I've had invited manuscripts rejected before. It goes in the research section.
Agree w/gutonc here. I just rejected an invited review in a journal that I'm a reviewer for. There are no guarantees with papers...
I've had invited manuscripts rejected before. It goes in the research section.
If you have 5 first author pubs, nobody will care about your posters. You can put them in both places but it's padding. That said...everybody does it.I have 2 questions:
1) If you have the same project (same title), was accepted first for poster at national meeting then after couple of months was published as a full article (peer reviewed) in journal. Can I add this both poster presentation + peer reviewed article? Because I took 2 years off for research, I have 4-5 projects like this (poster + full publications at peer reviewed journals having the same title).
I personally think this should go in whatever section there is for unpublished/in preparation/other than published/whatever they're calling it this year. I've had both an invited review and a book chapter nuked before so don't cite your chickens before they're published.2) ERAS now has a specific category for book chapters. I have 3 chapters proofed but the book will be published in 2017. ERAS ask for the date of the book publication. Can I enter 2017 or it's better to enter N/A?
I have little to no research experience and I'm applying to a competitive surgical sub-specialty. I was wondering does a medical school "research day" poster presentation really hold weight when it comes to applying for residency?
I'm prepping to do 2-3 posters at my medical school research day and just wondering is it really worth it or not?
I have little to no research experience and I'm applying to a competitive surgical sub-specialty. I was wondering does a medical school "research day" poster presentation really hold weight when it comes to applying for residency?
I'm prepping to do 2-3 posters at my medical school research day and just wondering is it really worth it or not?
As others have said, use what you've got--it's better than nothing. That being said, I have to wonder why, if you supposedly have enough material to make 2-3 posters at a small event (assuming they are on the same or similar projects), you couldn't roll that into one big poster and take it to a larger event.
This would be an extreme stretch of the definition of peer review.
It is a common understanding that peer reviewed publication indicates a work published in a scientific journal, not a college magazine.
What section would you suggest I put them under?
Seen mixed opinions on this so wanted to get some opinions. Let's say you submit an abstract to a conference and it gets accepted (and published in a specialty relevant journal with PMID), then the poster or oral presentation is done, and then eventually you publish a full manuscript. Do you list all three? Why or why not? Thanks!
Peer reviewed online publication.I am having some issues putting in a journal article in ERAS. I published a case report in SAGE Open Medical Case Reports. It is peer-reviewed online journal. Do I add it under "Peer Reviewed Journal Articles" or "Peer Reviewed Online Publication"?
Here is an example citation (not mine):
Choudhury, Shahana A., and Vernat Exil. "Rheumatic heart disease in Tennessee: An overlooked diagnosis." SAGE Open Medical Case Reports 2 (2014): 2050313X14527589.
Volunteer experience is fine.Guys, how do you register if you are peer reviewer for a scientific journal on myERAS? Volunteer work experience?
Yes. It's a research experience.at the end of 6 years of our medical school,, we write a thesis on a research, submit a book/thesis to the university records and give an oral perestation to the university heads on it. then we are graded out of 10. does this qualify as research publication/research experience?
but my thesis was published , albeit not in a journal. Its in the university records. cant it pass as "oral presentation" or "other articles" in the sub-fields of publications??Yes. It's a research experience.
Sure...whatever...pick one. I promise you that nobody (seriously, nobody but you and your grandma) cares about it though.but my thesis was published , albeit not in a journal. Its in the university records. cant it pass as "oral presentation" or "other articles" in the sub-fields of publications??

Couple of questions for publication semantics.
1) I wrote a textbook chapter over a year ago that was accepted, but the book itself is still being compiled for release in late 2015/early 2016. As such, it is not technically published- but there is no option that I can find for a book chapter that is accepted but not published. Should this just be left off entirely?
2) I am working on a case series that will be submitted soon- but likely after I submit my ERAS application. Should I include anything about this under research experience? I am leaning towards no, as I have a couple of legitimate basic science research experiences and writing a case series is a stretch as "research" but would love confirmation that this is the correct approach.
3) Finally, as a more general question, when and how is the best way to update programs with new information regarding publishing after initial submission of your ERAS form? Should this strictly be done when coming for an interview (ie, asked to have more information included in your file before you arrive), or is notifying all programs of updates acceptable? Along those lines, what would be considered "important enough" to warrant an update to programs?
Thanks!
Just wondering if anyone had any input on any of these questions. Thanks!
Peer reviewed online publication.
- Posters that were presented by another member of your research team (i.e., not you) at a regional, national or international research conference, even if you were listed as one of the authors -- even if you were listed as first author -- should not be included here. A listing belongs here if you were the one who did the talking.
3 sentences to describe the research.
Very not. Most people reviewing your app and interviewing you won't have a clue (nor care) about the technical details of your research. And the ones who do (assuming you get an interview, and wind up meeting with them) will ask you.How technical should we/ can we be?