How exactly abstract should be listed on CV

[Chicken Bone]

I looked through past threads, but I feel still confused. Here is what my situation is:

1. I have an abstract submitted to an annual conference of a society. It got accepted, and the abstract was published officially in one of the issues in the society's official journal. I later made a poster presentation at the annual conference. In this case, should I list the published abstract under publication and poster presentation under presentation on CV?

2. Very similar to the first one, but this time only the top 200 abstracts of the conference by peer-review got published officially in a journal. Plus, all abstracts were posted on the website in an abstract booklet. What should I list? Same to the first one?

3. The society doesn't publish abstracts in its journal, but it was posted in a booklet under the title "paper abstract." At the same time, they also have another booklet called "poster abstract." We made the podium presentation at this conference. What's the difference between paper abstract and poster abstract? Can I list this under publication?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GoSpursGo]

This is why ERAS is stupid in that it has only one section for any kind of abstract/poster/publication. Nobody thinks of a poster and a full publication as equivalent, no matter whether the abstract technically makes into a journal supplement.

dont double list any of these, they’re either a peer-reviewed abstract or they’re a poster, not both. I would list the first two as posters and the last as an oral/podium presentation.

 

[dienekes88]

On your CV, you should have multiple sections, and all of these go in the last of the following:

Peer reviewed publications
Book chapters
Abstracts/posters/presentations

 

[Chicken Bone]

This is why ERAS is stupid in that it has only one section for any kind of abstract/poster/publication. Nobody thinks of a poster and a full publication as equivalent, no matter whether the abstract technically makes into a journal supplement.

dont double list any of these, they’re either a peer-reviewed abstract or they’re a poster, not both. I would list the first two as posters and the last as an oral/podium presentation.

As for the first and third, it makes sense. But for the second one, this is a little weird, because it was first reviewed by the committee for a conference presentation. And then it was reviewed again to be a part of the top 200 abstracts that got published.

 

[GoSpursGo]

As for the first and third, it makes sense. But for the second one, this is a little weird, because it was first reviewed by the committee for a conference presentation. And then it was reviewed again to be a part of the top 200 abstracts that got published.

In general most conferences put posters through some sort of peer-review. If you want to say that you got an "award" by being listed as one of the top 200 abstracts, that's fine, but it's still not a publication. Still a poster.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Abstract = Poster < Presentation (not Poster) < Publication

Everyone knows this already who reads your application, and no one will be fooled no matter where you list it. You can call it a poster presentation or a conference abstract and sprinkle it with whatever, but everyone stills knows this was unlikely peer-reviewed and you likely stood in front of the poster for 3 hours to have 2 people come by. Those posters aren't CV builders, they are for networking (and to pad the coffers of the respective society you submitted it through). No one reading the application will pretend otherwise. I mean, you should list them cause you put some work into them, but they don't mean a whole lot beyond that. Oh, and as mentioned, don't double list.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

All abstracts presented are national/international societies representing legit specialties are technically peer reviewed even if not published in the journal of said society; I do not remember how it is on eras but on real CVs there’s a section for abstracts that can be separated into posters and oral presentations.

they should follow some variant of this format: authors...title...presented at the Nth Annual meeting of the society of medical specialty...date...location

under no circumstances do abstracts get listed as a publication even if they appear in a medical journal.

 

[Chicken Bone]

All abstracts presented are national/international societies representing legit specialties are technically peer reviewed even if not published in the journal of said society; I do not remember how it is on eras but on real CVs there’s a section for abstracts that can be separated into posters and oral presentations.

they should follow some variant of this format: authors...title...presented at the Nth Annual meeting of the society of medical specialty...date...location

under no circumstances do abstracts get listed as a publication even if they appear in a medical journal.

Thank you, i had this abstract to the biggest conference in a specialty, and they ranked all the abstracts by tier I and tier II, only the top 200 abstracts for podium presentation and 25 posters (tier I) would make to a journal publication, for the rest of the bulk amount of abstracts submitted, those were not published in a journal but just website booklet. Where can I list this? maybe have an honor section on my CV?

 

[GoSpursGo]

Abstract = Poster < Presentation (not Poster) < Publication

Everyone knows this already who reads your application, and no one will be fooled no matter where you list it. You can call it a poster presentation or a conference abstract and sprinkle it with whatever, but everyone stills knows this was unlikely peer-reviewed and you likely stood in front of the poster for 3 hours to have 2 people come by. Those posters aren't CV builders, they are for networking (and to pad the coffers of the respective society you submitted it through). No one reading the application will pretend otherwise. I mean, you should list them cause you put some work into them, but they don't mean a whole lot beyond that. Oh, and as mentioned, don't double list.

I will push back ever so slightly. I agree that in academia, these posters mean nothing and are for networking. However, as a med student I think it is meaningful that you actually managed to do research and are capable of putting your story together in a format that can be shared with the scientific community. Med school is littered with students who reach out and start a project because they want to "try research." A bunch of those students can never get off the ground, or can't analyze their data in any meaningful way. A poster ain't a pub, but it shows you give at least half a crap.

This will mean nothing if you're applying to a highly competitive specialty like derm where you have to just stack up actual publications to pass muster. But for less competitive specialties, like peds, having anything at all under your CV in terms of an actual deliverable is notable.

Thank you, i had this abstract to the biggest conference in a specialty, and they ranked all the abstracts by tier I and tier II, only the top 200 abstracts for podium presentation and 25 posters (tier I) would make to a journal publication, for the rest of the bulk amount of abstracts submitted, those were not published in a journal but just website booklet. Where can I list this? maybe have an honor section on my CV?

Yes, it's an honor/award.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

I will push back ever so slightly. I agree that in academia, these posters mean nothing and are for networking. However, as a med student I think it is meaningful that you actually managed to do research and are capable of putting your story together in a format that can be shared with the scientific community. Med school is littered with students who reach out and start a project because they want to "try research." A bunch of those students can never get off the ground, or can't analyze their data in any meaningful way. A poster ain't a pub, but it shows you give at least half a crap.

This will mean nothing if you're applying to a highly competitive specialty like derm where you have to just stack up actual publications to pass muster. But for less competitive specialties, like peds, having anything at all under your CV in terms of an actual deliverable is notable.

Yes, it's an honor/award.

I see a lot of pediatric applications with presentations and abstracts. They are certainly better than “gave a lecture to my classmates” because that is utter fluff, but what I said is accurate for pediatrics too. Again, people should put anything they can on their application, and sure having a poster presentation is better than nothing, but it’s just a easy to explain in the research section ones interest and the work they did. If an applicant can articulate that better, personally I find that more meaningful. In fact, if I person puts an abstract on their application and can’t articulate what they general concept of the research was, why it was being studied and role they had, that’s a red flag no matter what their application says.

However, this is mostly beyond the scope of the original question which can be distilled down to: Put whatever you feel is relevant on your application, don’t double dip and for gods sake, try to be interesting during the interview (though not too interesting... ie keep you shoes on)

 

[GoSpursGo]

I see a lot of pediatric applications with presentations and abstracts. They are certainly better than “gave a lecture to my classmates” because that is utter fluff, but what I said is accurate for pediatrics too. Again, people should put anything they can on their application, and sure having a poster presentation is better than nothing, but it’s just a easy to explain in the research section ones interest and the work they did. If an applicant can articulate that better, personally I find that more meaningful. In fact, if I person puts an abstract on their application and can’t articulate what they general concept of the research was, why it was being studied and role they had, that’s a red flag no matter what their application says.

However, this is mostly beyond the scope of the original question which can be distilled down to: Put whatever you feel is relevant on your application, don’t double dip and for gods sake, try to be interesting during the interview (though not too interesting... ie keep you shoes on)

Yeah I think we're saying 95% the same thing. Good to put it if you have it, don't pretend it's more important than it is. And ultimately you need to be able to explain it.

 

[aldol16]

1. I have an abstract submitted to an annual conference of a society. It got accepted, and the abstract was published officially in one of the issues in the society's official journal. I later made a poster presentation at the annual conference. In this case, should I list the published abstract under publication and poster presentation under presentation on CV?

Try not to double list if you can help it. IMO at the trainee level it's okay to list a poster and publication if the poster was on the way to the publication. What I mean is commonly academics present their preliminary findings at meetings, get feedback, and make adjustments before writing up their papers. So the poster and publication would have slightly differing content (even differing names). I think it's fine to list the publication in the pub section and the poster in the posters and presentations section.

For this case, it seems like the published abstract is the exact same work as the poster. In that case, you should probably list either the abstract or the poster but not both.

2. Very similar to the first one, but this time only the top 200 abstracts of the conference by peer-review got published officially in a journal. Plus, all abstracts were posted on the website in an abstract booklet. What should I list? Same to the first one?

See above.

3. The society doesn't publish abstracts in its journal, but it was posted in a booklet under the title "paper abstract." At the same time, they also have another booklet called "poster abstract." We made the podium presentation at this conference. What's the difference between paper abstract and poster abstract? Can I list this under publication?

Publication is for peer-reviewed publications. This sounds like it's not a peer-reviewed publication but really just a summary of what went on during the meeting. This one should probably go under only poster/presentation section.

 

[aldol16]

All abstracts presented are national/international societies representing legit specialties are technically peer reviewed even if not published in the journal of said society; I do not remember how it is on eras but on real CVs there’s a section for abstracts that can be separated into posters and oral presentations.

That's not true. They're not technically peer-reviewed in any sense. What it means is several people looked at your abstract which did not contain the details needed to actually peer review the methods you used, and found the basic description of methods and the results produced interesting enough to be of interest to conference attendees.

This is not peer review. Peer review refers to the process by which academic experts rigorously review your article for its methodology. You can't rigorously review anything when all you have is an abstract.

 

[Gilakend]

So I'm confused about how it works as an abstract. If you have an abstract that you submit to multiple conferences, say a local/institutional conferences and a national conference (to get feedback on it before you continue/publish it) then end up publishing it. How would it be listed on ERAS?

1. Just the publication?
2. The publication and 1 abstract submission?
3. The publication and all abstract submissions?

 

[Frogger27]

So I'm confused about how it works as an abstract. If you have an abstract that you submit to multiple conferences, say a local/institutional conferences and a national conference (to get feedback on it before you continue/publish it) then end up publishing it. How would it be listed on ERAS?

1. Just the publication?
2. The publication and 1 abstract submission?
3. The publication and all abstract submissions?

I listed all. Each presentation is at a different conference so it’s own individual entry, along with the manuscript

 

[Gilakend]

I listed all. Each presentation is at a different conference so it’s own individual entry, along with the manuscript

So just to clarify: when the ERAS is counting those for the charting outcomes even if it’s the same abstract but submitted to two conferences and then an eventual paper, that counts as 3 total?

Thanks for the response!

 

[Frogger27]

So just to clarify: when the ERAS is counting those for the charting outcomes even if it’s the same abstract but submitted to two conferences and then an eventual paper, that counts as 3 total?

Thanks for the response!

Correct. Every individual entry counts as 1 on ERAS. It shows up like this. Pretty easy to get these numbers up of you are productive in research. I had multiple projects that counted for 2-3 things on ERAS.

Peer Review Journal Articles/Abstracts

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger3. Project Title 1. Journal Info.

Frogger, Duck, Bird. Project Title 2. Journal Info

Peer Reviewed Journal Articles/Abstracts (Other than published)

eg, publications that are submitted or accepted but not yet published

Poster Presentations

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger 3. Project Title 1. Poster presented at National Conference x

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger3. Project Title 1. Poster Presented at Regional Conference y

Frogger, Duck, Bird. Project Title 2. Poster Presented at Medical School Conference z

Peer Reviewed Online Publications

Non-Peer Reviewed Online Publications

 

[aldol16]

Correct. Every individual entry counts as 1 on ERAS. It shows up like this. Pretty easy to get these numbers up of you are productive in research. I had multiple projects that counted for 2-3 things on ERAS.

That's interesting... is it expected that med students will pad like this? I've always wondered why the pubs/poster/abstracts # keeps creeping up on Charting Outcomes.

 

[Frogger27]

That's interesting... is it expected that med students will pad like this? I've always wondered why the pubs/poster/abstracts # keeps creeping up on Charting Outcomes.

I don't consider this padding... If you have a project that was accepted at a local and national conference, there is no reason not to put it twice. You went through the process of preparing it, submitting it, and traveling to that conference to present.

I think the number keeps creeping up because fields keep getting more competitive and people see research as a means to differentiate themselves. The number of abstracts/pubs last year for the unmatched ortho candidate was basically the same for the unmatched/matched candidate. It is just the norm that people start research early and inevitably will end up with a certain amount.

I had ~40 abstracts/publications on ERAS. I just looked at my abstracts - 6 of them were presented at multiple conferences and 6 of my presentations turned into manuscripts. So a good number of these projects were listed 2-3 times on there. Could I have only listed one presentation? Sure. But does it make a difference if I have 34 vs 40 entries? Doubtful. Plus, no one even looks close enough to know if you were padding anyways. People are just like "Wow thats a lot of research, tell me about your favorite project?" or they will skim it for one thing that sounds interesting if related to their field and ask about it.

 

[mvenus929]

So I'm confused about how it works as an abstract. If you have an abstract that you submit to multiple conferences, say a local/institutional conferences and a national conference (to get feedback on it before you continue/publish it) then end up publishing it. How would it be listed on ERAS?

1. Just the publication?
2. The publication and 1 abstract submission?
3. The publication and all abstract submissions?

Do whatever you think you need to to get into residency. Once you get in, I'd recommend culling your CV a little.

For instance, I don't list any posters that I presented at a local/institutional conference if I also presented them at a national conference--the national conference takes priority and I haven't seen any posters rejected at the local level (but have been rejected at the national level). But, if I did an oral presentation for the local conference and a poster for the national conference, it gets listed twice.

I also don't differentiate between posters and abstracts because abstracts are typically associated with posters (or an oral presentation). So, I list the presentation and then add the DOI/journal information when I get it.

For instance, for a poster I presented a couple years ago, the entry looks something like this:

Mvenus929, Coauthor-1, Coauthor-2. "The title of the abstract goes here" https://doi.org/[insert DOI number here]. Presented as Poster at National Peds Conference: City, State [country]. November x, 2018.

The poster was also presented at our local trainee poster presentation, but I don't bother listing that because, again, not as big of a deal as the national conference.

 

[Chicken Bone]

Correct. Every individual entry counts as 1 on ERAS. It shows up like this. Pretty easy to get these numbers up of you are productive in research. I had multiple projects that counted for 2-3 things on ERAS.

Peer Review Journal Articles/Abstracts

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger3. Project Title 1. Journal Info.

Frogger, Duck, Bird. Project Title 2. Journal Info

Peer Reviewed Journal Articles/Abstracts (Other than published)

eg, publications that are submitted or accepted but not yet published

Poster Presentations

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger 3. Project Title 1. Poster presented at National Conference x

Frogger, Frogger2, Frogger3. Project Title 1. Poster Presented at Regional Conference y

Frogger, Duck, Bird. Project Title 2. Poster Presented at Medical School Conference z

Peer Reviewed Online Publications

Non-Peer Reviewed Online Publications

seriously? I listed the same presentation for multiple national and regional conferences in one entry on my CV like Tom Jerry, A study of cat. Presented in XXX conference, xxx regional xxx, xxx international meeting. So, I can produce 4-5 entries from one study that isn't even published in a highly regarded journal. If this is how eras works, Ima have 50+ publications, abstracts, and presentations

 

[Dr G Oogle]

People will see right through it that. The first thing I do is look at the research part and if see that kind of nonsense is occurring and I will not look upon it favorably because it is 100% padding. If you present only at a local or regional conference great but If you present at a national conference no need to put the other thing on there. Also putting presentations at your med school research day is not beneficial, it’s little better than putting your project on house location and bean plant growth at your 4th grade science fair.

there is absolute nothing wrong with not having 15 research bullet points on your CV, there is something wrong with trying to stretch 3 research activities into 15 people will see right through that. Most probably won’t care but some might

 

[Dr G Oogle]

That's not true. They're not technically peer-reviewed in any sense. What it means is several people looked at your abstract which did not contain the details needed to actually peer review the methods you used, and found the basic description of methods and the results produced interesting enough to be of interest to conference attendees.

This is not peer review. Peer review refers to the process by which academic experts rigorously review your article for its methodology. You can't rigorously review anything when all you have is an abstract.

They are peer reviewed as in they are reviewed by a scientific committee and either accepted or rejected, thus reviewed by your peers. I would not assume the the same at local or regional conferences (at least not nearly the level of rigor compared to national conferences) They are not rigorously peer reviewed due to their nature, and I do not encourage people to put abstracts Under peer reviewed publications even if “published in a medical journal”

 

[aldol16]

I don't consider this padding... If you have a project that was accepted at a local and national conference, there is no reason not to put it twice. You went through the process of preparing it, submitting it, and traveling to that conference to present.

It's more of a thing in academia (especially in the basic sciences). It's frowned upon to list something multiple times - usually we would just list the highest level instance. So for example, if a poster was presented at a national conference but was later published, I would only list the publication on my academic CV. It's also frowned upon in the basic sciences to present the same thing twice. It's okay to present the same project if you have more data on it and want the feedback on that but the same exact thing shouldn't be presented twice (again, more of an academic perspective).

 

[aldol16]

They are peer reviewed as in they are reviewed by a scientific committee and either accepted or rejected, thus reviewed by your peers. I would not assume the the same at local or regional conferences (at least not nearly the level of rigor compared to national conferences) They are not rigorously peer reviewed due to their nature, and I do not encourage people to put abstracts Under peer reviewed publications even if “published in a medical journal”

Again, this is just a perverse definition of the term "peer reviewed." If you want to get down to the mechanics, I could send my paper to several faculty in the department who review it and say it's "peer reviewed." Again, people screening abstracts for a conference are looking for a lower quality floor and are using very limited information to screen, i.e., an abstract. They're looking to see if whatever you have is interesting/impactful for the conference attendees more than reviewing your methods (which are not provided to them except what is in the abstract).

I guess if someone wants to create a section on their CV that says "peer-reviewed posters/presentations," they can, but peer review here doesn't mean anything. A more accurate term would be "peer screened" but I wouldn't actually encourage someone to say that.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Again, this is just a perverse definition of the term "peer reviewed." If you want to get down to the mechanics, I could send my paper to several faculty in the department who review it and say it's "peer reviewed." Again, people screening abstracts for a conference are looking for a lower quality floor and are using very limited information to screen, i.e., an abstract. They're looking to see if whatever you have is interesting/impactful for the conference attendees more than reviewing your methods (which are not provided to them except what is in the abstract).

I guess if someone wants to create a section on their CV that says "peer-reviewed posters/presentations," they can, but peer review here doesn't mean anything. A more accurate term would be "peer screened" but I wouldn't actually encourage someone to say that.

I think we are both trying to make the same point from different perspectives. “Peer review for abstracts isn’t rigorous and cannot be due to the nature of abstracts” but technically still peer reviewed as in not “pay to play” like the open access conferences and journals. I certainly am not advocating that people should be listing abstracts under peer reviewed anything.

 

[Chicken Bone]

People will see right through it that. The first thing I do is look at the research part and if see that kind of nonsense is occurring and I will not look upon it favorably because it is 100% padding. If you present only at a local or regional conference great but If you present at a national conference no need to put the other thing on there. Also putting presentations at your med school research day is not beneficial, it’s little better than putting your project on house location and bean plant growth at your 4th grade science fair.

there is absolute nothing wrong with not having 15 research bullet points on your CV, there is something wrong with trying to stretch 3 research activities into 15 people will see right through that. Most probably won’t care but some might

Hi, what counts as a research activity? For example, my friend invited me to help with his project. He has finished all data collection and a rough draft, I only helped him re-organize the data, perform some analyses with little different methodologies and finish the manuscript with him. Does this count as a research activity? On the other hand, we are preparing an RCT now. We aim to publish a protocol, then two papers and an abstract to a conference at the end of the day. This RCT is also a continuation of our previously published work including one paper and one conference abstract. To sum up, this one activity will produce six things at the end of the day if things run as expected. This looks bad?

 

[Dr G Oogle]

It’s not bad to use same data set to generate novel analyses and write multiple papers or abstracts, but you have to be careful about salami slicing and turning what should be 1 or 2 or 3 papers and generate 6. On the other hand using literally the same abstract and presenting it 6 times and then saying you have 6 abstracts is not great. As far as “research activity” on eras you can put projects involved in but not published on a real CV only papers and abstracts should be noted

 

[Chicken Bone]

It’s not bad to use same data set to generate novel analyses and write multiple papers or abstracts, but you have to be careful about salami slicing and turning what should be 1 or 2 or 3 papers and generate 6. On the other hand using literally the same abstract and presenting it 6 times and then saying you have 6 abstracts is not great. As far as “research activity” on eras you can put projects involved in but not published on a real CV only papers and abstracts should be noted

Actually, it is not the same data set, it is numerous papers under one big project. For example like investigating an xxx disease in the rat model, paper 1 is about a mechanism of this, paper 2 is about the investigation of that gene, paper 3 is about analysis of mutant protein of Y, abstract 1 is about immune responses of Z, abstract 2 is about another thing and so on They are all related to each other, but they are different stuff. So I am confused about the research activity, should all of these be listed separately or as one activity. The reason I asked is I am pretty delved into the same board topic and if I continue so, I would expect to have almost 10 papers/abstracts but for only one activity

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Actually, it is not the same data set, it is numerous papers under one big project. For example like investigating an xxx disease in the rat model, paper 1 is about a mechanism of this, paper 2 is about the investigation of that gene, paper 3 is about analysis of mutant protein of Y, abstract 1 is about immune responses of Z, abstract 2 is about another thing and so on They are all related to each other, but they are different stuff. So I am confused about the research activity, should all of these be listed separately or as one activity. The reason I asked is I am pretty delved into the same board topic and if I continue so, I would expect to have almost 10 papers/abstracts but for only one activity

In the research activity, they are all one project. The publications are then listed as separate papers and the abstracts are listed as different abstracts.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

Actually, it is not the same data set, it is numerous papers under one big project. For example like investigating an xxx disease in the rat model, paper 1 is about a mechanism of this, paper 2 is about the investigation of that gene, paper 3 is about analysis of mutant protein of Y, abstract 1 is about immune responses of Z, abstract 2 is about another thing and so on They are all related to each other, but they are different stuff. So I am confused about the research activity, should all of these be listed separately or as one activity. The reason I asked is I am pretty delved into the same board topic and if I continue so, I would expect to have almost 10 papers/abstracts but for only one activity

Well they are probably different activities under one overarching theme. Genomic analysis is different studying immune response which is different than a proteinomic analysis etc. so they are all different experiments analytics etc. I worked in a lab studying hypo pigmentation disorders in undergrad I worked on a way to grow melanocytes in a specific media, understanding causes of vitiligo and genetic analysis all technically along the same spectrum but very different in the details