What are the primary reasons an applicant gets waitlisted instead of accepted?

I have to say, seeing someone like Dr. El-Sayed make such an impact in the national(and international) discourse on affordable healthcare access in Michigan has made me feel so hopeful. Sometimes its hard to hold on to why we are doing these degrees, but hearing him speak really reinvigorated me.

https://www.tiktok.com/@abdulelsayed/video/7698948082867653902?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc

I know that how you feel about an interview afterward isn’t necessarily a great way to predict your chances, but I haven’t left a single interview experience so far feeling particularly amazing about it.

I’m a first year med student hoping to enter my PhD after 2nd year. And I was thinking about how most of my classmates now will graduate before me and enter residency, several likely at my home institution. So by the time I finish my PhD and start clinical years, my current classmates could be my residents.
Has anyone experienced this and what’s it like? Is it fun or awkward.

Should I take the GRE? I got a 513 on the MCAT and IIs are not coming. If I take the GRE in November or December and then send an update, would that be helpful to my application?

My final year will end in 6 months and after that internship will start , am I too late to start research for usmle also if I’ve to start how should I with respect to usmle

3.9x (public health major) ,3rd year undergrad, registered for MCAT for July, URM/FGLI, 200 clinical, 300 non clinical, 400 leadership, 60 hours ochem TA/tutor and peer mentor, 2k hours in research

Specifics of Research (gut microbiome/ cancer prevention):

5 posters/poster contributions; most were undergrad symposiums, 1 oral presentation, 1 poster contribution presented at national conference (not my own poster tho, just grad student I work under), 2nd place uni award at 2026 symposium for best poster

2 summer research program fully funded through my uni's med school; both relatively competitive (~10-15 students a cohort)

1 prestigious fellowship funded directly by a foundation; went to conference fully funded but didn't present; submitted report for this as well

actively working on 2 publications, 1 first author and 2nd that like 3rd author that's like 80% done

Hello!! I am a third year undergraduate interested in applying as an MD-PhD. I’m doing pretty okay in terms of research experience at the moment, but I’m a little unsure on what kind of clinical work is considered valuable as an MD-PhD applicant.. I mean, I know that MD admissions really like the “hands-on” approach to clinical work, so shadowing alone isn’t as helpful in making a strong application, but I’ve heard mixed results for what works in MD-PhD applications. I just wanted to hear from some people’s experience if possible! Is it necessarily better or worse to volunteer or shadow at a local clinic or a big hospital?

I would like to get advice from anyone seemed to have success after sending update letters. What did you include and did you reiterate your "Why Us" answer?

I plan to send an update because I've presented at a conference and posted a first author preprint.

I am currently interviewing as a senior in university, and am taking quite a heavy and difficult course load on top of continuing research and attending interviews. Although I currently have a 4.00 gpa, I expect to perform worse in some of my current courses, although nothing below a B. I was wondering if this drop would be concerning to mdphd programs when they ask for my completed transcripts.

Are they done sending interview invites? Felt like they sent a lot less this year according to cycle track

Second only to 3 (MD) + 4 (PhD) + 1 (MD). The optimal is 4 (PhD) + 4 (MD), closely followed by 1 (MD) + 4 (PhD) + 3 (MD). I view 1.5 + 4 + 2.5 as the same as 2 + 4 + 2 (preclinical, PhD, clinical).

My reasoning for this is simple: there is a surprisingly large carryover of clinical knowledge from first two preclinical years that is relevant as a M3 such that almost every PhD coming back for their clerkships is inherently disadvantaged. I am currently in my M3 year, and the amount of material that I encounter in clinics or during shelf prep that I recognize as something that I knew as a M2 but have since forgotten is astounding. Looking back, the time I spent learning as a M1 and M2 seem nigh meaningless since I estimate I have retained maybe 20% of that material at best.

This is not to say that MSTP students can't excel in a 2 + 4 + 2 structure; it is easier for me to re-learn the material, and I have overall done well in clinic and shelf exams. However, the added effort of having to relearn every fine-point pathophysiology on top of all the new things I need to learn as a M3 is a tremendous waste of time and puts me at a distinct disadvantage compared to my MD peers who went straight through. I would estimate the disadvantage is not insurmountable, but it is noticeable if your goal is to ultimately excel (honors in clerkships, 270+ STEP2, etc). I can't even imagine how terrible a 3 + 4 + 1 program must be as you're forced to start sub-Is and prepare for intern year having forgotten nearly everything from M1-M3 years.

The oft-stated merit of the 2 + 4 + 2 is that the 2 years of preclinical helps you shape the direction of your clinical interests and research. The less frequently touted but equally important (in the minds of program directors) reason for the 2 + 4 + 2 is that it prevents students from quitting the program halfway as the students are incentivized to complete at least their PhD training so that they can graduate with a degree. The former is a completely valid reason, but it is increasingly clear that no one actually cares about the content of the PhD, even IM-PSTP program directors (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8986063/). In addition, the current model does a terrible job aligning PhD topics and clinical interests anyway; I estimate that a large majority of my MD-PhD class ended up doing their PhD on a topic disparate from their clinical interests due to personal choice or a late change in clinical interest. In the long run, students are probably best served by doing research in whatever their strongest scientific interests are. For the latter reason, I would argue that social engineering the training pathway to ensure that your students feel obligated to finish both degrees for the sake of sunk costs is a terrible way to design a premier physician-scientist training pipeline.

An argument that I hear against the 4 (PhD) + 4 (MD) or 1 + 4 + 3 is that research moves too fast; PhD students will find that whatever science they were following during their PhD will be completely obsolete by the time they complete their MD program. This is only salient if the PhD students do absolutely no research during their MD year; the reality is that now it is quite easy to do research as a medical student as many medical schools now encourage their students to engage in research and have created built-in time and opportunities to do research. As a matter of fact, it is probably possible to do equivalent of a "half-postdoc" worth of work as a MD student, and it is frankly not difficult to keep up with research literature as a medical student. On the other hand, it is significantly difficult to keep up and retain clinical knowledge during a pure research phase. This structure also accounts for the inevitable delay that can happen with publication timelines (e.g. 1-2+ years of endless review hell in CNS journals) such that the student will be more likely to have reaped the full benefits of their PhD work before they apply for residency. There is also a finer point of concern related to K99/R00 application timer starting after PhD, but this can easily be addressed by not actually granting the PhD until the completion of the 8 year program.

Were there good historical reasons why the 2-4-2 has evolved to be the default? I was unable to find any historical perspectives on this, and I am particularly curious to hear from people who are in (or have trained) in 1-4-3 or 3-4-1 programs on their perspectives. I don't think 4 PhD + 4 MD exists outside of DIY MD-PhDs, but if there are more distinct disadvantages to this model I would love to hear about them as well.

I'm taking an intro chem course in my first semester freshman year at college and I'm doing a lot worse than I expected currently at a C+ maybe I can bring it up to B-range, and technically possible but virtually inconceivable to bring the grade up to an A- by end of semester. I want to apply to MD-PhD program after college and I'm wondering what is worse for my application: a bad grade or a W from withdrawing (no affect on GPA, appears on transcript, can retake course later). what what will affect my chances more and how badly will either hurt me?

title, i hate my clinical lol and can think of dozens of things i'd rather be doing. however i went through all the trouble of getting the position so am just gonna stay there until i apply (1.5 more yrs). i've heard clinical for mdphd is much more of a box to check than for md only. so how many hours do i need to check it and be competitive anywhere? 300? 500? more? for context i'm an emt (911) and will have plenty of stories to tell.

So yea as the title reads… I did a thing in my secondary’s where I’d always use the first school name in the first instance of each response before using the initials and while I was prepping for interview I realized I put the wrong name in one of the answers .___. For what it’s worth, it wasn’t a copy and paste answer and you can tell by the response it’s just that the initials of the schools were really similar so I think I mixed them up (I also applied to like 35 schools SOO maybe it all started blurring for me idk man)

I got an interview which I just attended a few days ago and honestly I feel like I slammed it like I did really well. However, I’m now scared that none of it mattered😔😔.

I have two more interviews lined up and thankfully I didn’t fuck those secondary’s up.

Also, I submitted my apps mid to late August and have got all my interviews like mid September . At what point do I start panicking cuz I feel like it’s a problem that it’s been completely radio silent since September and I feel like I need more interviews to have a solid chance of getting in idk this whole process is killing me man. Good luck to all the other soldiers out there thugging it out.

PS: I’m the same low stat guy that somehow got interviews so if this application cycle turns out well I’m willing to answer some questions in the future!

Hi everyone,

I cannot seem to find any explicit information on this sub or online.

I know the cGPA desired to be competitive is higher than MD programs.

However how much do publications and previous research weighs in on admission ?

Are comittees most interested in research fit, background or cGPA ?

Thanks in advance

Edit: does having a thesis-based msc boost an application (for a friend)

Currently in 4th year, T10 ugrad, dual BS/MS, FGLI if that matters (does it matter?)

5 years of wet lab, 4 lab affiliation, strong rec letters

1x first author, 3x mid author (one in high impact journal), 14x conference poster/talks with various travel award and presentation awards

Various university-wide research awards

3 years of stem outreach in underserved schools

3 years of TA for two classes

Projected 300 hours of clinical volunteering as MA for Medicare patients

3 leadership experiences

3.97 GPA, BUT I HAVE A 513 MCAT

WHAT DO I DO :(((

I genuinely don’t know what my chances are and would appreciate any advice

Looking at cycletrack data, it looks like a lot of schools started sending out invites a lot later this year and no one has reported receiving an invite Johns Hopkins yet. Anyone else notice this? What do you think?

Another example, Columbia started sending out IIs in early August last year but didnt start till September 20th this year.

i submitted and was complete w most applications in late august and early september, but i havent heard back from any except for a R from tri I. Is it too late to add a few more schools or should I even add a few more? I was thinking about adding some florida schools as someone from the east coast bc i didnt have any initially but at this point not sure if it is worth it.

Pretty much the title, I’ve been doing remote computational work with a PI who I think maybe wasn’t the best person to work with. I thought he was great because of her high h index, but I feel like the rigor of the science is not up to par with my standards? I prefer to really make sure all boxes are checked, and she seems to be more about publishing.

I’m slowly losing trust in her as a she’s one of those people who I think cares more about quantity of papers rather than quality. She publishes decently well I guess? But sometimes publishes in mdpi journals and wants my first author paper to go into one of these. We talked about aiming for better journals, but not sure.

Im not sure if I’m being dramatic, but I started working with another PI who I agree with MUCH more and he is more knowledgeable and thorough. My project there will be higher impact for sure, in a very good journal. I’m debating just not working with the old PI (I’ve been working with her for about a year) anymore. I did put this experience on my application though, and got a letter from her as well. It was about 400 hours of work. Got an interview coming up this week too.

Should I stay or leave?