Are MD/PhD applicants expected to have a higher publication output?

[Guest]

...there isn’t any sort of double standard, is there?

[Guest]

(08-15-2020, 06:58 PM)Guest Wrote: ...there isn’t any sort of double standard, is there?

If you do a phd people will expect you to publish a ton or some high impact shit. If you dont it makes you look unproductive and thats a red flag.

[Guest]

It isn't a double standard. As a PhD you are taking at least 3 years, usually more, for the purposes of research. If you do not have publications coming from your PhD, or if your publications are of the same caliber/quantity as the non-PhD applicants, it will look back for you. PhDs would hopefully have a a couple higher impact publications (doesn't have to be nature or anything, but something of more caliber than the NSG specific journals). You should only get a PhD if you actually want to be a scientist in some regard, not to try to make yourself the best applicant possible to match at a top tier program. Too many people make this mistake...

[Guest]

senior resident, west coast. yep, i agree with the poster above. we definitely keep a closer eye on your research if you are MD/PhD. also, how you talk about your research is also revealing. i.e. whether you were just "name dropped" or actually conducted the research.

[Guest]

(08-15-2020, 09:13 PM)Guest Wrote: senior resident, west coast. yep, i agree with the poster above. we definitely keep a closer eye on your research if you are MD/PhD. also, how you talk about your research is also revealing. i.e. whether you were just "name dropped" or actually conducted the research.

So is it more quality of quantity that is expected to be greater among MD/PhD applicants? Because if the total number of publications for the average matched applicant is 18 (including non-papers), then do programs expect something like 23+ publications from MD/PhD students? Even the most successful PhD students at top universities do not have numbers like this. However, it total sense if higher impact and more basic science work is expected (but around the same volume).

[Guest]

Yes, but consider ~10% of applicants have a PhD, about half of which are worthy of consideration when you filter for socially awkward dweebs who have no business being in medicine, those with compelling geographic reasons which effectively limits their visibility in the applicant pool, or subpar step 1/sub-i performance. Having a PhD after your name puts you in serious consideration by every major academic program in the country regardless of many publications you have. Zero publications would be a red flag, but the raw count is bolstered by #s of podium talks, F grant awards, and how eloquently you can talk about your research and articulate a vision for your career during your interview. The most successful applicants tick all of these boxes, but you're going to end up at a strong program regardless of the length of your CV unless you really have something working against you

---

(08-15-2020, 11:50 PM)Guest Wrote:

(08-15-2020, 09:13 PM)Guest Wrote: senior resident, west coast. yep, i agree with the poster above. we definitely keep a closer eye on your research if you are MD/PhD. also, how you talk about your research is also revealing. i.e. whether you were just "name dropped" or actually conducted the research.

So is it more quality of quantity that is expected to be greater among MD/PhD applicants? Because if the total number of publications for the average matched applicant is 18 (including non-papers), then do programs expect something like 23+ publications from MD/PhD students? Even the most successful PhD students at top universities do not have numbers like this. However, it total sense if higher impact and more basic science work is expected (but around the same volume).

Looking up the recent MD/PhD cohorts at MGH. Their numbers are closer to five, nothing remotely close to the 23+ range

[Guest]

(08-15-2020, 11:56 PM)Guest Wrote: Yes, but consider ~10% of applicants have a PhD, about half of which are worthy of consideration when you filter for socially awkward dweebs who have no business being in medicine, those with compelling geographic reasons which effectively limits their visibility in the applicant pool, or subpar step 1/sub-i performance. Having a PhD after your name puts you in serious consideration by every major academic program in the country regardless of many publications you have. Zero publications would be a red flag, but the raw count is bolstered by #s of podium talks, F grant awards, and how eloquently you can talk about your research and articulate a vision for your career during your interview. The most successful applicants tick all of these boxes, but you're going to end up at a strong program regardless of the length of your CV unless you really have something working against you

---

(08-15-2020, 11:50 PM)Guest Wrote:

(08-15-2020, 09:13 PM)Guest Wrote: senior resident, west coast. yep, i agree with the poster above. we definitely keep a closer eye on your research if you are MD/PhD. also, how you talk about your research is also revealing. i.e. whether you were just "name dropped" or actually conducted the research.

So is it more quality of quantity that is expected to be greater among MD/PhD applicants? Because if the total number of publications for the average matched applicant is 18 (including non-papers), then do programs expect something like 23+ publications from MD/PhD students? Even the most successful PhD students at top universities do not have numbers like this. However, it total sense if higher impact and more basic science work is expected (but around the same volume).

Looking up the recent MD/PhD cohorts at MGH. Their numbers are closer to five, nothing remotely close to the 23+ range

Yeah actually scratch that, according to this, the 18 number from ChOM is incorrect. non-PhD have 5.5 and PhD have 12. 12 is pretty reasonable imo

[Guest]

(08-16-2020, 12:12 AM)Guest Wrote:

(08-15-2020, 11:56 PM)Guest Wrote: Yes, but consider ~10% of applicants have a PhD, about half of which are worthy of consideration when you filter for socially awkward dweebs who have no business being in medicine, those with compelling geographic reasons which effectively limits their visibility in the applicant pool, or subpar step 1/sub-i performance. Having a PhD after your name puts you in serious consideration by every major academic program in the country regardless of many publications you have. Zero publications would be a red flag, but the raw count is bolstered by #s of podium talks, F grant awards, and how eloquently you can talk about your research and articulate a vision for your career during your interview. The most successful applicants tick all of these boxes, but you're going to end up at a strong program regardless of the length of your CV unless you really have something working against you

---

(08-15-2020, 11:50 PM)Guest Wrote:

(08-15-2020, 09:13 PM)Guest Wrote: senior resident, west coast. yep, i agree with the poster above. we definitely keep a closer eye on your research if you are MD/PhD. also, how you talk about your research is also revealing. i.e. whether you were just "name dropped" or actually conducted the research.

So is it more quality of quantity that is expected to be greater among MD/PhD applicants? Because if the total number of publications for the average matched applicant is 18 (including non-papers), then do programs expect something like 23+ publications from MD/PhD students? Even the most successful PhD students at top universities do not have numbers like this. However, it total sense if higher impact and more basic science work is expected (but around the same volume).

Looking up the recent MD/PhD cohorts at MGH. Their numbers are closer to five, nothing remotely close to the 23+ range

Yeah actually scratch that, according to this, the 18 number from ChOM is incorrect. non-PhD have 5.5 and PhD have 12. 12 is pretty reasonable imo

there you go

[Guest]

I'm confused at the reasonable person judgement standard here. Why would a PhD not have higher pubs than a non-PhD?

[Focus]

(02-11-2021, 06:12 PM)Guest Wrote: I'm confused at the reasonable person judgement standard here.  Why would a PhD not have higher pubs than a non-PhD?

Often less pubs but higher impact.