How much does having a few publications help?

[hopefuldawkter]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I am aware that having a publication definitely won't compensate for low GPA/MCAT; however, assuming that MCAT/GPA are within range or competitive for a school. Does having a publication really matter, even though roughly less than 20% of applicants have a poster presentation?

 

[Ben2019]

I think it depends on various other factors. I have several publications, including first author. But got pre-II rejected by USC today. My MCAT/GPA are kind competitive according to MSAR.

 

[907914]

It can add to the overall pattern of the abilities, commitment and achievement of an applicant. However, I would not focus on accomplishing that by ignoring other factors particularly volunteering

FAM

 

[TheDataKing]

It can add to the overall pattern of the abilities, commitment and achievement of an applicant. However, I would not focus on accomplishing that by ignoring other factors particularly volunteering

FAM 🙂

 

[premed20172017]

FAM 🙂

<3 Fam!

 

[Heliobacter]

It can add to the overall pattern of the abilities, commitment and achievement of an applicant. However, I would not focus on accomplishing that by ignoring other factors particularly volunteering

FAM c:

 

[deleted859689]

Been asked about my research pubs every interview. It makes for a good interview topic especially if you are interviewing w/ faculty who know how to ask the right questions (e. g. already have background knowledge)

 

[OntologicalDamnation]

I am aware that having a publication definitely won't compensate for low GPA/MCAT; however, assuming that MCAT/GPA are within range or competitive for a school. Does having a publication really matter, even though roughly less than 20% of applicants have a poster presentation?

I have 8, including 1 first author. Will let you know how things turn out in a month or two since I submitted around Labor Day. Right now, however, it's radio silence.

I feel like the advantage of publications is that it helps you stand out from other research heavy applicants. There's hardly any space to talk about research in your primaries and the vast majority of schools don't even ask about research in your secondaries. One of the best ways to distinguish between 2 applicants with thousands of hours of research are publications as publications speak for themselves. If I didn't have these papers, schools wouldn't have realized the extent of time and effort I put into my projects and all of the countless all nighters I pulled.

Finally, I'm not sure how well MD adcoms can evaluate one's research compared to MSTP adcoms and grad school adcoms. However, I think that all ADCOMS are aware of the rarity of a publication.

 

[LizzyM]

Been asked about my research pubs every interview. It makes for a good interview topic especially if you are interviewing w/ faculty who know how to ask the right questions (e. g. already have background knowledge)

Don't confuse what is important in terms of admission decisions with what is asked about at an interview. Some of what you are being judged on can be assessed by having you talk about almost anything and interviewers will often focus on whatever in your application is novel rather than what is important just to keep in interesting for themselves as they slog thorugh countless interview days.

 

[notsobabydoc]

I honestly find this obsession with publication baffling. We are going to be doctors. So our main job is to treat patients. Very few of us will spend time publishing papers. If that’s your goal, you should go for MD/PhD. This has become an arms race without any practicality.

 

[Goro]

I am aware that having a publication definitely won't compensate for low GPA/MCAT; however, assuming that MCAT/GPA are within range or competitive for a school. Does having a publication really matter, even though roughly less than 20% of applicants have a poster presentation?

For a high stats candidate with a good app, it might whet the appetite for the research ******. For other schools, not so much. Research is over-rated by premeds anyway.

 

[notsobabydoc]

For a high stats candidate with a good app, it might whet the appetite for the research ******. For other schools, not so much. Research is over-rated by premeds anyway.

Totally agree. Anyone with a decent brain can get a poster in their biology department... seriously it doesn’t mean anything. Anyone who’s interested in something and has a brain can do research.

 

[notsobabydoc]

I disagree. You need publications for top residencies, especially surgery. I worked with multiple resident surgeons during undergrad and they continued to write prolifically to nail a top fellowship. I also worked with several attendings, who continue to write to boost themselves in the field and ultimately, become a chair in their department. If you care about prestige or working in a top academic hospital, which frankly, a lot of doctors care about, it matters. Also, if you read Paul Kalanithi's book, he was offered faculty positions at multiple hospitals with the help of his research. Atul Gawande is also where he is today because of his public health research and he has helped to educate the masses.

Outside of prestige/reputation, if you have done clinical research, you would see the importance of doing retrospective studies on improving patient care. The goal of a physician is to treat patients and also improve patient care.

Finally, most MD/PhDs do bench research. Research is still important on the MD only side. I've actually seen MDs churning out more papers than MD/PhD but that's because quality matters more than quantity in translational research. Overall, there is a practical application, but mostly to the dirty, yet important side of medicine.

If you care about climbing that ladder, yeah do research and trust me the whole research business is quid pro quo...

 

[moldydorito]

For a high stats candidate with a good app, it might whet the appetite for the research ******. For other schools, not so much. Research is over-rated by premeds anyway.

Very true. I have a couple pubs to my name, and it’s been brought up at I’d say around half of my interviews, especially the really top ones

 

[deleted859689]

Don't confuse what is important in terms of admission decisions with what is asked about at an interview. Some of what you are being judged on can be assessed by having you talk about almost anything and interviewers will often focus on whatever in your application is novel rather than what is important just to keep in interesting for themselves as they slog thorugh countless interview days.

This. I know fully well that research is optional at most schools and may be a slight plus, for the OP research might be cool to talk about during the interview - LizzyM is of course correct with what she said. Don’t count on just research to pull you through.

edit: I definitely did not actively bring up my research during my interviews!

 

[OntologicalDamnation]

If you care about climbing that ladder, yeah do research and trust me the whole research business is quid pro quo...

A lot of residents, at least at my institution, engage in shady ghost authorship. It happens among attendings too. I noticed random names in my papers, who didn't do an ounce of work. I was once moved down from 2nd to 3rd author because of "seniority"

 

[notsobabydoc]

A lot of residents, at least at my institution, engage in shady ghost authorship. It happens among attendings too. I noticed random names in my papers, who didn't do an ounce of work. I was once moved down from 2nd to 3rd author because of "seniority"

Exactly.... Completely corrupt system.

 

[Engrailed]

I disagree. You need publications for top residencies, especially surgery. I worked with multiple resident surgeons during undergrad and they continued to write prolifically to nail a top fellowship. I also worked with several attendings, who continue to write to boost themselves in the field and ultimately, become a chair in their department. If you care about prestige or working in a top academic hospital, which frankly, a lot of doctors care about, it matters. Also, if you read Paul Kalanithi's book, he was offered faculty positions at multiple hospitals with the help of his research. Atul Gawande is also where he is today because of his public health research and he has helped to educate the masses.

Outside of prestige/reputation, if you have done clinical research, you would see the importance of doing retrospective studies on improving patient care. The goal of a physician is to treat patients and also improve patient care.

Finally, most MD/PhDs do bench research. Research is still important on the MD only side. I've actually seen MDs churning out more papers than MD/PhD but that's because quality matters more than quantity in translational research. Overall, there is a practical application, but mostly to the dirty, yet important side of medicine.

Agree.

Totally agree. Anyone with a decent brain can get a poster in their biology department... seriously it doesn’t mean anything. Anyone who’s interested in something and has a brain can do research.

Disagree. Anyone with a brain cannot just get a poster. (Perhaps possible if it was doing some quick assays, nothing fancy <6 month project)
For the vast majority of posters/publications, these things take LOTS of time, commitment, and some luck.
Getting one's name on a paper is probably not difficult if working in a lab for at least a couple of years but that's when things like first/second authorship and journal impact factor also come into play.
Quality >>> Quantity.

 

[LizzyM]

Do keep in mind that the adcoms are, for the most part, physicians in academic medicine. They got where they are, in part, by writing and publishing papers. Some of them will still be writing and publishing and some are doing more administrative work (med school interviews, residency interviews, department/division budgets, hiring and mentoring junior faculty, etc) but publications are the coin of the realm in academic medicine so pre-meds that show promise in the field are going to be attractive to some research-oriented schools who see themselves as training the next generation of medical school faculty.

 

[Moko]

Having publications are by no means necessary but do help for research-heavy schools (USNews rankings are based heavily on research funding after all). When a large majority of applicants have research experience, having a publication can signal to adcoms the degree of one's contributions and involvement. Research productivity does not make up for major deficiencies in other parts of the application though.

 

[Goro]

I disagree. You need publications for top residencies, especially surgery. I worked with multiple resident surgeons during undergrad and they continued to write prolifically to nail a top fellowship. I also worked with several attendings, who continue to write to boost themselves in the field and ultimately, become a chair in their department. If you care about prestige or working in a top academic hospital, which frankly, a lot of doctors care about, it matters. Also, if you read Paul Kalanithi's book, he was offered faculty positions at multiple hospitals with the help of his research. Atul Gawande is also where he is today because of his public health research and he has helped to educate the masses.

Outside of prestige/reputation, if you have done clinical research, you would see the importance of doing retrospective studies on improving patient care. The goal of a physician is to treat patients and also improve patient care.

Finally, most MD/PhDs do bench research. Research is still important on the MD only side. I've actually seen MDs churning out more papers than MD/PhD but that's because quality matters more than quantity in translational research. Overall, there is a practical application, but mostly to the dirty, yet important side of medicine.

Except pubs as a pre-med really don't count as far as PDs are concerned. They want pubs in their field.

 

[OntologicalDamnation]

Except pubs as a pre-med really don't count as far as PDs are concerned. They want pubs in their field.

They still have weight in ERAS.

 

[Goro]

They still have weight in ERAS.

The wise PDs and residents here say otherwise

 

[notsobabydoc]

Regardless, those who were prolific in undergrad are more likely to remain so in medical school. There's a certain drive that one needs to possess to publish a high volume of work.

man, quantity quantity. 99% of research is useless.

 

[Skarl]

Seeing as a publication is potentially beneficial for high-stat applicants with expressed career goals related to research, should I update schools that have not sent me IIs yet with news of my recently accepted publication? Obviously I am updating schools that accept updates post-interview, but I know the convention is different before being invited to interview.

 

[Moko]

Seeing as a publication is potentially beneficial for high-stat applicants with expressed career goals related to research, should I update schools that have not sent me IIs yet with news of my recently accepted publication? Obviously I am updating schools that accept updates post-interview, but I know the convention is different before being invited to interview.

My thoughts: if your application was complete early on in the cycle, sending a succinct and significant pre-II update would not be unreasonable some time in November. Obviously, don't send one to schools that explicitly are against these types of updates.. not following instructions is an easy way to weed out applicants. I would consider an accepted publication as being significant enough, especially if this was your first publication. Worst case scenario: you will still not get an II (i.e be in the same situation).

 

[deleted688779]

My thoughts: if your application was complete early on in the cycle, sending a succinct and significant pre-II update would not be unreasonable some time in November. Obviously, don't send one to schools that explicitly are against these types of updates.. not following instructions is an easy way to weed out applicants. I would consider an accepted publication as being significant enough, especially if this was your first publication. Worst case scenario: you will still not get an II (i.e be in the same situation).

Would conditional acceptance count? The reviewers want a few more experiments included but likely won’t be complete until another two months. If all goes well, this will be in a high impact journal. I don’t want to send a premature update but I also don’t want to send one when interviews have concluded (UCLA)

 

[Moko]

Would conditional acceptance count? The reviewers want a few more experiments included but likely won’t be complete until another two months. If all goes well, this will be in a high impact journal.

Would be best if it's accepted, but if that's unlikely to happen before II's run out, a conditional acceptance is better than nothing.

 

[Skarl]

My thoughts: if your application was complete early on in the cycle, sending a succinct and significant pre-II update would not be unreasonable some time in November. Obviously, don't send one to schools that explicitly are against these types of updates.. not following instructions is an easy way to weed out applicants. I would consider an accepted publication as being significant enough, especially if this was your first publication. Worst case scenario: you will still not get an II (i.e be in the same situation).

Thanks Moko! It is my first publication and accompanied by another update of similar significance I think. I was complete early July for my schools so I will follow up with a succinct update letter near November as you recommended.

 

[Skarl]

Would conditional acceptance count? The reviewers want a few more experiments included but likely won’t be complete until another two months. If all goes well, this will be in a high impact journal. I don’t want to send a premature update but I also don’t want to send one when interviews have concluded (UCLA)

For my case, we were also asked to include new experiments but those experiments yielded results that weakened our original claim. We had to submit to another journal before acceptance. So maybe not best to count on an acceptance until offered formally, but I am not familiar with your specific situation.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Except pubs as a pre-med really don't count as far as PDs are concerned. They want pubs in their field.

Can you explain why pubs as a pre-med doesn't count? what do you mean by pubs in their field? is being a first author makes difference?

 

[OntologicalDamnation]

Can you explain why pubs as a pre-med doesn't count? what do you mean by pubs in their field? is being a first author makes difference?

They have less weight. Program directors want residents who show promise/have the potential to produce meaningful scholarship in that field. A gastroenterology paper won't be of interest to a plastic surgery program director.

 

[Moko]

For competitive residencies/subspecialties (in no particular order):
- Publications in the same field > Publications in another field >> No publications at all.
- Recent publications > Remote publications.
- First (or last if PI) author > Second author > nth author.
- Number and quality of publications.

Research skills are often translatable between fields. Recent track records better predict future productivity. Higher authorship typically associated with higher contribution and involvement. Also, the numbers reported by ERAS can be misleading. A single project can easily net multiple "points", e.g. a primary publication, other publications (letters to the editor, correspondences, etc), a few presentations at local and national conferences (oral+poster(s)), etc. When many groups practice essentially quid pro quo arrangements (you edit my paper, I edit yours), the numbers reported on ERAS can become easily inflated (the one caveat is that medical students usually are not beneficiaries of these arrangements).

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

They have less weight. Program directors want residents who show promise/have the potential to produce meaningful scholarship in that field. A gastroenterology paper won't be of interest to a plastic surgery program director.

I understand but how does specific research (GI vs Ortho) matters for medical school admissions? Isn't that matters more for residency or fellowship? I thought we are talking about medical school admissions not residency or fellowship programs.

 

[OntologicalDamnation]

I understand but how does specific research (GI vs Ortho) matters for medical school admissions? Isn't that matters more for residency or fellowship? I thought we are talking about medical school admissions not residency or fellowship programs.

We went on a tangent to discuss the larger importance of publications in the context of medicine.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

We went on a tangent to discuss the larger importance of publications in the context of medicine.

Got it, but can we go back to publications in the context of medical school admissions only 🙂

 

[Moko]

Got it, but can we go back to publications in the context of medical school admissions only 🙂

Research is research for medical school admissions. As long as an applicant has a reason for why they chose that particular field of research, they'll be fine. Ideally, their research will fit in their application's narrative, but this is not necessary.