Is this enough research?

[Ylide]

I'm applying to MSTP programs this summer (UCHSC, OHSU, U of Rochester, Harvard) and have a couple questions for those who know:

First, my research experience is only a few months. I have one internship in a pathology lab working on prostate cancer research that is 9 weeks long. Other than that, I've been working on a computational chemistry project with a professor at my undergraduate school. I've only been working with him since May and we're a ways away from a publication. The work I did in the pathology lab is publishable but hasn't been written yet.

Second, my GPA at my current school as a chemistry major is a 4.0, but I have some crappy grades from my first attempt at college in the early 90's. My composite GPA between the two is about a 3.75 which is decent but not above the recommended 3.8+. Will it be obvious to the reviewers that my current grades are much higher than my grades from 10 years ago or do they only see the composite? (My MCAT score is a 35, I'm not too worried there) Should I mention something about this in my personal statement or just leave it for an interviewer to ask about?

Finally, I'm a change of career case. I was in Information Technology for about 7 years, starting from lowly help desk and working my way up to director of network security for a financial company. I'm 29 now and will be 30 by the time I start the MSTP program in fall 2005. Does this help are harm my application?

Thanks in advance

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[microTAS]

Hey Ylide,

Your stats sound good, but you're right in asking about the research. Most people who apply have 2+ years of research, and research is the most important criteria for pretty much any MSTP. You don't need a publication but you do need depth or at least lots of experience. If you want to get into a decent MSTP, you may have to spend some more time in the lab.

G Luck

 

[Ylide]

Thanks for the reply. Would you say it eliminates my chances of getting into the program or just makes it a little more difficult?

 

[zep]

You need enough research experience to know for sure that you want research to be a central component of your career. I think that a lot of adcoms will doubt that a few months is enough.

 

[tofurious]

A few good months may be enough for a promising 19 year old who is moving through college as fast as he can, but since you have had a whole career and a whole lot of time to explore (granted no one wants to spend too much time in college), your credentials and life experiences make you a better MD candidate than an MSTP candidate.

 

[microTAS]

I think your chances are very slim at least to middle and top tier mstps. Sorry to break out the bad news.

If MSTP is what you're really into, you may want to spend an extra year pursuing research.

Thanks for the reply. Would you say it eliminates my chances of getting into the program or just makes it a little more difficult?

 

[b&ierstiefel]

and the extra year of research will definitely be worth it if you're passionate about being an MD/PhD student. the program is 7-8 years in length on average which is pretty long so an extra year won't seem like much in the long run.

peace

 

[psyuk]

you're pretty old to be thinking about applying to mstp programs. plus you dont have enough research experience to compete against other mstp applicants. you're better off as an md applicant.

become a post doctoral fellow if you are really serious about research after med school.

best of luck

 

[Ylide]

Thanks for all the input. I want to add that by the time I would actually begin the MSTP I will have over a year each in 2 separate areas of research as I'm continuing both projects through my last year of undergraduate work.

I'm certain that I want to get into an MSTP program, even if I have to wait a year. I thought a bit about it and concluded that I can easily get into a PhD program in path or toxicology (my main areas of interest) at several of the universities I'm interested in attending. I can always apply for the MSTP after my first year of graduate studies, right? If I attend CU Health Sciences Center, where I'm currently doing research, I would not be teaching my first year (there is no undergraduate program there) but doing three 12 week research rotations, which would give me a total of 2 years of additional research between now and when I would begin the MSTP. From what I've read, some of the programs are quite flexible as to what order you complete the medical and doctoral components.

Sound feasible? I'm still applying for the MSTP for fall 2005, there's always a chance I could get in if I interview well. I communicate well, have a solid understanding of the research I've done, and a well-rounded background.

 

[zep]

I'm certain that I want to get into an MSTP program, even if I have to wait a year.

Then you will get in - this year, next, or the year after. Remember, the 'P' in PhD stands for persistance. If you really want to do this then the adcoms will see it in you.

Best of luck.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

you're pretty old to be thinking about applying to mstp programs. plus you dont have enough research experience to compete against other mstp applicants. you're better off as an md applicant.

become a post doctoral fellow if you are really serious about research after med school.

best of luck

man...that's harsh

 

[Neuronix]

I thought a bit about it and concluded that I can easily get into a PhD program in path or toxicology (my main areas of interest) at several of the universities I'm interested in attending. I can always apply for the MSTP after my first year of graduate studies, right?

I don't know how it is at CU or some other programs specifically, but in general it is NOT adviseable to go to a PhD program and try to transfer to the MD/PhD program. It is well known that PhD programs are a potential backdoor into MD/PhD and yet most MD/PhD programs heavily disfavor or prohibit PhD students from applying.

I'm not really sure why this is. My speculation is that MD/PhD programs really want students who were good enough to get into their program to begin with. Many MD students fit that bill, but very few PhD students do. Even so, it's much easier logistically for a student to transfer from MD to MD/PhD. I mean, you're already in med school, you haven't started grad school yet. Whereas PhD students would have to go PhD -> MD -> PhD -> MD.

Regardless of the reasons, make sure you really know what you're doing before starting a PhD program. That may mean talking to the MSTPs at your programs of interest. As for what you SHOULD do, I'm unsure. I don't know anyone who has applied successfully at your age, so I don't know how schools are going to look at you. I do know that only a couple months of research isn't gonna cut it for someone who's much younger.

Good luck!

 

[tofurious]

I am anxiously awaiting at least one exclamation mark troll to come here and yell at Neuronix and "the Man"...

 

[Neuronix]

oh indianboy where have you gone!!

j/k

 

[zep]

Well, here's to you tofurious...

My speculation is that MD/PhD programs really want students who were good enough to get into their program to begin with. Many MD students fit that bill, but very few PhD students do.

This is boooooguusss. Blanket statements of this variety are rarely accurate. If you were to say that a greater % of MD students are qualified for MSTP acceptance compared to PhD students, then I would agree with you. But to say that very few PhD students are qualified is quite misleading (and insulting to many). Typically, in my experience, the main prohibitive factor for PhD applicants is a lack of volunteer, clinical and other 'humanitarian' activities on their CVs.

 

[Neuronix]

This is boooooguusss. Blanket statements of this variety are rarely accurate. If you were to say that a greater % of MD students are qualified for MSTP acceptance compared to PhD students, then I would agree with you.

My apologies. This is what I meant.

 

[tofurious]

Well, here's to you tofurious...

Thanks for the tease, but there was no exclamation mark nor was there any finger pointing at "the Man" for putting down the "people". PLUS, you actually made some sense. That wasn't what I was waiting for...

When Neuronix said "good enough", I don't think he meant CAPABLE of 1) doing well in school and on MCAT, 2) lots of EC, 3) extensive volunteering experience beyond washing petri dishes, and 4) solid research on top of it all but RATHER HAVING DONE THEM ALL. I think very few people question whether PhD candidates *CAN* do it, but most of them have NOT done it as most MD candidates have in a very short amount of time (college + 1-2 years post-bac). Going back to OP's question, since he had much more time to fulfill these "pre-reqs", the expectations of him are going to be so much higher that he needs to hold himself to a higher standard.

 

[zep]

I agree. [nods head]

 

[psyuk]

man...that's harsh

my hero.....