How do some students have so many publications?

[Poisson]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey guys,

I know that the way the school years are structured vary from school to school, especially since I am from Canada while you are in the U.S. The question I want to ask is: How do some medical students have so many publications?

As far as I know, this is how it works – and please correct me if I am wrong: The first opportunity that most medical students take to engage in research is during the summer between MS1 and MS2. Now that is great, but how many publications do most people get out of during research during this time. I mean, if you are treating it like a full time job (40 - 50 hours a week), what is the net result? 1 publication? 2 publications?

I have heard that people do research during the summer between MS2 and MS3. However, isn't it during the summer that you will be taking time off to study hard for Step I?

MS3 is hectic.

Not sure about MS4.

How the hell do some people have like 7 or 8 publications? It's crazy!

Thanks for the help,
Lunasly.

I would say that if you are looking for volume in publication, that is not a hard thing to do, nor a mark of excellence. You ask any seasoned veteran in research, and when they see some young person with a ton of publications, they are not going to think anything of it. Now what does the general public think of this? Well most people are going to shower those individuals with respect and admiration. What causes people to get more publications than others? Well the culture of the lab has to do with the output in publications, as well as how many friends a person might have. If the lab a person is in likes to publish a lot of medical research findings, is a high impact area, and a very hypothesis-driven area, yes you might be getting in Nature, and other top journals, with a lot of publication opportunities. Some labs also put a ton of people on papers, and tack on young undergrads. Then they publish similar papers, put on more undergrads and assistants. Also some people like to put their friends on papers for which there might have been minimal research involvement. In contrast, if you are in some lab trying to obtain intellectual property for something, they may hide their research. Some people like this might be near the top of their field, and want all of the benefits, thus may not publish. Also publication in a top journal does not necessarily mean the work is good. As for the medical school timeline of when you can get engaged in research, I'm not sure, that would depend on your institution I presume and on a case by case basis. I have heard of Bioengineers getting paid research positions throughout medical school.

 

[pkwraith]

OH MAN, don't even get me started on pube gunners. Those folks are the worst -- I question their ethics, it's like they're always finding themselves in hairy situations!

I am so tired of how they musk always publish all the time, and then bust my balls about my research progress. Someone really needs to shave us from them. I don't want to keep tangling with them. T'aint right.

 

[pandoraone]

I read through this and cannot believe people have over 30 papers *let alone first-authored papers.* My God

 

[duckie99]

I read through this and cannot believe people have over 30 papers *let alone first-authored papers.* My God

when you start filling out your ERAS app you'll find there are lots of different things people are allowed to classify as "publications"... There is no actual verification of anything a person wants to put down either. In any case, the vast majority of medical student "research" is very very low impact and everyone knows it. And by everyone I mean anyone involved with any sort of significant research. Program directors also understand this.

Unfortunately for some fields it is important to at least have some "work" that you can put on ERAS as a "publication" whether it be a couple abstracts, case presentations, poster presentations, lectures, etc. Generally the more competitive the field the more likely you'll need something. It doesn't matter that most of this stuff is essentially a waste of time. If every other student applying for the field has "something" they are at a big advantage over the guy who has nothing.

I've spoken with attendings involved with resident research as well and they also say that most of it is pretty useless. It is what it is. Good research usually requires many years of work, lots of funding, a lot of preparation, and it just isn't something rookie physicians can do based on all their other commitments. Gotta play the game however at least until you get to fellowship.

 

[sevenmints]

Let me explain to you how to get "pubs." Biggest scam ever:

Undergrad research - 3 years - 2 posters, 1 abstract = 3
MS 1 - 1 review paper during the summer with a senior attending = 1
MS 2 - USMLE Step I and girlfriend = 0
Year off - Lab + clinical = 4 basic science, 5 posters/abstracts of same material at mtgs, 4clinical papers
MS 3 - case reports, clinical papers, case series with attendings = 3
MS 4 -...

Total? LOL

 

[pandoraone]

So I get people can get higher numbers of clinical papers (arguably easier to get), but what about those with multiple basic science papers? I know one classmate who will have at least 5 basic science papers (without taking a year off and is not MD.PhD). He isn't first author but still. He also has about 5 clinical papers.....and this is in second year!

 

[Frazier]

So I get people can get higher numbers of clinical papers (arguably easier to get), but what about those with multiple basic science papers? I know one classmate who will have at least 5 basic science papers (without taking a year off and is not MD.PhD). He isn't first author but still. He also has about 5 clinical papers.....and this is in second year!

What do you mean? It's not hard to think of explanations...

He joined multiple labs. (Multiple projects =multiple possible pubs)
He joined a very productive lab. (Lab that churns out multiple papers = multiple possible pubs)
He butters up people very well. (Maybe he doesn't do all that much, but the PI/s really like him and want to help him so they give him generous authorship credit)

 

[pandoraone]

What do you mean? It's not hard to think of explanations...

He joined multiple labs. (Multiple projects =multiple possible pubs)
He joined a very productive lab. (Lab that churns out multiple papers = multiple possible pubs)
He butters up people very well. (Maybe he doesn't do all that much, but the PI/s really like him and want to help him so they give him generous authorship credit)

Yea, I figure it must be a combination of those things but how can you juggle all that (multiple labs) in med school and not fail?

 

[Sarah Kerrigan]

So I get people can get higher numbers of clinical papers (arguably easier to get), but what about those with multiple basic science papers? I know one classmate who will have at least 5 basic science papers (without taking a year off and is not MD.PhD). He isn't first author but still. He also has about 5 clinical papers.....and this is in second year!

This is very possible. He is not first author. That alone explains it. It is highly unlikely for someone to work in multiple labs at the same time because it will reflect poorly on you. Nobody is dumb enough to do this. It will clearly indicate you do not care about the science and only want the papers just to have them. Full time post docs work hard in one lab and this part time med student joins multiple labs? Joke. Anyways, if you have all these papers and ZERO first author papers it is a red flag that you just tagged onto a few projects and had no real leadership role. You ran a few gels. Nice job champ. You aren't fooling anyone unless you luck out and your interviewer has never done research before.

 

[Immunophile]

Some journals put an 800 word limit on case reports (there's probably journals out there with even lower word limits). You can write up a sloppy case report over a weekend and get it published as first author in a low impact factor journal. Also, I don't believe quantity is better than quality for residency. I'd like to believe that program directors are smarter than that.

Also first author basic science pubs are much harder to get than second author pubs. You can do one experiment, and if the results were good enough to be published, that will land you a second author paper. You can spend your summer in a productive lab and do a few different experiments and if you're lucky (and have a fair PI), you can get your name on those papers. It's basically right time/right place with a little hard work. However, getting a first author paper is a lot more work and I believe one first author paper is way more impressive than several second author papers.

Another way to get a lot of publications, is take a year off for research (still tough to get >2 first author basic science papers though) or do PhD.

The other thing is some people count acceptance of an abstract to a conference as a publication. It's still an achievement but in no way should this weigh the same as a basic science/clinical research paper. And unless I can find the abstract in something other than the booklet you pick up at the conference, I wouldn't even call it a publication.

 

[pandoraone]

This is very possible. He is not first author. That alone explains it. It is highly unlikely for someone to work in multiple labs at the same time because it will reflect poorly on you. Nobody is dumb enough to do this. It will clearly indicate you do not care about the science and only want the papers just to have them. Full time post docs work hard in one lab and this part time med student joins multiple labs? Joke. Anyways, if you have all these papers and ZERO first author papers it is a red flag that you just tagged onto a few projects and had no real leadership role. You ran a few gels. Nice job champ. You aren't fooling anyone unless you luck out and your interviewer has never done research before.

Thats interesting - thaks

 

[evilbooyaa]

This is very possible. He is not first author. That alone explains it. It is highly unlikely for someone to work in multiple labs at the same time because it will reflect poorly on you. Nobody is dumb enough to do this. It will clearly indicate you do not care about the science and only want the papers just to have them. Full time post docs work hard in one lab and this part time med student joins multiple labs? Joke. Anyways, if you have all these papers and ZERO first author papers it is a red flag that you just tagged onto a few projects and had no real leadership role. You ran a few gels. Nice job champ. You aren't fooling anyone unless you luck out and your interviewer has never done research before.

Yeah, most of that isn't true. Not having first authors is really not a red-flag as most people understand that you are a medical student. Obviously first author is BETTER, but it's definitely not a red flag. It's still better than no research. If quantity didn't matter, they would only allow publications, not abstracts/posters in ERAS.

 

[bkprodigy]

Some journals put an 800 word limit on case reports (there's probably journals out there with even lower word limits). You can write up a sloppy case report over a weekend and get it published as first author in a low impact factor journal. Also, I don't believe quantity is better than quality for residency. I'd like to believe that program directors are smarter than that.

Also first author basic science pubs are much harder to get than second author pubs. You can do one experiment, and if the results were good enough to be published, that will land you a second author paper. You can spend your summer in a productive lab and do a few different experiments and if you're lucky (and have a fair PI), you can get your name on those papers. It's basically right time/right place with a little hard work. However, getting a first author paper is a lot more work and I believe one first author paper is way more impressive than several second author papers.

Another way to get a lot of publications, is take a year off for research (still tough to get >2 first author basic science papers though) or do PhD.

The other thing is some people count acceptance of an abstract to a conference as a publication. It's still an achievement but in no way should this weigh the same as a basic science/clinical research paper. And unless I can find the abstract in something other than the booklet you pick up at the conference, I wouldn't even call it a publication.

^ This.
Students are so caught up in putting their names on the paper, but if it's not primary, then they essentially contributed very little. Program directors know that and you can't fool them. Who cares about crappy case reports, abstracts, posters?
What carries most weight is first authorship and that tells PDs whether or not you are capable of conducting independent research from beginning to end.

If one can conduct research (basic or clinical) at the level of clinicians, then at the interview, this will obviously show and that's where one will get +.

30+ pubs consisting mostly of 2nd,3rd authorships, abstracts, posters do not impress me at all. But a student with 10 primaries? Now that's impressive. But that student better make sure to publish at least 1 very high quality paper to hit the spot.

 

[CrimsonMirage]

Starting early and pursuing clinical research (over basic science) results in a ton of publications. Although, basic science publication will look more impressive and take forever to come out.

I did research during my first two years and continued into MS3. Once you establish yourself with a good mentor, pubs will follow 👍

 

[RadicalRadon]

^ This.
Students are so caught up in putting their names on the paper, but if it's not primary, then they essentially contributed very little. Program directors know that and you can't fool them. Who cares about crappy case reports, abstracts, posters?
What carries most weight is first authorship and that tells PDs whether or not you are capable of conducting independent research from beginning to end.

If one can conduct research (basic or clinical) at the level of clinicians, then at the interview, this will obviously show and that's where one will get +.

30+ pubs consisting mostly of 2nd,3rd authorships, abstracts, posters do not impress me at all. But a student with 10 primaries? Now that's impressive. But that student better make sure to publish at least 1 very high quality paper to hit the spot.

How would you feel about 6-8 first author abstracts at the premier annual meeting for the field? Assume papers to follow since those would be published during/after residency interviews.

I just wonder about how med student research is evaluated for the ultra-elite programs.

 

[bkprodigy]

How would you feel about 6-8 first author abstracts at the premier annual meeting for the field? Assume papers to follow since those would be published during/after residency interviews.

I just wonder about how med student research is evaluated for the ultra-elite programs.

Abstracts are abstracts. Peer-reviewed article is a different ball game.

 

[NickNaylor]

^ This.
Students are so caught up in putting their names on the paper, but if it's not primary, then they essentially contributed very little. Program directors know that and you can't fool them. Who cares about crappy case reports, abstracts, posters?
What carries most weight is first authorship and that tells PDs whether or not you are capable of conducting independent research from beginning to end.

If one can conduct research (basic or clinical) at the level of clinicians, then at the interview, this will obviously show and that's where one will get +.

30+ pubs consisting mostly of 2nd,3rd authorships, abstracts, posters do not impress me at all. But a student with 10 primaries? Now that's impressive. But that student better make sure to publish at least 1 very high quality paper to hit the spot.

Who the **** is publishing 10 first author papers in med school unless you're doing MD/PhD? Are you kidding me? You make it sound as if you just show up to lab one day and after X hours of work a pub magically appears. That is hardly how it works. It is entirely possible to spend a bunch of time in lab and have very little to show for it. This is very project- and mentor-dependent.

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[RadicalRadon]

Abstracts are abstracts. Peer-reviewed article is a different ball game.

Except PDs are assessing research potential. The timeframe for publication is years. Abstracts are evidence of this potential coupled w/ mentor LOR.

Very few high quality pubs are produced by med students and published during med school. Who are you kidding?

 

[ajh1983]

FYI, it's not that hard to get a few papers published if you plan ahead. I am doing 3-4 months of lab/bench research at U-Wisconsin medical school (ophtho/patho dept), and I will have 2 ophtho-specific pubs before I leave for MS1 this summer. I'm not dead set on ophtho, but it's a nice head start for any specialty for sure.

I just emailed this winter to the residency coordinator if any faculty needed volunteer research help with their projects before I move away for med, got 2 immediate replies. I'm actually in a paid research position through June with guaranteed pubs, one 1st author (individual portion of a larger pre-existing project), and one 2nd author (helping a lab-mate with her 2 year project). I may even get my hands into a 3rd project before I leave. And that's just PRE-MS1.

If you enjoy research and are likable, people will find work for you. You just need to network and know where to look.

 

[qxrt]

^ This.
Students are so caught up in putting their names on the paper, but if it's not primary, then they essentially contributed very little. Program directors know that and you can't fool them. Who cares about crappy case reports, abstracts, posters?
What carries most weight is first authorship and that tells PDs whether or not you are capable of conducting independent research from beginning to end.

If one can conduct research (basic or clinical) at the level of clinicians, then at the interview, this will obviously show and that's where one will get +.

30+ pubs consisting mostly of 2nd,3rd authorships, abstracts, posters do not impress me at all. But a student with 10 primaries? Now that's impressive. But that student better make sure to publish at least 1 very high quality paper to hit the spot.

10 primary authorships? Psh. My nonexistent cat could manage that much in one summer. I'd only be impressed by a med student who is the editor in chief of Science or Nature.

I'd personally be impressed by any authorship on any peer-reviewed publication (not case report). It's difficult enough to get a single legit publication during medical school. I don't hold everyone to ridiculous standards.

 

[bkprodigy]

Seems like I stirred the pot a bit. I have witnessed couple students who were able to do that and a few more who are on their way. I didn't imply it was the norm.

 

[chronicidal]

Seems like I stirred the pot a bit. I have witnessed couple students who were able to do that and a few more who are on their way. I didn't imply it was the norm.

Keep on stirring iff you can cite sources. I want to be inspired by real people.

 

[RadicalRadon]

Seems like I stirred the pot a bit. I have witnessed couple students who were able to do that and a few more who are on their way. I didn't imply it was the norm.

Keep on stirring iff you can cite sources. I want to be inspired by real people.

#ownedbyHMSstud

 

[Knocked Up]

Pubmed Courtney Pendleton. She is very real, very smart, and very beautiful.

Yes, it is possible to leave medical school with 10+ quality publications. Is it probable, no. Is getting a 270 on the boards probable? No. That is why we have all-stars and everyone else.

The key is to get into a surgical outcomes lab. Get a database and get to work. Translational studies with mice also amount to great work, but this can take a long time. If you are sitting in a lab and pipetting all day you are wasting time (unless you are an MD-Phd candidate). High yield work leads to quick results.

Getting started from day 1 + HHMI + great mentors = success.

 

[Hemichordate]

Pubmed Courtney Pendleton. She is very real, very smart, and very beautiful.

Yes, it is possible to leave medical school with 10+ quality publications. Is it probable, no. Is getting a 270 on the boards probable? No. That is why we have all-stars and everyone else.

The key is to get into a surgical outcomes lab. Get a database and get to work. Translational studies with mice also amount to great work, but this can take a long time. If you are sitting in a lab and pipetting all day you are wasting time (unless you are an MD-Phd candidate). High yield work leads to quick results.

Getting started from day 1 + HHMI + great mentors = success.

Are you her?

 

[drotoman]

Hey guys,

I know that the way the school years are structured vary from school to school, especially since I am from Canada while you are in the U.S. The question I want to ask is: How do some medical students have so many publications?

As far as I know, this is how it works – and please correct me if I am wrong: The first opportunity that most medical students take to engage in research is during the summer between MS1 and MS2. Now that is great, but how many publications do most people get out of during research during this time. I mean, if you are treating it like a full time job (40 - 50 hours a week), what is the net result? 1 publication? 2 publications?

I have heard that people do research during the summer between MS2 and MS3. However, isn't it during the summer that you will be taking time off to study hard for Step I?

MS3 is hectic.

Not sure about MS4.

How the hell do some people have like 7 or 8 publications? It's crazy!

Thanks for the help,
Lunasly.

Not that difficult to accomplish. For example, I already published 4 papers (only 1 first author paper though) during my undergrad years. And also it's not that hard to do 1-2 case reports during med school. Also, if you're involved in research projects in any way, your name will be on those papers, despite that fact that you might be the 12th author. It'll be still "your" publication on ERAS.

 

[alpinism]

Courtney also frequently wrote articles for Pharos. And yes, each article technically counts as a publication.

http://www.alphaomegaalpha.org/pharos/AOA-ThePharos-Winter2012.pdf

See page 6.

 

[Hemichordate]

But I thought ERAS only counts "scientific" publications?

 

[alpinism]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=751255

Here's a good summary of what ERAS counts as publications.

 

[lc0115]

.

 

[lc0115]

.

 

[NTF]

The "average" strong applicant (ie matching into derm, ortho, N/S, rad/onc, top 5 programs in less competitive specialties, etc) at my school had nowhere near the numbers of publications being talked about in this thread. But 2-3 during medical school was routine for the better students. Oftentimes 1 or more publications can be spun off from a decent after M1 summer project. Also it isn't hard to rattle off a few case reports for 1st authorship. Those who had more than 2-3 were either MD/PHD's or carrying over research from prior to medical school and were strongly established with a PI.

More power to the 30+ publishers, but it isn't realistic for most medical students.

 

[Substance]

Publishing requires the stars to align.

Hard work is important, but smart work is essential. That means, finding the right projects(ones that are possible to see to completion), finding the right PI (one that likes you not just as a monkey but as a person, who wants to see you succeed), and finding time(that means clearing your plate of distractions, even school-sanctioned ones).

You can start research early, you can get multiple things going, but if your PI is slow or disengaged, or the project just plainly cannot produce results (which happens more often than you think) then you just wasted a hell of a lot of time. And being a bushy-tailed naive first year medical student is the perfect way to be sucked into worthless projects, when you're none the wiser of what medicine entails.

Someone very smart once said to me:"if it doesn't get published, it never happened." This is true. Nobody cares about your failed projects. Nobody cares about the last place runner in the Olympics. Losers are losers. If you're going to do research, make sure it gets out there, and in a respectable journal (publishing on some open access pay-for-it-yourself rag is more embarrassing than not publishing at all).

 

[chronicidal]

Courtney Pendleton is a PGY-II neurosurgery resident at Thomas Jefferson University. She received her Bachelors' degree in Studio Art from NYU in 2004 and entered Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in 2007. She took an extra year as an HHMI-Ivy Medical Research Fellow in 2010-2011 and graduated with the class of 2012.

There are 58 items on Pubmed under the query (Courtney Pendleton[Author - Full]), date ranging from Jan 2008 to Apr 2013. (About 45 were published before Match Day.) Her research interests spanned four disciplines: 1) history of medicine, 2) clinical neurosurgery research involving retrospective chart review, 3) stem cells to treat brain tumors, 4) breast cancer.

By adding the search term (cushing[Title/Abstract] or cushing's[Title/Abstract]) not ("cushing's disease"), 48 items were identified as category 1. These were all essays or case reports based on the surgical records of Harvey Cushing from 1896 to 1912, obtained from the Hopkins archives. 21 of these 48 publications were first-author, including two in the AOA magazine Pharos, while the rest were second or third author.

The 10 non-Harvey Cushing articles were then categorized.

Category 2: One first-author in PLoS One.
Category 3: One first-author in Pediatr Neurosurg. Seven second or third author publications.
Category 4: The earliest paper, in a different lab: 10th author publication in PNAS.

Author list:
53 of the 58 publications had Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa as a co-author.
2 were with a neurosurgery resident (chart reviews).
1 was sole-author (essay in Pharos).
1 was with the lab of Ben Ho Park.
1 was a third-author case report in Spanish, from Spain, with a Hopkins undergrad. (???)

Step-by-step: how to be so prolific.

• Work in a lab at a hardcore medical school. Contribute enough that you get put somewhere on a paper to be published in the future.
• Get admitted to said hardcore medical school.
• Not satisfied with being 10th author on a nice basic science paper, decide you want to appear more hardcore.
• Find a hardcore, slave-driving mentor, such as the Alfredo.
• Play around with some basic science experiments and retrospective chart reviews.
• Find the records of a doctor who is extremely historically important and diversely-talented.
• Decide you found a gold mine and take a dedicated research year funded by HHMI.
• Write up everything, not as a book as is typical in the field of history of medicine, but as several dozen separate case reports and case series, as is typical for clinical medicine.
• Publish in 22 different sub-specialty journals.
• At the same time, help with half a dozen chart reviews and write your own.
• At the same time, put together coherent enough cell culture experiments to pass the sniff-test of publishing in PLoS One.

My take-away: neurosurgeons are crazy.

 

[Didierdrogba]

There are 58 items on Pubmed under the query (Courtney Pendleton[Author - Full]), date ranging from Jan 2008 to Apr 2013. (About 45 were published before Match Day.) Her research interests spanned four disciplines: 1) history of medicine, 2) clinical neurosurgery research involving retrospective chart review, 3) stem cells to treat brain tumors, 4) breast cancer.

My take-away: neurosurgeons are crazy.

wow seriously? she must be a real life troll of some sort

 

[BlaseFaire]

Haha. I laughed out loud.

 

[Hemichordate]

.

 

[pandoraone]

#2 from above (the *********). I came out of undergrad w/ my name attached to 5 publications (4 articles are published in peer-reviewed journals (the journals spead on a spectrum of "impressiveness"...1 article I have my name attached to (2nd author) actually was accepted by Nature (early bday/christmas/hannukah/kwanzaa present!) and the others appeared in lesser known, yet respectable, publications.

I feel honored to see my name in print...but know I'm damn lucky too. By complete chance the doctoral/post doc students in the research lab I joined as a yoing, silly unknowing, "thought it might be neat to add research to my resume" sophomore in undergrad (big 10 school) were some of the most productive & dedicated & brilliant scientists I've ever encountered. That moment of good fortune, combined with a dedicated work ethic (developed in part due to sheer excitement from the grad students regarding their research (thesis topics) being so contagious it iignited a fire under me as well), decently long/stressful hours at times (during the experimental/data collection phase of the aforementioned research requirements/lab work), I was privileged so as to add my name to the primary investigator's work & see my name in print too.

Dont get me wrong...I put in hundreds of hours over 2.5 years...but the catalyst to me being able to list publications...is (largely) in part due to the scientists/professors/physicians that I had the honor of working alongside.

....and with that amazing jump-off position...my (then-developed), now-current ability (research savvy / scientific know-how), has afforded me the opportunity to join a clinical research group at med school & allowed me to continue "adding to the number of studies / posters / pubs I can list on my ERAS app..." (3) *and of course 1 solid study/results beat 10 shaky ones any day*

Essentially...long story even longer...if you have no/few publications dont be discouraged...and dont be intimidated by the (majority) of people on SDN that say they have 10, 20, 1000 😉 pubs to their name...if its true (and we all know anonymous forums lend themselves to, um, "exaggerations" in a SDN poster's stats...often the secret ingredient was just plain(dumb) luck 🙂

Wow - impressive!

 

[Kaustikos]

I honestly can say I have very few publications. I was even told by my PI to turn down the opportunity to get involved in projects for those publications. Why? Because despite having the chance to get publications out the ass, I wouldn't be doing quality publications. Which was completely fine by me because I definitely enjoyed being involved with great research projects even if I wasn't involved the whole time/didn't get publications.

This was especially true at Lilly. Pharmaceuticals don't publish articles left and right. Pharmaceuticals focus more on drug development/refinement that don't lend much to "new ideas". Did I care? Nope. Again, it was about the experience. I saw the value in doing toxicology research that helped refine and filter potentially toxic/bad drugs into animals/humans. I developed an idea of how to think like a researcher through my triumphs and.... failures (lots of failures ). But the thing about working here is that it wasn't about publications but the projects you worked on and who you collaborated with. Doing projects with different departments/PI's spoke a lot about my abilities to do research and the value I could contribute. Which I honestly think is more important.

In the end - I have to reservations about not having publications because my experiences speak for themselves. My bosses/PI's valued my contribution and work. This was shown in the LOR I asked for Med School/Grad School. To me, personally, it seems that doing research in Med School shouldn't necessarily be about getting publications out the ass but developing a reputation that speaks about the value you add. I'd rather try to get a research position in a department I'm interested and have the people there say "OMG THIS GUY IS AMAZING!" But that's my opinion on the matter.

 

[Lunasly]

I am the man that created a thread with over 16,000 views!

 

[Kahreek]

Warning: Long message.

First off, some of the posters in here are way too jaded...nepotism is everywhere but ordinary people can work their butt off and do well. I know several people that came from backgrounds where they were first generation and had no connections and just raw work ethic. Sure you'll find people that "stroll in a get publications" but, are you kidding me, the vast majority of the ones that get a lot worked their tail off. I too had a bunch of first author pubs and it was sheer and pure hard work with a lot of perseverence. My stuff was a mix of basic science, review, and short clinical papers (case reports, pilot studies, etc.). You are always juggling several papers at the same time. It does not take long for faculty to figure out if you are efficient as hell and they will feed you as much as you will eat. In fact, you will stand out and then they will let you call the shots for the project idea after they are satisfied with your work. No faster way to get publications than to become truly passionate about the work that you are doing...it's a snowball. I'm staying in academic medicine and it's not to so call "circle jerk", it's because it's a beautiful avenue of discovery...if you're too jaded to believe this, then I'm sorry that you feel that way. To boot, some of the richest people I know personally were academicians...I'm sure that's going to piss of the private practitioners that thought they had the financial part figured out. Academics gives you the front seat for entrepreneurial work and there are obviously ethical and unethical ways to do that. You have to have the social networking know-how though.

Secondly, it's clear that there needs to be more clarity on what a pub is. Pubs include everything like: oral presentations, abstracts, reviews, case reports, clinical pilot studies, book chapters, basic science manuscripts, survey based studies, epidemiological studies (retrospective and cross-sectional chart reviews as two examples), clinical trial manuscripts (BTW this is a true black hole for medical students because clinical trials, unless a pilot study, take a long time to publish...keep this in mind).

Thirdly, you get control of how quickly you publish when you take control of the submission cycle (agree with drizz). To do this, you need to find the right mentor who is not lazy. You also need to convince them with prior work that you are a hard worker. Find their publication list...if they publish a lot, it's pretty unlikely that they are lazy.

Fourth, most people count pubs because, guess what, bigger is better in their minds. You as an applicant should know that in research you should have a mix of high risk and low risk projects. It's not rocket science. The low risk projects should be stuff that is going to get published more easily while the high risk (basic science work for me) takes time but when it succeeds, you get an amazing paper out of it. No, I was not a PhD. For that matter, I find PhDs to be much more burnt out than MDs who work their tail off. I know several people that were co-interviewers for derm who published like mad and received 20+ interviews and matched with a cake walk. I applied derm and had a truly laid back experience with the match. A lot of people complain that it shouldn't be about quantity...well it is an important factor...there is no better way to show dedication than to repeatedly publish especially when you are truly interested in your publications. Everyone does clinical rotations and can do well in them. There is no better way to shine for the competitive residencies than to have the publication record that puts you over the top.

Fifth, you have to stay humble. The quickest ticket to not having success in research is to let you ego get in the way. The more collaborative you are, the more you will get out of research and the more people will want to work with you. I find it interesting to see the posts from people that are clearly jaded who talk about favoritism as if it is rampant everywhere...it's present but it's not the rule. There is no way in hell favoritism allows you to be a repeated first author...you will have to do the work to get that.

Sixth, starting early is key. I agree that taking the first semester/quarter to feel things out academically is important. This is why it is so important to go to a P/F school if you can help it. Grades do nothing but create more competition in an overly competitive environment. Most residencies emphasize step 1, AOA, and third year grades...Of course AOA may take 1st and 2nd year grades into account so you have to be ready. That said, if you know you would like to work with a certain PI, start early. Meet with them and let them know of you interest and more important why you are interested. The why is important and the how of approaching the PI/mentor is perhaps the most important.

Seven, don't just chase the bright lights in front of you. Just because you went to Harvard, UCSF, Stanford, etc, does not make you a better and more efficient student. Actually, I know a bunch of kick ass people from these institutions but I know a bunch of kick ass people from other institutions as well. The kool-aid version is that the average student at a top 5 med school is brighter than the average student elsewhere. What a great and useless line. Last time I checked, I wasn't planning on being average and last time I checked with patients, they don't want an average doctor. I know a bunch of people from top 5 medical schools that were also lazy as hell and wouldn't send any family members to them at all. Competitive residencies take from the cream of the crop and school doesn't make a difference. If you're cream of the crop, you'll make your path and find the right mentors to help you do that.

Like Drizz implies, everyone went into medicine because of someone or something that inspired you so you are biased coming in. Waiting until 3rd year to explore is a bad idea on so many levels. I think it's just bad advice and I never advise med students to wait until 3rd year to figure it out. If you have interests, explore early. If you wait until 3rd year, you will make decisions based on how you got along with your team rather than what the field may truly offer to you...you need to know that. Also, if you don't explore early, you may miss out on fields that aren't offered in the 3rd year, especially if you do have an interest.

Finally to answer the hypothetical question of isn't one good first author pub as good as having a first author AND a bunch of middle author pubs...yes, the one good first author pub should be counted the same and that a bunch of middle author pubs may not be that valuable. In fact, I love it when people talk about how they published in Cell when they were a fourth or a fifth author...BUT, rest assured that 10 first author publications will trump your one good first author paper (unless it is Nature, Cell, Science, JAMA, NEJM, etc), especially if there are a few good first author papers in those 10. Productivity and hard work are very desirable qualities and productivity in research is a very tangible evidence of this.

Guys, it's not rocket science. That said, no one said it was easy. That's why there are only a few that can put in the work to get there. But, it's not as hard as you think. Just so that you know I did not go to a top 25 medical school...I know that I had way more interviews than people that went to top 5 medical schools and I interviewed at their schools too. Yes, I have a social life and passionate hobbies/interests that are way outside of medicine.

If you prefer to be jaded about the process, then suit yourself. I realize that people have had a variety of experiences and some people really did have bad experiences and bad mentors...so I do respect the other point of view and my heart goes out and I'm truly sorry to hear about anyone that has been taken advantage of or screwed.

Sorry but acadeimc medicine has a lot circle jerk, And i've noticed this is worse in USA than Canada. And being a circle jerk doesnt mean that people dont work hard. They do.

 

[g8orlife]

A rising 4th year at my school has published 2 papers each year mainly via outcomes research. He found a research group early in MS1 and has worked with them ever since. He'll probably add >2 more in this last year.

 

[Lunasly]

Warning: Long message.

First off, some of the posters in here are way too jaded...nepotism is everywhere but ordinary people can work their butt off and do well. I know several people that came from backgrounds where they were first generation and had no connections and just raw work ethic. Sure you'll find people that "stroll in a get publications" but, are you kidding me, the vast majority of the ones that get a lot worked their tail off. I too had a bunch of first author pubs and it was sheer and pure hard work with a lot of perseverence. My stuff was a mix of basic science, review, and short clinical papers (case reports, pilot studies, etc.). You are always juggling several papers at the same time. It does not take long for faculty to figure out if you are efficient as hell and they will feed you as much as you will eat. In fact, you will stand out and then they will let you call the shots for the project idea after they are satisfied with your work. No faster way to get publications than to become truly passionate about the work that you are doing...it's a snowball. I'm staying in academic medicine and it's not to so call "circle jerk", it's because it's a beautiful avenue of discovery...if you're too jaded to believe this, then I'm sorry that you feel that way. To boot, some of the richest people I know personally were academicians...I'm sure that's going to piss of the private practitioners that thought they had the financial part figured out. Academics gives you the front seat for entrepreneurial work and there are obviously ethical and unethical ways to do that. You have to have the social networking know-how though.

Secondly, it's clear that there needs to be more clarity on what a pub is. Pubs include everything like: oral presentations, abstracts, reviews, case reports, clinical pilot studies, book chapters, basic science manuscripts, survey based studies, epidemiological studies (retrospective and cross-sectional chart reviews as two examples), clinical trial manuscripts (BTW this is a true black hole for medical students because clinical trials, unless a pilot study, take a long time to publish...keep this in mind).

Thirdly, you get control of how quickly you publish when you take control of the submission cycle (agree with drizz). To do this, you need to find the right mentor who is not lazy. You also need to convince them with prior work that you are a hard worker. Find their publication list...if they publish a lot, it's pretty unlikely that they are lazy.

Fourth, most people count pubs because, guess what, bigger is better in their minds. You as an applicant should know that in research you should have a mix of high risk and low risk projects. It's not rocket science. The low risk projects should be stuff that is going to get published more easily while the high risk (basic science work for me) takes time but when it succeeds, you get an amazing paper out of it. No, I was not a PhD. For that matter, I find PhDs to be much more burnt out than MDs who work their tail off. I know several people that were co-interviewers for derm who published like mad and received 20+ interviews and matched with a cake walk. I applied derm and had a truly laid back experience with the match. A lot of people complain that it shouldn't be about quantity...well it is an important factor...there is no better way to show dedication than to repeatedly publish especially when you are truly interested in your publications. Everyone does clinical rotations and can do well in them. There is no better way to shine for the competitive residencies than to have the publication record that puts you over the top.

Fifth, you have to stay humble. The quickest ticket to not having success in research is to let you ego get in the way. The more collaborative you are, the more you will get out of research and the more people will want to work with you. I find it interesting to see the posts from people that are clearly jaded who talk about favoritism as if it is rampant everywhere...it's present but it's not the rule. There is no way in hell favoritism allows you to be a repeated first author...you will have to do the work to get that.

Sixth, starting early is key. I agree that taking the first semester/quarter to feel things out academically is important. This is why it is so important to go to a P/F school if you can help it. Grades do nothing but create more competition in an overly competitive environment. Most residencies emphasize step 1, AOA, and third year grades...Of course AOA may take 1st and 2nd year grades into account so you have to be ready. That said, if you know you would like to work with a certain PI, start early. Meet with them and let them know of you interest and more important why you are interested. The why is important and the how of approaching the PI/mentor is perhaps the most important.

Seven, don't just chase the bright lights in front of you. Just because you went to Harvard, UCSF, Stanford, etc, does not make you a better and more efficient student. Actually, I know a bunch of kick ass people from these institutions but I know a bunch of kick ass people from other institutions as well. The kool-aid version is that the average student at a top 5 med school is brighter than the average student elsewhere. What a great and useless line. Last time I checked, I wasn't planning on being average and last time I checked with patients, they don't want an average doctor. I know a bunch of people from top 5 medical schools that were also lazy as hell and wouldn't send any family members to them at all. Competitive residencies take from the cream of the crop and school doesn't make a difference. If you're cream of the crop, you'll make your path and find the right mentors to help you do that.

Like Drizz implies, everyone went into medicine because of someone or something that inspired you so you are biased coming in. Waiting until 3rd year to explore is a bad idea on so many levels. I think it's just bad advice and I never advise med students to wait until 3rd year to figure it out. If you have interests, explore early. If you wait until 3rd year, you will make decisions based on how you got along with your team rather than what the field may truly offer to you...you need to know that. Also, if you don't explore early, you may miss out on fields that aren't offered in the 3rd year, especially if you do have an interest.

Finally to answer the hypothetical question of isn't one good first author pub as good as having a first author AND a bunch of middle author pubs...yes, the one good first author pub should be counted the same and that a bunch of middle author pubs may not be that valuable. In fact, I love it when people talk about how they published in Cell when they were a fourth or a fifth author...BUT, rest assured that 10 first author publications will trump your one good first author paper (unless it is Nature, Cell, Science, JAMA, NEJM, etc), especially if there are a few good first author papers in those 10. Productivity and hard work are very desirable qualities and productivity in research is a very tangible evidence of this.

Guys, it's not rocket science. That said, no one said it was easy. That's why there are only a few that can put in the work to get there. But, it's not as hard as you think. Just so that you know I did not go to a top 25 medical school...I know that I had way more interviews than people that went to top 5 medical schools and I interviewed at their schools too. Yes, I have a social life and passionate hobbies/interests that are way outside of medicine.

If you prefer to be jaded about the process, then suit yourself. I realize that people have had a variety of experiences and some people really did have bad experiences and bad mentors...so I do respect the other point of view and my heart goes out and I'm truly sorry to hear about anyone that has been taken advantage of or screwed.

Quick question, but how did you approach your PI when first starting out? Do you stay honest and say you're here for the pubs?

 

[Frazier]

Quick question, but how did you approach your PI when first starting out? Do you stay honest and say you're here for the pubs?

No, that would be kind of obnoxious. You would rather say that you are seeking an opportunity that will permit you to continue strengthening your CV.

 

[evilbooyaa]

No, that would be kind of obnoxious. You would rather say that you are seeking an opportunity that will permit you to continue strengthening your CV.

In medical school, those words literally translate into "PUBS OR GTFO". There is no non-semantic difference between saying you are there to "strengthen your CV" vs "I'm here for pubs. Preferably one in Nature, followed by one in an Irish."

 

[Frazier]

In medical school, those words literally translate into "PUBS OR GTFO". There is no non-semantic difference between saying you are there to "strengthen your CV" vs "I'm here for pubs. Preferably one in Nature, followed by one in an Irish."

Sure, but it isn't supposed to be misleading. More about tact.

Saying "I am only interested in pubs" is akin to saying to an adcom "I'm only interested in the Benjamins"

...even though it may convey the same message (ie that you hope to have a concrete outcome from your research efforts), I doubt saying "pubs or gtfo" will deliver the same response from a PI.

 

[madchemist89]

Sure, but it isn't supposed to be misleading. More about tact.

Saying "I am only interested in pubs" is akin to saying to an adcom "I'm only interested in the Benjamins"

...even though it may convey the same message (ie that you hope to have a concrete outcome from your research efforts), I doubt saying "pubs or gtfo" will deliver the same response from a PI.

I told my PI that I was looking for as many publications as possible. He said, "Good. We have the same goal."

 

[g8orlife]

I told my PI that I was looking for as many publications as possible. He said, "Good. We have the same goal."

Sounds like something my PI would say.

 

[Frazier]

I told my PI that I was looking for as many publications as possible. He said, "Good. We have the same goal."

Excellent.

However, I'm not sure what this adds or detracts from my point, namely that saying "pubs or gtfo" isn't the smartest way to approach a PI for the first time.

None of this "oh, well I said..."

You saying "I was looking for as many publications as possible" is not saying "pubs or gtfo".

...It sounds like your comment was synonymous with "I'm looking to strengthen my CV as much as possible".

 

[evilbooyaa]

Excellent.

However, I'm not sure what this adds or detracts from my point, namely that saying "pubs or gtfo" isn't the smartest way to approach a PI for the first time.

None of this "oh, well I said..."

You saying "I was looking for as many publications as possible" is not saying "pubs or gtfo".

...It sounds like your comment was synonymous with "I'm looking to strengthen my CV as much as possible".

I wasn't insinuating that you should actually say to your PI, "PUBS OR GTFO". I think stating that you are there for pubs (as in my slightly edited last line "I'm here for pubs. Preferably one in Nature, followed by an Irish") is reasonable (as other posters have also commented). I just think that beating around the bush instead of stating why you are putting your time into that lab is a waste of everyone's time.