Awkward publication situation

[DendWrite]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I worked in a lab extensively last year and was very involved. The PI subsequently left at the end of the year for another job, so my work there is done. However, a fellow and I have two papers written (that I'm second author on) but have not yet submitted...the first was submitted and requires revisions, and the second has not been submitted at all.

However, the fellow has now left as well since the PI left, and I've heard nothing about getting these papers sent to a journal. They are all but complete, and I've contacted the fellow and the PI but to no avail. I'm wondering what I should do in this situation: it's obviously in my best interest to get these submitted to a journal, as well as (I can only imagine) the fellow's.

What should I do in this situation? I can't really submit the paper myself as I am not a PI nor first author. Would it be considered unethical to repeat the experiment in the lab I currently work in, collect my own data and publish if the old PI / fellow do not seem interested in publishing?

The data we collected is accurate and they are publishable papers. I'm just in a bit of a quandary (and a bit frustrated, since I put a good 100 hours of work into preparing the second paper) of what to do. Any advice is certainly appreciated.

 

[Kaustikos]

Kill the PI and Fellow, keep them in your basement and proceed to publish the paper.

How have you tried to get in contact with them? Through email or have you tried a phone call/getting in touch in person? Even with the data generated, I don't think you can call it your own paper, regardless of them leaving.

 

[vickpick]

hmmm, quite frankly, since the PI and fellow left, it doesnt mean they abandoned the porject. They maybe working on it on their new job.

The second thing could be, the PI thought there is not potential in the project and he decided that all work done was a waste of time. A lot of times, journals say "needs revision" when they actually will never publish it even after "revision."

 

[tiedyeddog]

I think the PI HAS to give the final OK when publishing...i.e., you need the PI... Stuck without him/her, sorry.

 

[richse]

hmmm, quite frankly, since the PI and fellow left, it doesnt mean they abandoned the porject. They maybe working on it on their new job.

The second thing could be, the PI thought there is not potential in the project and he decided that all work done was a waste of time. A lot of times, journals say "needs revision" when they actually will never publish it even after "revision."

I disagree with this. Most journals will clearly reject a paper they do not want to publish either with or without review. They normally give you a standard letter about only accepting 10% or so of qualified articles. On the other hand, if they review it and ask for a resubmission then the odds are very very good it will be published as long as you address every issue the reviewers brought up.

To the OP, keep trying to contact them. It is in their best interest to get these papers published so don't give up.

 

[pietachok]

I think the PI HAS to give the final OK when publishing...i.e., you need the PI... Stuck without him/her, sorry.

You can publish a paper without the OK of the PI if you independently collect data and it is not the same experiment/study as was performed by the PI and graduate student (you would be the PI of your own study). However, even if you re-did THIS experiment that all of you had been working on to get your own data points, you would be committing theft of intellectual property b/c you did not design the experiment. If you do a substantially different experiment but with a hypothesis that is truly yours, you would be ok--but you do tread dangerously on the border of intellectual theft since any hypothesis you generate is likely to be tangential and/or greatly influenced by the PI's concepts.

Also, if any materials or funding was provided by an organization, company, etc. they often have rights and/or regulations regarding publications. Although they wouldn't be listed as a co-author, you can be required to allow them to approve the study/publication. You may feel like you are doing the study for "free" but, technically if some piece of equipment was paid for by X, including your university, you might not own all your work or have the right to develop this entirely on your own.

Even if you did do a completely independent experiment that you were confident was intellectually your own, without a graduate degree, reputable coauthors, and/or other publications, it is extremely difficult to get a paper published.

You should continue to try to contact the PI and grad student.

If it comes time to submit AMCAS or secondaries and this hasn't been resolved, you can put "publications in development" and describe them just as you would if they were publications. You can give the title, coauthors, and the journal(s) to which you hope to submit.

 

[fMRI]

Sorry, you *CANNOT* proceed with this on your own. When submitting something to a journal, either *ALL* authors or the *LEAD* author (on behalf of all other authors) need to sign stuff, like COI (conflict of interest disclosures) etc. You are in NO position to do this, and were in deep trouble if you went ahead. Please do get in touch with the others and work out a solution with them.

And yes, sometimes it can be advantageous to hold back a publication -- for example when somebody is about to change labs/universities, because the impact points are credited towards the institution/lab that is named on the paper.

As for repeating experiments, that can be highly problematic. They were not entirely yours from the beginning -- and by simply repeating them, they won't really become your work. A more important factor to consider is this: if you have lab animals involved (or humans!), you will have trouble to apply for clearance from the IRB (institutional review board, or whoever oversees research at your institution) because the experiments were already performed. (As undergraduate student, you most certainly cannot apply for this -- this is stuff the PI does...) Why don't you take it from there and take the work further with somebody who is less likely to leave your institution?

Sorry, this is not what you wanted to hear, but I hope it helps. 🙂

 

[witness23]

I would move on if your PI does not contact you. Even if the PI moves, if its an important paper then he will try to push for pub. Whether you name will still be on there on the paper that was not submitted is tricky.

 

[Kaustikos]

Sorry, you *CANNOT* proceed with this on your own. When submitting something to a journal, either *ALL* authors or the *LEAD* author (on behalf of all other authors) need to sign stuff, like COI (conflict of interest disclosures) etc. You are in NO position to do this, and were in deep trouble if you went ahead. Please do get in touch with the others and work out a solution with them.

And yes, sometimes it can be advantageous to hold back a publication -- for example when somebody is about to change labs/universities, because the impact points are credited towards the institution/lab that is named on the paper.

As for repeating experiments, that can be highly problematic. They were not entirely yours from the beginning -- and by simply repeating them, they won't really become your work. A more important factor to consider is this: if you have lab animals involved (or humans!), you will have trouble to apply for clearance from the IRB (institutional review board, or whoever oversees research at your institution) because the experiments were already performed. (As undergraduate student, you most certainly cannot apply for this -- this is stuff the PI does...) Why don't you take it from there and take the work further with somebody who is less likely to leave your institution?

Sorry, this is not what you wanted to hear, but I hope it helps. 🙂

I think people forget this. They fall into the trap of "I gathered the data proving the point" and forgetting who came up with the hypothesis/idea in the first place.

 

[exoslimjim]

i think the main problem is asking on this forum as many premeds have never submitted a manuscript or maybe even an abstract.

there is no rule for a PI to be an author, in fact there was a correspondence in nature whether the "supervisor role" warrants authorship. An association is required, as in your sponsoring institute, thus PIs are generally faculty or staff. you cant really say that you have a financial/sponsoring association as an undergrad becus you don't have grants...

in any case, the answer is no you can't submit because the work was not your own, even if you "repeated" all the experiments. look up the controversy between nejm and the founder of plos for a good example. im a little confused on what was said about the irb, but an expired irb does not mean that you are not allowed to publish that data... im not sure if that was also what you were saying.

your best bet is to find a new lab similar to your last one, and introduce your previous data. Best case is that your new PI will like it, and you can adjust/add to it and acknowledge your old PI if they dont want authorship.

 

[fMRI]

i think the main problem is asking on this forum as many premeds have never submitted a manuscript or maybe even an abstract.
...
im a little confused on what was said about the irb, but an expired irb does not mean that you are not allowed to publish that data... im not sure if that was also what you were saying.

Right, the IRB is only concerned with the experiments, not when or where you publish. But, DendWrite wanted to know if he/she can just *repeat* the experiments.

DendWrite asked:

Would it be considered unethical to repeat the experiment in the lab I currently work in, collect my own data and publish if the old PI / fellow do not seem interested in publishing?

Leaving "ethics" apart (yes, and it's not just unethical but also *plagiarism*!), if the project required IRB clearance in the first place, you are not very likely to get it a second time. (Maybe he/she was doing a project that did not require this?? We haven't heard about it.) Fact is that the IRB does not easily grant the repetition of a project... If you guys cannot work out how to publish it, that is a different sort of probem that does not warrant subjecting humans/animals (given that there are *already* results) to a *repetition* given that the data is already there. That makes perfect sense, right?
Undergraduates, in general, have no formal training (there are lovely requirements to certify as PI, usually very boring and to be repeated ever so often...) nor a suitable relationship with the university to even apply to the IRB. That's that for possibly repeating whatever he is doing.

Uh, not every reader in this forum is necessarily pre-med. 😀

As a few people already suggested: Move on. You might have done a lot of busy-work on this project, but it isn't really "your" project. It's somebody else's "brain child". Learn from this experience, get over it, enjoy what you learned doing it and move on to something new. (Don't hold a grudge, things like that do happen... running around as a grumpy undergrad doesn't improve *your* situation. Look at the positive side: be gracious and enjoy the ability to talk in some detail about your project, even if there is *no* publication on your CV.) Good luck with the next thing!

 

[Kaustikos]

As a few people already suggested: Move on. You might have done a lot of busy-work on this project, but it isn't really "your" project. It's somebody else's "brain child". Learn from this experience, get over it, enjoy what you learned doing it and move on to something new. (Don't hold a grudge, things like that do happen... running around as a grumpy undergrad doesn't improve *your* situation. Look at the positive side: be gracious and enjoy the ability to talk in some detail about your project, even if there is *no* publication on your CV.) Good luck with the next thing!

Perfectly worded. Imo, research in a graduate institution allows one the chance to develop critical thinking/problem solving skills that aren't necessarily offered in courses. In addition, it seems the op had a great deal of interaction with the project which in itself is a great opportunity regardless of publications. Hell, even PhD programs don't expect you to have a publication. Focus on the experience, not the product.

 

[DendWrite]

I appreciate all the advice. I figured that repeating the experiment would be unethical to do, and I'm not interested in trying to bend the rules or anything. I did get a lot of experience working on the project and I know that ultimately that's the most valuable. I'm tending toward the PhD / MD/PhD route, which is why a publication or two would make me feel better, but I know that it's not essential. I'll just chalk it up to a learning experience. I can definitely "talk intelligently" about the research, and from what I've heard that's in a lot of cases nearly as important as being published.

I guess if I don't have any pubs. on my resume I'll just have to be proactive about bringing up my experience / interests at any interviews .

 

[Kaustikos]

I appreciate all the advice. I figured that repeating the experiment would be unethical to do, and I'm not interested in trying to bend the rules or anything. I did get a lot of experience working on the project and I know that ultimately that's the most valuable. I'm tending toward the PhD / MD/PhD route, which is why a publication or two would make me feel better, but I know that it's not essential. I'll just chalk it up to a learning experience. I can definitely "talk intelligently" about the research, and from what I've heard that's in a lot of cases nearly as important as being published.

I guess if I don't have any pubs. on my resume I'll just have to be proactive about bringing up my experience / interests at any interviews .

The thing that's important is that graduate research helps you think like a scientist. Rather than doing factory-esque science like pharmaceuticals (I would know, having seen it in many labs where I work), you approach things differently and learn a lot more. It definitely helps in MD/PhD programs.

 

[randombetch]

I appreciate all the advice. I figured that repeating the experiment would be unethical to do, and I'm not interested in trying to bend the rules or anything. I did get a lot of experience working on the project and I know that ultimately that's the most valuable. I'm tending toward the PhD / MD/PhD route, which is why a publication or two would make me feel better, but I know that it's not essential. I'll just chalk it up to a learning experience. I can definitely "talk intelligently" about the research, and from what I've heard that's in a lot of cases nearly as important as being published.

I guess if I don't have any pubs. on my resume I'll just have to be proactive about bringing up my experience / interests at any interviews .

Wait, my question is - how are you going to get a LOR from your PI if he's not responding?