Worth trying for MSTP without much research?

[ADSigMel]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have less than 100 hours of research (although I am listed as an author in an upcoming publication), so I never really even thought about MSTP until the Med-mar came out and I got an email yesterday inviting me to apply for MSTP at one of my top choice schools.

I have already submitted my AMCAS application with the schools to which I plan to apply. 5 of them have MSTPs. So I don't even know if I *could* change my designation at those schools to be considered for MSTP.

I was just wondering, is lack of research a definitive non-starter for MSTP aspirations?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Ayahuasca]

I am not applying MSTP, but I feel that less than 100 hours of research is not sufficient. That is only like 2.5 weeks of full time research.

 

[dl2dp2]

The issue isn't whether you should apply or not, but whether you know what you are getting into. You can apply, and then you might get in. And then you might realize 10 years down the line that you made a huge mistake. These are unpredictable factors. Whereas, if you don't apply you nib that possibility in its bud.

On the other hand, maybe that would've been the best decision you've ever made. So either decision, like everything else in life, has some risk associated.

Spending more time doing research gives you more information to make that decision.

I don't know why people always think of not getting in as the risk, when getting into the wrong thing is a MUCH bigger risk.

 

[JustAPhD]

Less than 100 research hours and the fact that you didn't even think about MSTP programs until you got an email leads me to think you don't really have any idea what you would be getting yourself into. A feeling that I would expect a MSTP interviewer to share.

The better question than if your lack of research disqualifies you is why would you want a PhD?

 

[ADSigMel]

All very fair points. Honestly, aside from the free tuition and stipend (I've still got over $100k in law school loans, so the thought of adding more debt makes my soul die a little), my main reason for considering MSTP would be that, as an older applicant (I'll be 35 at matriculation, assuming I get in this cycle), I might only be physically able to practice clinical medicine for 25 years. But, as long as my mind still works, a Ph.D. in conjunction with my MD and JD would make it possible for me to keep contributing to the field much later in life.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[ADSigMel]

BTW, I would have done a lot more research had I had time, but I did a 1-year DIY post-bac and worked as a scribe at night to get clinical experience. There were only so many hours during the day that I had available for research while going to school, working full-time as a scribe, continuing to work part-time as an attorney, and raising a family. It's not that I don't enjoy research - I really do!


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[eteshoe]

100 hrs is not close to enough research for you to know if you like research like that. This path is too long to just randomly walk into it. It may do you some good to talk to some MSTP students and practicing physician scientists before jumping in.

 

[cactusman]

If you go the MSTP route, you'd also add another 4 years on and get paid less. And I don't understand honestly why you would be physucally capable of academic medicine if you are not in shape to do family med or a number of IM subspecialties (which, btw, tend to be preferred by MSTP grads). And not everything in academic medicine needs a PhD.

I agree with previous posters that you don't have enough research experience to know what you're getting into, and I think from your posts your reasoning doesn't align with the actual motivations for going MD/PhD.

 

[Redpancreas]

I have less than 100 hours of research (although I am listed as an author in an upcoming publication), so I never really even thought about MSTP until the Med-mar came out and I got an email yesterday inviting me to apply for MSTP at one of my top choice schools.

I have already submitted my AMCAS application with the schools to which I plan to apply. 5 of them have MSTPs. So I don't even know if I *could* change my designation at those schools to be considered for MSTP.

I was just wondering, is lack of research a definitive non-starter for MSTP aspirations?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

My friend got mail from Harvard, Mayo, etc. telling him to apply and ended up at the Caribbean...A lack of research is by definition a "non-starter" for MSTP applications. You are applying to receive your MD/PhD paid for by the government (200-400K value). These programs are extremely competitive and look for your accomplishments as a researcher and have separate essays and interviews dedicated to your research experience as well as its technical details. You definitely are not a good candidate for the programs regardless of MCAT/GPA. You could try to apply to normal MD/PhD programs and try your luck. I've heard that some are actually looking for students to enroll in the program to promote an image of increased physician-scientist presence at their center. That being said, the compensation will vary from half-tuition to no compensation and the PhD I heard can take longer than it would take to get an MD and PhD separately.

 

[ADSigMel]

Thanks, everybody! The "free tuition" thing gave me pause, but yeah, the physician scientist path probably isn't for me. I'm happy enough to stick with the "plain old" MD/DO! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[efle]

You could maybe do some research during early med school, especially summer, and then apply to enter the MSTP at that school if you decide you truly want a research career?

I think most schools allow internal application from MD-only into MSTP like that.

 

[Dr. Stalker]

I have less than 100 hours of research (although I am listed as an author in an upcoming publication), so I never really even thought about MSTP until the Med-mar came out and I got an email yesterday inviting me to apply for MSTP at one of my top choice schools.

I have already submitted my AMCAS application with the schools to which I plan to apply. 5 of them have MSTPs. So I don't even know if I *could* change my designation at those schools to be considered for MSTP.

I was just wondering, is lack of research a definitive non-starter for MSTP aspirations?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

OP - playing devil's advocate here as I am also a fellow MSTP applicant. Do the hours matter? hell yes. Your 100 hours will raise a lot of eyebrows. Fear not, your publication should assuage that. Will the Tri-I program at weill cornell forgive you? Probably not. Lesser MSTP programs will.

Are you taking a gap year? If so, you must mention in all gap year essays you're working full time in your basic science lab. This will show your continued dedication to the physician-scientist track. Also, you should highlight/mention you only found out about the MSTP so recently as an explanation/excuse for not having more hours under your belt.

What are your #s? MCAT and GPA? Those also play a big factor in admissions at MSTP. At a school I know, the MD average is a 32, but the MSTP average is a 38. A whopping 6 point difference!

Lastly, the AMCAS and many MSTP programs require additional essays on the physician-scientist track; what your end goal is, why you want both an MD and a PhD (vs an MD that just does research [yes; they do exist]). If you can articulate yourself cleverly in these essays, MSTP will give your application consideration. Perhaps not as much as the students that spend 2-3 years post-undergrad at the NIH, but, they will not just throw your application away. The MSTP review process is different from the MD admissions process.

 

[BombsAway]

Agree with above poster. You'll already be an MD/JD. They aren't pokemon, you don't have to catch them all.