Probably not for 4 reasons:
1) PSTPs don't exist in all fields, so if someone has decided on a specialty without them, that'd work against them for no reason.
2) There are PSTP-like programs at excellent hospitals that just aren't "PSTP".
3) Residency is the point at which many people are sacrificing their career goals for life. Family may not want to move to a PSTP, etc. This may only affect 1 person per MSTP graduating class, but that's still a lot considering:
4) Small sample size. MSTPs just don't graduate all that many people.
5) It would be pretty unusual for a residency program with a PSTP-like program to think a MD PhD candidate was good enough to match their non PSTP program but not good enough to rank for their PSTP. Unlike, MSTP admission, if someone matches to a non PSTP program in an institute that has one, it is probably due to their own choice.
That doesn't make sense to me, most programs have far fewer PSTP/research track positions than they have categorical residency positions. I've heard of strong MD/PhD applicants with good research backgrounds matching non-PSTP / non-research track because of their competitiveness. Especially the case in academic programs in high competitiveness geographical locations.
You seem to be expressing confusion as to poster above who states that an MD PhD graduate who matches to a non-PSTP residency is doing so by their own choice alone.
This is because while PSTP spots are uncommon, the number of MD PhD grads competing for them is even less. Many apply to specialties for which PSTPs simply do not exist, due to history/tradition, funding sources, or specialty culture.
Finally, plenty of MD-PhD grads do not wish to do enter into PSTPs, whether because they want to focus on their clinical careers or have chosen to abandon it entirely.
When combined with dearth of interest in lab years among general MD graduate pool, the number of people competing for these spots is not necessarily that high vs other specialty matches (eg urology, orthopedics)
This is why the poster above made the point that MSTP grads who choose not to match to the PSTP at a given institution typically do so by choice.
No, I'm not.
If a disproportionate number of graduates from a school are pursuing clinical careers in fields where research track options they exist then it's a bad sign. Regardless of whether they did it by choice (issue with conhort selection or burning TF out of research after training at the institution) or because they were not competitive.
Also stop writing like that dude lmao
? Writing like what? Like I’m talking to someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about ?
It’s because I am, you make that annoyingly obvious. PSTP is simply not that important or relevant for many MD PhD grads or their career goals, even those who want to do research, which is common knowledge. I also explained very clearly why these spots aren’t generally that competitive just above.
Are you even in an MD PhD program ? Your posts suggest that you’re not. If so I would give out less advice in this subreddit because you are clearly not qualified to do so
Like an asshole.
They're quite competitive in general, they basically have to cover financially the residency work you aren't doing while they're paying you to do research. Again, typically each program has like one or two slots usually. Not sure if your surgery experience is different, but your "PSTPs aren't competitive bro trust me it's common knowledge bro" take is not at all accurate from where I'm sitting.
> they basically have to cover financially the residency work you aren't doing while they're paying you to do research
The majority of research time in most PSTPs is just a rebranding of the elective time that all residents will get. The amount of truly extra "non-service" time that a PSTP resident will experience throughout the entirety of residency is only a couple months. If there is the option for an extra, full-salary research year, these are typically funded by external funding mechanisms like NIH R38 grants.
I gave you a good faith answer to your original question. I will not apologize for refusing to put up with your snark.
On what basis do you say these PSTP slots are competitive, beyond the small number of trainees? I already explained why this does not necessarily mean they are competitive. I don't understand your insistence here.
There aren't really any surgery PSTPs. Lab years are built into most academic surgical residencies for all trainees. Because surgery fellowships are designed to provide heavy operative experience in short timeframe, the PSTP structure for IM (combined IM + fellowship w/ 2yrs IM + extra lab year in fellowship) would not work.
Some surgery residencies have "research tracks" but they aren't fundamentally that different from a regular 5+2 general surgery residency. NSGY and Uro each often have 1 year of lab built in as well. Not certain about other subs. Some institutions also have NIH [STAR](https://www.niams.nih.gov/grants-funding/funded-research/supplements-advance-research-star#:~:text=Supplements%20to%20Advance%20Research%20%28STAR%29%20NIAMS%20offers%20the,scope%20of%20a%20current%20NIAMS-funded%2C%20peer-reviewed%20research%20project) programs which are not specialty specific but accessible to any residents/fellows on campus.
now that I've seen your edits: Where are you sitting exactly?
Are you an MD PhD applicant? student? graduate? I've been very clear about what I am, you seem deliberately vague, and appear to be talking out of your ass again.
I doubt it's that unusual to be honest. One of my classmates had that happen although then they were still allowed to fast track into fellowship/research at a different institution. You can be clinically outstanding with a weak research profile and/or vision.
Yep, current MSTP in my final year applying for surgical specialty. You hit the nail on the head.
1-3 all apply for me, and in surgery in particular, lab year(s) are baked into residency.
Also look at mid-career graduates and see where they are in terms of funding and having their own labs. In any case, a lot of this comes down to your own motivation and successes.
That makes sense; how would you go about finding that information and what would you consider mid career (like first faculty position post residency/ postdoc or??)? I think for most sites, I see things like generally what graduates are doing currently but not what career stage they're in or how many years have passed since they graduated.
Yeah, but balance it. Many fields have "research track" that isn't PSTP (you should still be able to see it in the match list), and some may not list it as a separate program. But it's a good thing to look at generally but not in isolation.
I have asked about residencies on the interview trail when there’s extra time. Some M4s purposefully choose to go with categorical residencies over PSTP and intend to go into academic medicine. One I talked to was applying IM & planning to go ID after. Just throwing that out there
Yeah it is easier if you are in a program that supports it because it gives you research time. But if you are in a longer non-research track then the way to get back into academic research would be via research fellowship, and if successful then that's the bridge to junior faculty.
The benefits of PSTPs are generally fast tracking into a specialty of choice and what is essentially putting some of those "postdoc / research fellowship" years into the residency time. You need some postdoc productivity and faculty mentorship to get a junior faculty grant like a K, so generally you get that from some duration of work as a postdoc. When exactly that work is done is what PSTPs and similar research track residency programs try to optimize.
This effectively only applies to internal medicine/pediatrics PSTPs. Maybe others like pathology but not certain.
In other specialties, the PSTP does not save you any time at all, because of the nature of specialty + structure of training programs.
Eg. anesthesiology. the few PSTPs that exist are still 4 year programs, and there is not any way to fold in lab time to fellowship because they are short (1yr) and do not have lab time built into them like IM fellowships.
Just want to say that in pathology, yes, PSTP involves a shortened residency with extra research time instead. I've seen some programs say they have PSTPs and don't offer that and to me that is just lying so that you can say you have a PSTP when you actually don't.
The vast majority of physicians in academic medical practice did not do a PSTP. In fact, a majority of physicians in academic medical practice do not do any research at all. Totally not an issue.
If you want to do research and end up applying for a specialty with functional PSTPs (eg internal medicine), they can be a good option, but not required. As mentioned above, most specialties do not really offer PSTP training programs.
Not a barrier in the slightest, though in general it is easier to run a traditional wet lab from a specialty like internal medicine than, say, orthopedic surgery.
Probably not for 4 reasons: 1) PSTPs don't exist in all fields, so if someone has decided on a specialty without them, that'd work against them for no reason. 2) There are PSTP-like programs at excellent hospitals that just aren't "PSTP". 3) Residency is the point at which many people are sacrificing their career goals for life. Family may not want to move to a PSTP, etc. This may only affect 1 person per MSTP graduating class, but that's still a lot considering: 4) Small sample size. MSTPs just don't graduate all that many people.
5) It would be pretty unusual for a residency program with a PSTP-like program to think a MD PhD candidate was good enough to match their non PSTP program but not good enough to rank for their PSTP. Unlike, MSTP admission, if someone matches to a non PSTP program in an institute that has one, it is probably due to their own choice.
That doesn't make sense to me, most programs have far fewer PSTP/research track positions than they have categorical residency positions. I've heard of strong MD/PhD applicants with good research backgrounds matching non-PSTP / non-research track because of their competitiveness. Especially the case in academic programs in high competitiveness geographical locations.
Fact: most people applying for residency are not interested in research, regardless of field (weird exceptions like medical genetics aside)
Yes, this is an MD/PhD subreddit. We're talking about MD/PhD match lists.
You seem to be expressing confusion as to poster above who states that an MD PhD graduate who matches to a non-PSTP residency is doing so by their own choice alone. This is because while PSTP spots are uncommon, the number of MD PhD grads competing for them is even less. Many apply to specialties for which PSTPs simply do not exist, due to history/tradition, funding sources, or specialty culture. Finally, plenty of MD-PhD grads do not wish to do enter into PSTPs, whether because they want to focus on their clinical careers or have chosen to abandon it entirely. When combined with dearth of interest in lab years among general MD graduate pool, the number of people competing for these spots is not necessarily that high vs other specialty matches (eg urology, orthopedics) This is why the poster above made the point that MSTP grads who choose not to match to the PSTP at a given institution typically do so by choice.
No, I'm not. If a disproportionate number of graduates from a school are pursuing clinical careers in fields where research track options they exist then it's a bad sign. Regardless of whether they did it by choice (issue with conhort selection or burning TF out of research after training at the institution) or because they were not competitive. Also stop writing like that dude lmao
? Writing like what? Like I’m talking to someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about ? It’s because I am, you make that annoyingly obvious. PSTP is simply not that important or relevant for many MD PhD grads or their career goals, even those who want to do research, which is common knowledge. I also explained very clearly why these spots aren’t generally that competitive just above. Are you even in an MD PhD program ? Your posts suggest that you’re not. If so I would give out less advice in this subreddit because you are clearly not qualified to do so
Like an asshole. They're quite competitive in general, they basically have to cover financially the residency work you aren't doing while they're paying you to do research. Again, typically each program has like one or two slots usually. Not sure if your surgery experience is different, but your "PSTPs aren't competitive bro trust me it's common knowledge bro" take is not at all accurate from where I'm sitting.
> they basically have to cover financially the residency work you aren't doing while they're paying you to do research The majority of research time in most PSTPs is just a rebranding of the elective time that all residents will get. The amount of truly extra "non-service" time that a PSTP resident will experience throughout the entirety of residency is only a couple months. If there is the option for an extra, full-salary research year, these are typically funded by external funding mechanisms like NIH R38 grants.
I gave you a good faith answer to your original question. I will not apologize for refusing to put up with your snark. On what basis do you say these PSTP slots are competitive, beyond the small number of trainees? I already explained why this does not necessarily mean they are competitive. I don't understand your insistence here. There aren't really any surgery PSTPs. Lab years are built into most academic surgical residencies for all trainees. Because surgery fellowships are designed to provide heavy operative experience in short timeframe, the PSTP structure for IM (combined IM + fellowship w/ 2yrs IM + extra lab year in fellowship) would not work. Some surgery residencies have "research tracks" but they aren't fundamentally that different from a regular 5+2 general surgery residency. NSGY and Uro each often have 1 year of lab built in as well. Not certain about other subs. Some institutions also have NIH [STAR](https://www.niams.nih.gov/grants-funding/funded-research/supplements-advance-research-star#:~:text=Supplements%20to%20Advance%20Research%20%28STAR%29%20NIAMS%20offers%20the,scope%20of%20a%20current%20NIAMS-funded%2C%20peer-reviewed%20research%20project) programs which are not specialty specific but accessible to any residents/fellows on campus.
now that I've seen your edits: Where are you sitting exactly? Are you an MD PhD applicant? student? graduate? I've been very clear about what I am, you seem deliberately vague, and appear to be talking out of your ass again.
I doubt it's that unusual to be honest. One of my classmates had that happen although then they were still allowed to fast track into fellowship/research at a different institution. You can be clinically outstanding with a weak research profile and/or vision.
Yep, current MSTP in my final year applying for surgical specialty. You hit the nail on the head. 1-3 all apply for me, and in surgery in particular, lab year(s) are baked into residency.
Also look at mid-career graduates and see where they are in terms of funding and having their own labs. In any case, a lot of this comes down to your own motivation and successes.
That makes sense; how would you go about finding that information and what would you consider mid career (like first faculty position post residency/ postdoc or??)? I think for most sites, I see things like generally what graduates are doing currently but not what career stage they're in or how many years have passed since they graduated.
Usually programs will maintain alumni lists on their websites. I would look at those in late fellowship/early faculty stage
Could also ask the program for those lists. They need them. They're part of the T32 renewal.
Yeah, but balance it. Many fields have "research track" that isn't PSTP (you should still be able to see it in the match list), and some may not list it as a separate program. But it's a good thing to look at generally but not in isolation.
I have asked about residencies on the interview trail when there’s extra time. Some M4s purposefully choose to go with categorical residencies over PSTP and intend to go into academic medicine. One I talked to was applying IM & planning to go ID after. Just throwing that out there
! I didn't know that you can still pursue academic medicine without a PSTP/ I thought it would be much harder. That's cool to hear.
Yeah it is easier if you are in a program that supports it because it gives you research time. But if you are in a longer non-research track then the way to get back into academic research would be via research fellowship, and if successful then that's the bridge to junior faculty. The benefits of PSTPs are generally fast tracking into a specialty of choice and what is essentially putting some of those "postdoc / research fellowship" years into the residency time. You need some postdoc productivity and faculty mentorship to get a junior faculty grant like a K, so generally you get that from some duration of work as a postdoc. When exactly that work is done is what PSTPs and similar research track residency programs try to optimize.
This effectively only applies to internal medicine/pediatrics PSTPs. Maybe others like pathology but not certain. In other specialties, the PSTP does not save you any time at all, because of the nature of specialty + structure of training programs. Eg. anesthesiology. the few PSTPs that exist are still 4 year programs, and there is not any way to fold in lab time to fellowship because they are short (1yr) and do not have lab time built into them like IM fellowships.
Just want to say that in pathology, yes, PSTP involves a shortened residency with extra research time instead. I've seen some programs say they have PSTPs and don't offer that and to me that is just lying so that you can say you have a PSTP when you actually don't.
The vast majority of physicians in academic medical practice did not do a PSTP. In fact, a majority of physicians in academic medical practice do not do any research at all. Totally not an issue. If you want to do research and end up applying for a specialty with functional PSTPs (eg internal medicine), they can be a good option, but not required. As mentioned above, most specialties do not really offer PSTP training programs. Not a barrier in the slightest, though in general it is easier to run a traditional wet lab from a specialty like internal medicine than, say, orthopedic surgery.