<p>Well, my basic question is whether it's possible to pursue (clinical) research and to work as a practicing physician with an MD degree. As it looks right now, i'll have between 2 and 3 years worth of research experience when I apply to graduate/professional school, and to this point, I have really only considered a PhD. I'm starting to wonder though, whether i would get bored doing "hardcore" research day in and day out.</p>
<p>I have considered the whole MD/PhD deal, but I simply don't know that i'll be competitive enough for something like that. Speaking with one of the grad students in my lab, she said she had heard of med students completing fellowships in an area of research. I was simply wondering whether anybody knew anything about these sorts of fellowships, how the timeline works, and what sorts of careers they might lead to.</p>
<p>Any info. is much appreciated.</p>
<p>There are plenty of people who do both with just an MD. It's less likely to be completely bench research, and would be more likely focused on clinical or translational research, but I'm sure that bench research is not out of the realm of possibility if you wanted it. </p>
<p>There are a significant number of residency programs that offer research tracks or what amount to non-accredited fellowships (51 programs in internal medicine, 20 in peds, 72 in psych, 77 in surgery, and 16 in OB/GYN according to the FREIDA database to give you an idea). Usually this is an extra year added on to the residency, though some may put research time in the place of electives. </p>
<p>I can only speak for the accredited pediatric fellowships (ie cardiology, pulmonology, gastroentrology, critical care, etc), but most of those have between 12 to 18 months out of the 36 as dedicated to research. I would assume that similar requirements (though perhaps not periods of time) exist for the adult counterparts.</p>
<p>Ooohh! That sounds interesting for my research oriented D, BRM. Thanks. (Gee, something else I had zippo idea about.)</p>
<p>Wow, very cool.</p>
<p>I guess I have a decision to make now, blah..</p>
<p>I was also wondering, are there mid-tier med schools that favor research oriented applicants. I was simply wondering because i've only heard of top schools (ie JHU, harvard) that "require" students to have done research.</p>
<p>Curm, </p>
<p>sorry i hadn't mentioned that before. sometimes I forget that these things aren't that self apparent if you're not going through the actual process yourself. And then I tend to figure that if I don't mention it, NCG or BDM likely had gotten to it.</p>
<p>A little bit more on the issue. The one thing to realize is that these are non-accredited fellowships and so there's no oversight as to what a "research track" actually means. Also, there are a handful of programs which are a year or two longer than the standard lengths. (IIRC, you said your daughter is interested in surgery at the moment - there are 31 by my count, out 250 Gen surgery programs, longer than five years) At some of these programs the residents are required to complete research in the extra time, while in a few the extra year can be used for an MPH or an MBA or research. </p>
<p>Basically, the point is, if you want to do research, there are plenty of places which will give you that opportunity, in whatever field you want to go into. The other thing is, even if a program doesn't demand research activity, or doesn't offer a specified "track", a resident could likely very well take a leave of absence to pursue research for a year. I know we tend to think of residency programs as these very stringent, regulated periods of time, but I'm coming to realize that at many places they're not absolute. There is some flexibility, and as long as the program can afford to have one less resident (which they'll have a year with an extra resident at the end) they'll probably be okay with it. It would be something that would vary from program to program and she could bring it up during residency interviews. Of course there might be the whole issue of getting paid and such, but those are minor details. I also wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't used by some women as a good way in which to time having a baby. Still have work to do, but it'd be a lot better than being q3 or q4 for 8 months with a newborn. And of course doing a year of research is more positively received than someone who just takes a year off. (Just one example that I think the college kids who ask about how to get into the "best residency program EVAR!" fail to understand the complexity of issues people think about when they're in the late 20s and early 30s, and how that affects match list decision making)</p>