Being "Published" refers to what other than a peer-reviewed journal article?

[NightSwim]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm curious what the holy sdn term "being published" specifically means. I understand that it usually denotes being an author on a peer-reviewed journal article. Can it also refer to having an abstract accepted to a national conference, whereupon a poster is presented or an oral presentation is given? I would guess being an author of a chapter in a scientific/medical textbook also means "being published".

Sub-question: Where does presenting a poster at a regional conference (of a reputable national scientific/clinical organization) fall in the scheme of things? Obviously I assume its less meaningful, but does it still earn brownie points in applications to med school and/or residency?

 

[apumic]

No. That would be having presented. Published means a peer-reviewed journal.
Authoring a chapter could be considered publishing as well.

Presenting at a national (or major regional) conference is basically one notch below a publication. It's still a big deal and shows research productivity.

 

[NightSwim]

Okay, thanks for the response.

Then, if the goal of a research study is to get a published journal article, when and why do PIs want to present at a national conference? Do they want to do both, i.e. publish an article and present a poster? I guess, I'm trying to understand what the role of presenting at national conferences is in the research process.

 

[apumic]

Okay, thanks for the response.

Then, if the goal of a research study is to get a published journal article, when and why do PIs want to present at a national conference? Do they want to do both, i.e. publish an article and present a poster? I guess, I'm trying to understand what the role of presenting at national conferences is in the research process.

Often you want to do both. You might also present before you publish. Conferences are a good time to get others' questions about your research (so that you can address those questions prior to publication or preparation for publication). Additionally, some things may not really be publishable but are presentable and/or student projects are often easier to get presented than published, so it's a good place to start as a junior researcher.

 

[LAman10]

Often you want to do both. You might also present before you publish. Conferences are a good time to get others' questions about your research (so that you can address those questions prior to publication or preparation for publication). Additionally, some things may not really be publishable but are presentable and/or student projects are often easier to get presented than published, so it's a good place to start as a junior researcher.

adding to this, sometimes a project is not "publishable" in the sense that it's simply not enough to garner a full publication from the PI's journal of choice. But either way, the PI needs to get grant money. Presenting at a conference is just another way to get money/publicity

 

[JJMrK]

LizzyM has said before that her school uses a multi-tiered system for judging an applicants research experience. The top category is those who have published something. I believe the category just below that is people who have done presenting. Maybe she'll stop by and chime in.

 

[BrainBuff]

Has anyone figured out by now (or suspects) which school this LizzyM character belongs to?

 

[flip26]

Has anyone figured out by now (or suspects) which school this LizzyM character belongs to?

My guess is Yale...I have my reasons.

She has revealed drips and drabs. We know that it is a top school, and I think we know that it is Ivy affiliated, or at least she is located in the hallowed northeastern corridor of the US.

 

[brooklynblunder]

i dont think its yale, i have a guess though

 

[LizzyM]

I like to keep my location private, guys, but I'm willing to chime in on how presentations & publications are assessed.

It varies by school and can vary from year to year as the leadership of an institution changes. That said, peer-reviewed publications are gold, presentations at national or regional meetings are silver and funding for your research is money in your pocket (and shows that you know how to write a fundable proposal -- and that's very, very important to some people). Being an independent investigator, e.g. in a doctoral program, or developing and testing your own hypothesis is the pinacle and there are steps below that down to "lab tech", scut puppy, and nada.

 

[Lokhtar]

As an undergraduate, if I have four publishes (two second author, two third author), two presentations at a regional conference (first author) and one at a national conference (first author, society of neuroscience), would that put me in the top tier of research experience by students?

 

[shiftingmirage]

Can it also refer to having an abstract accepted to a national conference, whereupon a poster is presented or an oral presentation is given?

Just wanted to add that one can have an abstract published. I (along with many others) had a poster at a national conference and the abstract was published. Not as impressive as an article, but I've seen lots of CVs that include published abstracts.

 

[fastboyslim]

As an undergraduate, if I have four publishes (two second author, two third author), two presentations at a regional conference (first author) and one at a national conference (first author, society of neuroscience), would that put me in the top tier of research experience by students?

Sounds like someone's just trying to show off.

 

[fastboyslim]

In my field, there are two major conferences a year. So everyone rushes to meet the abstract deadlines for those even if they aren't totally finished, just as long as they have presentable preliminary analysis. It's because if they don't, they have to wait 6 months for the next conference deadline. The manuscript on the other hand, people take all the time they need to make it as good as they want and submit whenever they want.

 

[Lokhtar]

Sounds like someone's just trying to show off.

No, I know two of my undergraduate friends also applying this cycle that have two first authors each. I am not sure what the average is, I know I am above it, but I am obviously not as good as those two friends. For the top tier, I am not sure if being a first author in a publication is a requirement.