Hi everyone,

I was acknowledged on a publication. (not published as an author). Would this matter much to anyone? such as ad-coms? is it CV-worthy? Please let me know what you think about this.
thanx
:cool:

Hi everyone,

I was acknowledged on a publication. (not published as an author). Would this matter much to anyone? such as ad-coms? is it CV-worthy? Please let me know what you think about this.
thanx
:cool:
An acknowledgment is not authorship. Do bring it up at an interview, however, if you were involved in the study or list it as an experience but definitely don't add it as a publication.

Not a pub, but it is research experience. When I read apps, I pay attention to this as I know some PIs can be tight with the coauthor numbers.

Not a pub, but it is research experience. When I read apps, I pay attention to this as I know some PIs can be tight with the coauthor numbers.

So my acknowledgement, in the eyes of adcoms or whoever, is still noteworthy?

:cool:

So my acknowledgement, in the eyes of adcoms or whoever, is still noteworthy?

:cool:

How are you going to put it on the CV? What I did for some of the research I did without any pubs, I just put a synopsis of my research project on my CV. Actually , I did that for all my research projects. Not sure if this helps. I had my paper reviewed by Nature Reviews Micro and I am still trying to figure out a way to put that on my CV, so anyone with any ideas please let me know!

How are you going to put it on the CV? What I did for some of the research I did without any pubs, I just put a synopsis of my research project on my CV. Actually , I did that for all my research projects. Not sure if this helps. I had my paper reviewed by Nature Reviews Micro and I am still trying to figure out a way to put that on my CV, so anyone with any ideas please let me know!


This, in my opinion, does merit a place on your CV because you have completed a piece of scholarship worthy of submission to a peer-reviewed journal. I would list it as "manuscript submitted." I have seem some people list the specific journal where they submitted, for example "manuscript under consideration at NRM." Personally, I would leave it as "manuscript submitted." If it is accepted with revisions, I would change the designation to include the journal name.

Best of luck with your NRM submission. You have passed a very high hurdle already by writing and submitting a manuscript (albeit a review) of sufficient quality and interest to merit peer-review in the eyes of some very knowledgable editors.

-PB

This, in my opinion, does merit a place on your CV because you have completed a piece of scholarship worthy of submission to a peer-reviewed journal. I would list it as "manuscript submitted." I have seem some people list the specific journal where they submitted, for example "manuscript under consideration at NRM." Personally, I would leave it as "manuscript submitted." If it is accepted with revisions, I would change the designation to include the journal name.

Best of luck with your NRM submission. You have passed a very high hurdle already by writing and submitting a manuscript (albeit a review) of sufficient quality and interest to merit peer-review in the eyes of some very knowledgable editors.

-PB


My paper is already in publication(J of Infectious Diseases) and NRM already reviewed my paper in there July(05) issue. My question is how do I note this on my CV? As a seperate entry or as a footnote? Any advice is appreciated.

I would list it as "manuscript submitted." I have seem some people list the specific journal where they submitted, for example "manuscript under consideration at NRM." -PB
This is commonplace ONLY if you are a listed author which is sounds like you are. The situation for the OP is very different. If you write "manuscript submitted", people will assume you are a named author.

My paper is already in publication(J of Infectious Diseases) and NRM already reviewed my paper in there July(05) issue. My question is how do I note this on my CV? As a seperate entry or as a footnote? Any advice is appreciated.


Sorry, I miss understood your original question. There was a brief commentary / review / blurb in NRM of your other published paper. I see. Hmmmmm, that is pretty cool. I don't know that I would list that on your CV though. By far, the most impressive thing is that you have a published manuscript... that alone will speak more than adding footnotes about what became of the paper after it was published

-PB