DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of Microbiology & Immunology 2018-19 Graduate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of Microbiology & Immunology 2018-19 Graduate Department of Microbiology & Immunology 2018-19 Graduate Student Handbook We hope that your graduate training will be stimulating, your research fruitful, and your overall experience with colleagues and friends at Stanford enjoyable. This handbook is meant to be a guide for the requirements, both academic and administrative, that you will need to accomplish on your way to a Ph.D. It is by no means complete, but in conjunction with the Stanford Bulletin, it will guide you through your time at Stanford. When questions arise, use the resources available in the department: Justin Sonnenburg (Director of the Graduate Program), Wanapa Veeraprasit (Student Services Officer), your rotation and thesis lab advisors, and your best resource, your fellow students. Welcome to Stanford! Graduate Student Handbook 2018-19 2 Contents Student Honor Code and Fundamental Standard ................................................................ 3 Program of Study .................................................................................................................5 Curriculum ...................................................................................................................... 5 Masters of Medicine Students and Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) ......... 6 Residency Policy ............................................................................................................. 7 Grading Policy ................................................................................................................ 7 Registering for Classes ................................................................................................... 7 Rotations ......................................................................................................................... 8 Seminar Programs and Journal Clubs ............................................................................. 8 Departmental Scientific Conference ............................................................................... 9 Teaching Assistantships .................................................................................................. 9 Terminal Graduate Registration (TGR) ........................................................................ 10 Satisfactory Degree Progress ........................................................................................ 10 Qualifying Examination .....................................................................................................11 General goals ................................................................................................................ 11 Format ........................................................................................................................... 11 Recommended structure ................................................................................................ 12 Research Proposal and Committee Meetings ....................................................................13 Choosing a Committee .................................................................................................. 13 Research Proposal ......................................................................................................... 14 Proposal Format ............................................................................................................ 14 How to Prepare ............................................................................................................. 15 Dissertation Committee Meetings ................................................................................. 15 Individual Development Plan and Annual Planning Meetings ..................................... 16 University Oral Examination .............................................................................................17 Submitting the Dissertation................................................................................................18 Financial Aid ......................................................................................................................18 Tuition ........................................................................................................................... 19 Stipends and Salary ....................................................................................................... 19 Cardinal Care ................................................................................................................ 19 Miscellaneous Expenses ............................................................................................... 19 Taxes ............................................................................................................................. 19 Health and Safety ...............................................................................................................20 Facilities .............................................................................................................................20 General .......................................................................................................................... 20 Lab Equipment and Supplies ........................................................................................ 20 Library........................................................................................................................... 21 Annual Events and Holidays ..............................................................................................21 Appendix I. Degree Requirements .....................................................................................22 Appendix II. List of Ethics Courses ...................................................................................23 Appendix III. List of Approved Electives ..........................................................................24 Appendix IV. Teaching Assistantship ...............................................................................25 Appendix V. Qualifying Exam ..........................................................................................26 Appendix VI. Dissertation Committee Meeting Form ......................................................27 Appendix VII. Faculty Research Interests .........................................................................28 Appendix VIII. Current MI Graduate Students .................................................................30 Appendix IX. Department Administration ........................................................................31 Graduate Student Handbook 2018-19 3 Student Honor Code and Fundamental Standard The sections below about Stanford University’s Honor Code and Fundamental Standard are from the Office of Community Standards’ home page https://communitystandards.stanford.edu/student-conduct-process/honor-code-and- fundamental-standard. Honor Code The Honor Code is the university's statement on academic integrity written by students in 1921. It articulates university expectations of students and faculty in establishing and maintaining the highest standards in academic work. 1. The Honor Code is an undertaking of the students, individually and collectively: A. that they will not give or receive aid in examinations; that they will not give or receive unpermitted aid in class work, in the preparation of reports, or in any other work that is to be used by the instructor as the basis of grading; B. that they will do their share and take an active part in seeing to it that others as well as themselves uphold the spirit and letter of the Honor Code. 2. The faculty on its part manifests its confidence in the honor of its students by refraining from proctoring examinations and from taking unusual and unreasonable precautions to prevent the forms of dishonesty mentioned above. The faculty will also avoid, as far as practicable, academic procedures that create temptations to violate the Honor Code. 3. While the faculty alone has the right and obligation to set academic requirements, the students and faculty will work together to establish optimal conditions for honorable academic work. Violations of the Honor Code Examples of conduct that have been regarded as being in violation of the Honor Code include: Copying from another’s examination paper or allowing another to copy from one’s own paper Unpermitted collaboration Plagiarism Revising and resubmitting a quiz or exam for regrading, without the instructor’s knowledge and consent Giving or receiving unpermitted aid on a take-home examination Representing as one’s own work the work of another Giving or receiving aid on an academic assignment under circumstances in which a reasonable person should have known that such aid was not permitted Sanctions for Violating the Honor Code In recent years, most student disciplinary cases have involved Honor Code violations; of these, the most frequent arise when a student submits another’s work as his or her own, or gives or receives unpermitted aid. The standard sanction for a first offense includes a one- quarter suspension from the University and 40 hours of community service. In addition, most faculty members issue a "No Pass" or "No Credit" for the course in which the violation Graduate Student Handbook 2018-19 4 occurred. The standard sanction for multiple violations (e.g. cheating more than once in the same course) is a three-quarter suspension and 40 or more hours of community service. Fundamental Standard The Fundamental Standard has set the standard of conduct for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The NIH Human Microbiome Project Authors: the NIH HMP Working Group (
    Downloaded from genome.cshlp.org on October 5, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press The NIH Human Microbiome Project Authors: the NIH HMP Working Group (http://nihroadmap.nih.gov/hmp/members.asp) ABSTRACT: The Human Microbiome Project ( HMP), funded as an initiative of the NIH Roadmap for Biomedical Research (http://nihroadmap.nih.gov), is a multi-component community resource. The goals of the HMP are (1) to take advantage of new, high-throughput technologies to characterize the human microbiome more fully by studying samples from multiple body sites from each of at least 250 “normal” volunteers; (2) to determine whether there are associations between changes in the microbiome and health/disease by studying several different medical conditions; and (3) to provide both a standardized data resource and new technological approaches to enable such studies to be undertaken broadly in the scientific community. The ethical, legal, and social implications of such research are being systematically studied as well. The ultimate objective of the HMP is to demonstrate that there are opportunities to improve human health through monitoring or manipulation of the human microbiome. The history and implementation of this new program are described here. INTRODUCTION: It has been known for some time that the human body is inhabited by at least ten times more bacteria than the number of human cells in the body, and that the majority of those bacteria are found in the human gastrointestinal tract (Savage 1977). Throughout the history of microbiology, most human studies have focused on the disease-causing organisms found on or in people; fewer studies have examined the benefits of the resident bacteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Print Version of Inside Stanford
    The Precision Health and Integrated Diagnostics Center aims STANFORD to prevent healthy people from becoming ill. INSIDE Page 4 Volume 10, No.MEDICINE 10 May 21, 2018 Published by the Office of Communication & Public Affairs Multigene tests for breast cancer on the rise STEVE FISCH By Krista Conger he use of genetic tests aimed at detecting the pres- ence of mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Tgenes in women with breast cancer is rapidly de- clining in favor of tests that can detect multiple cancer- associated mutations, according to researchers at the School of Medicine and five other U.S. medical centers. Some researchers had wondered whether multigene testing, which may identify genetic mutations of un- certain clinical significance, would lead more women to consider prophylactic mastectomies — a surgery in which both breasts are removed to prevent future can- cers — out of an abundance of caution. However, the current study did not show an increase in mastectomies associated with testing more genes. The shift reflects a growing acknowledgement by clinicians that multigene panel tests can yield more clinically useful information for patients and their unaf- fected relatives, the researchers said. Overall, multigene panels were about twice as likely as the tests for BRCA1 and BRCA2 to identify disease- associated genetic variants, the study found. However, multigene testing was more likely than the BRCA-only testing to be delayed until after surgery to remove the tumor. This time lag may limit a patient’s treatment op- tions, the researchers said. ‘Becoming the norm’ “In general, multigene panel tests yield more clinically useful results and are rapidly becoming the norm,” Allison Kurian said.
    [Show full text]
  • Thinking About the Human Microbiome As a Source of Benefit and Risk
    David Relman • Thomas C. and Joan M. Merigan Professor in Medicine, and Microbiology & Immunology at Stanford University • Chief of Infectious Diseases at the Veterans Aairs Palo Alto Health Care System Thinking about the human microbiome as a source of benefit David A. Relman is the Thomas C. and Joan M. Merigan Professor in Medicine, and Microbiology & Immunology at Stanford University, and Chief of Infectious Diseases at the Veterans Aairs Palo Alto Health Care System. He is also Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and risk (FSI), and served as Science Co-Director at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (2013-2017), at Stanford. He is currently director of Tuesday, September 24 a new Biosecurity Initiative at FSI. Relman trained at MIT and then Harvard Medical School, followed by clinical training in internal medicine and 1:30 - 2:30 p.m. MRGN 121 infectious diseases at the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and then a postdoctoral fellowship in microbiology at Stanford. The diversity and intimacy of our Relman was an early pioneer in the modern study of the human relationships with the communities of indigenous microbiota (microbiome). A landmark paper in 2005 was one of microbes that live in and on our body is the rst to describe the human gut microbiota with molecular methods. nothing short of breathtaking. Recent Most recently, his work has focused on human microbial community ndings raise questions about how assembly, and community stability and resilience. Principles of disturbance these relationships get started early in and landscape ecology are tested in clinical studies of the human life, the ways in which they contribute microbiome.
    [Show full text]
  • The Characteristics of Pandemic Pathogens
    Center for Health Security The Characteristics of PANDEMIC PATHOGENS Improving Pandemic Preparedness by Identifying the Attributes of Microorganisms Most Likely to Cause a Global Catastrophic Biological Event Center for Health Security The Characteristics of PANDEMIC PATHOGENS PROJECT TEAM Amesh A. Adalja, MD, Project Director Matthew Watson, BS Eric S. Toner, MD Anita Cicero, JD Thomas V. Inglesby, MD Copyright © 2018 by Johns Hopkins University EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Characteristics of PANDEMIC PATHOGENS Background and Purpose of Report CONTENTS he Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security conducted this study to elucidate the characteristics T of naturally occurring microorganisms that constitute a global catastrophic biological risk (GCBR). 3 Executive Summary GCBRs are defined as “those events in which biological agents—whether naturally emerging or 8 Introduction 9 Purpose, Methods, and Analysis reemerging, deliberately created and released, or laboratory engineered and escaped—could lead to 10 Basis of Recommendations sudden, extraordinary, widespread disaster beyond the collective capability of national and international 18 Recommendations governments and the private sector to control. If unchecked, GCBRs would lead to great suffering, loss of 22 Future Directions life, and sustained damage to national governments, international relationships, economies, societal 22 Conclusion 23 References stability, or global security.” 26 Appendix A: List of Experts Interviewed 28 Appendix B: Meeting Participants The overarching aim of the study was to provide an inductive, microbe-agnostic analysis of the microbial world to identify fundamental principles that underlie this special category of microorganisms that have potential to cause global catastrophe. Such principles could refine pandemic preparedness by providing a new framework or lens through which to survey the threat landscape of infectious diseases in order to better anticipate, prepare for, and respond to GCBR threats.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Microbiome Science: Vision for the Future, Bethesda, MD, July 24 to 26, 2013
    Human microbiome science: vision for the future, Bethesda, MD, July 24 to 26, 2013 The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Ravel, J., M. J. Blaser, J. Braun, E. Brown, F. D. Bushman, E. B. Chang, J. Davies, et al. 2014. “Human microbiome science: vision for the future, Bethesda, MD, July 24 to 26, 2013.” Microbiome 2 (1): 16. doi:10.1186/2049-2618-2-16. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1186/2049-2618-2-16. Published Version doi:10.1186/2049-2618-2-16 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12717400 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Ravel et al. Microbiome 2014, 2:16 http://www.microbiomejournal.com/content/2/1/16 MEETING REPORT Open Access Human microbiome science: vision for the future, Bethesda, MD, July 24 to 26, 2013 Jacques Ravel1*, Martin J Blaser2, Jonathan Braun3, Eric Brown4, Frederic D Bushman5, Eugene B Chang6, Julian Davies7, Kathryn G Dewey8, Timothy Dinan9, Maria Dominguez-Bello2, Susan E Erdman10, B Brett Finlay5, Wendy S Garrett11, Gary B Huffnagle12,13, Curtis Huttenhower14, Janet Jansson15, Ian B Jeffery16, Christian Jobin17,18, Alexander Khoruts19, Heidi H Kong20, Johanna W Lampe21, Ruth E Ley22, Dan R Littman23,24, Sarkis K Mazmanian25, David A Mills26,27, Andrew S Neish28, Elaine Petrof29, David A Relman30,31, Rosamond Rhodes32, Peter J Turnbaugh33, Vincent B Young12,13, Rob Knight34 and Owen White35 Abstract A conference entitled ‘Human microbiome science: Vision for the future’ was organized in Bethesda, MD from July 24 to 26, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • David Relman Institutional Interviews Journal Interviews AUTHOR COMMENTARIES - 2009 Podcasts
    Home About Thomson Reuters Press Room Contact Us ● ScienceWatch Home ● Inside This Month... ● Interviews Featured Interviews Author Commentaries 2009 : September 2009 - Author Commentaries : David Relman Institutional Interviews Journal Interviews AUTHOR COMMENTARIES - 2009 Podcasts September 2009 ● Analyses David Relman Featured Analyses Featured Scientist Interview What's Hot In... A recent analysis of Essential Science IndicatorsSM from Thomson Reuters Special Topics data showed that the work of Dr. David Relman had the highest percent increase in total citations in the field of Microbiology. His record in this field includes 24 papers cited a total of 1,467 times between January 1, 1999 and ● Data & Rankings April 30, 2009. Sci-Bytes Fast Breaking Papers Dr. Relman is the Thomas M. and Joan C. Merigan Professor in the Department of Medicine, Division of New Hot Papers Infectious Diseases and the Department of Microbiology & Immunology at Stanford University School of Emerging Research Fronts Medicine. He is also the Chief of Infectious Diseases for the VA Palo Alto Healthcare System. Fast Moving Fronts In the interview below, ScienceWatch.com correspondent Gary Taubes talks with Dr. Relman Corporate Research Fronts about his highly cited research on human microbiota. Research Front Maps As a pioneer of the modern study of human microflora, there must have been a moment when Current Classics you first came on the subject and found it worthy of interest. How did that happen? Top Topics I was finishing a postdoctoral fellowship at Stanford with Stanley Falkow and my plan was to pursue a Rising Stars career in the research basis for microbial pathogenesis and combine that with some clinical care.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Learned from the Prenatal Microbiome Controversy Martin J
    Blaser et al. Microbiome (2021) 9:8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-020-00946-2 COMMENTARY Open Access Lessons learned from the prenatal microbiome controversy Martin J. Blaser1*, Suzanne Devkota2,3*, Kathy D. McCoy4*, David A. Relman5,6,7*, Moran Yassour8* and Vincent B. Young9* Abstract For more than a century, the prenatal environment was considered sterile. Over the last few years, findings obtained with next-generation sequencing approaches from samples of the placenta, the amniotic fluid, meconium, and even fetal tissues have challenged the dogma of a sterile womb, and additional reports have emerged that used culture, microscopy, and quantitative PCR to support the presence of a low-biomass microbial community at prenatal sites. Given the substantial implications of prenatal exposure to microbes for the development and health of the host, the findings have gathered substantial interest from academics, high impact journals, the public press, and funding agencies. However, an increasing number of studies have challenged the prenatal microbiome identifying contamination as a major issue, and scientists that remained skeptical have pointed to inconsistencies with in utero colonization, the impact of c-sections on early microbiome assembly, and the ability to generate germ-free mammals. A lively academic controversy has emerged on the existence of the wider importance of prenatal microbial communities. Microbiome has asked experts to discuss these issues and provide their thoughts on the implications. To allow for a broader perspective of this discussion, we have specifically selected scientists, who have a long-standing expertise in microbiome sciences but who have not directly been involved in the debate so far.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neglected Dimension of Global Security a Framework to Counter Infectious Disease Crises
    The Neglected Dimension of Global Security A Framework to Counter Infectious Disease Crises www.nam.edu/GHRF PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS NOTICE: Statements, recommendations, and opinions expressed are those of the Commission on a Global Health Risk Framework for the Future (GHRF Commission). The National Academy of Medicine served as Secretariat for the GHRF Commission, with support from the following National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff: Carmen C. Mundaca-Shah, Project Director V. Ayano Ogawa, Research Associate Priyanka Kanal, Intern (until July 2015) David Garrison, Senior Program Assistant (from December 2015) Mariah Geiger, Senior Program Assistant (until December 2015) Faye Hillman, Financial Officer Patrick W. Kelley, Director, Board on Global Health Consultants Anas El-Turabi, Doctoral Candidate in Health Policy (Evaluative Science & Statistics), Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University Philip Saynisch, Doctoral Candidate in Health Policy, Harvard Business School and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University Sponsors The Commission was supported by the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Mr. Ming Wai Lau, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the United States Agency for International Development, and Wellcome Trust. Copyright 2016 by the Commission on a Global Health Risk Framework for the Future. Suggested citation: GHRF Commission (Commission on a Global Health Risk Framework
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Print Version of Inside Stanford
    The gut- microbe diversity of a population of hunter- STANFORD gatherers in Tanzania varies seasonally, a study found. INSIDE Page 5 Volume 9, No. MEDICINE15 August 28, 2017 Published by the Office of Communication & Public Affairs For Stanley Falkow, a legacy of mentorship By Kathy Zonana all of his other resources as well,” Rel- but leave his room feeling like we are so ter mentor began with a mistake. He was man said. “He never has done any of that lucky to get to think about these interest- in his first faculty job, at Georgetown hen Stanley Falkow was awarded giving with anything other than obvious ing questions and work with such great University, and a former co-worker from a National Medal of Science last evidence of joy. And it’s not just the joy people and try to do useful things.” Walter Reed Army Institute of Research of being a generous person, but the joy of Wyear at the White House, he was But first, how not to mentor had, at the urging of Falkow and others, lauded not only for “his monumental sharing interesting ideas and having such just earned a PhD in a colleague’s lab. contributions toward understanding a wonderful job, so that you can’t help Falkow’s journey to becoming a mas- “The day he got his degree, he walked how microbes cause disease and resist into my office and said, ‘Falkow, I hope the effects of antibiotics,” but also for a TIMOTHY ARCHIBALD you’re satisfied, because this is for you lesser-known, albeit perhaps equally sig- and not for me,’” Falkow remembered.
    [Show full text]
  • Report from an Individual Simultaneous Consultation on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’S Immunization Safety Office Research Agenda
    Final ISO Consultancy Report, January 29, 2008 Report from an Individual Simultaneous Consultation on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Immunization Safety Office Research Agenda May 10 and 11, 2007, Atlanta, GA Prepared on December 29, 2007 by Karen R. Broder, MD, Commander, United States Public Health Services, Senior Medical Advisor, Immunization Safety Office (ISO), Office of the Chief Science Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on behalf of the ISO External Scientific Consultants: Georges Peter, MD, Professor Emeritus, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (moderator) Kevin Ault, MD, Associate Professor, Emory University School of Medicine (representing obstetrics and gynecology) Claire Broome, MD, MPH, Adjunct Professor, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University (representing epidemiology) Penelope Dennehy, MD, Professor, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (representing pediatric infectious diseases) David Relman, MD, Associate Professor, Stanford University School of Medicine (representing genomics) William Schaffner, MD, Professor, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine (representing adult infectious diseases) Christopher Wilson, MD, Professor, University of Washington School of Medicine (representing immunology) Disclaimer: The ideas and recommendations of this report reflect those of the individual consultants. This report does not represent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or Department of Health and Human Services policy,
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. David Relman Dr. Relman Is the Thomas C. and Joan M. Merigan
    Dr. David Relman Dr. Relman is the Thomas C. and Joan M. Merigan Professor in the Departments of Medicine, and of Microbiology and Immunology at Stanford University, and Chief of Infectious Diseases at the VA Palo Alto Health Care System in Palo Alto, California. He received an S.B. (Biology) from MIT (1977), M.D. (magna cum laude) from Harvard Medical School (1982), completed his clinical training in internal medicine and infectious diseases at Massachusetts General Hospital, served as a postdoctoral fellow in microbiology at Stanford University, and joined the faculty at Stanford in 1994. Dr. Relman’s current research focus is the human indigenous microbiota (microbiome), and in particular, the nature and mechanisms of variation in patterns of microbial diversity within the human body as a function of time (microbial succession), space (biogeography within the host landscape), and in response to perturbation, e.g., antibiotics (community robustness and resilience). One of the goals of this work is to define the role of the human microbiome in health and disease. This research integrates theory and methods from ecology, population biology, environmental microbiology, genomics and clinical medicine. During the past few decades, his research directions have also included pathogen discovery and the development of new strategies for identifying previously-unrecognized microbial agents of disease. This work helped to spearhead the application of molecular methods to the diagnosis of infectious diseases in the 1990’s. His research has emphasized the use of genomic approaches for exploring host-microbe relationships. Past scientific achievements include the description of a novel approach for identifying previously-unknown pathogens, the identification of a number of new human microbial pathogens, including the agent of Whipple’s disease, and some of the most extensive and revealing analyses to date of the human indigenous microbial ecosystem (see http://relman.stanford.edu).
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Proceedings September 22-23, 2014 | Joseph B
    Executive Proceedings September 22-23, 2014 | Joseph B. Martin Conference Center Harvard Medical School | Boston, Massachusetts, USA Unrestricted Educational Grants provided by: A note from W. Allan Walker, MD Dear Colleague, Research on the microbiota, and specifically the gut microbiota, is advancing rapidly. This new frontier of science is unveiling an entirely new understanding of how individual systems in the body can be affected by the gut microbiota. In addition, we are finding that the world of microbes plays a critical role across systems throughout the lifespan. Better understanding the Microbiome provides an essential context for knowing how to incorporate probiotics into our diets to promote health and prevent disease. We hosted a major symposium in Boston at the Harvard Medical School to look at “Gut Microbiota, Probiotics and Their Impact Throughout the Lifespan”. Leading researchers from around the world were convened to discuss current and emerging science in four areas of the age spectrum: I. Pregnancy; II. Neonatal Period; III. Adult Period; and IV. Older Adults. This Executive Proceedings provides a brief view of the topics covered in each of these areas. However, I would also encourage you to view the Webcast of the event on http://nutrition.med.harvard.edu. There you will see all the details of each scientific presentation. In addition, you will be able to hear the stimulating discussions among the experts at the end of each session. Each presentation can be viewed separately for you convenience. I would like to thank the Program Committee and the Program Moderators for their insights and significant contributions in making this inaugural symposium on gut microbiota and probiotics throughout the lifespan a success.
    [Show full text]