ballwera

I'd ask to see your rec. Letters from your past submissions. What you think might be a strong letter could be hurting you.

Could just be differences in our centers. I had multiple postdocs (PhDs) in my lab that recruited and took samples from patients. We also have clinical coordinators to do this for us as well. We actually had incidental findings in some of our research that had to be reported back to the patients. You do not need an MD in most cases just proper training. Also immunology is really good as well for getting human samples... you just need a blood draw after all. Also w/ the rise of biobanking human samples are getting easier and easier to obtain. Again this is not true either. If you fill out appropriate paperwork you have access to biobanks as well as tissue banks ( we used to get blood filters from the blood bank on a regular basis). We also work w/ MDs to obtain fresh samples (biopsies), and in most cases they aren't actually part of the research. If this poster is wholly focused on interacting w/ patients then they need to consider a degree in the medical field (MD, Nursing, Genetic Counselor) though, because a research career will most likely not fill that need.

Definitely not true on the human sample front. I was doing human subject research as a tech.

Not sure if you are into molecular biology / genetics but I'd look into this... You work in a purely clinical lab, and do translational research. http://www.abmgg.org/pages/training_options.shtml

Just out of curiosity, why go back for a PhD at all? It's not really necessary if you already have an MD, I'd save yourself the 5 years and go do a postdoc.

I wouldn't do that because you need to have reach schools on your application as well. You have more research experience and publications than the majority of students applying. Adcoms tend to favor exp. and letters more than gpa in my experience.

Wish I would have gotten that advice before I applied. I kinda wish I would have applied to some more "prestigous" schools.

Not sure what your numbers are like, but I'd really only worry about it if you are sub 3.0 with no upward trend on your transcript.

Have you considered applying to BME or Biophysics programs? I know they aren't Neuro programs, but that is where a large portion of imaging research is done.

No advantages per se, but it is good to contact the program managers/coordinators early on. It can pay real dividends later on in the process, especially at smaller programs.

To be honest, scientists have their own opinions about others work. To the point that I've seen highly published well known scientists in screaming matches on conference calls. As long as the science is sound, I wouldn't worry about it too much. Remember, if the science is truly THAT BAD, there would be no funding and no publications coming from the lab.

You're aren't going to like this, but a gap year will be best for your application. An extra year of 40 hour weeks will really let you mature as a scientist. Right now you barely if it all are meeting what adcoms consider to be "required" amounts of research and it will show if you get to the interview stage. I'm not sure what your intentions are after grad school, but you are potentially leaving prestigious schools on the table because you want to rush into grad school. In all honesty, a gap year isn't wasted time when you are talking 4-5+ years of graduate school plus postdocs. Just my 2 cents.

I didn't even realize that was a thing... Those depts. must have some serious dough.

What are you planning to do with this degree?

If they aren't required I don't see it as that big an issue. However, what was your undergraduate degree in? Those courses are pretty much the gold standard gen eds for any science degree (unless you graduated H.S w/ college credits of course).

1) Be careful using those lists for anything, they are very subjective and very biased. I'd go with your gut and look at schools/programs that interest you and focus on their research, where the faculty publish and where alumni have gone. 2) The "pressure cooker" environment is all relative. What some consider high pressure, others will see as a cake walk.

I'm not sure it's reachy enough haha I think you have too many safeties.

You could consider an ms and a phd. I'm doing a phd in systems bio and an ms in applied math.

Unless you have someone paying you to do that masters, do not under any circumstance do it. Waste of time and money IMO. Take two or so years off, work as a tech and take some post bacc courses.

Imo i wouldn't push off graduation just to get a little research experience. I would graduate and take a job as a tech somewhere for a year or two. I'd also try to nail down what type of research you want to do as well, because you have a broad range of program types you are applying to.

Couldn't disagree with you more about gpa. Once you get past an A- average (3.67) gpa is a meaningless statistic imo. At that point it matters more about what you took, which is the reason you send the adcom a full transcript...

Along these lines, don't be upset if you screw something up, that's how you learn.

Group projects have been the bane of my existence this year. Whoever thought they were a good idea at the graduate level needs to have their head examined.

The time and money investment is not worth it for a masters if you plan on pursuing a PhD anyway. Take the tech position and don't look back. As long as you do solid work, you'll get fantastic letters and you will be at a serious advantage during interviews.

Did the same last summer good luck! Are you getting married before school starts?