I am aiming for academic IM, will this publication help in any way?
Yes it will, please do not listen to the person above you.
Explain
Review articles take a lot of time and teach the fundamentals of research. Learning how to evaluate the literature critically is a important skill to learn.
No, it won't help by much at all. You aren't even considered for a first or second author in this. I think it's a positive thing to have on your CV, but it won't be something where they'll choose you over another candidate with stronger numbers
Alas, as AlbinoHawk alluded to us this is more of an exercise in self improvement (which can be VERY beneficial depending on the field OP wants to enter) but it is unlikely to move the scale one way or another when matching residency. I think it is better than nothing and depending on the field OP wants to enter, this opportunity is a good idea for self improvement but it’s unlikely to make a difference in matching.
I am currently working on a review article as a med student and my mentor said it is helping their research group show history of publishing so they can earn grant money. Not sure if I am going to be on the grant, but it does feel like a stepping stone to getting on more projects with this PI in the future. Might be good for early younger med students, but not necessarily 3rd years. I am also shooting for one of the least competitive specialties so it's a little different situation for me.
Sure, don’t get me wrong there is SOME value in these pubs. But given the choice it is certainly more valuable to get original research publications. This review is certainly more valuable to your PI than it is to you. Your point that it may get you an “in” for other projects is valid.
It's not a zero value activity. The OP was asking in regards to making a difference for their application. Having reviewed applicants for my residency, I never saw a situation where a review article was taken as a serious consideration over someone else
Then you should fundamentally change the way you handle review articles.
What do you even mean? Lol.
I'm assuming what you mean is that I should give these articles more value when considering an applicant. This is not "my" standard. This is the standard across the board. Do you even know what a review article is? Why would I (or anyone) give someone more consideration for being part of a team writing one versus someone that gets +5 points on their step or go an honors in a rotation or has a glowing letter of recommendation? I know you're desperate to stand out to get into your field of choice, but it will not happen with magical thinking or gimmicks. It will only happen by doing the things that actually hold value
Bruh… I can’t believe people are giving you this much slack. You’re opinions are wrong. They’re so wrong, at this point you’re **** posting. If you’ve actually published you know reviews are basically nothing, because they’re the foundation of every project. Literally everyone does it. You’re forcing people to say that there is value because the value they (reviews) offer isn’t zero… well their value is worth 0.000001… and my ass rounds down… they’re worth zero! You’re a med student earning a terminal degree… if your UG degree didn’t teach you the fundamentals of research, you need to get a refund!
I guess I will drop the damn thing and use the time to sleep more….
Similar to others, I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Again, a review article is not zero value, but it is not on the same level as original research. And it isn’t even particularly close
Learning useless facts for a unnecessary high step score should not hold value. Doing a review article endlessly searching the literature on your topic of interest relevant to your field should hold value.
Should vs reality. Gotta play the game with the rules that are in front of you. If/when you get to the other side, you can attempt to change the game.
Well that isn't the comparison we're making here. The question is whether it is worth it to spend time on a literature review as a medical student, vs pursuing original research. If both options are on the table the answer is clearly original research
No--OP specifically said non-systematic. This is just in regards to your run of the mill literature review.
I think it shows a lot of initiative. Everyone knows it's hard to publish in medical school. I had a project going that failed and ended up without any publications. I would view a candidate like you in a positive light. I can't say how much it would compensate or give you an edge. I don't imagine huge, but it could be what gets you an interview
Again, the message from this thread shouldn’t be that reviews are worthless—that’s not true. They just aren’t as impressive as original research.
I think I said repeatedly that lit reviews have some value. Not as much as original research. But you have to weigh the benefit of a lit review against the time needed
I am not sure how I can more clearly answer your question. Lit reviews make your CV better. Whether or not they are worth the effort required is a multifactorial question.
Yes, but not as much as other projects mentioned above. I did a review that was well received because it was in a niche, relatively unexplored topic. But I didn't have the resources to get a more rigorous project published in time. Do what you can and network.
Review article is worth less than a case report? They take so much more time though
Yes, that's as far as they go, but honestly, everyone knows undergrads and medical students aren't going to be publishing anything monumental. We all know that 90% of stuff on a CV is just padding. People do one project then give it 3 different names for the oral presentation, paper and poster just to make it seem they were 3 projects. I just think people overemphasize how important research can be unless it is in an actual high impact journal and your name is in the top authors
A review article doesn't present any new or novel finding. A case report at least purports to do that
I think a review is more valuable than the case report (but less than original research obviously). Case reports are rarely ever useful to the literature, while quality reviews are helpful references at least, and they are more likely to be cited. Also, it takes more research/writing skills to process a review than a case report. Focus on what you're interested in though, because reviews do take a big time commitment and won't be worth it if it's not a good learning experience for yourself.
Valuable to you, maybe, but researchers don't see it this way because it's putting together data that already exists out there. They don't see things in terms of time commitment or your own learning but rather results for the literature at large. If a prestigious lab does it, it is taken seriously because they analyze the data at higher levels. Ironically, because they are elite labs, they are more of a favor to a journal than of value to them. Research is meant for new findings and novelty, so that's why a case report is considered of value. I agree that 99% of case reports just exist, but once in a while, they hold value. The most recent example is that this is how they found the link of JJ vaccine and GBS
I am a researcher! I agree that effort doesn't matter as much as contribution, but I believe a literature review contributes more than a case report, on average, assuming both are written well. When the research items themselves are not of particularly high value to science, we consider the writing/research skills gained from the assignment in evaluating applicants (similar to why applicants get some credit for "submitted" manuscripts of value, even though they are not published and may never be published). The reason I mention that OP should consider their own learning is because I don't think a literature review is particularly high value on a CV given the time commitment, so there must be other benefits. But I put case reports very low on the totem pole - they are not original research and no one reads them (typically). Even a case report in a prestigious journal speaks more to luck than scientific aptitude/hypothesis generating. It is far more likely for a literature review to receive citations than a case report.
I agree with you--the biggest point to keep in mind, though, is the time commitment for a review. Much more than a case report and so that may be less valuable for a student then multiple case reports that they could do in the time of a single review.
In your opinion, what is considered a top journal?
Loosely, Impact Factor >10. Again, not that a review in a journal with IF 8 is magically worthless, but just as a general guideline.
Agree with above that IF >10 is likely prestigious (exceptions being the ID journals falsely elevated by COVID). Also flagship journals in your field are definitely worth considering (like JACS - American College of Surgeons) which typically also have good impact factors but may be lower for more specialized or less research heavy fields.
