Skip to main content
Log in

The M.D.-Ph.D. Training Experience: Complimentary Perspectives and Advice

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The M.D.-Ph.D. training process uniquely prepares individuals with skillsets capable of redefining the boundaries of medicine. While the clinical and research worlds are seemingly different, the two worlds in fact nicely complement each other. Symbiotically, the dual-degree training allows physician-scientists to be more inquisitive physicians and more clinically applicable scientists. Upon reflecting on my recent journey through an M.D.-Ph.D. training program, my advice for young trainees is to continually self-improve by surrounding yourself with individuals smarter than yourself, becoming comfortable with the uncomfortable, and finding supportive mentors in both the research and clinical realms. Through the particular training underwent, physician-scientists are uniquely positioned to truly redefine the boundaries of medicine to provide better care to our patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gordon R. The vanishing physician scientist: a critical review and analysis. Account Res. 2012;19:89–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Milewicz DM, Lorenz RG, Dermody TS, Brass LF. Rescuing the physician-scientist workforce: the time for action is now. J Clin Invest. 2015;125:3742–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sklar DP. We must not let clinician–scientists become an endangered species. Acad Med. 2017;92:1359–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kwan JM, Daye D, Schmidt ML, Conlon CM, Kim H, Gaonkar B, et al. Exploring intentions of physician-scientist trainees: factors influencing MD and MD/PhD interest in research careers. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(115):115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ganetzky RD. Becoming a physician–scientist: a view looking up from base camp. Acad Med. 2017;92:1373–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Syed YY. Eteplirsen: first global approval. Drugs. 2016;76:1699–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoy SM. Nusinersen: first global approval. Drugs. 2017;77:473–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-017-0711-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Guiraud S, Davies KE. Pharmacological advances for treatment in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2017;34:36–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brass LF, et al. Are MD-PhD programs meeting their goals? An analysis of career choices made by graduates of 24 MD-PhD programs. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2010;85:692–701.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Strong MJ, Busing N, Goosney DL, Harris KA, Horsley T, Kuzyk A, et al. The rising challenge of training physician–scientists: recommendations from a Canadian National Consensus Conference. Acad Med. 2018;93:172–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bliska JB. The importance of role models in research. PLoS Pathog. 2016;12:e1005426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Mark Chrzanowski.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chrzanowski, S.M. The M.D.-Ph.D. Training Experience: Complimentary Perspectives and Advice. Med.Sci.Educ. 28, 793–795 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-018-0621-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-018-0621-7

Keywords

Navigation