How important are publications?

[musik2468]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How important is it to be published as an undergraduate, especially when you're applying to top research-ranked medical schools? Let's say I've been working in the same lab for 2-3 years by the time I apply, but don't have my name on any papers. Am I screwed?
How many undergrads actually end up getting published (not necessarily first author, but some kind of authorship)? Also, does the PI typically initiate it, or does the undergraduate have to beg and pester?

 

[Greonis]

Screwed? Certainly not. Despite what you see here on SDN, the majority of undergraduates do not have any publications of their own. Many of said undergraduates will go on to be accepted at a wide gamut of medical schools.

From what I've read, I get the sense that having a publication will certainly help you (moreso at research-oriented schools), but not having one does not hurt you at all. There are two reasons for this: being published is often a product of luck/circumstance, and what you personally get out of the research (working in a lab, collaborating, exposure to the applicative areas of science, etc...) is of far more importance.

 

[enjoydrywax]

How important is it to be published as an undergraduate, especially when you're applying to top research-ranked medical schools? Let's say I've been working in the same lab for 2-3 years by the time I apply, but don't have my name on any papers. Am I screwed?
How many undergrads actually end up getting published (not necessarily first author, but some kind of authorship)? Also, does the PI typically initiate it, or does the undergraduate have to beg and pester?

If you want to go to a top-ranked research school (i.e harvard, ucsf etc.) then I would say it's pretty much necessary to guarantee you an interview spot. Of course, it isn't REQUIRED, but the trend seems to indicate otherwise.. I assume I am in the minority with this opinion and will probably be rebutted as such. In terms of what number author, it really doesn't matter. Second author and third author are safe bets because it's hilariously rare to find a UG first author paper in a PEER REVIEWED journal. It just doesn't happen.

Also remember that these publications have to be in SERIOUS journals, which means NOT your school's monthly undergraduate research lets-make-everybody-feel-good journal. Honestly if I were on an adcom and I saw somebody pass that off as a publication I would probably laugh. Again, I am probably in the minority on this one.

Also if you are in a lab for 2-3 years and have nothing to show for it (i.e a publication or even poster presentation) I would say that would raise some ears. They would probably assume you were just there to handle the bitch work; running westerns, preparing samples, etc etc. Probably means you didn't have your own mini project.

Remember though: even if you don't you still aren't screwed, just at a disadvantage if you want to go to a top ten research institution.

To address your last few questions, I am not sure how many UGs get published. Personally I think it's around 25%, but don't quote me on that one--that data is strictly anecdotal. Also, it really depends on your lab. I did bull**** work for 2 years in my lab and my postdoc really felt bad for me so he slapped my name on two papers as second author. Granted I generated just about all the data for those papers, but I didn't write a single word or produce a single figure. Honestly, I couldn't even tell what the papers are about and before every single interview I have to review them again just to brush up. I have classmates who have worked twice as long and four times as hard with nothing to show for it because they have really rigorous/serious PIs. Haha, this game is so subjective and unfair that sometimes I feel like I got away with murder. Anyway good luck.

 

[fizzle]

If you want to go to a top-ranked research school (i.e harvard, ucsf etc.) then I would say it's pretty much necessary to guarantee you an interview spot. Of course, it isn't REQUIRED, but the trend seems to indicate otherwise.. I assume I am in the minority with this opinion and will probably be rebutted as such.

This isn't really an opinion; either most interviewed applicants have publications or they don't. My guess is that most don't, even at the top schools.

 

[StPlayrXtreme]

I don't think the publication matters as much as the nature of your research. For example, if you took on a significant project of your own and wrote an honors thesis, I think that can be just as good.

There are a lot of people out there that have a primary goal of publishing...It's nice to be published, but I'd rather work on a really cool project team than work on something less interesting for the sake of getting published.

Personally, I do research because I like my project team, it's very focused towards biomedical device design...I think it's more significant knowing that my work might help the project team in producing a device, and I really don't care if my name gets on a paper. I don't care too much about the publication part, good thing I'm going into medicine and not a PhD program.

 

[Excelsius]

How important is it to be published as an undergraduate, especially when you're applying to top research-ranked medical schools? Let's say I've been working in the same lab for 2-3 years by the time I apply, but don't have my name on any papers. Am I screwed?
How many undergrads actually end up getting published (not necessarily first author, but some kind of authorship)? Also, does the PI typically initiate it, or does the undergraduate have to beg and pester?

SDN doesn't really represent your average applicant. Something like only 10% of all medschool applicants are on SDN. Of those here, majority are well above national averages, likely because for anyone to actually spend so much time on a forum there probably is a large drive to compete. Another factor is that more successful students are more vociferous about their accomplishments. Therefore, keep all of this in mind when you assume anything about applicants. Here is some info for you: a lot of undergrads that I have met have never done research. The small percentage that does do research, the idea of being published is almost inconceivable to them. Many students go to medshool, reach residency, and still don't have a single publication, i.e., even many med students don't have any pubications.

If you don't like research, it is highly unlikely that you will succeed in it as it takes a lot of work, if done properly. If you do like it, just do your best and whether you get published or not, your work will be not go unnoticed. This is because your PI will write you a great letter of recommendation that will open a lot of doors for you. I think generally SDNers don't realize how crucial LORs are. I'd argue that great LOR from a PI with no publication is much better than a publication with an insignificant LOR (unless it's a first author). One of the reasons for this is that some labs do publish the name of the student if he/she was there just doing scutwork. This is why LOR is so important.

 

[JJMrK]

it's hilariously rare to find a UG first author paper in a PEER REVIEWED journal. It just doesn't happen.

Anecdotal evidence for sure, but I have two friends who are first authors as undergrads. So it might be rare, but it does happen.

 

[Lukkie]

there's tons of throwaway journals anyone can get published in

 

[135892]

...There are two reasons for this: being published is often a product of luck/circumstance...

Yeah, this is definitley true in some circumstances. I mean I got a publication (not first author) for doing about 6 months of, what I would consider mediocre, work. I didn't even really know what I was doing for my project, so this was pure luck on my part. But in reality, first author publications are what truly matter. And I doubt most applicants have a first author pub (although I'm sure a significant amount do).

And I think that your PI will talk to you about potential publications. It definitely wouldn't hurt to ask (nicely) though. You should never beg or pester anyone for something like this.

 

[MadEvans]

Also, does the PI typically initiate it, or does the undergraduate have to beg and pester?

I buy all of the researchers in my department chocolates whether I worked with them or not, and I have 13 publications. They are really good chocolates.

 

[madamebovary]

For Md/PHD programs, it is kinda important, but i mean getting publishable data takes time and luck. I remember talking to one representative from U miami mdphd program, they said on avg the accepted students get 1-3 published papers. But like i said that is for md/phd

 

[RoyBasch]

How important is it to be published as an undergraduate, especially when you're applying to top research-ranked medical schools? Let's say I've been working in the same lab for 2-3 years by the time I apply, but don't have my name on any papers. Am I screwed?
How many undergrads actually end up getting published (not necessarily first author, but some kind of authorship)? Also, does the PI typically initiate it, or does the undergraduate have to beg and pester?

I wouldn't say its common, and definitely not required. But, if you can get a publication, its definitely a huge boon to your application, especially for some schools. You should not have to beg and pester, if you have done enough work to merit an authorship, you'll get one. If you have not done enough work, then no begging or pestering will make a difference.

In the lab I worked in it was a pretty simple rule: If any quantitative or really crucial qualitative data directly gathered by you (i.e. the experiment was run by you and the data is in your lab notes) was used in the paper it merited an authorship. Example, if an assay you set up were used in a figure that actually makes the final edit, then you get an authorship. As far as which author (2nd, 3rd, 4th...) its sort of a question of what percentage of the data you gathered.

If you have gathered data used in figures and you have no authorship you might want to try to negotiate with the PI.
-Roy

Edit: 25% of applicants published? I seriously doubt that. Maybe among SDN applicants.

Also I have heard that for a few schools such as UCSF, Harvard, and Stanford publications are kind of a de facto requirement like clinical experience (i.e. not required but nobody gets in without it). But these are just a handful of the VERY best RESEARCH oriented schools. Also for MD/PhD it's a bigger deal.

 

[JJMrK]

there's tons of throwaway journals anyone can get published in

If you're talking about my post, they were legit journals.

 

[fizzle]

In the lab I worked in it was a pretty simple rule: If any quantitative or really crucial qualitative data directly gathered by you (i.e. the experiment was run by you and the data is in your lab notes) was used in the paper it merited an authorship. Example, if an assay you set up were used in a figure that actually makes the final edit, then you get an authorship. As far as which author (2nd, 3rd, 4th...) its sort of a question of what percentage of the data you gathered.

If you have gathered data used in figures and you have no authorship you might want to try to negotiate with the PI.
-Roy

Though some labs may grant authorship for running experiments and collecting data, there are also many labs that do not consider this as grounds for authorship (I'm just saying this so that you all don't pester your PI for an authorship). At the labs that I've worked at, authorship was granted simply on intellectual contribution--if you contributed a new idea or method that helped the project succeed, then you got authorship. Simply running experiments/gathering data and following instructions was the role of the technician and wasn't considered grounds for authorship, no matter how important the data.

In other words, treat research as a learning experience, and don't feel entitled to an authorship for simply following your mentor's instructions! Author-ships are inherently difficult things to get; they represent work that no one has done before. Undergraduates are certainly not expected to have any.

 

[cyclin M]

there's tons of throwaway journals anyone can get published in

No this isn't true.

Think about it, if you're a pre-med loser who just wants a quickie paper with your name on it you probably want to publish in a low impact factor journal because frankly you just don't give a damn.

But as professor and expert in the field, the PI will kill himself before he resigns his name and reputation to a half-assed "research" paper (read book report) in a no name journal. Waste of resources, space, time.

So good luck finding a PI that will throw away his rep and resources to let you publish in these no name journals.

Publishing is not required.

But publishing will put you above the pack. How much? Not enough to cover a low GPA or low MCAT, but it will help you get accepted versus another guy with similar stats and no publication.

 

[BlueElmo]

Even if I do not get published, if I can get a good letter of rec from the PI, will that get me some points?

 

[virusgirl]

Even if I do not get published, if I can get a good letter of rec from the PI, will that get me some points?

Absolutely. Research experience is an important part of your application, not because you want to show off your name in Cell or Nature, but because it enables you to develop important analytical skills that will be very useful as you embark on a career that requires you to stay up to date on scientific developments. Publications are just an added bonus at this stage in the game. The strong LOR from your PI is going to carry more weight than your publication.

Honestly, I question the value of publications in the med school application process. While there are some (exceedingly rare) exceptions, an undergrad is not likely to be first/corresponding author, which is the author that really counts. Being second, third, etc. is very much a reflection of what your PI's attitude toward student authors is, and because it's such a crap shoot, I am not sure what weight such publications carry.

 

[Ebola Virus]

Absolutely. Research experience is an important part of your application, not because you want to show off your name in Cell or Nature, but because it enables you to develop important analytical skills that will be very useful as you embark on a career that requires you to stay up to date on scientific developments. Publications are just an added bonus at this stage in the game. The strong LOR from your PI is going to carry more weight than your publication.

Honestly, I question the value of publications in the med school application process. While there are some (exceedingly rare) exceptions, an undergrad is not likely to be first/corresponding author, which is the author that really counts. Being second, third, etc. is very much a reflection of what your PI's attitude toward student authors is, and because it's such a crap shoot, I am not sure what weight such publications carry.

I agree that research is an IMPORTANT part in the medical school application, since it is an area that distinguishes one pre-med from another. For MD/Ph.D program, it is necessary to have a few publications as well as a LOR from the PI. For MD programs, it isn't necessary to have publications, but a strong LOR from the PI would be needed.

Speaking from experiences, I know that my publication (as first author and peer-reviewed), helped secure a couple of my acceptances. It's nice to throw a cherry on top of a great interview by handing each interviewers your publication. It's true that the publication in it of itself would not make or break the interview, but it does change the atmosphere a bit when the person you're interviewing with has a Ph.D, who mainly conducts research.

What's more important than just having a publication is being able to talk about your research. Your interviewers wouldn't be impress if you were second author on a high IF paper if all you remember doing were making solutions and feeding lab rats. But the bottomline is this, secure a LOR from the PI even if you didn't have any publication.

 

[drelizabeth292]

if you're doing straight MD, you dont have to have publications. does it look cool? yeah : IF you know what you're talking about. i think its more important that you learned about the research process etc.

 

[scarletgirl777]

If you want to go to a top-ranked research school (i.e harvard, ucsf etc.) then I would say it's pretty much necessary to guarantee you an interview spot. Of course, it isn't REQUIRED, but the trend seems to indicate otherwise.. I assume I am in the minority with this opinion and will probably be rebutted as such. In terms of what number author, it really doesn't matter. Second author and third author are safe bets because it's hilariously rare to find a UG first author paper in a PEER REVIEWED journal. It just doesn't happen.

Also remember that these publications have to be in SERIOUS journals, which means NOT your school's monthly undergraduate research lets-make-everybody-feel-good journal. Honestly if I were on an adcom and I saw somebody pass that off as a publication I would probably laugh. Again, I am probably in the minority on this one.

Also if you are in a lab for 2-3 years and have nothing to show for it (i.e a publication or even poster presentation) I would say that would raise some ears. They would probably assume you were just there to handle the bitch work; running westerns, preparing samples, etc etc. Probably means you didn't have your own mini project.

Remember though: even if you don't you still aren't screwed, just at a disadvantage if you want to go to a top ten research institution.

To address your last few questions, I am not sure how many UGs get published. Personally I think it's around 25%, but don't quote me on that one--that data is strictly anecdotal. Also, it really depends on your lab. I did bull**** work for 2 years in my lab and my postdoc really felt bad for me so he slapped my name on two papers as second author. Granted I generated just about all the data for those papers, but I didn't write a single word or produce a single figure. Honestly, I couldn't even tell what the papers are about and before every single interview I have to review them again just to brush up. I have classmates who have worked twice as long and four times as hard with nothing to show for it because they have really rigorous/serious PIs. Haha, this game is so subjective and unfair that sometimes I feel like I got away with murder. Anyway good luck.

The bolded is a completely ridiculous statement. I also doubt that 25% of my undergrad PREMED (not pre-PhD) peers got published. Most medical students have never even gotten an abstract until a summer or year off of research during medical school.

 

[scarletgirl777]

I agree that research is an IMPORTANT part in the medical school application, since it is an area that distinguishes one pre-med from another. For MD/Ph.D program, it is necessary to have a few publications as well as a LOR from the PI. For MD programs, it isn't necessary to have publications, but a strong LOR from the PI would be needed.

Speaking from experiences, I know that my publication (as first author and peer-reviewed), helped secure a couple of my acceptances. It's nice to throw a cherry on top of a great interview by handing each interviewers your publication. It's true that the publication in it of itself would not make or break the interview, but it does change the atmosphere a bit when the person you're interviewing with has a Ph.D, who mainly conducts research.

What's more important than just having a publication is being able to talk about your research. Your interviewers wouldn't be impress if you were second author on a high IF paper if all you remember doing were making solutions and feeding lab rats. But the bottomline is this, secure a LOR from the PI even if you didn't have any publication.

Also This is too funny. I have friends who got into multiple MD-PhD programs without a single publication including Harvard, UCSF, WashU etc (and no, they were not URMs). Where do people get this?

 

[Excelsius]

Also This is too funny. I have friends who got into multiple MD-PhD programs without a single publication including Harvard, UCSF, WashU etc (and no, they were not URMs). Where do people get this?

Yes, you don't need publications. You do need good research.

 

[richse]

If you want to go to a top-ranked research school (i.e harvard, ucsf etc.) then I would say it's pretty much necessary to guarantee you an interview spot. Of course, it isn't REQUIRED, but the trend seems to indicate otherwise.. I assume I am in the minority with this opinion and will probably be rebutted as such. In terms of what number author, it really doesn't matter. Second author and third author are safe bets because it's hilariously rare to find a UG first author paper in a PEER REVIEWED journal. It just doesn't happen.

In the past 3 years my lab has had at least 5 undergrads publish first author papers. It's not that rare. We are not a big lab either. It really depends on how interested the PI is in letting you write. Just ask before you join a lab. My PI literally tells undergrads his goal is to get them to write a first author paper from their senior research projects. We publish in well known neuroscience journals (Biological Psych, J Cog Neuro, Neuroscience, Brain Research, etc) before anyone starts sniping about journal quality.

 

[boggvir]

Anecdotal, but my sister has two publications where she is the second and third author respectively, and another one where she will be the first author soon (honors thesis, she's taking it seriously and her PI thinks it will be published). I, on the other hand, have no publishings. She's rare, but not that rare. It happens.

 

[exoslimjim]

what are "legit" journals? as long as it is peer reviewed, it is a real publication...

but I'm thinking that journal quality does matter... i.e. it may help if your journal is easily recognized and known for good quality like CNS, pnas, jbc, biochem, bbrc, endo... 1st author undergrads are much more rare in these, but they are out there.

 

[Lukkie]

but I'm thinking that journal quality does matter... i.e. it may help if your journal is easily recognized and known for good quality like CNS, pnas, jbc, biochem, bbrc, endo... 1st author undergrads are much more rare in these, but they are out there.

someone find me a 1st author undergrad paper in one of the aforementioned journals

 

[cliffhuxtableDO]

I'm publishing an abstract in the Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise as the first author, and I'm also presenting a poster at the American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting. Then the paper will be submitted to a slightly lesser recognized journal, but I'll be the first author to whichever journal we decide on. Basically, you just need to find a professor who is all about undergraduate research and be willing to do the work.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

someone find me a 1st author undergrad paper in one of the aforementioned journals

Agreed, good luck finding any undergrad first authors in a journal with impact above 5.

 

[BlueElmo]

Absolutely. Research experience is an important part of your application, not because you want to show off your name in Cell or Nature, but because it enables you to develop important analytical skills that will be very useful as you embark on a career that requires you to stay up to date on scientific developments. Publications are just an added bonus at this stage in the game. The strong LOR from your PI is going to carry more weight than your publication.

Honestly, I question the value of publications in the med school application process. While there are some (exceedingly rare) exceptions, an undergrad is not likely to be first/corresponding author, which is the author that really counts. Being second, third, etc. is very much a reflection of what your PI's attitude toward student authors is, and because it's such a crap shoot, I am not sure what weight such publications carry.

If it's a very mediocre LOR, should I even bother submitting it? I don't have any publications so I have no "proof" of research. I don't know whether to submit that letter or not.

 

[RoyBasch]

Though some labs may grant authorship for running experiments and collecting data, there are also many labs that do not consider this as grounds for authorship (I'm just saying this so that you all don't pester your PI for an authorship). At the labs that I've worked at, authorship was granted simply on intellectual contribution--if you contributed a new idea or method that helped the project succeed, then you got authorship. Simply running experiments/gathering data and following instructions was the role of the technician and wasn't considered grounds for authorship, no matter how important the data.

Yeah I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, it had to be from an experiment you proposed/designed to gather said data.
-Roy

 

[BrainBuff]

This whole topic of publications and research is completely overrated. Most physicians graduate from their residency programs without EVER having published anything. And that includes their undergrad and med school years. I find laughable the emphasis that these premed forums always place on research and publications. It is difficult enough for experienced, academic and tenured faculty members to have their works accepted for publication at reputable peer reviewed journals. Do you know how ridiculous it is to think that undergrads are being published as FIRST AUTHORS ??!!

Only a small percentage of Harvard Med admits (the top med school in the world) have any meaningful publications and usually as co-authors.

Just relax, concentrate in your courses, MCATs and your true passions. Get good letters of rec and if the med school you are applying to finds you interesting and a fit for them, then you made it. If not...you can always go to the caribbean ...or become a nurse.

There.

 

[cyclin M]

You're right, just because you and the small bubble of people around you haven't published in prestigious journals as first author means it's absolutely impossible. 🙄

It is certainly rare, but I know two people in my grade who have published in JACS as first author and the other in Analytical Chem. Very rare, but it is doable. These people are going for PhDs though.

 

[cliffhuxtableDO]

I think the overall point is that publications are not REQUIRED, but since they are few and far between for undergrads, that makes them stand out more as a nice EC.

 

[virusgirl]

If it's a very mediocre LOR, should I even bother submitting it? I don't have any publications so I have no "proof" of research. I don't know whether to submit that letter or not.

Do you know for a fact that it will be a mediocre letter? I think it would probably be a good idea to sit down with your PI and have an honest chat about whether he/she could write you a positive letter. If the answer is no, you do not want that letter sent out.

I don't know if you really need "proof" of research, but when people do research, they typically do have a letter from someone in the lab, so not having one might raise some eyebrows. Is there someone else in your lab who could write it? My understanding is that as long as the person writing it has some sort of doctoral degree, it doesn't necessarily need to be from the PI, but other people should definitely weigh in on this if they feel so compelled. Do you work with any post-docs?

If you really can't get a positive letter out of this particular lab experience, I would either seek out additional research opportunities or get a letter from a professor who has seen you do relatively independent labwork. The point is not to learn to pipet, but rather to develop the intellectual skills of a scientist, and you want someone who can attest that you are able to evaluate literature, form a hypothesis, and develop an informed experimental plan.

 

[BrainBuff]

cyclicM

You're right, just because you and the small bubble of people around you haven't published in prestigious journals as first author means it's absolutely impossible.

we all know what happens to be people who like to ASSume things. You do not know me and my bubble is in fact a lot larger than what your small brain can imagine.
Your anecdotal example is ridiculous. If you are referring to the Journal of the American Chemical Society, that is a joke. In any case, I was referring to relevant Medical Journals which for the most part are the ones that make a significant impression.

Then, again feel free to include the clipping of your school project from the week end edition of the local newspaper. It just says that you are just like everyone else.

 

[exoslimjim]

I hope you are joking Brain... most researchers actually only know little about research outside their niche...but i've never heard any pi or researcher call jacs a joke. It is one of the best physical chemistry journals, certainly one of the top 4. Considering that there are soo many "relevant" medical journals, a publication in jacs is much harder than an equivalent IF publication in bio sciences.

and you may want to be more careful using the phrase "meaningful publications" or "significant impression". do some reading, a nobel prize in chemistry came out of a "small" and "insignificant" journal.

 

[cyclin M]

Your anecdotal example is ridiculous. If you are referring to the Journal of the American Chemical Society, that is a joke.

lol is this guy serious? FYI you just lost all credibility there BrainBuff.

But I will forgive you because you're clearly just jealous of other people's accomplishments and instead of striving to be like them and learn from them, you belittle their accomplishments even when it is ridiculous to do so. Looking down on JACS? lol this guy thinks he's Jesus.

You do not know me and my bubble is in fact a lot larger than what your small brain can imagine.

Then, again feel free to include the clipping of your school project from the week end edition of the local newspaper. It just says that you are just like everyone else.

Way to hurt my feelings 🙁

🙄

 

[BlueElmo]

Do you know for a fact that it will be a mediocre letter? I think it would probably be a good idea to sit down with your PI and have an honest chat about whether he/she could write you a positive letter. If the answer is no, you do not want that letter sent out.

I don't know if you really need "proof" of research, but when people do research, they typically do have a letter from someone in the lab, so not having one might raise some eyebrows. Is there someone else in your lab who could write it? My understanding is that as long as the person writing it has some sort of doctoral degree, it doesn't necessarily need to be from the PI, but other people should definitely weigh in on this if they feel so compelled. Do you work with any post-docs?

If you really can't get a positive letter out of this particular lab experience, I would either seek out additional research opportunities or get a letter from a professor who has seen you do relatively independent labwork. The point is not to learn to pipet, but rather to develop the intellectual skills of a scientist, and you want someone who can attest that you are able to evaluate literature, form a hypothesis, and develop an informed experimental plan.

thanks.

 

[Depakote]

let's keep the discussion in this thread civil.

 

[Narmerguy]

How difficult is it to get a publication out by the time you apply as well? Because nothing you do Senior year is going to be recognized that much.

Do the schools care at all if you've submitted publications but are waiting for a response?

 

[scarletgirl777]

How difficult is it to get a publication out by the time you apply as well? Because nothing you do Senior year is going to be recognized that much.

Do the schools care at all if you've submitted publications but are waiting for a response?

I have found that many don't. Since it can take a year to get something published, this is part of the reason that an undergrad who can publish, especially first author, is a pretty impressive thing.

 

[JJMrK]

If you are referring to the Journal of the American Chemical Society, that is a joke. In any case, I was referring to relevant Medical Journals which for the most part are the ones that make a significant impression.

Tell us you're joking.

 

[ReptarBar]

a doctor that im working with is letting me write a publication regarding his work on facial reconstruction. im probably going to be the first author on it as well as on future pubs that he wants me to write.

am i just lucky? is this the kind of publication med schools want to see? the research isnt lab related, but rather for my first pub im just going to peruse some old articles/journals as well as his work and write something.

 

[scarletgirl777]

a doctor that im working with is letting me write a publication regarding his work on facial reconstruction. im probably going to be the first author on it as well as on future pubs that he wants me to write.

am i just lucky? is this the kind of publication med schools want to see? the research isnt lab related, but rather for my first pub im just going to peruse some old articles/journals as well as his work and write something.

Much easier to get an authorship with clinical research as opposed to basic science, but an authorship is an authorship. Congratulations!

 

[ReptarBar]

im concerned though because it all seemed to fall in my lap too nicely. do med schools really like these kinds of publications? im probably going to have 4 co-authored pubs with this doctor regarding his work (and i am going to do 99% of the writing).

does clinical research tend to produce more pubs than normal lab research, and do these pubs have the same weight in admissions? are they considered a hook?

the journal is the journal of the american college of surgeons btw. is that a legit journal?

 

[Lokhtar]

Your anecdotal example is ridiculous. If you are referring to the Journal of the American Chemical Society, that is a joke.

I was referring to relevant Medical Journals which for the most part are the ones that make a significant impression.

No. Just.....No. JACS has got the most citations in its field. What are you smoking? If you go to an admission committee and they think that a publication in JACS is a joke, you should look for another school.

 

[mbe36]

Can UG publications be referenced to when applying for residency??

Thanks.

 

[Lokhtar]

Ya, a publication in a peer reviewed journal is a permanent thing to put down.