Which residency programs value research the most?

[chondroblast]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Which residency programs do you think care the most about your research experience and which care the least (if at all)?

A ranking would be nice 🙂

 

[Dral]

Do you mean by specialty or within a specialty?

 

[chondroblast]

Do you mean by specialty or within a specialty?

I'm thinking by specialty. So for instance
Neurosurgery: Highly Valued

 

[mcloaf]

RadOnc

 

[QuantumJ]

RadOnc

 

[elektroshok]

Rad onc, derm.

With the caveat that any specialty at a highly academic center will value it..

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[evilbooyaa]

In Rad Onc it is all but mandatory to have a shot at matching. And NSG/Derm. High level places in any field value research.

 

[chondroblast]

How do you get research experience if you're not doing MD/PhD?

 

[neusu]

Interesting. There's a document called Charting Outcomes In the Match http://b83c73bcf0e7ca356c80-e8560f4...tent/uploads/2013/08/chartingoutcomes2011.pdf

The top 5 ranked by number of experiences reported on ERAS: 1) Rad Onc (4.2) 2)PRS (3.8) 3) Dermatology (3.7) 4) ENT (3.5) 5) Neurosurery (3.4)

 

[neusu]

How do you get research experience if you're not doing MD/PhD?

Several options. 1) E-mail residents/faculty to ask if they have projects you can work on during medical school. Once establishing a project, work as hard as you can. If you don't have enough time to get published during medical school 1a) Take a year off and focus on research. 2) Transition in to MD/PhD program

3) Crush boards and who cares about research

 

[BurghStudent]

In every specialty there will be programs at productive academic centers. They value research heavily.

 

[chondroblast]

Not the same as research, but here is a list of specialties by percent of successful matches with PhDs (Data gathered from the residency outcomes data):

Anesthesiology: 3.5%
Dermatology 9.1%
Diagnostic Radiology: 4.3%
Emergency Medicine: 1.7%
Family Medicine: 0.9%
General Surgery: 2.2%
Internal Medicine: 5.7%
Internal Medicine/Pediatrics: 3.3%
Neurological Surgery: 10.3%
Neurology: 11.9%
Obstetrics and Gynecology: 1.3%
Orthopedic Surgery: 2.4%
Otolaryngology: 3.7%
Pathology: 17.2%
Pediatrics: 4.2%
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: 1.1%
Plastic Surgery: 6.8%
Psychiatry: 5.1%
Radiation Oncology: 22.1%

0-5%
5-10%
10+%

 

[ValentinNarcisse]

Also important to mention basic science research is more highly valued than clinical/outcomes research at most top academic centers.

 

[JoshSt]

How do you get research experience if you're not doing MD/PhD?

Search the last 10 or so pages of this forum. There was a semi-recent thread where some med students shared their experience of how they got >10 pubs in med school w/o doing MD/PhD

 

[evilbooyaa]

Interesting. There's a document called Charting Outcomes In the Match http://b83c73bcf0e7ca356c80-e8560f4...tent/uploads/2013/08/chartingoutcomes2011.pdf

The top 5 ranked by number of experiences reported on ERAS: 1) Rad Onc (4.2) 2)PRS (3.8) 3) Dermatology (3.7) 4) ENT (3.5) 5) Neurosurery (3.4)

More important than # of research experiences is the # of abstracts, presentations, publications.

The top 5 (for US seniors who matched in the field) - 1) Rad Onc (8.3), 2) PRS (8.1), 3) Derm (7.5), 4) NeuroSurg (7.4), 5) ENT (5.1).

Regarding how to get involved, e-mail faculty if your school has a department in the field. Most attendings have some sort of clinical project that they need someone to do chart review on. If they don't have one, they can point you in a good direction.

 

[neusu]

More important than # of research experiences is the # of abstracts, presentations, publications.

The top 5 (for US seniors who matched in the field) - 1) Rad Onc (8.3), 2) PRS (8.1), 3) Derm (7.5), 4) NeuroSurg (7.4), 5) ENT (5.1).

Regarding how to get involved, e-mail faculty if your school has a department in the field. Most attendings have some sort of clinical project that they need someone to do chart review on. If they don't have one, they can point you in a good direction.

Thanks, I'm lazy and didn't read the whole document.

 

[failedatlife]

Don't fool yourself, they value your Step 1 score and down the line your third year grades and letters. Not universal in neurosurgery. To quote the chairman of neurosurgery at my school (on rotation now): "Research is nice but honestly any smart person can write a paper, it's not special at all". He dissuaded my friend from applying because "most programs will cut you off at a 240". They do get a stiffy from 260s in that department here apparently.

 

[NWwildcat2013]

Don't fool yourself, they value your Step 1 score and down the line your third year grades and letters. Not universal in neurosurgery. To quote the chairman of neurosurgery at my school (on rotation now): "Research is nice but honestly any smart person can write a paper, it's not special at all". He dissuaded my friend from applying because "most programs will cut you off at a 240". They do get a stiffy from 260s in that department here apparently.

I just don't believe this.

After I did well on Step 1 I had a few months during which I picked the brains of people in various surgical subs and they all emphasized that I had a good start with my Step 1, but I would need to do research at a breakneck pace in MS3 to be competitive. Basically, they said I could get interviews without research but when it came to making a rank list I would be severely disadvantaged relative to my competition.

 

[HereWeGo17]

Contrary to what failedatlife keeps arguing, doing well on classes/Steps and doing well in research are not mutually exclusive. Especially when you are looking at competitive fields like derm, Rad Onc, and surgical subspecialties, almost all applicants have good stats in everything. I was able to excel in all domains - classes, clerkships, Steps, research, and LORs - and applied to a surgical subspecialty. I was able to get interviews at virtually every top academic program in the country, but at all of the interviews I was surrounded by other applicants who had also excelled in everything.

If you want to have a good shot at a competitive specialty and/or program, you have to be great, not merely good, at everything. Don't be someone who is one-dimensional and does a ton of research at the expense of doing poorly on classes/Steps, or vice versa.

 

[neusu]

Don't fool yourself, they value your Step 1 score and down the line your third year grades and letters. Not universal in neurosurgery. To quote the chairman of neurosurgery at my school (on rotation now): "Research is nice but honestly any smart person can write a paper, it's not special at all". He dissuaded my friend from applying because "most programs will cut you off at a 240". They do get a stiffy from 260s in that department here apparently.

No one is implying research is > step 1. Research is > no research. Many specialties, especially neurosurgery, place a strong emphasis on it. Not having anything in that column will cut you off at most bigger, academic programs that get named around here. It indicates you are a well rounded candidate, can handle multiple things at once (e.g. grades, step 1, and research), and are able to see a task to completion.

 

[SunsFun]

Is there a negative impact of having publications that are not exactly related to the field one plans to apply to?

Example: publishing in diabetes outcomes while planning to apply to surgery?

No


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Anicetus]

Contrary to what failedatlife keeps arguing, doing well on classes/Steps and doing well in research are not mutually exclusive. Especially when you are looking at competitive fields like derm, Rad Onc, and surgical subspecialties, almost all applicants have good stats in everything. I was able to excel in all domains - classes, clerkships, Steps, research, and LORs - and applied to a surgical subspecialty. I was able to get interviews at virtually every top academic program in the country, but at all of the interviews I was surrounded by other applicants who had also excelled in everything.

If you want to have a good shot at a competitive specialty and/or program, you have to be great, not merely good, at everything. Don't be someone who is one-dimensional and does a ton of research at the expense of doing poorly on classes/Steps, or vice versa.

If I were to ever successfully publish research in medical school at the same time as struggling to get good grades, I would do neuro research on Super Humans - who can just do everything.

 

[HereWeGo17]

Is there a negative impact of having publications that are not exactly related to the field one plans to apply to?

Example: publishing in diabetes outcomes while planning to apply to surgery?

Not at all. My research was in a field that is completely unrelated to my chosen specialty. In fact I had ZERO research experience in the surgical subspecialty I chose, since I didn't experience it until the end of MS3 year. I had no issues getting interviews at very good programs, and all the interviewers were genuinely curious/enthusiastic/respectful of my research.