Why is research so important?

[whiteteeth]

While I was working at a hospital as nursing student (I'm in my final year now), I was talking with a volunteer...

and we both realized that we were pre-med.

 

He asked me if I did any research? I said no. I didn't do any lab work.

 

He was like "Oh..." in a disappointing way and said "Well, I think research is also important (aside from GPA) if you want to get into medical school"

 

I replied, "That's too bad for me then."

 

I do have clinical experiences where I do physical assessments on the patients, interact with them and their family, educate the patients, help to keep them alive, administer medications, treatment, do collaborative work with the health care team to provide the best care for the patient (providing timely updates to each professionals providing care for my patient).

 

I had really good experiences in my clinical placements and internship (TGH, Sick Kids, so on)

 

My GPA is okay-bare minimum (It's in the 3.8s. I hope to raise it in my final year).

 

Do research >>>> my clinical experiences?

 

I don't ever plan on doing lab research (plus, I'm not in a typical life science program, and thus, I'm not qualified enough to get a job as a lab researcher). It's just not interesting for me.

 

What interests me is providing clinical care and treatment for the patients.

[Lactic Folly]

I don't think research > your clinical experiences. However, all other things being equal, someone who has research AND clinical experiences will have an edge. Remember that there's much more out there than lab research. Clinical care and treatment is based on research as well. There are lots of potential projects around health education, medication administration, communication, etc., including quality and patient safety research.

[charmer08]

UofT MD Admissions FAQ

 

4) How much volunteer and research experience do I need?

 

There is nothing that an applicant “needs” in the autobiographical sketch. A candidate will not be penalized for interest in the clinical side of medicine, rather than research, or vice versa. There is no required number of activities or required number of hours. Some candidates may have a large number of activities among which they share their time; others may have a few activities to which they devote a large amount of time.

 

[whiteteeth]

Thanks Charmer & Lactic Folley.

 

Yes, I understand the importance of research for clinical care and treatment.

 

I use evidence based research for all my care and treatment.

 

I've done a bit of clinical research during my third year.

 

I was trying to refer (which I forgot to write) to lab research work (which is equally as important).

[thehumanmacbook]

I don't have any lab research, but I do have research in other fields. It's important in the sense that it's not required explicitly, but so many people have it sometimes it seems like a staple of sorts amongst pre-meds. But officially you will NOT be penalized for lacking in research...nonetheless I and many people here would agree that it's good to have some in any area.

 

PS: whiteteeth sounds like a pre-dent name, just saying

[Hieu]

I don't ever plan on doing lab research (plus, I'm not in a typical life science program, and thus, I'm not qualified enough to get a job as a lab researcher). It's just not interesting for me.

 

What interests me is providing clinical care and treatment for the patients.

 

I think clinical researchs are more for nurses and physicians.

Lab researchs are more for PhD.

[arabconstruct]

Research is very important for me because with its aid it can be your guideline or you basis as well in everything you want to know.

[charmer08]

I think clinical researchs are more for nurses and physicians.

Lab researchs are more for PhD.

 

so whats for MD/PHDs?

[leap87]

I don't think research > your clinical experiences. However, all other things being equal, someone who has research AND clinical experiences will have an edge. Remember that there's much more out there than lab research. Clinical care and treatment is based on research as well. There are lots of potential projects around health education, medication administration, communication, etc., including quality and patient safety research.

 

+1

 

I think clinical researchs are more for nurses and physicians.

Lab researchs are more for PhD.

 

Really? Then I am doing wrong research.... and potentially for the wrong degree!

[EoE]

I want to +1 what Alastriss has said. Also, two thoughts:

 

1. Having a publication (especially first author) in any field is like a single line on your resume/application that speaks volumes about the things mentioned above (commitment/competence/science skill/maturity/etc). That may help answer the questions that is the title of this thread. Adcoms are looking for ways to quickly assess an applicant and having research experience (especially a publication) can demonstrates a combination of at least some of the skills that will be necessary in medicine (I think). So it may not be that research is important to adcoms as a requirement (officially or unofficially) it may just serve as a handy way of demonstrating skills.

 

2. If med schools are looking for certain personal qualities/skills in an applicant, I have a hunch that these qualities are maybe loosely or closely based on the CanMEDS guidelines. One of which is 'scholar'. That may be another reason research is considered important, because it fulfills that quality.

[rmorelan]

2. If med schools are looking for certain personal qualities/skills in an applicant, I have a hunch that these qualities are maybe loosely or closely based on the CanMEDS guidelines. One of which is 'scholar'. That may be another reason research is considered important, because it fulfills that quality.

 

That doesn't need to be a hunch - we know those are what they are looking for

[Guest copacetic]

As someone who has been involved in the admissions process i can tell you that nobody really cares what you say you did, if you dont have any follow through or much to show for it. Its one thing to say "yeah i did research" or "yeah i volunteered" but what does that mean? did you stand in a corner quietly doing nothing when you were "volunteering" or was your contribution meaningful and did you learn about yourself while doing it. Did you sit on a lab bench somewhere pipetting for 8 hours at a time and produce nothing, or were you actively engaged expanding your scholastic aptitudes and being productive. Its not what you did but why you did it and what you can show for it. along the same lines nobody cares whether or not you were part of the life sciecnes group at your undergrad if you didnt have some kind of leadership position and actually did something. nobody cares that you went to the meetings.

[leap87]

Though research is all fine and good, you see a lot of medical students sacrifice competence in clinical training to obtain more prestigious research projects and publications. Research has become part of the game, just like volunteering and audition rotations.

 

In my opinion, most medical student and resident research is kind of useless.

 

I know I won't be doing any research when I'm finished residency. I'll leave that to the academic types. They can write grants all day and night.

 

I believe that, and have seen MANY successful doctors do this, it is important to balance both. Conducting research and collaborating with fellow people from academia is important from the clinical perspective. It is the research that will drive new protocols, treatments, assessments, etc. Researchers are sometimes incapable of seeing the clinical aspects and thus, doctors present an integral part to doing projects that are actually going to benefit the society instead of just sit in a journal article.

 

IMO, when you mention "research", many people confuse it with lab bench work. Yes, some of the research is lab bench, but some is not. For example, my research concentrates on patients and a particular neurological disorder. I interact with patients all the time to a) get a better understanding of the disorder; in an effort to modify pre-existing assessments and help in faster diagnosis; c) develop a rehabilitation technique which will help these patients either go back to work faster or get better. Therefore, it is very important to also interact with doctors and clinicians - they will be able to tell you key aspects of the disorder/disease and give you a whole ton of other medical background.

 

One of the biggest disadvantages of today's research is the fact that there is not enough collaboration amongst a) researchers around the world; clinicians and researchers; c) doctors and researchers. Think about it.... if they actually stepped forward and started collaborating, can you imagine how fast the advances in research would be and thus, clinical care?

 

Research is detrimental to healthcare. Period.

[Cerena]

I believe that, and have seen MANY successful doctors do this, it is important to balance both. Conducting research and collaborating with fellow people from academia is important from the clinical perspective. It is the research that will drive new protocols, treatments, assessments, etc. Researchers are sometimes incapable of seeing the clinical aspects and thus, doctors present an integral part to doing projects that are actually going to benefit the society instead of just sit in a journal article.

 

IMO, when you mention "research", many people confuse it with lab bench work. Yes, some of the research is lab bench, but some is not. For example, my research concentrates on patients and a particular neurological disorder. I interact with patients all the time to a) get a better understanding of the disorder; in an effort to modify pre-existing assessments and help in faster diagnosis; c) develop a rehabilitation technique which will help these patients either go back to work faster or get better. Therefore, it is very important to also interact with doctors and clinicians - they will be able to tell you key aspects of the disorder/disease and give you a whole ton of other medical background.

 

One of the biggest disadvantages of today's research is the fact that there is not enough collaboration amongst a) researchers around the world; clinicians and researchers; c) doctors and researchers. Think about it.... if they actually stepped forward and started collaborating, can you imagine how fast the advances in research would be and thus, clinical care?

 

Research is detrimental to healthcare. Period.

 

Awesome post, leap.