What is a good research?

[VeronicaK]

Hi everyone. I was wondering what kinds of research are most valued to medschools. Some people told me it doesn't have to involve being in a lab. What really matters is whether you're passionate about it or not. I have been accepted to do research next year, but I am not sure if it is worth it as the research involves reading through publications and developing case studies based on them for third year biology students (no lab work). I am interested, but I am not sure if it would be worth my time. Ideas?

 

Also, any input on what defines a good research project would be appreciated.

[aaronjw]

Hi everyone. I was wondering what kinds of research are most valued to medschools. Some people told me it doesn't have to involve being in a lab. What really matters is whether you're passionate about it or not. I have been accepted to do research next year, but I am not sure if it is worth it as the research involves reading through publications and developing case studies based on them for third year biology students (no lab work). I am interested, but I am not sure if it would be worth my time. Ideas?

 

Also, any input on what defines a good research project would be appreciated.

 

 

People need to stop pursuing activities that are good or worthwhile to med school. Any activity where you learn something is a worthwhile activity. That could mean thinking you liked and we're interested in something until you did it and found out it wasn't for you, or an activity that may not seem very professionally rewarding but was personally rewarding, etc.

 

If you've been accepted that means you applied and had a specific interest and intent in what you'd be doing. I doubt you were accepted sight unseen and without you knowing what the research and your role was. If that's the case then you need to re-evaluate how you make choices.

 

In terms of whether this is worth your time is only something you can answer at the end and it's up to you to try and find a way to make it worth your time but you certainly can't answer that before you even start.

 

In terms of research that's good? Any type you find interesting.

[azn_angel_099]

Any research that gets you a publication would be good. If you not aiming for a publication then I don't think it matters. What is important is the skills that you learn during the process: dedication, persistence, critical thinking, how to do proper experiments with controls.. etc

[m.heinrich]

I too am wondering about research...I am just about to complete my UG, and included in this undergrad were several research focused courses (statistics, research methods, ethics), most notably a full year research application course that requires the completion of a research proposal minus only data acquisition and submission to an ethics board. My question is this...Do these courses (specifically the research proposal course) carry any merit towards "research"? I ask as I am contemplating the upcoming summer and will need to devote 95% of it to the MCAT. I would also like to spend some time volunteering with certain interest groups to get a feel of a potential career path. Should I be looking to acquire further "research".

 

Thanking you in advance

 

Michael

[MathToMed]

Something like that would definitely be worth mentioning on your autobiographical sketch, and the most relevant area would be either Academics or Research (ultimately your decision). This would also be helpful in an interview should it be a relevant point of discussion, but don't try to force the conversation in that direction.

 

Just make sure you don't oversell it as bona fide research, try to be honest about the implications/value of it. Ad coms are pretty good at sniffing out these kind of details, and it would reflect poorly if you tried to overstate the relevance of such an experience. (Though really, this is a rule of thumb to be used with everything application related).

 

That being said, it never hurts to better yourself and pad out your application that much more. Ultimately, you'll have to answer your own question, as only you know your capability to handle MCAT studying and research concurrently.

 

Good luck!

 

-------------------

 

As for the OP's question, I think the true value of research to a medical school is the associated skillset. You learn perseverance, time management and even networking when you complete a research project, potentially as part of a team of researchers. There is virtually no research that you could do that will make an ad com say "Wow, what a great, medically driven project!" as the research they care about is done by those who have already been accepted to their school. Instead, your project will make them say "Wow, this candidate can sure handle the workload of executing a research project!"

 

If selecting a project, make sure it's something you enjoy, as you will be able to boast about your findings and hard work that much easier. Can you imagine trying to convince an interviewer that your research is interesting, if even you found it duller than watching paint dry?

[ralk]

I too am wondering about research...I am just about to complete my UG, and included in this undergrad were several research focused courses (statistics, research methods, ethics), most notably a full year research application course that requires the completion of a research proposal minus only data acquisition and submission to an ethics board. My question is this...Do these courses (specifically the research proposal course) carry any merit towards "research"? I ask as I am contemplating the upcoming summer and will need to devote 95% of it to the MCAT. I would also like to spend some time volunteering with certain interest groups to get a feel of a potential career path. Should I be looking to acquire further "research".

 

Thanking you in advance

 

Michael

 

Generally speaking, research done as part of course requirements doesn't count as a research EC. They can still be discussed in an interview of course, and therefore can be quite valuable, but it's not quite the same as doing research outside of coursework.

 

Whether you need to do further research for med school is a more difficult question. Schools tend to like students who have done research, particularly research-focused schools like U of T, but it's not a requirement either (even at U of T).

 

To the OP - research is research is research. Quality (and quantity) matter far more than subject. Med schools aren't looking for ready-made experts in health care, just for people with the skills and track record to become one.

[tooty]

Published research is good research. Otherwise it's a waste of time, in terms of recognition.

[rask]

Published research is good research. Otherwise it's a waste of time, in terms of recognition.

 

While I agree that publications are an important recognition of your work, I disagree with the seemingly pervasive notion that doing research without a publication as the end result is a waste of time. Especially at the undergraduate level.

 

Many undergrads are focused on finding research opportunities that will 'guarantee' them a publication. I can only assume that the lack of experience in terms of what actually goes into getting a publication out the door is responsible for this idea that is it easy and can be guaranteed. So many factors that may be out of your control go into whether something gets published; availability of samples, timelines for completion of other experiments if it's part of a larger study, equipment failures, the person who knows how to run the machine was away for 2 months, the PI is slow doing edits...etc. just to name a few, that expecting a first author Nature paper after a summer or even a year of work in a lab is often unrealistic. Admissions folks aren't dumb, they know this and wouldn't assume that someone who didn't have a publication is an automatic failure.

 

As MathToMed mentioned, the skillset acquired is the important factor and the real benefit of doing research at an undergraduate level. Do something you enjoy. Something that peaks your interest. If you get a publication, great! But if you don't, focus on what you learned. Not necessarily the specific protocols, but how to work independently, how to ask intelligent questions, how to think critically, how to communicate complex ideas to others. Those are the factors that contribute to being a good doctor, not whether your name is on a list with 10 other people because you ran a couple of samples.

[rogerroger]

Published research is good research. Otherwise it's a waste of time, in terms of recognition.

 

Some sort of publication is better than nothing if it is only "recognition" we are considering... However, it is amazing what sorts of rubbish are published. Being published in some no name journal is of questionable overall benefit.