CV ?/Listing presentations and posters

[orrghead16]

I am currently working on my CV because I need to update it for some university scholarships. Rather than asking the fire-house pre-allo board, I figured you guys would have a better idea about this kind of stuff.

Over the past year a lot of my work has been presented at national meetings. Most of the meetings I have been able to make and gave the presentations or posters myself. However a few (really the biggest & most impressive) I was unable to make. We still submitted my work and the PI usually manned it for me. I was still listed as first author on them. One of them was the Gordon Conference (It was in Europe & during the fall), which is is probably the leading conf in the field. The PI presented a short talk there which was almost entirely my projects & I was listed first-author.

Is it OK to list these abstracts/pres/posters on my CV (& later on AMCAS) even though I did not actually present them? As long as I am first-author?

Also, the grad students in the lab usually list me as a high author (2 or 3) for the presentations & abstracts they give. While they are certainly presenting their projects, all of our stuff is so interrelated and they often use one of my figs, etc. that they list me. I don't have any of these listed, and don't think that I should. Am I right?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Neuronix]

I don't see the problem with listing everything you're talking about. On the 2nd and 3rd author ones you just have to make it clear where you are on the author list. I put a full author list on each reference and bold my own name in each list for this purpose.

 

[Hurricane]

Yes, you definitely should list them. Whether or not you were there to present, the work was still published, because the abstract was printed in the meeting's official program. Right now you'll probably just lump all of your publications together, but when you start getting journal articles published, CVs often have separate lists for full publications and "published abstracts."

There are various formatting options, but one way is the following:

Author1, Author2, Author3. (2008) The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds. Abstract no. 69. Society for Scientology Annual Meeting, Hollywood, CA.

Bold your name like Neuronix said. Some people add stars to their name if they were a presenting author, but it's not really necessary.

 

[orrghead16]

Awesome, thanks for the help guys.

I have everything lumped together right now because I have so few in each category. I take it that "published abstracts" are both posters and presentations? Should you further break those down between posters v. pres.?

 

[MedRower]

Rather than asking the fire-house pre-allo board, I figured you guys would have a better idea about this kind of stuff.

Nice. This is a good reputation for this board to have.

 

[GWD]

Nice. This is a good reputation for this board to have.

Sorry to go off topic, but what's up with this pre-allo board? I don't check any of these boards but this one, but I see a lot of references to that forum on this one. Sounds like I am not missing much.

orrg: In any attempt to contribute something to your thread, I think neuronix' response was pretty adequate.

 

[ohhowiwish]

My old lab adviser sends me updates of any new poster presentations with my name on it and tells me to update my CV since some of them have won awards. Even though you may not have physically presented it, your data was still used and is a part of the overall work, so to beat a dead horse, definitely include it in your CV.

I had a semi-related question about this. For the AMCAS application, should I just list the lab as one category and include all the related details (poster presentations + publications + fellowships) in the description box, or should I break them up into 2-4 categories? They seem rather repetitive to report as separate categories, but I might not have enough # of allotted characters to talk about everything. Should I just omit all details of the research and cut to the chase since there will already be an essay detailing my lab work?

Sorry to go off topic, but what's up with this pre-allo board? I don't check any of these boards but this one, but I see a lot of references to that forum on this one. Sounds like I am not missing much.

orrg: In any attempt to contribute something to your thread, I think neuronix' response was pretty adequate.

Not missing anything at all, although probably most of my questions belong there more than here

 

[Hurricane]

Awesome, thanks for the help guys.

I have everything lumped together right now because I have so few in each category. I take it that "published abstracts" are both posters and presentations?

yup

Should you further break those down between posters v. pres.?

nope

good luck 🙂

 

[RxnMan]

I don't see the problem with listing everything you're talking about. On the 2nd and 3rd author ones you just have to make it clear where you are on the author list. I put a full author list on each reference and bold my own name in each list for this purpose.

I do the same. I have two sections "Publications" and "Posters and Presentations." Items under pubs are anything that appeared in a journal. Abstracts at meetings, podium presentations, posters...all go under "Posters and Presentations." I underline my name (opposed to bolding them, as I use bold for my section headings). I usually put what it was in parenthesis at the end of the citation:

Smith, J.Q., Thorton, B.B., "Mechanisms of How People Fall Down and Go Boom," J. Internal Med, 11:23, 1958. (Poster)

I italicize the poster title. Again, there's no problem with putting all of these things on your CV, you just have to be very clear about what each item is.

 

[RxnMan]

...For the AMCAS application, should I just list the lab as one category and include all the related details (poster presentations + publications + fellowships) in the description box, or should I break them up into 2-4 categories?...

Check my Re-App FAQ. There's a section about how to fill out AMCAS the best way (or, at least how it worked for me). My fellowships (at that time mostly paid 3-month summer research experiences) I'd consider them paid work, research, or an award. Then I'd look to see what category I had the least of. Then I'd list it under that category. That way you spread things out.

Think about it this way - would you want to be the research wonk (everything listed under research), or would you want to look like an all-around strong candidate? (ECs spread more evenly)

My FAQ's got some better examples too.

 

[ohhowiwish]

Given that most schools probably can only assign some points to each category of EC (e.g. 0-5 points), having 5 good experiences in 5 different ECs is better (4 x 5 = 20 total EC score) than 5 great experiences in 1 single category (5 x 1 = 5 total EC score).

Thanks RxnMan! I didn't know they had some scoring system so I'll definitely break them up into 3 separate categories then for the fellowship/publication/poster presentation. I don't think I'll list a separate category as my research then since md/phd applicants need to write an essay dedicated to this alone- it seems rather redundant unless they want a Cliffnotes version of the essay, and also its inherent with those 3 other activities

(Sorry about the thread hijacking OP 😳)

 

[RxnMan]

Thanks RxnMan! I didn't know they had some scoring system so I'll definitely break them up into 3 separate categories then for the fellowship/publication/poster presentation. I don't think I'll list a separate category as my research then since md/phd applicants need to write an essay dedicated to this alone- it seems rather redundant unless they want a Cliffnotes version of the essay, and also its inherent with those 3 other activities

(Sorry about the thread hijacking OP 😳)

Hold up. I know MY school has a scoring system. I don't know about others. As always, your mileage may vary.