordinator, research assistant, whatever they want to call it, as long as the job puts you in patient rooms and gets your name on stuff. I did a year running projects for a floor at a big academic center and got tons of time with patients (explaining studies and getting consent) and tons of time seeing what the daily life as that kind of specialist was like (observing hundreds of procedures to gather data during them). Got my name thrown onto 4 or 5 papers and far more posters/abstracts at the national conference even though my time spent per each was often not that much.

In contrast, my basic science paper took over a year from originally noticing the interesting phenomenon to getting a paper accepted. Took full time work for months and part time for many more months. It was a first author instead of middle, but relatively speaking, the clinical time was much more "high yield" in my opinion for someone trying to build up a good research resume. Unfortunately in this game we've chosen to play, both for medical admissions and residency application, it tends to be quantity over quality.

Very helpful. Thanks. To whom does one apply for this? Are there PIs one should email as one would do for a sought after wet lab position?

 

[sargon2123]

Unfortunately in this game we've chosen to play, both for medical admissions and residency application, it tends to be quantity over quality.

I disagree. I’ve seen and heard folks testify that 1st author anything sticks out to PD’s. But yes, the long CV does impress most.

 

[Moko]

Both having a first author paper and/or many non-first-author papers are impressive. It also depends greatly on what you gained from these experiences (and how you convey it to the schools).

 

[efle]

I disagree. I’ve seen and heard folks testify that 1st author anything sticks out to PD’s. But yes, the long CV does impress most.

I'm sure it cant hurt, but when the avg number of abstracts/pubs on ERAS for surgical subspecialties is 15-18, and you have to choose between a pile of quick and dirty chart reviews for middle author vs one long term bench project of your own...

 

[sargon2123]

I'm sure it cant hurt, but when the avg number of abstracts/pubs on ERAS for surgical subspecialties is 15-18, and you have to choose between a pile of quick and dirty chart reviews for middle author vs one long term bench project of your own...

Wow, has it really gone that high? Have 2019 charting outcomes been released?

 

[efle]

Wow, has it really gone that high? Have 2019 charting outcomes been released?

It's already that high in 2018 for stuff like neurosurg, plastics etc. They release every other year. My guess is 2020 will be even worse, the current numbers already represent more than double what was average a decade ago.

It's an arms race in bull****ting. All my friends interested in these specialties have been grinding out as many minor projects as possible, and then submitting each minor project to multiple conferences.

It's a similar mindset to the growing obsession with Step1 preparations, it's like a positive feedback loop getting worse every year. Decompensated medical ed failure, if you will

 

[MyOdyssey]

All my friends interested in these specialties have been grinding out as many minor projects as possible, and then submitting each minor project to multiple conferences.

Are these "grinding" friends MDs or MD/PhDs?

 

[sargon2123]

Are these "grinding" friends MDs or MD/PhDs?

Probably both. I think it’s common knowledge that efle goes to a T5.

 

[sargon2123]

It's already that high in 2018 for stuff like neurosurg, plastics etc. They release every other year. My guess is 2020 will be even worse, the current numbers already represent more than double what was average a decade ago.

It's an arms race in bull****ting. All my friends interested in these specialties have been grinding out as many minor projects as possible, and then submitting each minor project to multiple conferences.

It's a similar mindset to the growing obsession with Step1 preparations, it's like a positive feedback loop getting worse every year. Decompensated medical ed failure, if you will

Do you think the best strategy is then to do the minimum to get your name up on case reports and then go the extra mile for 1-2 first author papers? It’s quite laughable that PDs are impressed by a bunch of 7th-10th author publications if it makes your CV longer. I’d say it’s detrimental for quality control of residents too. First author shows you saw something all the way through. The vast majority of other authorship mean you got lucky or knew someone at the right time.

If that truly is the game though, better that I know now

 

[efle]

Are these "grinding" friends MDs or MD/PhDs?

MDs. Multiple have already decided to do gap years. The MD/PhD people are under a lot less pressure to produce abstracts/pubs during preclinical years, for obvious reasons

Do you think the best strategy is then to do the minimum to get your name up on case reports and then go the extra mile for 1-2 first author papers? It’s quite laughable that PDs are impressed by a bunch of 7th-10th author publications if it makes your CV longer. I’d say it’s detrimental for quality control of residents too. First author shows you saw something all the way through. The vast majority of other authorship mean you got lucky or knew someone at the right time.

If that truly is the game though, better that I know now

The threshold for getting your name on a clinical chart review is extremely low. If I were planning to match neurosurg without dedicated research time, then yeah exactly. My strategy would be to help out with data abstraction or poster creation or whatever else you can get your hands on in your department.

The game is well understood by young trainees like residents and fellows, too. We constantly get spam emails here that essentially say, "We have lots of chart review that needs doing. Its pretty idiot proof so were gonna let med students do it. In exchange for giving up your weekend to mindlessly review charts for us, we will give you 25th author on this project." They want our labor because they're hella busy and we want easy pubs.

 

[MyOdyssey]

MDs. Multiple have already decided to do gap years. The MD/PhD people are under a lot less pressure to produce abstracts/pubs during preclinical years, for obvious reasons


The threshold for getting your name on a clinical chart review is extremely low. If I were planning to match neurosurg without dedicated research time, then yeah exactly. My strategy would be to help out with data abstraction or poster creation or whatever else you can get your hands on in your department.

The game is well understood by young trainees like residents and fellows, too. We constantly get spam emails here that essentially say, "We have lots of chart review that needs doing. Its pretty idiot proof so were gonna let med students do it. In exchange for giving up your weekend to mindlessly review charts for us, we will give you 25th author on this project." They want our labor because they're hella busy and we want easy pubs.

Thank you for exposing the ugly underbelly of the medical/research industrial complex.

 

[Phoebus Apollo]

Reading this and feeling a bit disheartened. I would like to focus on one or a few more substantial projects during med school than numerous ones that hold little significance for me/teach me very little

Sigh

 

[Moko]

Reading this and feeling a bit disheartened. I would like to focus on one or a few more substantial projects during med school than numerous ones that hold little significance for me/teach me very little

Sigh

Join a prolific group so that you can take point on a couple projects for first authorship, while being able to make contributions to others' manuscripts for 'nth' authorship. But yes, a lot of research projects end up being CV padding and fluff, which is a waste of everyone's time.

 

[efle]

Reading this and feeling a bit disheartened. I would like to focus on one or a few more substantial projects during med school than numerous ones that hold little significance for me/teach me very little

Sigh

I mean, you can do this. You just have to accept that you'll be an outlier on the low end if you want to match a competitive subspecialty at a major academic center, while only having those few entries.

 

[aldol16]

Do you think the best strategy is then to do the minimum to get your name up on case reports and then go the extra mile for 1-2 first author papers? It’s quite laughable that PDs are impressed by a bunch of 7th-10th author publications if it makes your CV longer. I’d say it’s detrimental for quality control of residents too. First author shows you saw something all the way through. The vast majority of other authorship mean you got lucky or knew someone at the right time.

The threshold for getting your name on a clinical chart review is extremely low. If I were planning to match neurosurg without dedicated research time, then yeah exactly. My strategy would be to help out with data abstraction or poster creation or whatever else you can get your hands on in your department.

Reading this and feeling a bit disheartened. I would like to focus on one or a few more substantial projects during med school than numerous ones that hold little significance for me/teach me very little

Surgeons can count, but they can't read. That basically sums it up. Although having fewer 1st author publications > having more nth author publications. This isn't an exact science where there's an optimal ratio though. I would say that you better have a few first author papers if you're trying to match competitively.

Protip: On the publications section in your CV, bold your name in the author list. Especially if you have multiple first-author papers.

 

[efle]

Surgeons can count, but they can't read. That basically sums it up. Although having fewer 1st author publications > having more nth author publications. This isn't an exact science where there's an optimal ratio though. I would say that you better have a few first author papers if you're trying to match competitively.

Protip: On the publications section in your CV, bold your name in the author list. Especially if you have multiple first-author papers.

There's actually been some interesting studies on the bibliometrics of matched students in specialties like neurosurg and ENT. Turns out, the vast majority of ERAS line items are conference submissions and middle authorships, or if first authorships, it's usually case reports and the occasional review paper.

In fact, the median number of first-authorships for a Neurosurg match in 2017 was zero

It's all about faking it until you make it. 18 ERAS research entries on average and the median number of first authors is 0. It's almost funny how high the BS is getting piled up in a sad sort of way

 

[aldol16]

There's actually been some interesting studies on the bibliometrics of matched students in specialties like neurosurg and ENT. Turns out, the vast majority of ERAS line items are conference submissions and middle authorships, or if first authorships, it's usually case reports and the occasional review paper.

In fact, the median number of first-authorships for a Neurosurg match in 2017 was zero

It's all about faking it until you make it. 18 ERAS research entries on average and the median number of first authors is 0. It's almost funny how high the BS is getting piled up in a sad sort of way

Wow! I had not seen that. Thanks for sharing it!

I definitely see this in my colleagues, but I do question how much they'll be able to set themselves apart just by getting 18 middle-author positions on projects that they had very little input on. What happens when someone asks them about a key experiment or methodological choice? When I come up with the methods myself, I know why I chose something versus the alternative(s). But sometimes when colleagues ask me for advice on their projects and I ask them why they did it a certain way, they're at a complete loss. I'm sure that in the end, having first-author publications will matter and will help you stand out from the rest of the pack.

 

[Phoebus Apollo]

What happens when someone asks them about a key experiment or methodological choice?

Yes. Exactly. I feel like this is so important

 

[efle]

Wow! I had not seen that. Thanks for sharing it!

I definitely see this in my colleagues, but I do question how much they'll be able to set themselves apart just by getting 18 middle-author positions on projects that they had very little input on. What happens when someone asks them about a key experiment or methodological choice? When I come up with the methods myself, I know why I chose something versus the alternative(s). But sometimes when colleagues ask me for advice on their projects and I ask them why they did it a certain way, they're at a complete loss. I'm sure that in the end, having first-author publications will matter and will help you stand out from the rest of the pack.

We can only hope there's some karmic justice out there, but honestly I was underwhelmed at the research related questions I got when interviewing for med school. Nobody asked me anything specific enough to indicate they'd read any of the papers. Maybe residency interviews will be different.

 

[aldol16]

We can only hope there's some karmic justice out there, but honestly I was underwhelmed at the research related questions I got when interviewing for med school. Nobody asked me anything specific enough to indicate they'd read any of the papers. Maybe residency interviews will be different.

I think residency interviews are different. I've heard of people being asked specific questions about their research, related to methodology. But it might depend on where you want to go, i.e. research-heavy program vs. not.

 

[sargon2123]

I think residency interviews are different. I've heard of people being asked specific questions about their research, related to methodology. But it might depend on where you want to go, i.e. research-heavy program vs. not.

There's actually been some interesting studies on the bibliometrics of matched students in specialties like neurosurg and ENT. Turns out, the vast majority of ERAS line items are conference submissions and middle authorships, or if first authorships, it's usually case reports and the occasional review paper.

In fact, the median number of first-authorships for a Neurosurg match in 2017 was zero

It's all about faking it until you make it. 18 ERAS research entries on average and the median number of first authors is 0. It's almost funny how high the BS is getting piled up in a sad sort of way

First author on a review is pivotal though is it not? That’s hard for a med student to get accepted and takes a lot of time to get right.

 

[efle]

First author on a review is pivotal though is it not? That’s hard for a med student to get accepted and takes a lot of time to get right.

I mean it's still an accomplishment for sure. But reviews, chart reviews/retrospectives and case reports/series are all a big step down from conducting your own hypothesis driven original project where you design and execute an experimental method etc

 

[MyOdyssey]

I mean it's still an accomplishment for sure. But reviews, chart reviews/retrospectives and case reports/series are all a big step down from conducting your own hypothesis driven original project where you design and execute an experimental method etc

As a medical student, is that easy to do on bench research? What about clinical research?

 

[aldol16]

First author on a review is pivotal though is it not? That’s hard for a med student to get accepted and takes a lot of time to get right.

I mean it's still an accomplishment for sure. But reviews, chart reviews/retrospectives and case reports/series are all a big step down from conducting your own hypothesis driven original project where you design and execute an experimental method etc

It all depends. In many specialties, reviews are typically by invite and so while it is hard for a med student to just go out and do a review and get it accepted, it's not as hard for a PI to assign a med student to write a review that has been invited. It still requires work, but obviously a different kind of work than original research.

The exception I would think would be a systematic review or a meta-analysis, where there is a critical analysis component. This is probably seen as better than just a review but still different from original research.

 

[efle]

As a medical student, is that easy to do on bench research? What about clinical research?

The only peeps I know pursuing this kind of thing are taking a gap year to do it. The people aiming for competitive specialties that want to go straight through are pretty much all chart review work or case reports.

 

[aldol16]

The only peeps I know pursuing this kind of thing are taking a gap year to do it. The people aiming for competitive specialties that want to go straight through are pretty much all chart review work or case reports.

It is very possible to get involved in clinical research that isn't chart reviews or case reports in the pre-clinical years. You have a lot of time to do whatever tickles your fancy. Once you get into clerkships, you kind of are limited in terms of what you can do because you have to be at certain places at certain times.

 

[efle]

It is very possible to get involved in clinical research that isn't chart reviews or case reports in the pre-clinical years. You have a lot of time to do whatever tickles your fancy. Once you get into clerkships, you kind of are limited in terms of what you can do because you have to be at certain places at certain times.

Oh you definitely can get involved. I just dont know anyone using that to rack up their dozen research entries. Actually I do know one neurosurg guy that's helping some prospective stuff and just doing reviews/reports in addition

 

[aldol16]

Oh you definitely can get involved. I just dont know anyone using that to rack up their dozen research entries. Actually I do know one neurosurg guy that's helping some prospective stuff and just doing reviews/reports in addition

Almost everyone I know who's going into a competitive field has started research early. Honestly, the pre-clinical years are the best time to do research and get the brunt of it out of the way, unless you really want to take a research year.

 

[efle]

Almost everyone I know who's going into a competitive field has started research early. Honestly, the pre-clinical years are the best time to do research and get the brunt of it out of the way, unless you really want to take a research year.

I would also bet that a lot of the entries come from people's gap years prior to med school. I know most of mine will. With gap years after college becoming the majority at the research heavy med schools anyways, I'm probably not an exception

 

[aldol16]

I would also bet that a lot of the entries come from people's gap years prior to med school. I know most of mine will. With gap years after college becoming the majority at the research heavy med schools anyways, I'm probably not an exception

Certainly. However, this will be more of a minority of people from what I've seen. This is mainly because in order for your publications before med school to matter much, it has to be in the competitive specialty. If you did your research years in ENT prior to med school and now have 10 ENT papers because of it, that's great. But for many other people, they probably didn't have much of a choice in terms of what specialty to do their research in during their pre-med school years and I would say that 99.9% don't have the foresight to say "Oh, I might be applying to ENT in six years so I'm going to try to get a research coordinator job in ENT." So for everyone else, you're going to have to get that field-specific research during med school.

In any case, if you have 10 ENT papers from 2014-2016 but then zero papers since, it's not exactly speaking to your stomach for research.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Why do residency programs care about a research track record in their candidates?

 

[sargon2123]

Certainly. However, this will be more of a minority of people from what I've seen. This is mainly because in order for your publications before med school to matter much, it has to be in the competitive specialty. If you did your research years in ENT prior to med school and now have 10 ENT papers because of it, that's great. But for many other people, they probably didn't have much of a choice in terms of what specialty to do their research in during their pre-med school years and I would say that 99.9% don't have the foresight to say "Oh, I might be applying to ENT in six years so I'm going to try to get a research coordinator job in ENT." So for everyone else, you're going to have to get that field-specific research during med school.

In any case, if you have 10 ENT papers from 2014-2016 but then zero papers since, it's not exactly speaking to your stomach for research.

Lol that’s not true. If it makes your CV longer then that helps too

 

[aldol16]

Lol that’s not true. If it makes your CV longer then that helps too

Sure. But we're talking about a spectrum, not a dichotomy. More papers = good. More papers demonstrating a consistent research record and dedication to research = better. More first-author papers = even better.

 

[aldol16]

Why do residency programs care about a research track record in their candidates?

Not all of them will care. Research-heavy programs will care about research. Non-research heavy programs will care less/not care about research. The problem is, most "top ranked" programs are research-heavy. Probably because they're research-heavy.

 

[sargon2123]

Are there even any community, non-research heavy programs for the derm, plastics, ent-type specialties?