Research: basic v. clinical

[Commis]

Hello all, new to this forum.

Quick background: I'm a med student going into 2nd year who has spent the summer doing basic microbio research in the ENT dept of my home institution looking at a certain gene/protein and its effects on tumor regulation. My research is part of the "honors in research" program at my institution, so I essentially oversee my own project to the finish, where over the span of 1-3 years, I will write a poster, paper, present the results at a student research day, etc.

I have 2 questions, both of which may be grossly oversimplified:

1) For those of you intimately familiar with the Oto residency selection game, is there an overall preference for basic vs. clinical research on an applicants CV? I would imagine that it depends on the institution and probably even the individual committee member looking at the app, but if there is any general, overall sense of bias, I'd like to know.

2) My PI (an ENT himself) has done previous research on our particular protein and its role in regulation of H&N squamous cell car and multiple myeloma in vitro and in vivo. He wants to expand the scope of his previous findings, so my project is basically repeating his experiment(s) in non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer. Although my research will say "Dept. of Otolaryngology" on the cover page, I'm afraid that admissions committees might look at it and think, "well, what exactly does this have to do with ENT?? It's not even about HNSCC". Should I be concerned, or am I worrying myself needlessly?

Any feedback would be appreciated. I am highly motivated to learn as much as possible about ENT and the residency game.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gstrub]

I haven't gone through the match yet, but have solicited similar advice from this forum and from some ENT residents I know. Here is what I discovered:

First question: Basic science research leading to a first author publication in a respected journal is probably the most respected accomplishment research-wise. If this is in ENT fantastic, but it certainly doesn't have to be ENT-related. The key here is to be able to explain (in an interview or on an application) how what you did can be related to ENT. Don't worry if it seems like a stretch...the key is that you have a major research-related accomplishment. Ranking second to this would probably be a 1st author clinical research publication in an ENT journal, followed by 2/3/4th author on any publication, followed by just having research experience (posters, abstracts, presentations, but no pubs).

Second question: I wouldn't worry about this at all. First, you are doing research in the ENT department and will have a LOR from an ENT who has worked with you in the lab and presumably will work with you clinically. This is a tremendous opportunity to distinguish yourself from other medical students and demonstrate your motivation for the field.

Bottom line for research is publication. Try to get your hands into as many experiments as possible that will put your name on papers, and hopefully you can get a 1st author pub out of your honors project.

Just my $.02...good luck.

 

[resxn]

First Question: Really it's the quality of the study and your role in it, not whether basic or clinical.

Second question: Doesn't matter. Research is research. You'll have more to talk about if it's more ENT than Ob/Gyn but the nuances within ENT won't matter.