ERAS 'Publications' Listing FAQ

[ChocolateChip>Oreos]

---

Members don't see this ad.

If you have an oral accepted and a paper automatically gets submitted in the jounral of the conference- can I list that as 2 things on my CV? Or just include it as 1?

 

[mvenus929]

If you have an oral accepted and a paper automatically gets submitted in the jounral of the conference- can I list that as 2 things on my CV? Or just include it as 1?

Is it actually a paper, or just the abstract that gets into the journal? If it's an abstract (which is more likely), you should not list it again. If it's a full manuscript that is peer reviewed, then sure, list it twice.

 

[ChocolateChip>Oreos]

Is it actually a paper, or just the abstract that gets into the journal? If it's an abstract (which is more likely), you should not list it again. If it's a full manuscript that is peer reviewed, then sure, list it twice.

Appreciate the response. You're right (just looked it up for this conference) it's the abstract that gets into the journal.
For ERAS does your same recommendation apply?

 

[mvenus929]

Appreciate the response. You're right (just looked it up for this conference) it's the abstract that gets into the journal.
For ERAS does your same recommendation apply?

Yes. If you list an abstract + a presentation for the same project, nearly everyone who looks at your application is going to know that you're padding it.

 

[GoSpursGo]

If you have an oral accepted and a paper automatically gets submitted in the jounral of the conference- can I list that as 2 things on my CV? Or just include it as 1?

I agree with above--these are the same product, so they should only be listed once as the more impactful category. You should list it as an oral presentation rather than as an abstract.

 

[ChocolateChip>Oreos]

Yes. If you list an abstract + a presentation for the same project, nearly everyone who looks at your application is going to know that you're padding it.

I agree with above--these are the same product, so they should only be listed once as the more impactful category. You should list it as an oral presentation rather than as an abstract.

Thank you both! But if I get an oral presentation then submit a paper based on the oral (and it goes through the peer review process)- can I list that as 2 separate things on my CV?

Also- where do Letters to the editor go? (if it goes through a review process). Can I list that under papers? or Other?

 

[LostInParadise7]

Can you list oral presentations or poster presentations scheduled for end of october? The abstracts were already accepted but the two conferences are scheduled for October end I'm not sure if it's reasonable to list them on ERAS? I was only going to list the abstracts as accepted but I'd rather post the presentations instead. I've gotten conflicting advice, some even going as far as saying post both the abstract as accepted and the posters with "not presented yet", but that seems like double dipping and I don't want any eye rolls from someone reviewing my application lol.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thank you both! But if I get an oral presentation then submit a paper based on the oral (and it goes through the peer review process)- can I list that as 2 separate things on my CV?

Yes

Also- where do Letters to the editor go? (if it goes through a review process). Can I list that under papers? or Other?

Under papers if peer reviewed, otherwise I think there is a non peer reviewed manuscript category

Can you list oral presentations or poster presentations scheduled for end of october? The abstracts were already accepted but the two conferences are scheduled for October end I'm not sure if it's reasonable to list them on ERAS? I was only going to list the abstracts as accepted but I'd rather post the presentations instead. I've gotten conflicting advice, some even going as far as saying post both the abstract as accepted and the posters with "not presented yet", but that seems like double dipping and I don't want any eye rolls from someone reviewing my application lol.

Presentations, list as accepted

 

[LostInParadise7]

Yes

Under papers if peer reviewed, otherwise I think there is a non peer reviewed manuscript category

Presentations, list as accepted

Thanks for replying so quick! There isn't an option under poster presentations or oral presentations to list them as accepted. I've input the dates in October and ERAS still says "poster presented". Should I just put accepted at the top before the first author, something like this "[Poster Accepted], First Author, etc."?

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thanks for replying so quick! There isn't an option under poster presentations or oral presentations to list them as accepted. I've input the dates in October and ERAS still says "poster presented". Should I just put accepted at the top before the first author, something like this "[Poster Accepted], First Author, etc."?

Either before the first author, or next to the date, or anything like that.

 

[LostInParadise7]

Either before the first author, or next to the date, or anything like that.

awesome, ty!

 

[LostInParadise7]

Yes

Under papers if peer reviewed, otherwise I think there is a non peer reviewed manuscript category

Presentations, list as accepted

Tagging on to my previous question, I'm torn between posting the abstract vs. the poster presentations. The abstracts were accepted as poster presentation at the ACG meeting and will be published in a special supplement to the AJG October issue (apparently there's a running joke they accept and publish everything lol?). I am neither 1st author nor will likely be the poster presenter. Which would look better on myERAS? I've spoken to quite a few of my peers who have posted both (options 1 + 2) for conferences that have already passed, but I don't know how comfortable I am doing that; I'm trying to avoid as many eye roles as possible.

1. Peer-Reviewed Journal / abstract (other than published) -- Accepted vs. In-press (as in it'll be published in October)

vs.

2. "[Poster Accepted] First Author etc." -- unfortunately even after I put the dates in October (an option only available for Posters but not abstracts), ERAS chooses to auto fill "[Poster presented]". For my other poster presentations I've put a " * " next to the presenter, but this thread is making me think I need to put "(presenter)" instead.

After reading through most of this thread, I got the impression that oral presentation > "published" abstract > poster presentation.

But what about ones that are only accepted because the conference is past the application date? This question also extends to the CHEST 2022 conference where I have an oral presentation accepted + a couple of posters as well. With CHEST however, I have no confirmation whether the abstracts will be getting published in a supplement or not; any insight into this would be appreciated as well.

I'm not a US MD/DO but rather an MS4 at a Carib school if that makes any difference. If I include both options for all of my "publications" I'll have >18 pubs but if I include one or the other it drops down to >8. My pubs are all mostly case reports as that was all I could get my hands on. I would 100% be padding and adding both if I had fewer "publications" but I feel like seeing a lot of publications and then seeing them padded by a Carib student would definitely rub some PDs/PCs the wrong way. Or should being a Carib make me want to pad my CV to "stand out" and include both options? I'm applying to a non-competitive specialty with above average scores if that makes any difference.

Any help or recommendation is appreciated. Thank you everyone.

 

[GoSpursGo]

After reading through most of this thread, I got the impression that oral presentation > "published" abstract > poster presentation..

Oral presentation>poster presentation>abstract. But the caveat is that in order to be listed as a presentation for you, *you* need to be the presenting author. Otherwise you should list it as an abstract since that was your role. You could potentially list as a presentation if you clearly identify the presenting author.

You should not double dip. Both as a general rule, but especially in your case. Since you have a decent number of pubs (albeit low impact) you don’t want to make it appear that you are stat padding as it may make people invalidate what is actually decent output given your circumstances

 

[mvenus929]

Tagging on to my previous question, I'm torn between posting the abstract vs. the poster presentations. The abstracts were accepted as poster presentation at the ACG meeting and will be published in a special supplement to the AJG October issue (apparently there's a running joke they accept and publish everything lol?). I am neither 1st author nor will likely be the poster presenter. Which would look better on myERAS? I've spoken to quite a few of my peers who have posted both (options 1 + 2) for conferences that have already passed, but I don't know how comfortable I am doing that; I'm trying to avoid as many eye roles as possible.

1. Peer-Reviewed Journal / abstract (other than published) -- Accepted vs. In-press (as in it'll be published in October)

vs.

2. "[Poster Accepted] First Author etc." -- unfortunately even after I put the dates in October (an option only available for Posters but not abstracts), ERAS chooses to auto fill "[Poster presented]". For my other poster presentations I've put a " * " next to the presenter, but this thread is making me think I need to put "(presenter)" instead.

After reading through most of this thread, I got the impression that oral presentation > "published" abstract > poster presentation.

But what about ones that are only accepted because the conference is past the application date? This question also extends to the CHEST 2022 conference where I have an oral presentation accepted + a couple of posters as well. With CHEST however, I have no confirmation whether the abstracts will be getting published in a supplement or not; any insight into this would be appreciated as well.

I'm not a US MD/DO but rather an MS4 at a Carib school if that makes any difference. If I include both options for all of my "publications" I'll have >18 pubs but if I include one or the other it drops down to >8. My pubs are all mostly case reports as that was all I could get my hands on. I would 100% be padding and adding both if I had fewer "publications" but I feel like seeing a lot of publications and then seeing them padded by a Carib student would definitely rub some PDs/PCs the wrong way. Or should being a Carib make me want to pad my CV to "stand out" and include both options? I'm applying to a non-competitive specialty with above average scores if that makes any difference.

Any help or recommendation is appreciated. Thank you everyone.

I mean, practically speaking (recognizing that this may vary based on field), a poster presentation is essentially equivalent to an abstract. Every national poster presentation I've done has been published as an abstract in a journal supplement, so if you did a poster presentation at a regional, rather than national, conference, that would warrant a poster presentation over an abstract.

But either way, these are very low hanging fruit. If you describe in the description your contribution to it, I don't think it particularly matters how it is listed. If it's easier to list as an abstract that has been accepted, do that and just put in the description that it was presented as a poster at xxx conference by yyy author.

 

[tinzleton]

I have a case report that was accepted to American college of radiology: case in point but we havent formally submitted it yet. Can I put this under the "other than published"? and if so, do I say accepted or provisionally accepted? like they accepted our case/topic but and I have a draft written, but we havent submitted yet. does this mean it was accepted proviosnally? like we have to finish it with their guidelines?

 

[gutonc]

I have a case report that was accepted to American college of radiology: case in point but we havent formally submitted it yet. Can I put this under the "other than published"? and if so, do I say accepted or provisionally accepted? like they accepted our case/topic but and I have a draft written, but we havent submitted yet. does this mean it was accepted proviosnally? like we have to finish it with their guidelines?

I would choose accepted provisionally

 

[GoSpursGo]

I have a case report that was accepted to American college of radiology: case in point but we havent formally submitted it yet. Can I put this under the "other than published"? and if so, do I say accepted or provisionally accepted? like they accepted our case/topic but and I have a draft written, but we havent submitted yet. does this mean it was accepted proviosnally? like we have to finish it with their guidelines?

Agree with @gutonc , accepted provisionally

 

[tinzleton]

I've had different advice on this question and wanted to clear it up. If I gave an oral presentation on a very uncommon case report to attendings, residents, and students can I put this under the publications section or must I list it as a work experience ? I also think the attending who had this case wrote in his letter that we'll be working on it as a case report publication. not sure though . any advice would be great!

thank you!

 

[mvenus929]

I've had different advice on this question and wanted to clear it up. If I gave an oral presentation on a very uncommon case report to attendings, residents, and students can I put this under the publications section or must I list it as a work experience ? I also think the attending who had this case wrote in his letter that we'll be working on it as a case report publication. not sure though . any advice would be great!

thank you!

Work experience, because it's teaching (case conference reviewing unusual cases is a very common thing in academia and it counts as a teaching session). It's not a research effort. If you get the publication, you can list it under publications.

 

[GoSpursGo]

I've had different advice on this question and wanted to clear it up. If I gave an oral presentation on a very uncommon case report to attendings, residents, and students can I put this under the publications section or must I list it as a work experience ? I also think the attending who had this case wrote in his letter that we'll be working on it as a case report publication. not sure though . any advice would be great!

thank you!

This is honestly nothing. It's part of medical school to present on the cases that your team sees--these sorts of informal presentations are expected and your performance is reflected in the grades you received. It is not a work experience because it is part of your educaiton. If you eventually write up a case report it'll be a pub, but you don't have anything yet.

FWIW, one of my pet peeves is when people try to put these informal presentations down as an "oral presentation." Maybe most people would just roll their eyes and move on, but this would actively give me a negative impression of you.

 

[tinzleton]

This is honestly nothing. It's part of medical school to present on the cases that your team sees--these sorts of informal presentations are expected and your performance is reflected in the grades you received. It is not a work experience because it is part of your educaiton. If you eventually write up a case report it'll be a pub, but you don't have anything yet.

FWIW, one of my pet peeves is when people try to put these informal presentations down as an "oral presentation." Maybe most people would just roll their eyes and move on, but this would actively give me a negative impression of you.

thank you for your quick response! So just to make sure. Even if it was grand rounds at that hospital, I can't put it under oral presentations?

 

[GoSpursGo]

thank you for your quick response! So just to make sure. Even if it was grand rounds at that hospital, I can't put it under oral presentations?

OK, grand rounds would be the literal one exception. While we know these sorts of things are sort of gifted all the time to trainees, it still does technically count as an oral presentation if it's truly a department or institution level grand rounds.

Just don't oversell it.

 

[mvenus929]

OK, grand rounds would be the literal one exception. While we know these sorts of things are sort of gifted all the time to trainees, it still does technically count as an oral presentation if it's truly a department or institution level grand rounds.

Just don't oversell it.

I'm still of the opinion that Grand Rounds is a teaching presentation (that is, a lecture), not a research presentation, and thus doesn't count as an oral presentation (and should be placed under work experience). But anyone who reads the description will be able to make that distinction relatively quickly.

 

[GoSpursGo]

I'm still of the opinion that Grand Rounds is a teaching presentation (that is, a lecture), not a research presentation, and thus doesn't count as an oral presentation (and should be placed under work experience). But anyone who reads the description will be able to make that distinction relatively quickly.

you’re not wrong, and in recent times that is certainly how it has been used. However, historically it was usually a way to host visiting lecturers, and to highlight rising institutional stars. Because of that it is generally (IMO) still acceptable to list under a presentation as a trainee.

I have indeed moved it to “teaching” on my professional CV unless I’m invited to another institution.

 

[ChocolateChip>Oreos]

Thoughts on submitting a poster presentation as an oral presentation to a different conference? Can you list this as 2 separate on your CV?

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thoughts on submitting a poster presentation as an oral presentation to a different conference? Can you list this as 2 separate on your CV?

Yes, you can do this as long as the second conference allows presentation of previously presented data. It is number padding a bit , but as long as you actually presented at both conferences then you can list it twice. Just don't think it's impressive... because again, it's super obvious what you're doing.

 

[Doctor_Strange]

PGY-2 getting ready for fellowship season on the horizon. My current understanding – and in fact what my PD said – was for certian conferences your abstract can count as two things – a poster/oral and as an abstract if published under the supplemental section if the given journal with a DOI. I have several in this category. Some conferences don't publish in the journal (eg. my state's ACP or even my county medical society meeting)

I wanted to confirm if it in fact permissible to list a given abstract twice? I would like to maximize my scholarship so long as it is honest. Any advice out there? Even though my PD said it was okay I'd like to confirm

Thanks in advance!

Edit: One weird example: I submitted an abstract on monkeypox. It was accepted to the conference as a poster and also published in the journal with a DOI. I also wrote the case up as a case report and published it in a separate journal with its own DOI. So, technically it shows up three times on my CV and that’s when I began to wonder if maybe I am doing something wrong?

 

[gutonc]

I mean...you can. But we all know it's CV padding and it's frowned upon.

List is once. Abstract/presentation is the correct place. Put the case report in the pubs section.

ETA: Also, merging with the ERAS Pubs FAQ thread.

 

[mvenus929]

Agree with gutonc. Poster/abstract --> publication is permitted without raised eyebrows (this is the generally expected path to research), so you can definitely list the presentation and the publication separately, but listing the poster and abstract separately is clearly padding.

I typically add the information about the published abstract after the poster presentation.

For example:
M.Venus, W.Mars. "Discussion about the differences in men and women." Presented as poster at Society of Psychology X. San Diego, CA. February 13, 2023. Published in Annals of Psychology, Supp 3, p345. DOI: xxx/yyyy/xyxy

Easier to do on your actual CV than ERAS, I admit, but you have a place for comments on ERAS.

 

[GoSpursGo]

PGY-2 getting ready for fellowship season on the horizon. My current understanding – and in fact what my PD said – was for certian conferences your abstract can count as two things – a poster/oral and as an abstract if published under the supplemental section if the given journal with a DOI. I have several in this category. Some conferences don't publish in the journal (eg. my state's ACP or even my county medical society meeting)

I wanted to confirm if it in fact permissible to list a given abstract twice? I would like to maximize my scholarship so long as it is honest. Any advice out there? Even though my PD said it was okay I'd like to confirm

Thanks in advance!

Edit: One weird example: I submitted an abstract on monkeypox. It was accepted to the conference as a poster and also published in the journal with a DOI. I also wrote the case up as a case report and published it in a separate journal with its own DOI. So, technically it shows up three times on my CV and that’s when I began to wonder if maybe I am doing something wrong?

Also agree with above. OK to list the presentation and the pub, but don't then also list the abstract.

 

[hc1717]

If two authors (one being me) have the same last name and same initials, how should I proceed with clarifying which one I am for each of these? Since I can imagine it could be a bit confusing to look at otherwise.

 

[Apollyon]

If two authors (one being me) have the same last name and same initials, how should I proceed with clarifying which one I am for each of these? Since I can imagine it could be a bit confusing to look at otherwise.

Same initials x3? Like, you're both Smith JL?

 

[hc1717]

Same initials x3? Like, you're both Smith JL?

Yes exactly

 

[gutonc]

Yes exactly

I have this problem too. Honestly though, it doesn't matter. Assuming there's still no formatting in ERAS (in which case you could bold your name), there's not a whole lot you can do.

That said, unless one or both of you are the lead, or senior author, it really doesn't matter one way or another. Just list it and move on.

 

[hc1717]

I have this problem too. Honestly though, it doesn't matter. Assuming there's still no formatting in ERAS (in which case you could bold your name), there's not a whole lot you can do.

That said, unless one or both of you are the lead, or senior author, it really doesn't matter one way or another. Just list it and move on.

Thank you. Problem is one of us is first author on a couple of the publications so will have to probably just let it be in that case too I guess.

 

[gutonc]

Thank you. Problem is one of us is first author on a couple of the publications so will have to probably just let it be in that case too I guess.

Is it you?

If so, address it in your PS since it’s clearly a big part of your CV.

If it’s not you, enjoy the reflected glory but be prepared to clarify during interviews.

 

[hc1717]

Is it you?

If so, address it in your PS since it’s clearly a big PRT of your CV.

If it’s not you, enjoy the reflected glory but be prepared to clarify during interviews.

It's not me (with the currently published papers) but that sounds like a plan, thanks

 

[GoSpursGo]

If two authors (one being me) have the same last name and same initials, how should I proceed with clarifying which one I am for each of these? Since I can imagine it could be a bit confusing to look at otherwise.

If you were particularly worried, you could just spell out your name in the author list. As @gutonc notes, if this was a real CV you would just bold your name to remove all doubt, so I think you should do whatever you feel like makes sense to clarify this (ie put an asterisk next to you, etc)

 

[hc1717]

If you were particularly worried, you could just spell out your name in the author list. As @gutonc notes, if this was a real CV you would just bold your name to remove all doubt, so I think you should do whatever you feel like makes sense to clarify this (ie put an asterisk next to you, etc)

I like the asterisk idea, didn't think about that. In a CV I do bold it already as you mentioned, but asterisk seems to be a good way to do it for ERAS. Thank you

 

[Doctor_Strange]

Two questions:

1) I have a publication with a PMID on PubMed, but for some reason, I cannot find a volume or issue #. I submitted a case report to a special collection on the topic of Monkeypox. It was peer-reviewed and as I said published in their journal, but without a volume or issue. Any thoughts? Leave those two components blank, or fill in "1" for each.

2) I have an abstract that was submitted to ATS, it was not a poster presentation. I later presented this abstract at a local county medical society meeting. I then write up the abstract as a manuscript. I do not know if I should list this three times or two. In the monkeypox scenario, I submitted it as a poster to a conference and it was also released as a supplemental abstract (with a DOI). In that case, it felt way too excessive so I only listed the final case report publication and the poster presentation (leaving out the abstract). In this situation, it feels different, but not sure how to approach it.

Thanks in advance!

 

[mvenus929]

Two questions:

1) I have a publication with a PMID on PubMed, but for some reason, I cannot find a volume or issue #. I submitted a case report to a special collection on the topic of Monkeypox. It was peer-reviewed and as I said published in their journal, but without a volume or issue. Any thoughts? Leave those two components blank, or fill in "1" for each.

2) I have an abstract that was submitted to ATS, it was not a poster presentation. I later presented this abstract at a local county medical society meeting. I then write up the abstract as a manuscript. I do not know if I should list this three times or two. In the monkeypox scenario, I submitted it as a poster to a conference and it was also released as a supplemental abstract (with a DOI). In that case, it felt way too excessive so I only listed the final case report publication and the poster presentation (leaving out the abstract). In this situation, it feels different, but not sure how to approach it.

Thanks in advance!

1) Depending on the timing of the publication, it may not have been assigned a 'print' issue yet. In which case, if you can leave volume or issue blank, do so, otherwise put x or 0 or something in there to indicate it hasn't been assigned those numbers.

2) If you write up a manuscript (not just have the abstract published), that is a separate entry to anything else. Whether you list out two different abstract presentations or one doesn't really matter, though it will seem a little more like padding if you list it out as two.

 

[Doctor_Strange]

1) Depending on the timing of the publication, it may not have been assigned a 'print' issue yet. In which case, if you can leave volume or issue blank, do so, otherwise put x or 0 or something in there to indicate it hasn't been assigned those numbers.

2) If you write up a manuscript (not just have the abstract published), that is a separate entry to anything else. Whether you list out two different abstract presentations or one doesn't really matter, though it will seem a little more like padding if you list it out as two.

I think for #2, I will defer to just the write-up and poster presentation.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Two questions:

1) I have a publication with a PMID on PubMed, but for some reason, I cannot find a volume or issue #. I submitted a case report to a special collection on the topic of Monkeypox. It was peer-reviewed and as I said published in their journal, but without a volume or issue. Any thoughts? Leave those two components blank, or fill in "1" for each.

2) I have an abstract that was submitted to ATS, it was not a poster presentation. I later presented this abstract at a local county medical society meeting. I then write up the abstract as a manuscript. I do not know if I should list this three times or two. In the monkeypox scenario, I submitted it as a poster to a conference and it was also released as a supplemental abstract (with a DOI). In that case, it felt way too excessive so I only listed the final case report publication and the poster presentation (leaving out the abstract). In this situation, it feels different, but not sure how to approach it.

Thanks in advance!

I agree with @mvenus929 . Just fills something in for the fields for 1. For 2, probably just list twice.

 

[Doctor_Strange]

Thank you @GoSpursGo and @mvenus929 for your replies.

I had another question which is even more peculiar:

I have participated in this online, free-open-access medical education organization called The Human Diagnosis Project. Anyone can submit a case and have it reviewed by their editors and ultimately it will be uploaded onto the website and app where users can guess the differential based on bite-sized aliquots. When I applied to residency, I listed the 3-4 submissions I did under "Non-peer reviewed online publication". I am no wondering if this whole time it was a "peer-review online publication". I have an associated URL link that would take you to the app to see the case, but there is no online database to search for cases by author (you could search via the app). Thoughts on how to list this?

Thank you again!

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thank you @GoSpursGo and @mvenus929 for your replies.

I had another question which is even more peculiar:

I have participated in this online, free-open-access medical education organization called The Human Diagnosis Project. Anyone can submit a case and have it reviewed by their editors and ultimately it will be uploaded onto the website and app where users can guess the differential based on bite-sized aliquots. When I applied to residency, I listed the 3-4 submissions I did under "Non-peer reviewed online publication". I am no wondering if this whole time it was a "peer-review online publication". I have an associated URL link that would take you to the app to see the case, but there is no online database to search for cases by author (you could search via the app). Thoughts on how to list this?

Thank you again!

I honestly don’t think this is any kind of publication at all.