Average Publications of Successful Applicants

[chemist16]

---

Members do not see this ad.

What do you guys think is the average number of research publications/posters/presentations of admitted students (MD and MD/PhD included) on SDN and of the overall applicant population? From reading some profiles on here, I think there is definitely a bias on this site - what do you think the true average really is?

 

[Grace184]

I was going to share mine, but you only want admitted, when I re read that, am I correct?

 

[chemist16]

Well, how about admitted versus applying - data from both pools would be interesting.

 

[HCHopeful]

-1 for MD and 0 for MD/PhD.

 

[Grace184]

3 for DO App(1 in undergrad)
5 poster presentations
Edit: should be stated I have my PharmD and was a practicing clinical pharmacist and university professor for several yrs- only relevant to why I kept receiving pubs and poster presentations

 

[efle]

Most people have a couple posters, maybe a middle author pub. SDN is full of the extremely qualified with first authorships, half a dozen pubs+presentations etc. It's the exact same with the MCAT, SDN has a huge over-representation of 34+ scores

 

[HCHopeful]

If looking at applicants at my in-state public school, 32% of accepted applicants don't even have research experience, let alone a publication.

It depends on so much.

 

[Grace184]

Yeah we're the people seeking advice from others not squandering away in a cave like Gollum (don't tell me you haven't met those people when they got their hands on notes or copes of old tests....."My precious....")

 

[Holmwood]

It's hard enough for grad students to get publications... or PhDs for that matter.

As others have said, there's just an over-representation of very highly qualified people here at SDN. It's that sort of halo effect that makes even very competitive applicants shy away from posting their accomplishments for fear of being inadequate.

 

[doc05]

you don't need publications for an MD acceptance. Nor for MD/PhD. (although it's helpful for the latter).

 

[Grace184]

It's hard enough for grad students to get publications... or PhDs for that matter.

As others have said, there's just an over-representation of very highly qualified people here at SDN. It's that sort of halo effect that makes even very competitive applicants shy away from posting their accomplishments for fear of being inadequate.

I could see how that may be... But on the other hand, we are the perfect people to they'll them HOW to get published. Who you're working with, type of research, etc, makes a difference. Most students think research=pub. NO. Has the PI been published before? Abandon ship. Work in a lab that gets pubs, and work your way up the ranks, etc.

 

[efle]

I could see how that may be... But on the other hand, we are the perfect people to they'll them HOW to get published. Who you're working with, type of research, etc, makes a difference. Most students think research=pub. NO. Has the PI been published before? Abandon ship. Work in a lab that gets pubs, and work your way up the ranks, etc.

This is great advice. Type of research is probably the biggest imo. Labs that can hand undergrads heavy grunt work like screening hundreds of small molecules on cell lines are probably the best, as they're pretty much guaranteed to end up with some interesting data if they log enough hours. Look for labs churning out many many low-impact journal pubs if you want to get your name published, rather than the type of lab that does detailed animal work and spends a couple years silent before spitting out a Science paper

 

[Holmwood]

I could see how that may be... But on the other hand, we are the perfect people to they'll them HOW to get published. Who you're working with, type of research, etc, makes a difference. Most students think research=pub. NO. Has the PI been published before? Abandon ship. Work in a lab that gets pubs, and work your way up the ranks, etc.

I also agree with the type of research.


I say at least get a poster in. . .

I'm more of a fan of leading a project with no publication (yet!) and presenting at a nationally known conference than to do grunt work and get a fourth author in a publication though.

 

[VitaminVater]

I can guarantee one of the most used phrases at MD/PhD interviews is:
"[describes research project(s)]...and we're aiming to have the manuscript published by [insert unrealistic date]"

 

[Holmwood]

I can guarantee one of the most used phrases at MD/PhD interviews is:
"[describes research project(s)]...and we're aiming to have the manuscript published by [insert unrealistic date]"

This is totally me right now.

 

[VitaminVater]

This is totally me right now.

Then I recommend you make the date [+1 day after acceptances go out] 😛

 

[Grace184]

This is great advice. Type of research is probably the biggest imo. Labs that can hand undergrads heavy grunt work like screening hundreds of small molecules on cell lines are probably the best, as they're pretty much guaranteed to end up with some interesting data if they log enough hours. Look for labs churning out many many low-impact journal pubs if you want to get your name published, rather than the type of lab that does detailed animal work and spends a couple years silent before spitting out a Science paper

And THIS is what they need to read about. That's why they should be on here. Is there a pre med research forum? I'd hate to create another forum but a lot of students do want to pursue research as a carreer and they don't know how. For gods sake, one of them told me a CV was the same as a resume and I multiple times and I wanted to virtually smack him! (I know I'm still a pre med but if it's ONE thing I know, it's a CV!)

 

[efle]

And THIS is what they need to read about. That's why they should be on here. Is there a pre med research forum? I'd hate to create another forum but a lot of students do want to pursue research as a carreer and they don't know how. For gods sake, one of them told me a CV was the same as a resume and I multiple times and I wanted to virtually smack him! (I know I'm still a pre med but if it's ONE thing I know, it's a CV!)

If you've done very very little of worth they can be the same thing 😉

 

[Grace184]

I also agree with the type of research.


I say at least get a poster in. . .

I'm more of a fan of leading a project with no publication (yet!) and presenting at a nationally known conference than to do grunt work and get a fourth author in a publication though.

Hey conferences are great networking times! I've met many people with puppet strings at conferences (hint they're at the bar)

 

[Grace184]

If you've done very very little of worth they can be the same thing 😉

Haha very true! He wanted to put his hobbies.....

Edit: they specifically asked for a CV

 

[Goro]

Having a pub is really rare for the applicants I've seen. <1/year, maybe.

What do you guys think is the average number of research publications/posters/presentations of admitted students (MD and MD/PhD included) on SDN and of the overall applicant population? From reading some profiles on here, I think there is definitely a bias on this site - what do you think the true average really is?

 

[T1p]

I have several friends who are in top research medical schools without any publications. They just had a one or two abstracts accepted for posters/presentations. The quality of the letter of recommendation written by your PI probably matters more, as it gauges your teamwork, critical thinking, and motivation.

As aforementioned, the type of research you are in is important if your goal is to publish. Clinical research will crank out more papers than basic science and translational research because they are often outcome based. You can also look into clinical databases and mine it for meaningful results to publish without ever having to set foot in a lab.

Whatever you do, basic or clinical, just make sure you take a proactive role in the research. Don't be that person who just cleans test tubes or hands patients surveys. Interviewers can easily gauge how involved you are when they ask you about your research.

 

[Grace184]

Having a pub is really rare for the applicants I've seen. <1/year, maybe.

Then I'll just apply to all DO schools and make it 1
Edit: except for Touros and lucom, and i know you aren't lurking there anyway

 

[WedgeDawg]

I would say 0-1 on average, depending on who you're sampling. Posters seem to be far more common (which is to be expected).

Heck I still don't have a pub and research was easily the strongest part of my app.

 

[gyngyn]

It is uncommon for an applicant to have a publication (even in CA).

 

[Grace184]

My thing is -and I feel like I'm gonna get jumped- my expertise lies in collecting retrospective data. From adverse drug reports, cuiriousity, etc. we check back on the chart- who's on what and for what time frame. It's a clinical analytical data collection.

 

[WedgeDawg]

My thing is -and I feel like I'm gonna get jumped- my expertise lies in collecting retrospective data. From adverse drug reports, cuiriousity, etc. we check back on the chart- who's on what and for what time frame. It's a clinical analytical data collection.

Lol why do you think you would get jumped for this?

 

[Grace184]

Lol bc I've barely worked in a lab.... Academia fire away- in a a PM. But I've just done a lot of my work on the opposing bench, not bc there's less barriers (well, there are) but my practicing side promotes keeping track of all healing or harmful methods in the hospital. So I've gotten pubs for this. I dunno it's just the who benchside to bedside thing can be controversial (my 1st ever pub).

 

[unnumzaan]

My thing is -and I feel like I'm gonna get jumped- my expertise lies in collecting retrospective data. From adverse drug reports, cuiriousity, etc. we check back on the chart- who's on what and for what time frame. It's a clinical analytical data collection.

Lots of research that medical students get involved in is exactly this.

 

[Grace184]

Lots of research that medical students get involved in is exactly this.

Yes but mine is organized and directed by me. I tell who to pull what and what I want out of it, etc...
At this point we are talking when I had just received my PharmD and was a first year resident.
I was the "PI" if you want to call it that

 

[nemo123]

During our white coat ceremony, the dean said our class collectively had somewhere between 30-40 publications in our class of 101 (which includes MD/Phd students and a couple people who already have their Phds).

 

[WedgeDawg]

@Grace184

Absolutely no one is going to jump down your throat for that - it's a perfectly fine and fairly common way of contributing to scientific literature.

 

[Grace184]

Mine were based in antidepressant monitoring in children
Clozapine and olanzapine in qt prolongation
Etc

 

[Conflagration]

Eh, I don't have an article. But I won an award in a juried symposium. It was more about my major (math) than medicine, but it gave me a lot of work ethic for sure. 🙂

 

[northernlights15]

My friend has 3-4 publications but she's like 8th author on them. Her PI was generous and added her name for editing. Are those worth anything?

 

[WedgeDawg]

My friend has 3-4 publications but she's like 8th author on them. Her PI was generous and added her name for editing. Are those worth anything?

To adcoms? Not by themselves. If she can talk about the research, her role in it, future plans, etc, then the experience will be quite valuable, but the authorship by itself will not.

 

[Dr. Retractor]

This is great advice. Type of research is probably the biggest imo. Labs that can hand undergrads heavy grunt work like screening hundreds of small molecules on cell lines are probably the best, as they're pretty much guaranteed to end up with some interesting data if they log enough hours. Look for labs churning out many many low-impact journal pubs if you want to get your name published, rather than the type of lab that does detailed animal work and spends a couple years silent before spitting out a Science paper

The type of lab is definitely important, and as someone who has worked in both types of labs, I would say they each have their own pros/cons. Good timing in the latter type of lab can lead to your name on a high-impact article, which is better (imo) than your name a bunch of low-impact articles. Working in the former type of lab would lead to a more varied experience, and a lot more to talk/write about.

*n=1, anecdotal, etc.

 

[northernlights15]

To adcoms? Not by themselves. If she can talk about the research, her role in it, future plans, etc, then the experience will be quite valuable, but the authorship by itself will not.

She has a 3.6/3.48ish sci GPA and 30 MCAT and clearly very strong research experience and I was curious if this would help her at the research powerhouses. She applied VERY top heavy.

 

[WedgeDawg]

She has a 3.6/3.48ish sci GPA and 30 MCAT and clearly very strong research experience and I was curious if this would help her at the research powerhouses. She applied VERY top heavy.

Definitely not with those stats.

Adcoms aren't stupid and generally are well-established academicians themselves. They know what 8th author on a paper means.

 

[Holmwood]

She has a 3.6/3.48ish sci GPA and 30 MCAT and clearly very strong research experience and I was curious if this would help her at the research powerhouses. She applied VERY top heavy.

She may have some pull if she's URM. But other than that.... yeah, I can't recommend that.

 

[northernlights15]

Definitely not with those stats.

Adcoms aren't stupid and generally are well-established academicians themselves. They know what 8th author on a paper means.

Yeah I kept telling her those schools were a crapshoot for even the best applicants but she insisted… And I told her to add some realistic low and mid tier schools and she stated she didn't like those schools so she saw no point in applying. She does have strong research experience and presented at several conferences and is published her own first author paper soon. We'll see. At times I felt convinced her research experience would push her over the top at those schools, but maybe not. We'll see I guess.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Yeah I kept telling her those schools were a crapshoot for even the best applicants but she insisted… And I told her to add some realistic low and mid tier schools and she stated she didn't like those schools so she saw no point in applying. She does have strong research experience and presented at several conferences and is published her own first author paper soon. We'll see. At times I felt convinced her research experience would push her over the top at those schools, but maybe not. We'll see I guess.

The thing is, there are people who have all that... and also a 3.9+/36+

 

[northernlights15]

She may have some pull if she's URM. But other than that.... yeah, I can't recommend that.

She's as white as a snowflake! And she does have sufficient clinical experience but stopped those activities 2-3 years ago to pursue her research. I have no idea how that will go over at schools but I guess it's good that she still had some clinical experience. I wish I could still convince her to add some mid and low tiers but she's pretty content with her own list.

I think she applied to like 20 schools and I don't remember every single one but these are some of the ones I recall…

1) UCSF
2) Stanford
3) UCSD
4) Keck
5) Northwestern
6) Yale
7) OHSU
8) Wake Forest
9) Cornell
10) Hofstra (which she thought was a safety)
11) Stony Brook
12) Temple?? (One of the 3 Philly schools)
13) George Washington
14) Rush
15) Tulane

I forgot the rest…maybe schools like Tufts and other mid-top tiers.

 

[northernlights15]

The thing is, there are people who have all that... and also a 3.9+/36+

According to this thread, not that many people have publications! That's why I asked if her research experience would help. But grades and MCAT surely take precedence over any of that.

 

[Banco]

I had 1 poster, 1 presentation, 1 undergrad thesis. No pubs. Most people don't have pubs.

 

[WedgeDawg]

She's as white as a snowflake! And she does have sufficient clinical experience but stopped those activities 2-3 years ago to pursue her research. I have no idea how that will go over at schools but I guess it's good that she still had some clinical experience. I wish I could still convince her to add some mid and low tiers but she's pretty content with her own list.

I think she applied to like 20 schools and I don't remember every single one but these are some of the ones I recall…

1) UCSF
2) Stanford
3) UCSD
4) Keck
5) Northwestern
6) Yale
7) OHSU
8) Wake Forest
9) Cornell
10) Hofstra (which she thought was a safety)
11) Stony Brook
12) Temple?? (One of the 3 Philly schools)
13) George Washington
14) Rush
15) Tulane

I forgot the rest…maybe schools like Tufts and other mid-top tiers.

:/ she's going to have a fairly rough cycle. You should definitely encourage her to apply to more schools that are in-line with her stats. I hope she manages to grab an acceptance. Without something exceptional, her app will probably be DOA at half the schools on that list.

According to this thread, not that many people have publications! That's why I asked if her research experience would help. But grades and MCAT surely take precedence over any of that.

As I said earlier, it depends on who you're sampling. Do you really think that the group of students who interview at Drexel will have (on average) the same number of publications at the group of students who interview at Stanford or Yale? Successful applicants to top schools represent a very small portion of medical school applicants. Overall, you won't see too many people with many publications. At research-heavy schools? Probably a good deal more.

 

[Holmwood]

She's as white as a snowflake! And she does have sufficient clinical experience but stopped those activities 2-3 years ago to pursue her research. I have no idea how that will go over at schools but I guess it's good that she still had some clinical experience. I wish I could still convince her to add some mid and low tiers but she's pretty content with her own list.

I think she applied to like 20 schools and I don't remember every single one but these are some of the ones I recall…

1) UCSF
2) Stanford
3) UCSD
4) Keck
5) Northwestern
6) Yale
7) OHSU
8) Wake Forest
9) Cornell
10) Hofstra (which she thought was a safety)
11) Stony Brook
12) Temple?? (One of the 3 Philly schools)
13) George Washington
14) Rush
15) Tulane

I forgot the rest…maybe schools like Tufts and other mid-top tiers.

She's not going to make it to OHSU without 32 mcat or above, unless she's from around that area. As for the other schools.... Lol. Good luck to her!

 

[unnumzaan]

Yes but mine is organized and directed by me. I tell who to pull what and what I want out of it, etc...
At this point we are talking when I had just received my PharmD and was a first year resident.
I was the "PI" if you want to call it that

Wait I don't understand what your point is. I was validating your research by stating that it's exactly the kind of research that people do after getting into medical school.

 

[Spinach Dip]

1 publication (2nd author), 2 posters. Another paper which might become a publication (2nd author again). And that was during the course of getting my Masters.

Not successful yet, but the cycle is hardly beginning.

 

[Narmerguy]

Research was one of the strong points of my application and I had no papers even after finishing a masters. I think there is sometimes a mistaken notion on SDN that pubs just drop like candy if you're a top applicant who is hardworking and smart but the reality is that publications can be hard to come by even for graduate students who do this all day. I would not focus on this for medical school applications, it will neither make nor break your application. If you're going to do research just focus on doing good research, understanding your topic well, making a positive impression with the PI (who will later be writing you a letter), and trying to find some opportunity to translate your efforts into a final product (thesis, poster, paper, presentation, etc).