How does it look to get published as an undergrad? how do med schools view that

[mrh125]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm in my last quarter at my university and I was offered a research internship in my major (Evolution and ecology) and if I do really well I might get published. How do med schools view this? I'm trying to figure out if it will be worth doing because it'll take time away from my classes and mcat study time.My other e.c.s are pretty average:
I've shadowed a cardiologist for a few years, shadowed/worked with a cosmetic dentist for around a thousand hours.
I did generic busy work research in plant biology (entered data in excel, repotted plants), and worked as part of a professor's global health program designed to increase literacy in India and africa, help prevent diseases, and reduce contamination of food supplies from aflatoxin. Really though I just spent upteen hundred hours building their website and debugging horrendously broken code, doing random research on the conditions of various places the prof was interested in helping, and helping throw together grant submissions at the 11th hour while getting screamed at by everyone lol. He also promised to help get me published as part of one of his enzyme projects or global health projects, but that always fell through because he was completely unresponsive no matter how persistent I was.
Oh and I've also done misc charity/non-profit work.

Anyways, would getting published as an undergrad make my e.c.s look a lot better or are they ok as is? I've always wanted to get published, but now might not be the best time especially if my E.C.s are fine.

 

[GoPelicans]

What schools are you aiming for? If top 20, a publication might turn heads. If not, I think just having research experience on your app is probably good enough. If you think the time commitment of doing this research will hinder your ability to get a MCAT score compatible with the tier of schools you are aiming for, then IMO it's not worth the risk.

 

[CyberMaxx]

Over the past decade, research has become an important part of a medical school application. Many schools, especially those with strong research programs, would like to see applicants have some research experience. The more independent your research experience is the better. It is not necessary to have a publication in order to have good research experience. As long as you have done something that you are interested in and are able to talk about it intelligently, that should be sufficient.

That being said, it is always a plus to have presentations and publications.

 

[CyberMaxx]

double post

 

[gyngyn]

Over the past decade, research has become an important part of a medical school application. Many schools, especially those with strong research programs, would like to see applicants have some research experience. The more independent your research experience is the better. It is not necessary to have a publication in order to have good research experience. As long as you have done something that you are interested in and are able to talk about it intelligently, that should be sufficient.

That being said, it is always a plus to have presentations and publications.

Agree. Especially with the bolded.

 

[TriagePreMed]

If it will hurt your MCAT, don't do it. There are no guarantees to getting published an in what time frame. I've been working at my lab close to a year and half with a post-doc that's been here 3 years. We're still a good 4 months away from a very minor paper and about 6 from a good paper. Initially, this project was thought to be completed in about a 1.5-2 years. Surprising things happen in research though.

 

[sunshine02]

An old thread but just wondering...if you only have research experience but no publications to show for it, will you be at a disadvantage for top 20 med schools?

 

[jeghaber]

An old thread but just wondering...if you only have research experience but no publications to show for it, will you be at a disadvantage for top 20 med schools?

No. Publications are not the norm and nor are they expected. Ever.

 

[Goro]

It looks very good and if a PI is on the interview panel, s/he will probably hit you up to come into their lab! It's hard to get published, student, grad student, or post-doc.

I'm in my last quarter at my university and I was offered a research internship in my major (Evolution and ecology) and if I do really well I might get published. How do med schools view this? I'm trying to figure out if it will be worth doing because it'll take time away from my classes and mcat study time.My other e.c.s are pretty average:
I've shadowed a cardiologist for a few years, shadowed/worked with a cosmetic dentist for around a thousand hours.
I did generic busy work research in plant biology (entered data in excel, repotted plants), and worked as part of a professor's global health program designed to increase literacy in India and africa, help prevent diseases, and reduce contamination of food supplies from aflatoxin. Really though I just spent upteen hundred hours building their website and debugging horrendously broken code, doing random research on the conditions of various places the prof was interested in helping, and helping throw together grant submissions at the 11th hour while getting screamed at by everyone lol. He also promised to help get me published as part of one of his enzyme projects or global health projects, but that always fell through because he was completely unresponsive no matter how persistent I was.
Oh and I've also done misc charity/non-profit work.

Anyways, would getting published as an undergrad make my e.c.s look a lot better or are they ok as is? I've always wanted to get published, but now might not be the best time especially if my E.C.s are fine.

 

[487806]

An old thread but just wondering...if you only have research experience but no publications to show for it, will you be at a disadvantage for top 20 med schools?

No. Publications are not the norm and nor are they expected. Ever.

Agreed with jeghaber. The same is also true in applying to MSTPs. Publications aren't expected at all.

 

[plumhill]

Does publishing an abstract (not conference proceedings) in a really, really low-impact journal count for anything?

 

[jeghaber]

It looks very good and if a PI is on the interview panel, s/he will probably hit you up to come into their lab! It's hard to get published, student, grad student, or post-doc.

Just to append: hard, yes -- but the critical difference is that for that group the expectation to publish does in fact exist. Not so for a medical school applicant.

 

[Goro]

Very true.

Just to append: hard, yes -- but the critical difference is that for that group the expectation to publish does in fact exist. Not so for a medical school applicant.

 

[JJMrK]

No. Publications are not the norm and nor are they expected. Ever.

Agreed with jeghaber. The same is also true in applying to MSTPs. Publications aren't expected at all.

I agree for the most part. However, publications are becoming more common.

If you are applying to MSTP programs, you probably should have at least a presentation or two, IMO. You need to know what you're getting into.

 

[knv2u]

. If you think the time commitment of doing this research will hinder your ability to get a MCAT score compatible with the tier of schools you are aiming for, then IMO it's not worth the risk.

Or the OP could take gap year(s) and study for the MCAT later. Why not have his cake and eat it too? Depending on his goals and schools of interest, this may be worth it.

 

[compstomper]

While I'm not an authority on the matter, I can tell you my experience on the interview trail. The subject of my research came up at every interview (11 so far, more to come🙂). My research was published after my AMCAS submission but before my interviews, so I sent schools updates before my interviews. Most of my interviewers did ask if I was published, and made note of the facts (when it was published, where, etc.) in detail.

So it stands to reason that a significant number of schools do care about the distinction between published research and non-published research. Unfortunately I have no idea how much weight it carries to have one or the other.

 

[polyatomic]

While I'm not an authority on the matter, I can tell you my experience on the interview trail. The subject of my research came up at every interview (11 so far, more to come🙂). My research was published after my AMCAS submission but before my interviews, so I sent schools updates before my interviews. Most of my interviewers did ask if I was published, and made note of the facts (when it was published, where, etc.) in detail.

So it stands to reason that a significant number of schools do care about the distinction between published research and non-published research. Unfortunately I have no idea how much weight it carries to have one or the other.

I agree - at every one-on-one interview I had I was asked about my research and publication. I think the importance of it depends on who you're talking to/who's reading your materials. One of my interviewers was a widely successful MD/PhD, and my research seemed to be all he cared about.

 

[LizzyM]

While I'm not an authority on the matter, I can tell you my experience on the interview trail. The subject of my research came up at every interview (11 so far, more to come🙂). My research was published after my AMCAS submission but before my interviews, so I sent schools updates before my interviews. Most of my interviewers did ask if I was published, and made note of the facts (when it was published, where, etc.) in detail.

So it stands to reason that a significant number of schools do care about the distinction between published research and non-published research. Unfortunately I have no idea how much weight it carries to have one or the other.

Of course, we do care if you get published. That's a feather in your cap! That said, being asked about your research during an interview is routine because it can be used as a measure of your ability to take a complex subject and explain it in a way that a non-expert can understand. This is an important skill to have as a physician.

 

[jeghaber]

While I'm not an authority on the matter, I can tell you my experience on the interview trail. The subject of my research came up at every interview (11 so far, more to come🙂). My research was published after my AMCAS submission but before my interviews, so I sent schools updates before my interviews. Most of my interviewers did ask if I was published, and made note of the facts (when it was published, where, etc.) in detail.

So it stands to reason that a significant number of schools do care about the distinction between published research and non-published research. Unfortunately I have no idea how much weight it carries to have one or the other.

Interesting. Not to argue that research isn't often an important part of one's application or that it does in fact come up often in interviews, but I'll add my own data points. My research probably was at least mentioned in most of my interviews. However only a few (~5) commented on my publication and even fewer wanted to actually discuss it (2). When the interviewers brought it up it was mostly as a side comment of "..oh and I see that you've published..good good.." before asking about something else -- sometimes research related, sometimes not.

In any case, research is never going to be bad. Publications are never going to hurt. But I'm still sticking inclined to say that they're not necessary. As others have mentioned in this thread, it might be slightly different for the most competitive MSTP programs, but even then I doubt most (as in >50%) have published. Feel free to correct me on that speculative statistic though 😛

 

[nemo123]

Interesting. Not to argue that research isn't often an important part of one's application or that it does in fact come up often in interviews, but I'll add my own data points. My research probably was at least mentioned in most of my interviews. However only a few (~5) commented on my publication and even fewer wanted to actually discuss it (2). When the interviewers brought it up it was mostly as a side comment of "..oh and I see that you've published..good good.." before asking about something else -- sometimes research related, sometimes not.

In any case, research is never going to be bad. Publications are never going to hurt. But I'm still sticking inclined to say that they're not necessary. As others have mentioned in this thread, it might be slightly different for the most competitive MSTP programs, but even then I doubt most (as in >50%) have published. Feel free to correct me on that speculative statistic though 😛

Same with me. Out of all the interviews I've been to, only 1 interviewer wanted to talk about my research experiences and my pub (basically asked me if she thought my Alzheimer's research would potentially be used in the future for treatments). That's it. My interviewers always wanted to talk about the other ECs in my app and my background.

 

[kyamh]

Same with me. Out of all the interviews I've been to, only 1 interviewer wanted to talk about my research experiences and my pub (basically asked me if she thought my Alzheimer's research would potentially be used in the future for treatments). That's it. My interviewers always wanted to talk about the other ECs in my app and my background.

Completely true here..I think 3, maybe 4 interviewers talked to me about my research. I only got around to explaining my science twice. This is particularly strange because ressearch is by far the most prominent thing on my application as well as the most impressive. I am happy to talk about other parts of my application, but it's a shame that I haven't had the chance to showcase my enthusiasm for my full time job. Almost every interviewer, however, has wanted to talk about the work I did in college (as in, work for money) - nothing particularly interesting aside from climbing up the chain of command over 4 years

 

[SN12357]

Completely true here..I think 3, maybe 4 interviewers talked to me about my research. I only got around to explaining my science twice. This is particularly strange because ressearch is by far the most prominent thing on my application as well as the most impressive. I am happy to talk about other parts of my application, but it's a shame that I haven't had the chance to showcase my enthusiasm for my full time job. Almost every interviewer, however, has wanted to talk about the work I did in college (as in, work for money) - nothing particularly interesting aside from climbing up the chain of command over 4 years

I agree. I've gotten a mix but in general my research has been talked about much less in interviews than I thought it would be. Maybe because it's the strongest part of my application and in the interview they want to focus on weaknesses? The thing about that is its hard to tell how much the research was weighted in getting the interview.

I agree, though, publications are a positive but absolutely not required even for the top research programs.