Which one is more impressive for residency apps? (research)

[osumc2014]

For the summer after med 1 which one would be better for a more competitive residency.

1) doing a project with a very well established PI (lots of top journal publications) and landing "co-author" (whatever that means) on a long term project (not my own project). Not really that time consuming. paid by the grant from PI

2) doing research on a project of your own with little known PI, but primary authorship. Very time consuming. Publications may be to not as prestigious journals. Getting a research funding fellowship.

I am also extremely interested in the topic for both projects

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[QofQuimica]

It doesn't really matter; a summer research project is just a little taste of research, and if you can get a poster, that would be great. A pub would be even better, but most people won't get one, probably including you. (PIs are often unwarrantedly optimistic when it comes to these things.) But that's fine, because what residency PDs care most about are your Step 1 and Step 2 scores, your third year clerkship grades, and your LORs. I'm telling you this as someone who is applying for residency with a PhD and two MSes. 🙂

 

[Rollo]

It doesn't really matter; a summer research project is just a little taste of research, and if you can get a poster, that would be great. A pub would be even better, but most people won't get one, probably including you. (PIs are often unwarrantedly optimistic when it comes to these things.) But that's fine, because what residency PDs care most about are your Step 1 and Step 2 scores, your third year clerkship grades, and your LORs. I'm telling you this as someone who is applying for residency with a PhD and two MSes. 🙂

Interesting.

I don't know what residency you're applying to, but have you found (or heard) that research experiences are more important for competitive residencies (i.e. rad onc, derm, ENT)?

Consensus seems to be that research is more important for the competitive residencies...at least that's what I gather from looking at NRMP PD survey and SDN forums for those specialties.

 

[cpants]

Research can be critical for a competitive residency, whether that is uro, ent, derm, etc or just a medicine spot at a big name program. Both of your options have their advantages. A primary authorship is much better resume wise, even if it is in a lesser journal. However, working with a leader in the field has the advantage of you getting to know that person and thereby getting the benefit of his letter and connections. The most important thing is getting published. Research without a publication (abstract, poster, or article) is almost meaningless.

 

[jdh71]

For a student, I'd recommend going with the big name PI. Ride those coat-tails, enjoy the connections and opened doors. Make your primary authorship bones in fellowship or research orientated residency later.

 

[235009]

definitely go with the big name PI! the research will probably be more publishable and your PI will have more clout and more resources which will facilitate publishing. you are casting this as if publishing is going to happen with either PI which is not true...it is much less likely that you will even publish at all in scenario #2

 

[osumc2014]

definitely go with the big name PI! the research will probably be more publishable and your PI will have more clout and more resources which will facilitate publishing. you are casting this as if publishing is going to happen with either PI which is not true...it is much less likely that you will even publish at all in scenario #2

first one the PI published at least 2 consistently over past years with a med student, so I think that ll be ok, the 2nd one is really not for sure publication, but since it ll be with med school fellowship, they require a poster presentation at least at the end, if not an abstract

thanks for the responses! I love both projects, but I also dont wanna kill myself next summer, the first one is much more relaxed/flexible hours.

 

[QofQuimica]

Interesting.

I don't know what residency you're applying to, but have you found (or heard) that research experiences are more important for competitive residencies (i.e. rad onc, derm, ENT)?

Consensus seems to be that research is more important for the competitive residencies...at least that's what I gather from looking at NRMP PD survey and SDN forums for those specialties.

Research is definitely more important for some specialties than others, but it doesn't trump board scores and clerkship grades for any specialty. So in the hierarchy of what matters for residency apps, it's not at the very top of the list.

In the OP's case, he is a first year and likely has no idea what he even wants to go into. So any research he wants to do is fine, but the choice shouldn't be made with the expectation of getting a pub. Again, it's hard to accomplish much in a single summer, and the odds of getting a pub from two months worth of work are very low, especially if it's basic science work. But it's very realistic to get a poster out of it; probably most med students who do a research summer can easily do enough work in one summer to present a poster at a conference. That is still something that can go on your ERAS as a research experience.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

I have a fair bit of experience with basic science/translational research but none with clinical research and I agree with what Q has said: if you're conducting research in a basic science type lab, it is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly hard to complete a project of any significance (and worthy of publication) in 2 months over summer. A poster presentation is definitely far more feasible.

If the two labs you're comparing are basic sciencey, I would recommend the big name PI who already has a project in mind and can guide you through it. He/she also probably has enough money to send you to a conference or two for a poster presentation if you show enough interest and work hard. I wouldn't restrict myself to the second PI just to present at the end of the summer poster session. As far as I understand it, these type of sessions are "worth" less than presenting at regional/national/international conferences. And the big name PI might have a better chance at getting you the opportunity to present at such a conference.

But ultimately though, in the grand scheme of things, it's unlikely to matter which lab you end up in. Unless you're performing doctoral level work, I can't imagine a summer project (or even most year long ones) being very meaningful/high impact.

 

[osumc2014]

I have a fair bit of experience with basic science/translational research but none with clinical research and I agree with what Q has said: if you're conducting research in a basic science type lab, it is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly hard to complete a project of any significance (and worthy of publication) in 2 months over summer. A poster presentation is definitely far more feasible.

If the two labs you're comparing are basic sciencey, I would recommend the big name PI who already has a project in mind and can guide you through it. He/she also probably has enough money to send you to a conference or two for a poster presentation if you show enough interest and work hard. I wouldn't restrict myself to the second PI just to present at the end of the summer poster session. As far as I understand it, these type of sessions are "worth" less than presenting at regional/national/international conferences. And the big name PI might have a better chance at getting you the opportunity to present at such a conference.

But ultimately though, in the grand scheme of things, it's unlikely to matter which lab you end up in. Unless you're performing doctoral level work, I can't imagine a summer project (or even most year long ones) being very meaningful/high impact.

Ok thanks for the responses!

I wonder what residency programs are looking for in terms of research then? If they are not expecting doctoral work then doesn't anything count?
Do most applicants to competitive programs do year long research that is more conclusive? Also I've always felt that research that only requires looking up old papers, doing some stats and getting a publication just doesnt seem as meaningful as basic science work (no offense if anyone did that, please correct me if I'm wrong).

Also does 2nd author on an abstract mean anything the summer right before M1?

thanks again for the responses, they've been informative 👍

 

[QofQuimica]

I wonder what residency programs are looking for in terms of research then? If they are not expecting doctoral work then doesn't anything count?

Again, it depends on the specialty and on the specific program.

Do most applicants to competitive programs do year long research that is more conclusive?

I don't know the answer to that, but my guess is that the most competitive people would have more than just one summer's worth of research experience.

Also I've always felt that research that only requires looking up old papers, doing some stats and getting a publication just doesnt seem as meaningful as basic science work (no offense if anyone did that, please correct me if I'm wrong).

Having done both types of research, I'd say you're wrong. Researchers on both sides of the divide (clinical versus basic) are often intellectual snobs when it comes to these things, but *all* good research is difficult to plan and execute. Even a good retrospective clinical research project is not something you can just dash together, because the output of a model is only as good as the data and parameters you put into it.

Also does 2nd author on an abstract mean anything the summer right before M1?

Again, you'd list this on your ERAS as a research experience.

 

[mbe]

I've got a question on doing research.. My bench research project is drawing to a close- worked on it through summer and also the academic year, unpaid but getting published as a co-author. I'm not sure where to go next.

Option 1. should I ask the PI if I could participate in another bench research project
Option 2. Or should I go try out clinical research?
Option 3. Or should I try to do both?

I quite liked bench research, and wouldnt mind doing another one. But I would also like to try out what clinical research is like. (actually it'll more likely be an epidemiological study.) I heard it's a lot to do with statistics and literature database.. so I should be possible to do it on my own time at my own pace, no? I am also being realistic and judging my chances of getting publications out of the clinical research. (pretty sure I won't land another bench publication for a while..) and what are people's opinions on doing both simultaneously? Please give your comments.

Regardless of whatever I choose, I will probably carry out another bench research project next summer at the same lab I am in now. So maybe a bit of diversity now? lol