Second author pub in peer-reviewed journal - does it help?

Discover Your Odds of Getting into Medical School
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
0Complications said:
:laugh: This is priceless. You have no publications, and you plan on submitting something for publication?

I'm not sure if you're aware, but plenty that submit to Nature are rejected. You should post your high and mightiness when you have actually had an article published.


OP, I think it is well established by this point that a publication will help. I don't think there is any other way to look at it. It shows your dedicated involvement in the research process. Congrats on the pub!
Click to expand...

yeah seriously...submitting a publication doesn't say jack about your research experience
I'm a case in point, submitted twice, no publication...yet
 
The point of a publication is not necessarily just for prestige, but is also just to show that you have something to show for while working in your lab. It's really easy to say that you've worked in a lab for so and so whatever time, but it doesn't really mean that you have accomplished anything. Having a submission shows that you did make some kind of contribution to a research project, and medical schools like that.
 
Also, like someone above said, Impact factor does not say everything. I am getting published in the journal of neurosurgery, which while it does have an impact factor of about 2.5, which is not all that great, it is the most highly renowned journal in neurosurgery.
 
Dr Gerrard said:
Also, like someone above said, Impact factor does not say everything. I am getting published in the journal of neurosurgery, which while it does have an impact factor of about 2.5, which is not all that great, it is the most highly renowned journal in neurosurgery.
Click to expand...


+1

Impact factor is a function of many other factors, like readership and the size of the field - even if you make a large contribution to a micro-field, if the work is only of interest to that specific field it's likely that you'd want to publish in a specialist journal - which will necessarily have a lower impact factor (the less people that read it, the less people that will cite it). In short, I wouldn't worry too much about the IF of a journal (and unless you are first author you don't really have any input into where the paper is submitted anyway), but I would focus on the quality of your work. The great thing about being published is that your work is accessible - if the quality is high, that will come through.

As a final note, think about Mendel - for the first 20 or so years after publishing his work on genetics his personal IF (eigenfactor or whatever the term is) was essentially 0. Quality over prestige!
 
gujuDoc said:
Good points in your last paragraph of this post, but again on the first points you made. at the MD/PhD, PhD, or MD level, or even MS level if your goal is a career in research, then yes IF is a huge deal. at a ugrad level of someone just trying to get in med school who most likely has no desire to be a researcher the rest of their lives, well that's another story altogether.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. For undergrads any publication is impressive to medical schools and will help your case with admissions.

Dr Gerrard said:
Also, like someone above said, Impact factor does not say everything. I am getting published in the journal of neurosurgery, which while it does have an impact factor of about 2.5, which is not all that great, it is the most highly renowned journal in neurosurgery.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, it depends what field you are publishing in. Some fields will never have impact factors of >5 but they are still the best in their field.
 
I see a lot of activity here since last night, and for what its worth (which is not very much), I'd just like to add my +1 to each post.
 
I was wondering, whats the value of a case report second author? Same as what has been discussed here? (college freshmen btw)
 
Az1698 said:
I was wondering, whats the value of a case report second author? Same as what has been discussed here? (college freshmen btw)
Click to expand...

No. Second author publications are MEANINGLESS. They will be DETRIMENTAL to you throughout your ENTIRE career. NEVER TELL ANYONE YOU DID THIS AZ1698. It could mean the end.

😛:laugh:
 
let me clarify: obviously specialized journals will have lower impact factors. But when you get to the level of 0.5, there are some serious issues with that journal that cannot be attributed to narrowness of scope. The reason why I say that this may hurt the OP is because by publishing his research in such a journal, it basically gives a low value of his research. On the other hand, had this paper not been published, the adcom would have no other evaluation of his research other than his own description, which could easily be much more impressive.

in fact, i have been published twice already, once in organic letters and once in journal of the american chemical society, and i also have 5 more manuscripts on the way. No, impact factor doesn't say everything, and often times it is flawed, but in the research world, it unfortunately is what is used to evaluate quality of research.
 
unitofpain said:
let me clarify: obviously specialized journals will have lower impact factors. But when you get to the level of 0.5, there are some serious issues with that journal that cannot be attributed to narrowness of scope. The reason why I say that this may hurt the OP is because by publishing his research in such a journal, it basically gives a low value of his research. On the other hand, had this paper not been published, the adcom would have no other evaluation of his research other than his own description, which could easily be much more impressive.

in fact, i have been published twice already, once in organic letters and once in journal of the american chemical society, and i also have 5 more manuscripts on the way. No, impact factor doesn't say everything, and often times it is flawed, but in the research world, it unfortunately is what is used to evaluate quality of research.
Click to expand...

Good thing these med school applicants aren't aiming for the RESEARCH WORLD! Get this in your head - it will never hurt a MEDICAL SCHOOL APPLICANT (that is, someone not aiming at the research world) to add ANY PUBLICATION to their AMCAS application. IF is NOT A FACTOR.

IF IS NOT A FACTOR FOR AN UNDERGRAD STUDENT APPLYING TO MEDICAL SCHOOL.

MED SCHOOL ADCOMS WILL BE IMPRESSED THAT THERE IS A PUBLICATION AT ALL.

THOUSANDS OF STUDENTS ARE ACCEPTED EACH YEAR WITH NO PUBLICATIONS, AND EVEN LITTLE OR NO RESEARCH.

Warning: stop trolling. I'm not the only one noticing.
 
how can you be sure of this? are you on the committee? had he, instead of publishing his research, simply stated that he was submitting his research to a higher tier journal, wouldn't that have impressed the adcom more? By "hurt", i mean that, relative to what he could have done with his research, it was a downplay. Of course no research will ever be a negative, im just saying that he could have made it more of a positive.
i dont think i've responded with anything but cordiality to your opinions, you could at least return the favor. I am simply stating my opinion on the matter.
 
unitofpain said:
how can you be sure of this? are you on the committee? had he, instead of publishing his research, simply stated that he was submitting his research to a higher tier journal, wouldn't that have impressed the adcom more? By "hurt", i mean that, relative to what he could have done with his research, it was a downplay. Of course no research will ever be a negative, im just saying that he could have made it more of a positive.
i dont think i've responded with anything but cordiality to your opinions, you could at least return the favor. I am simply stating my opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is sadly incorrect. How can I be sure of this? Yes, I am a student on committee. Had he stated that he was submitting his research to a higher tier journal, this would have been a lie. If this is what you believe, clearly, you come from a background where morality is not much of an issue.

It is not a downplay to report what you have done. Making **** up is not how I live my life - if this is how you live yours, then so be it, it's certainly not my problem. Your cordiality has only begun to show now. Don't forget how you started posting with an air of divinity. Regardless, polite or impolite, don't come here and post garbage - you can seriously affect an applicant's career.
 
unitofpain said:
how can you be sure of this? are you on the committee? had he, instead of publishing his research, simply stated that he was submitting his research to a higher tier journal, wouldn't that have impressed the adcom more? By "hurt", i mean that, relative to what he could have done with his research, it was a downplay. Of course no research will ever be a negative, im just saying that he could have made it more of a positive.
i dont think i've responded with anything but cordiality to your opinions, you could at least return the favor. I am simply stating my opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...

Someone of your research stature should know that you never, NEVER list the journal name you submitted to when citing your article, unless it has been accepted or is in press. 'Manuscript Submitted' is the appropriate way to cite in this case.

So my conclusion, being as cordial as possible, is that you are mostly wrong about everything. You are young, show some humility...it will really take you places.
 
unitofpain, I have to disagree with you here.

Simply saying you are planning to submit does not mean anything to anyone.

Here is the research wow-factor rankings:

1. published
2. in review
3. submitted
4. "research"

So you see, just because you submitted to a high impact journal i.e. Nature does not mean much because I can submit to Nature tomorrow, have it rejected almost immediately, and have it not mean a thing.

What's that old adage again...A paper published is worth 2 to be submitted...or was it in the bush
 
Having a publication accepted for publication or published is a +4 at one top tier school. Having been funded for a project is a +3, having done a summer program or a couple of semesters is a +2, and having been a research assistant is a +1. (You get categorized into one of these groups or 0 for "no research").

Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account.

A case report (asked earlier) might not be counted because it is not related to a research endeavor. Basically, a research publication is used as a measure that the research came to its intended end which is to advance the field through the development or contribution of new knowledge. However, a case report does contrbute to new clinical knowledge so maybe some would give you brownie points for a case report. It couldn't hurt. 😉
 
LizzyM said:
Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account.
Click to expand...
It's always refreshing to see admins swing by and swiftly end debate.
 
unitofpain said:
let me clarify: obviously specialized journals will have lower impact factors. But when you get to the level of 0.5, there are some serious issues with that journal that cannot be attributed to narrowness of scope. The reason why I say that this may hurt the OP is because by publishing his research in such a journal, it basically gives a low value of his research. On the other hand, had this paper not been published, the adcom would have no other evaluation of his research other than his own description, which could easily be much more impressive.

in fact, i have been published twice already, once in organic letters and once in journal of the american chemical society, and i also have 5 more manuscripts on the way. No, impact factor doesn't say everything, and often times it is flawed, but in the research world, it unfortunately is what is used to evaluate quality of research.
Click to expand...


Yes, but you are still assuming that the 2nd author can veto the 1st author (or the PI for that matter!) when it comes to journal selection. If the 1st author or PI wants to submit to a journal which you don't think is "good enough" then you should stop, think, and consider the years of experience that they have on you and trust their decision. If you're still unhappy, you can always ask to have your name taken off the paper. 🙂
 
gujuDoc said:
Thank you. Keep in mind unitofpain that this LizzyM I've quoted is an admissions officer at a top tier university. She's been on these forums for a few years and an adcom member many more years.

You will also here QofQuimica, Tildy, NJBMD, REL, and other adcom members on here tell you much of the same. I can bet anything on that one.
Click to expand...
I miss our adcom subforum!
 
"Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account."

So, quality of research is not important, nor is the actual contribution by the student. I guess we must pity the student who spends all his years working hard on a project to get first author only to be far surpassed by a student with 8 8th author papers. If this is truly the way admissions works at medical schools, then I am extremely disappointed; i actually can't understand how no one else sees a problem with this outrageous claim.
 
unitofpain said:
"Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account."

So, quality of research is not important, nor is the actual contribution by the student. I guess we must pity the student who spends all his years working hard on a project to get first author only to be far surpassed by a student with 8 8th author papers. If this is truly the way admissions works at medical schools, then I am extremely disappointed; i actually can't understand how no one else sees a problem with this outrageous claim.
Click to expand...

First of all, they're not going to be "far surpassed," they're just going to be as roughly equals. Second of all, if you try playing up your research in your application, you'll probably be asked about it at your interviews, which is where the student who has the in-depth knowledge of exactly what they did in their research will get ahead--you'd be surprised about how many students list research as a big part of their application but actually have no clue what they were doing.

Finally, adcoms understand that getting a publication as an undergrad is just as much about luck as it is about dedication. There are any number of reasons why you might put in years of research and not get a paper out of it as an undergrad. Getting that publication has a lot to do with latching onto the right lab at the right time; maybe you hop into a lab when they're just starting a project that won't get results for years, or maybe they're trying something in the project that will later turn out to lead in a completely wrong direction, or maybe your PI just inexplicably doesn't like you and doesn't give your project any attention, or maybe your PI loses his funding midway through the project... or any number of things that are completely out of your control.

So kudos to you for being lucky enough to have participated in some truly excellent research at such a young age, and be proud of the feather in your cap. But lose the idea that everyone who's applying to med school has huge, high-impact publications and that's all that matters with regards to research--a student can still pick up a lot of skills that will be useful for research in medical school without getting a publication out of it.
 
i seriously can't believe this thread is still alive
 
we are talking about medical school, not a research career. when you are an up and coming scientist/assistant professor, sure you might want to go after a bigger name to set up your rep or whatever (I heard NIH does look at how many times you have been cited and whatnot and stuff).

However, we are talking about medical school. Its just important that you know how science is done
 
:banana: staying alive, staying alive :banana:

Adcoms for medical school may be interested in whether or not an applicant has had some research experience as they believe that it is a predictor of participation in research in medical school/residency/career (in academic medicine). Basically, we ask, "Have they had a taste & do they like it?"

Any publication puts the applicant in the top 10% of the applicants I see with regard to research experience. We really don't need to distringuish among the applicants within that top 10%; it isn't worth the effort for what we are trying to assess.
 
LizzyM said:
Having a publication accepted for publication or published is a +4 at one top tier school. Having been funded for a project is a +3, having done a summer program or a couple of semesters is a +2, and having been a research assistant is a +1. (You get categorized into one of these groups or 0 for "no research").

Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account.

A case report (asked earlier) might not be counted because it is not related to a research endeavor. Basically, a research publication is used as a measure that the research came to its intended end which is to advance the field through the development or contribution of new knowledge. However, a case report does contrbute to new clinical knowledge so maybe some would give you brownie points for a case report. It couldn't hurt. 😉
Click to expand...


Just curious, how many points are awarded, if any, for presentations? Are all presentations lumped together or are they separated into subcategories; NIH, International, National, Regional, Local, Undergrad, etc?

I was also wondering, if someone has ~4 years of research experience in a lab does that still only qualify as one point, because their classification is a Student Research Assistant?

Thanks!
 
If a student worked all those extra hours, spent years getting a first-author publication ready, hoped to publish in a top journal, do you really think he wants to go to medicine? Don't you think that such a significant level of interest indicates that he would rather go into a research field? Now perhaps s/he wants to do MD/PhD in which case all that extra work would make sense. But for those of us who know we want to go into medicine but would like a "taste" of what research is like, the number of extra hours poring over dense material simply isn't worth it. Instead, maybe these students spend time not being a douche on SDN forums and do something productive for the community, shadow, etc. You sound like a stubborn, arrogant, *possibly* intelligent HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE who doesn't recognize the differences between these fields. Of course top journal publications are going to help in PhD more than for MD/DO schools. Most people think carefully about what they want to do before applying to med. school, and the people will more likely than not find themselves in one camp or the other (except for the aforementioned ultra-elite). It's great that you like research, but why do you feel the need to constantly degrade other people's efforts if they aren't as "good" as yours?

The theoretical student with 8 8th author papers may not be able to speak eloquently about his research, whereas the 1st author will. This is what interviews are for. You guide the topics. If the first author is able to passionately speak about research and tie that into his desire for medicine, then he'll have the advantage over someone who says they cleaned pipettes in a lab somewhere. One will show they really liked it, the other will have a different story. It'll work out in the end, don't you get your high school self all worked up over nothing. You wil have 3-4 years to change your mind, and hopefully your attitude before you decide whether or not you want to apply to med school.

Purpose of all this: It's worthless to put people down...so shut up if you don't have anything nice/helpful to say (an often overlooked kindergarten principle that I have come to hold dear to my heart...unless absolutely necessary)
 
Last edited:
0Complications said:
Just curious, how many points are awarded, if any, for presentations? Are all presentations lumped together or are they separated into subcategories; NIH, International, National, Regional, Local, Undergrad, etc?

I was also wondering, if someone has ~4 years of research experience in a lab does that still only qualify as one point, because their classification is a Student Research Assistant?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I can't imagine anyone would stay in the lab for 4 years doing only what we would consider worthy of 1 point. Research assistant usually means the general scut work of placing orders, making gels and solutions, keeping the place tidy, etc. In clinical settings, it is the person who distributes & collects questionnaires, or interviews subjects without any input as to the science being done.

If you have some responsibility for the scinece, keeping a lab notebook, troubleshooting, consulting with the principal investigator, etc, then you'd be at 2 points. I don't recall if having a research grant that provides you with a stipend is a 2 or a 3, having done a poster or a presentation anywhere is a 3 and a publication in a peer-reviewed journal is a 4. This is a quick & dirty way to classify appliants according to the level of involvement they've had in research. An adcom might do the same in classifying leadership, clinical exposure, community service, etc depending on what they value in an applicant.
 
gujuDoc said:
Define what research assistant is in this case. my guess is she refers to research assistant in the sense that you don't have your own project but helped someone else with theirs. LizzyM correct me if I'm wrong on this.

also, I'd like the answer to the question in paragraph 1 above too. Just curious.
Click to expand...

My question wasn't really to apply a distinction between different types of research assistants, because a research assistant by the nature of the position assists others with their research, and are possibly able to pursue some of their own interests in the research at the same time, but that still doesn't change the title of research assistant, which is what was only assigned 1 point.

My question was more in reference to the time frame, I think 4 years shows a dedication level above a 1 or 2 summers of research, which is why I was wondering if it is assigned a point value of less than a summer internship (@ 2 pts). That just caught me by surprise when it was stated like that is all.
 
LizzyM said:
I can't imagine anyone would stay in the lab for 4 years doing only what we would consider worthy of 1 point. Research assistant usually means the general scut work of placing orders, making gels and solutions, keeping the place tidy, etc. In clinical settings, it is the person who distributes & collects questionnaires, or interviews subjects without any input as to the science being done.

If you have some responsibility for the scinece, keeping a lab notebook, troubleshooting, consulting with the principal investigator, etc, then you'd be at 2 points. I don't recall if having a research grant that provides you with a stipend is a 2 or a 3, having done a poster or a presentation anywhere is a 3 and a publication in a peer-reviewed journal is a 4. This is a quick & dirty way to classify appliants according to the level of involvement they've had in research. An adcom might do the same in classifying leadership, clinical exposure, community service, etc depending on what they value in an applicant.
Click to expand...


Thank you for the clarification. I was unclear as to how that worked.

I do have a follow-up question though, is the maximum number of points for presentations 3? For instance, if an applicant has done 10 abstract/poster presentations does that count as a 30 or a 3?
 
0Complications said:
Thank you for the clarification. I was unclear as to how that worked.

I do have a follow-up question though, is the maximum number of points for presentations 3? For instance, if an applicant has done 10 abstract/poster presentations does that count as a 30 or a 3?
Click to expand...

What we are trying to do is classify applicants on a scale of 0 to 4 and then pick those that have distinguished themselves academically and in other ways as evidence by having scored 3 or 4 in several different areas (gpa, mcat, research, clinical, service, etc). So no, you don't get points that are added up.

Let me add that each school is different and a school may change the way it does things over time. Having done some research and giving some indication that you might like to do some in med school will impress some medical school adcoms. AT other schools, it may be less of a priority.
 
LizzyM-
What if an applicant has done research in multiple labs?
For example, I have a publication from one lab (a year back) and now I am working in a different lab (my own project- I did a poster presentation also). Does that count as double points? 😛
 
GangGreen said:
LizzyM-
What if an applicant has done research in multiple labs?
For example, I have a publication from one lab (a year back) and now I am working in a different lab (my own project- I did a poster presentation also). Does that count as double points? 😛
Click to expand...

No, you'd be classified as a "4", in the top group as far as research experience goes based on having a publication. That plus very good to excellent MCAT and very good to excellent gpa, plus a consideration of the competitiveness of your school, clinical exposure, community service/leadership, the quality of the LORs, and some other stuff I can't remember at the moment would go into the decision to offer you an interview.

It is all part of a well-rounded application.
 
LizzyM said:
No, you'd be classified as a "4", in the top group as far as research experience goes based on having a publication. That plus very good to excellent MCAT and very good to excellent gpa, plus a consideration of the competitiveness of your school, clinical exposure, community service/leadership, the quality of the LORs, and some other stuff I can't remember at the moment would go into the decision to offer you an interview.

It is all part of a well-rounded application.
Click to expand...

I see. That's fair I guess. 👍

Thanks!
 
are there decimalz and extra creditz????


just kidding

they should make people do an ELISA on the day of the interview and the person(s) with the lowest standard deviation amongst his/her triplicate values win
 
LizzyM said:
No, you'd be classified as a "4", in the top group as far as research experience goes based on having a publication. That plus very good to excellent MCAT and very good to excellent gpa, plus a consideration of the competitiveness of your school, clinical exposure, community service/leadership, the quality of the LORs, and some other stuff I can't remember at the moment would go into the decision to offer you an interview.

It is all part of a well-rounded application.
Click to expand...

wow, this is a bit off-topic, but are you saying it's typical to categorize GPAs and MCAT scores into 4 or 5 separate "bins"? Might I ask how big these "bins" are? What would it take to get a 4 in these areas?
 
LizzyM said:
What we are trying to do is classify applicants on a scale of 0 to 4 and then pick those that have distinguished themselves academically and in other ways as evidence by having scored 3 or 4 in several different areas (gpa, mcat, research, clinical, service, etc). So no, you don't get points that are added up.

Let me add that each school is different and a school may change the way it does things over time. Having done some research and giving some indication that you might like to do some in med school will impress some medical school adcoms. AT other schools, it may be less of a priority.
Click to expand...


That makes sense.

I know that you may have discussed this before and I don't want to hijack this thread, but what are the basic point guidelines for GPA and MCAT? I'm guessing leadership would be somewhat similar to research exp, by something extremely impressive such as founding a free clinic would be a 4, something less impressive a 3, and so on. But I have always wondered how GPA and MCAT are truly classified.

I have seen your scoring method ([GPA * 10] + MCAT = Competitiveness compared to school averages), which seems very helpful, but I wonder what exactly that LizzyM score means in the process. For example, if I have a 72 and a schools numbers are 70 (using median data) would that be equatable to 2 points in the GPA/MCAT section of my application? Also if I have a 76 and the school has a 70, would my points actually be negatively impacted because the school might believe I have no intent on actually going there?

Sorry for all the questions, but you have piqued my curiosity...

Oh, one more based on what you replied to the last poster about granting an interview. Once you grant an interview are all applicants basically deemed equal in the process where it is their performance in the interview that is going to determine their success at gaining admission (prob not, but i figured I would ask), and if not then how are the intervews graded? Are they ranked by likability, ability to articulate responses, content of responses, or some other measure or a combination of all of the above in a series of scoring categories?

With those interview scores in mind, do you have an suggestions on ways to approach an interview to maximize ones score outside of the obvious factors such as knowing yourself, answers to the why medicine question, and not discussing high risk topics when not specifically adresses by the interviewer? I guess I'm asking, what are some things that intervewers know about the process that interviewees might not that you think would be helpful to presenting yourself well to an interviewer?

Thanks, and I apologize for my failed attempt at brevity.
 
unitofpain said:
"Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account."

So, quality of research is not important, nor is the actual contribution by the student. I guess we must pity the student who spends all his years working hard on a project to get first author only to be far surpassed by a student with 8 8th author papers. If this is truly the way admissions works at medical schools, then I am extremely disappointed; i actually can't understand how no one else sees a problem with this outrageous claim.
Click to expand...

Quite frankly, I only pity trolls. I also hope that you are so "extremely disappointed" that you just stop posting. That would be a welcome change to the SDN. I assure you that SDN users would be thrilled to have one less unit of pain to deal with.
 
by the way, LizzyM, thanks again for such great insight into the process - much appreciated! 🙂
 
There are over 100 schools and even at one school the "system" for evaluating appies has changed over time. You might figure that for a given school, a gpa equal to the average gpa of last year's class (either offered admission or matriculated -- the former is usually higher than the latter) is going to be judged "average" or a 2 on a 0 to 4 scale. Ditto for the MCAT. Going up or down a little bit from that would be 3 or 1, going up or down more would be 4 or 0. Got it? How the bins are labeled or whether there are 5 bins or 10 or 7 varies with the school.

Some schools might give points for different things and you need so many points to get an interview, other schools may say that you need x or better in gpa and MCAT plus being outstanding in one or more areas or between y and z in gpa and MCAT plus be outstanding in two or more areas.

Schools vary, I think, on whether they judge interviewed applicants solely on the interview when making admission decisions or if they factor in academics, extra-curriculars, etc.

Overall, only a fraction of the applicants get interviews and only a fraction of those inteviewed get offers. If you want to know the fractions at each school, buy the MSAR. I wish I got a kickback from AAMC for plugging their book but I don't.
 
LizzyM said:
There are over 100 schools and even at one school the "system" for evaluating appies has changed over time. You might figure that for a given school, a gpa equal to the average gpa of last year's class (either offered admission or matriculated -- the former is usually higher than the latter) is going to be judged "average" or a 2 on a 0 to 4 scale. Ditto for the MCAT. Going up or down a little bit from that would be 3 or 1, going up or down more would be 4 or 0. Got it? How the bins are labeled or whether there are 5 bins or 10 or 7 varies with the school.

Some schools might give points for different things and you need so many points to get an interview, other schools may say that you need x or better in gpa and MCAT plus being outstanding in one or more areas or between y and z in gpa and MCAT plus be outstanding in two or more areas.

Schools vary, I think, on whether they judge interviewed applicants solely on the interview when making admission decisions or if they factor in academics, extra-curriculars, etc.

Overall, only a fraction of the applicants get interviews and only a fraction of those inteviewed get offers. If you want to know the fractions at each school, buy the MSAR. I wish I got a kickback from AAMC for plugging their book but I don't.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info. 👍
 
LizzyM said:
There are over 100 schools and even at one school the "system" for evaluating appies has changed over time. You might figure that for a given school, a gpa equal to the average gpa of last year's class (either offered admission or matriculated -- the former is usually higher than the latter) is going to be judged "average" or a 2 on a 0 to 4 scale. Ditto for the MCAT. Going up or down a little bit from that would be 3 or 1, going up or down more would be 4 or 0. Got it? How the bins are labeled or whether there are 5 bins or 10 or 7 varies with the school.

Some schools might give points for different things and you need so many points to get an interview, other schools may say that you need x or better in gpa and MCAT plus being outstanding in one or more areas or between y and z in gpa and MCAT plus be outstanding in two or more areas.

Schools vary, I think, on whether they judge interviewed applicants solely on the interview when making admission decisions or if they factor in academics, extra-curriculars, etc.

Overall, only a fraction of the applicants get interviews and only a fraction of those inteviewed get offers. If you want to know the fractions at each school, buy the MSAR. I wish I got a kickback from AAMC for plugging their book but I don't.
Click to expand...

Dear LizzyM,
Thank you for your information, and for being awesome.
😍
Camaras2480
 
Haha wow this thread has actually turned into a pretty useful/helpful thread (minus unitofpain!).:laugh:

Thanks LizzyM!!!!! 👍
 
LizzyM,
Is it common for adcoms (or interviewers for that matter) to look up the actual listed publication in AMCAS. Do they actually pull out the publication and read it? How common is it?

Thanks.
 
GangGreen said:
LizzyM,
Is it common for adcoms (or interviewers for that matter) to look up the actual listed publication in AMCAS. Do they actually pull out the publication and read it? How common is it?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I'm not LizzyM... however, I have to think that it's extremely rare almost to the point of it never happening. Adcoms barely have enough time to read the applications that hit their desk without then going out and hunting for a paper. If an interviewer cares, they'll ask you about your research in the interview and save themselves the trouble of hunting for the information.
 
GoSpursGo said:
I'm not LizzyM... however, I have to think that it's extremely rare almost to the point of it never happening. Adcoms barely have enough time to read the applications that hit their desk without then going out and hunting for a paper. If an interviewer cares, they'll ask you about your research in the interview and save themselves the trouble of hunting for the information.
Click to expand...

In the old days it would be very, very rare to pull a paper but today I can do it from my desktop in about 30 seconds so if the topic is one of interest, I might pull the paper just for my own edification.
 
LizzyM said:
In the old days it would be very, very rare to pull a paper but today I can do it from my desktop in about 30 seconds so if the topic is one of interest, I might pull the paper just for my own edification.
Click to expand...

Well, that's what I get for trying to moonlight as an adcom 😳
 
LizzyM said:
In the old days it would be very, very rare to pull a paper but today I can do it from my desktop in about 30 seconds so if the topic is one of interest, I might pull the paper just for my own edification.
Click to expand...

How would you go about looking for a paper? I know for sure that my paper wouldn't show up in pubmed, but I think it might show up on a google search. And of course, I have a VERY common last name, so I think googling my initials and last name would be futile hahah
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

KindaNeurotic
  • Question Question
Abstract Published in Journal Supplement Without My Name
Replies
0
Views
332
KindaNeurotic
KindaNeurotic
P
In terms of the time of day, does it matter when I submit secondaries?
Replies
8
Views
1K
pablo213
pablo213
reeve7
  • Question Question
LOR author title question
Replies
1
Views
244
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
B
Pub addition
Replies
4
Views
480
HappyRabbit
HappyRabbit
L
  • Locked
What does it take to get into Stanford BRUH
Replies
3
Views
1K
chilly_md
chilly_md
Top