Authorship Order Importance

[mymembernames]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi All,

I did a search on google and here (couldn't find much) and was wondering how bad it looks to have two publications for residency if I am the last author on both? It is my understanding that first through third author holds more weight and after that it doesn't play a big role? Why do some paper list the PI as the last author? Would people mistaken my position as last as the PI? Kinda confused and was wondering how this all would look for residency. Thanks in advance and sorry for all the questions 🙂

 

[URHere]

In my experience, author order usually means something like this:

1st (person who did most of the work and writing), 2nd (person who helped a lot), 3rd-anywhere in the middle of the list (super variable. Could have spent anywhere from 1 hour to hundreds of hours on the project), almost last author (big wigs who have their name on the paper for recognition, collaborators from other institutions, anyone in a regulatory position), last author (the PI in charge of the lab or overseeing the research project).

Obviously things can be a little bit different for a case report, lit review, or anything else not coming from an actual research lab/research group. However, last author is usually the person in charge, first author is the one who did the work, and middle author carries a variable amount of weight depending on who you talk to.

 

[mymembernames]

^Thanks for the response. I guess it is quiet variable because I am definitely not the person in charge / PI of these two studies which my name is listed as last.

 

[NickNaylor]

PIs are typically listed last. It's not going to "look bad" on your application. It will be quite obvious to people looking over your application that you weren't, as a medical student, a PI overseeing a lab. Just be happy that you have pubs.

 

[Merely]

How do some people have 88 pubs from just medical school? I know some neurosurgeon on here said that I just can't fathom that considering med school is hard without any pubs.

 

[Psai]

How do some people have 88 pubs from just medical school? I know some neurosurgeon on here said that I just can't fathom that considering med school is hard without any pubs.

don't worry, that's not the norm

 

[Merely]

Thanks I assumed that I just actually don't fathom how it's possible though from a practical standpoint unless they are literally just getting their name thrown on every single paper coming from their research team without even seeing the paper.

 

[mymembernames]

Thanks everyone, I guess won't worry about it 🙂

 

[TBV]

Thanks I assumed that I just actually don't fathom how it's possible though from a practical standpoint unless they are literally just getting their name thrown on every single paper coming from their research team without even seeing the paper.

That happens. I'm involved in a large project and we will be splitting it into 4-5 different pubs and then probably all together into a large pub. So quite possible I'm on at least 4 of those all from 8 weeks of research.

 

[Law2Doc]

don't worry, that's not the norm

Agreed. Most people don't pull up so short of 100. 😉

As mentioned, if you are part of a group that generates a lot of papers, you can end up "on" a lot of papers (usually as a middle author -- you on theirs, they on yours).

 

[operaman]

Thanks I assumed that I just actually don't fathom how it's possible though from a practical standpoint unless they are literally just getting their name thrown on every single paper coming from their research team without even seeing the paper.

It's not, unless they had some extra time and even then, 88 pubs is insane. Many/most people get their PhD without having this many pubs. I know some young, tenured research faculty at top institutions with multiple R01 and industry grants who don't have that many publications.

A lot of it is field-dependent as some journals will tolerate publishing tiny pieces of what's ultimately a larger project; others will not. I suppose if you get the right combo of a big productive lab or two, a field with journals that will publish smaller papers that have been split off a larger project, and then find yourself a position in that lab where you can have a piece of everything coming out of there, plus a PI who interprets authorship rules liberally, then maybe you could hit numbers like this in 4 years. I know some people with a ton of pubs who were great coders and statisticians who did a lot of stats and IT work for a number of PIs who listed them as an author on everything they helped with. Even so, 88 is still pushing the realm of credibility for a standard 4-year MD student.


OP- my guess from your position as last author is that these may have been review articles or invited articles of some sort. In those cases, it is traditional to put the PI's name first. Nobody will mistake that you are senior investigator on the project.

 

[benjamin94559]

Basically what URhere said but also for clinical things, usually the person whose patients "belong" to gets last author.

 

[Goro]

This is indeed how it usually works, but interestingly, I seem many clinical reviews where the PI is the lead author.

In my experience, author order usually means something like this:

1st (person who did most of the work and writing), 2nd (person who helped a lot), 3rd-anywhere in the middle of the list (super variable. Could have spent anywhere from 1 hour to hundreds of hours on the project), almost last author (big wigs who have their name on the paper for recognition, collaborators from other institutions, anyone in a regulatory position), last author (the PI in charge of the lab or overseeing the research project).

Obviously things can be a little bit different for a case report, lit review, or anything else not coming from an actual research lab/research group. However, last author is usually the person in charge, first author is the one who did the work, and middle author carries a variable amount of weight depending on who you talk to.

 

[operaman]

Yeah, I think it's fairly standard for the senior author to be listed first on review articles, especially if it was an invited review article.