What's the best speciality for someone with a strong scientific bent?

[Lord_Vader]

This might seem like a weird question but what is the best speciality (or specialities) for someone who is into basic science more than clinical science? My favorite courses during MS1/MS2 were biochemistry, genetics, and microbiology. I absolutely hated physio and didn't enjoy anatomy very much either. I know this pretty much rules out all surgical specialities but in terms of the medical specialities, which ones would be the best fit for someone like me? I would want to see patients so I know pathology is ruled out. I hated my infectious disease elective so that's not going to work out for me. I do know that I would like to do basic science research as part of my career so hopefully that tailors down the choices that are available to me.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Allergy/Immunology
Endocrinology (particularly peds)
Medical Genetics (good luck)
Pathology --> transfusion medicine (get to work with patients)
Oncology
Rheumatology

 

[Warderino92]

Rad Onc has a strong science bent but if you don't much care for anatomy it's probably not one of the best fields to match what you're looking for.

 

[Lord_Vader]

Allergy/Immunology
Endocrinology (particularly peds)
Medical Genetics (good luck)
Pathology --> transfusion medicine (get to work with patients)
Oncology
Rheumatology

Hmm these probably interest me the most at the moment. Just curious, why did you write "good luck" next to medical genetics?

 

[WedgeDawg]

Hmm these probably interest me the most at the moment. Just curious, why did you write "good luck" next to medical genetics?

There are very few residency spots for it, as far as I'm aware. I'm actually not even sure if it's its own residency, an IM fellowship, both, or neither.

 

[bashwell]

This might seem like a weird question but what is the best speciality (or specialities) for someone who is into basic science more than clinical science? My favorite courses during MS1/MS2 were biochemistry, genetics, and microbiology. I absolutely hated physio and didn't enjoy anatomy very much either. I know this pretty much rules out all surgical specialities but in terms of the medical specialities, which ones would be the best fit for someone like me? I would want to see patients so I know pathology is ruled out. I hated my infectious disease elective so that's not going to work out for me. I do know that I would like to do basic science research as part of my career so hopefully that tailors down the choices that are available to me.

Just wanted to say I wouldn't necessarily rule out certain future specialties based on whether or not you liked certain basic sciences in M1/M2. For example, I've actually known of a surgeon who also hated anatomy in med school but he loves surgery. Maybe there's correlation but it's not exactly a 1:1 correspondence between what you liked/disliked in basic sciences and what you'll like/dislike as a future specialty.

 

[Cinclus]

There are very few residency spots for it, as far as I'm aware. I'm actually not even sure if it's its own residency, an IM fellowship, both, or neither.

There are medical genetics residencies. I always liked genetics, and I thought about medical genetics when I was in my preclinical years. I rotated in med genetics clinic in my second month of clinics and disliked it. Oh well. I'm going into EM, so that probably explains the dislike.

 

[Psai]

Derm

 

[futuremdforme]

IM? Neuro?

 

[Mad Jack]

Derm

Derm is a fairly procedure heavy, clinically oriented field. While it's possible to do a lot of interesting things in derm, most practices are more geared toward high output procedures and check-ups than anything else. The clinical art of lesion identification is not very basic-sciency, it's more of an Aunt Minnie sort of thing.

 

[BigTumor]

Derm is a fairly procedure heavy, clinically oriented field. While it's possible to do a lot of interesting things in derm, most practices are more geared toward high output procedures and check-ups than anything else. The clinical art of lesion identification is not very basic-sciency, it's more of an Aunt Minnie sort of thing.

There are physician-scientist residencies in dermatology and as an MD/PhD it was highly sold to my classmates and me by attendings in derm. I looked into it briefly and there is actually a lot of interest in basic science in derm and a solid amount underway.

 

[sliceofbread136]

Nurse practitioner

 

[URHere]

Anything research-track (assuming of course that you actually like doing basic science work and not just reading about it)

 

[Slack3r]

Derm is a fairly procedure heavy, clinically oriented field. While it's possible to do a lot of interesting things in derm, most practices are more geared toward high output procedures and check-ups than anything else. The clinical art of lesion identification is not very basic-sciency, it's more of an Aunt Minnie sort of thing.

As someone mentioned above, there is a TON of basic science research in derm. Theres a lot of interesting work being done in skin immunology, wound healing, tissue engineering, nanotechnology, etc. While, yes, a high volume clinical derm practice doesn't involve much basic science, neither does any other specialty, including those listed above. Luckily physician scientists =/= clinicians.

 

[URHere]

Luckily physician scientists =/= clinicians.

Not sure what you mean by this. All physician scientists are trained as clinicians and most stay in clinical practice. The OP mentioned an interest in basic science research, and there's no reason why he/she can't be both a physician scientist and a clinician.

 

[Slack3r]

Not sure what you mean by this. All physician scientists are trained as clinicians and most stay in clinical practice. The OP mentioned an interest in basic science research, and there's no reason why he/she can't be both a physician scientist and a clinician.

I meant that a dermatologist (or other specialist) with a busy clinical practice is not likely going to be a physician scientist.

 

[Celestia]

As far as I know, it's possible to do basic science in most any specialty if you really want to. However, I think the first list you were given is actually pretty decent.

Sounds like you should go a specialty like IM (possibly peds), and you will undoubtedly be able to make a better decision after 3rd year rotations; and of course residency rotations.

If you know you want to do basic science research, then clearly whatever project you work on in your research time may influence your career decisions.

Also, in terms of that first list, although it is true that in daily clinical practice most clinicians don't use a lot of science, I think where you might use it most would be oncology, pathology, and medical genetics.

You mentioned an interest in Rheum, but from what I see, as much as the science is interesting, on a daily basis in clinical practice, you usually just end up giving them one of a limited number of drugs. Maybe there will be new drugs in the future that will change that, who knows. And maybe I am broadcasting my ignorance - any practicing rheumatologist who wishes to clarify that is welcome to do so.

 

[Gambler 101]

Heme/onc

 

[bashwell]

Cardiology has tons of basic science research, same with hematology/oncology.

 

[Celestia]

Cardiology has tons of basic science research, same with hematology/oncology.

But if physio not as interesting to OP, may need to work harder against that resistance. Lots of physio in cards.

 

[bashwell]

But if physio not as interesting to OP, may need to work harder against that resistance. Lots of physio in cards.

That's true, good point. Although I'd reiterate to OP what I said above: There's not necessarily a direct 1:1 correspondence between what someone likes/dislikes in the basic sciences and what they'll like/dislike in a specialty. For instance physio is very important in anesthesiology, and I really like anesthesiology as a specialty, but I'm more "meh" about physiology as a subject.

 

[Celestia]

Another thing to think about when considering including basic science as a career path is the availability of funding. Top two causes of death right now in US are CV and Onc, which may explain bashwell's observation that lots of research is being done in those two fields.

You may want to get some perspectives on that from some more senior academic folk.

 

[Celestia]

That's true, good point. Although I'd reiterate to OP what I said above: There's not necessarily a direct 1:1 correspondence between what someone likes/dislikes in the basic sciences and what they'll like/dislike in a specialty. For instance physio is very important in anesthesiology, and I really like anesthesiology as a specialty, but I'm more "meh" about physiology as a subject.

I think that's generally true. I think that's why I suggested waiting till getting into clinical rotations to really make a decision. IM seems like a good path, IMO.

 

[Señor S]

There are very few residency spots for it, as far as I'm aware. I'm actually not even sure if it's its own residency, an IM fellowship, both, or neither.

There are residencies but a fellowship is more common and it's typically done after Peds (though some do it after IM or Ob/Gyn). It's not very competitive afaik.

 

[evilbooyaa]

There's a good amount of Radiation Oncologists that do a basic science research pathway, it's called the "Holman Pathway". Google it to see if you're interested. The downside as mentioned previously, is that Rad Onc is quite anatomy heavy, based on the clinical aspect of the field.

 

[Celestia]

Mm- I have question for OP. Why IR? It really doesn't seem to fit with what you are saying here - interest in basic science and no interest in anatomy.

 

[Ischemia1032]

I would say radiology and oncology have the most breadth and depth of any specialty out there, even if you sub-specialize in thses specialites, they are still great. They are incredibly difficult to learn. Then some of the internal medicine sub-specs.