Getting published post-secondaries...What can I do?

[Adriaran]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Sadly, I'm less than a month away from submitting a Cancer publication (co-authored with a Nobel Laureate, seriously) but I've already received half of my secondaries and don't think I ought to procrastinate them, especially because review and revision on articles can take several months. But I hope that it will be published before many of my interviews. What is the best way to take advantage of this? A good number of the schools I'm applying to seem to explicitly decline application updates of any kind, including many of the research heavy schools like Hopkins 😢, depressingly.

I talk about my research in my application quite a bit, and the majority of schools I've applied to are big on research. So my fingers are crossed that they ask about it or at least comment on it in interviews. Is there any acceptable way for me to bring up being recently published in an interview, so that I can get at least some benefit for my application from it? Is it the sort of thing they would add to their comments on my app?

 

[honey0102]

I think it's best to submit the secondaries as soon as you can. Publishing is never a guarantee, papers can be rejected or returned for revisions that end up taking a long time. You can mention it in an update if it is allowed, and if not then definitely in interviews, providing things go as planned

 

[cactusman]

Sadly, I'm less than a month away from submitting a Cancer publication (co-authored with a Nobel Laureate, seriously) but I've already received half of my secondaries and don't think I ought to procrastinate them, especially because review and revision on articles can take several months. But I hope that it will be published before many of my interviews. What is the best way to take advantage of this? A good number of the schools I'm applying to seem to explicitly decline application updates of any kind, including many of the research heavy schools like Hopkins 😢, depressingly.

I talk about my research in my application quite a bit, and the majority of schools I've applied to are big on research. So my fingers are crossed that they ask about it or at least comment on it in interviews. Is there any acceptable way for me to bring up being recently published in an interview, so that I can get at least some benefit for my application from it? Is it the sort of thing they would add to their comments on my app?

I think there's a way you could slip it into an interview, but it will probably still be under review, so you won't actually have a finished publication.

 

[efle]

It needs to be accepted before you tell schools about it. Who knows how long review will take or how many additional experiments they'll request etc.

Wait for officially being accepted, then send as an update letter.

 

[efle]

A good number of the schools I'm applying to seem to explicitly decline application updates of any kind, including many of the research heavy schools like Hopkins 😢, depressingly.

Also this def isn't true? I had a paper submitted in autumn and accepted in winter and I sent updates to several t20s including Hopkins. At interview day they'll give you a business card of the person to send all updates to.

 

[MCATISEZ]

Also this def isn't true? I had a paper submitted in autumn and accepted in winter and I sent updates to several t20s including Hopkins. At interview day they'll give you a business card of the person to send all updates to.

Perhaps I am not applying to the same caliber schools, but is it not possible to slip it in during your multitude of secondary essays that will likely have you speak of your research experience? Many ask for your future plans where I've slipped in conferences I plan to present in and I'm confident my abstracts will be accepted (my lab consistently presents in them).

No "planning to" will not hold nearly the weight of you doing it. But it could help build your story...
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[begoood95]

I think a pub counts as on of those very few things that are update-worthy. So, that's what you can do: wait, hopefully you'll get published, and whenever/if that happens, shoot 'em an update letter.

 

[Goro]

Sadly, I'm less than a month away from submitting a Cancer publication (co-authored with a Nobel Laureate, seriously) but I've already received half of my secondaries and don't think I ought to procrastinate them, especially because review and revision on articles can take several months. But I hope that it will be published before many of my interviews. What is the best way to take advantage of this? A good number of the schools I'm applying to seem to explicitly decline application updates of any kind, including many of the research heavy schools like Hopkins 😢, depressingly.

I talk about my research in my application quite a bit, and the majority of schools I've applied to are big on research. So my fingers are crossed that they ask about it or at least comment on it in interviews. Is there any acceptable way for me to bring up being recently published in an interview, so that I can get at least some benefit for my application from it? Is it the sort of thing they would add to their comments on my app?

No, because a submitted paper is NOT a paper.
The best you can do is if it's accepted, send a note to schools that welcome updates that your paper is now "in press"

 

[aldol16]

You can mention that the paper was submitted to the journal in your essays and then send schools that accept update letters pre-interview an update letter once the paper is accepted. Check the school policy though because some schools won't accept updates until the post-interview stage. You shouldn't be delaying completion of your secondaries because of this because your paper will most likely require revisions and additional experiments (the better the journal, the more likely they'll want further corroboration) and for very good journals, the whole review process can take months or even a whole year. What will most likely happen is that if your paper is in good shape, it'll get accepted once you've gone on the majority of your interviews and you can send the update letter then.

Some on here will tell you that mentioning a submitted paper means nothing but for top research schools, it at least gives the indication that you're being productive and, in my opinion, is an achievement in itself. While anybody can submit any paper to a journal, in practice the vast, vast majority of papers submitted are legitimate papers with legitimate scientific results. Some of them may have big issues that need to be fixed and others might just not be significant enough for that journal to publish. I've never seen a completely bull**** paper reach the peer review stage.

 

[DameJulie]

It's worth an update, for those schools that accept a post-secondary update. I noticed that most schools only allow updates if you are invited to an interview. So chances are you might mention the pub at the interview more likely than on an update.

 

[Adriaran]

Also this def isn't true? I had a paper submitted in autumn and accepted in winter and I sent updates to several t20s including Hopkins. At interview day they'll give you a business card of the person to send all updates to.

Might have recently changed? When I search "hopkins medical school application updates" I get this on their website:

Frequently Asked Questions| Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine M.D. Admissions

Granted, it does say "to determine your status for an interview". Maybe that's the caveat, but post-interview it would be fine.

 

[cactusman]

Might have recently changed? When I search "hopkins medical school application updates" I get this on their website:

View attachment 221171

Frequently Asked Questions| Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine M.D. Admissions

Granted, it does say "to determine your status for an interview". Maybe that's the caveat, but post-interview it would be fine.

Dayyum that wording.
"Any extraneous information will be destroyed."

 

[efle]

Might have recently changed? When I search "hopkins medical school application updates" I get this on their website:

View attachment 221171

Frequently Asked Questions| Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine M.D. Admissions

Granted, it does say "to determine your status for an interview". Maybe that's the caveat, but post-interview it would be fine.

Yes, I should have been more clear! You cannot update them prior to interview. However at the interview, they'll give you a card for one of the head honchos in admissions there, and instruct you to directly email them any updates.

 

[efle]

Some on here will tell you that mentioning a submitted paper means nothing but for top research schools, it at least gives the indication that you're being productive and, in my opinion, is an achievement in itself. While anybody can submit any paper to a journal, in practice the vast, vast majority of papers submitted are legitimate papers with legitimate scientific results. Some of them may have big issues that need to be fixed and others might just not be significant enough for that journal to publish. I've never seen a completely bull**** paper reach the peer review stage.

But, for most worthwhile journals a big chunk of submitted papers end up rejected - that's the danger in telling schools beforehand (or at least before getting "accepted pending minor revision" or some such). Unless you think OP should tell schools his paper is submitted, but not mention the specific journal?

 

[bbbcccppp]

Paraphrasing LizzyM. Submit the secondary. Then you have a good reason to update in 5 or 6 months and re confirm interest with a meaningful update


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[efle]

^ Yes! As above you've got to submit the secondary ASAP and just hope the paper is accepted in time to update before decisions come out. Delaying for a month just to be able to say you have submitted a manuscript doesn't make sense.

 

[aldol16]

But, for most worthwhile journals a big chunk of submitted papers end up rejected - that's the danger in telling schools beforehand (or at least before getting "accepted pending minor revision" or some such). Unless you think OP should tell schools his paper is submitted, but not mention the specific journal?

The fact that most papers get rejected at the best journals is also a well known fact in academia. That doesn't mean your work isn't good science. It more likely than not means that it simply may not have the impact in the field that publication in such a prestigious journal demands. You could take all the papers that are accepted to Angewandte Chemie, a very good chemistry journal, and submit them to Nature or Science and the majority of them would be rejected. The work is the same - it's all good science. Whether it's published in a specific journal has a lot to do with factors outside of the science.

That's why submission of a paper, in my opinion, is still an achievement at the undergraduate level. You've produced a body of scientific work that is going through the peer review stage. That means you've at least made your best effort to tell a coherent story to communicate your results and have contextualized your data with respect to the field. It's not nearly as good as an accepted paper but it's still an achievement worthy of mention.

 

[efle]

The fact that most papers get rejected at the best journals is also a well known fact in academia. That doesn't mean your work isn't good science. It more likely than not means that it simply may not have the impact in the field that publication in such a prestigious journal demands. You could take all the papers that are accepted to Angewandte Chemie, a very good chemistry journal, and submit them to Nature or Science and the majority of them would be rejected. The work is the same - it's all good science. Whether it's published in a specific journal has a lot to do with factors outside of the science.

That's why submission of a paper, in my opinion, is still an achievement at the undergraduate level. You've produced a body of scientific work that is going through the peer review stage. That means you've at least made your best effort to tell a coherent story to communicate your results and have contextualized your data with respect to the field. It's not nearly as good as an accepted paper but it's still an achievement worthy of mention.

So in OP's shoes, you would mention writing and submitting a manuscript, but leave off the journal name in case it gets rejected and you have to aim lower?

 

[aldol16]

So in OP's shoes, you would mention writing and submitting a manuscript, but leave off the journal name in case it gets rejected and you have to aim lower?

I would just say a paper entitled "X" was submitted to Journal Y and leave it at that. Like I said, anybody who knows anything about research knows that papers get rejected and they get rejected for any number of reasons that may or may not be related to the science of the work.