How much research??

[ReesesDoc]

Hey guys,

I am a current M3 applying for ophtho this fall. I worked on one research project in the fall, will be presenting it as a poster at ARVO in May, and am currently working on the paper for it.

I thought this was a decent amount of research, but another classmate just told me that he has almost 5 projects:

1 case report, 3 projects, and 1 article writeup

I was wondering, how much research do people typically have when they apply?? I was happy with my research, but looks like I may be way behind??

Please help!
RD

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[90 diopter]

I only had one research project as a medical student, and it unfortunately never got published. I still matched at my top choice though.

If you're presenting at ARVO, you'll be fine, assuming your grades, Step 1 score, letters of recommendation, and interview skills are all solid.

 

[ophthope]

Agree with above: you're presenting at ARVO and 95% of your fellow applicants won't have done anything like that.

I had basically zero research going into fourth year, scrambled for a case report and writing/editing parts of a text. Matched my #1.

So you aren't way behind. In fact you're ahead of most I would say. I'd slack off on the research at this point (as in finish what you're doing but don't take on any new projects) and focus on getting solid LORs and making sure you'll be a good interviewee. Others can comment but with the amount of research you have at this point I highly doubt that more of it will be adding anything to your CV unless you're gunning for a top research-heavy residency program. And rest, friend, because that interview trail can really drain you of time, energy, and money.

 

[MonsterAddict]

This is something I have been struggling with as well. I have pretty much zero research experience and I hope that it wont cause me too many problems on the interview trail. I don't see myself being able to get much done before I have to apply.

 

[ophthope]

This is something I have been struggling with as well. I have pretty much zero research experience and I hope that it wont cause me too many problems on the interview trail. I don't see myself being able to get much done before I have to apply.

This time last year I hadn't started yet either. It's surprising what you can do if you're proactive about finding residents who need a case report written up. Don't worry but I'd recommend hustling a little just to try and get a case report or something. Do a grand rounds presentation if you can. Just for the sake of having things to write on the application and then talk about on interviews.

 

[kwel]

Agree with above: you're presenting at ARVO and 95% of your fellow applicants won't have done anything like that.

I heard ARVO pretty much accepts everything.. I always assumed that to mean it's pretty easy to get a poster there. Not trying to diminish the importance of an ARVO poster or anything, but what makes it so special in comparison to other conferences?

 

[ophthope]

I heard ARVO pretty much accepts everything.. I always assumed that to mean it's pretty easy to get a poster there. Not trying to diminish the importance of an ARVO poster or anything, but what makes it so special in comparison to other conferences?

I'm not saying an ARVO poster is better than others, although at least people generally know about ARVO. Of course presenting a paper at the AAO or something will hold more weight. But I'm saying probably 95% of applicants haven't done anything like having a poster at a conference. Few applicants I met had done stuff like that. A lot of us decided way too late in medical school to do things that were that involved and it's just not feasible.

Most attendings I talked to that were on admissions committees said they looked at research as a way to show commitment to the field. Outside of the really research-y programs, nobody expected residents to be actually doing major research anyway so they aren't looking for someone that has proven they can publish in a major journal or anything. They're just trying to make sure you really are devoted to pursuing Ophthalmology as a career. Even in the couple of top-15 programs where I interviewed it seemed most residents were doing as much research as they were required to do and not much more. Residency is busy, you just don't have time and attendings know that so they aren't necessarily looking for an applicant to be a tried and true researcher. They're looking for someone who is going to work hard for three years to become a good Ophthalmologist. A poster presentation at a major Ophthalmology conference like ARVO shows pretty real commitment and is more than most applicants have done - that's what I'm saying. A lot of applicants who match really high on their rank list probably don't even know what ARVO is about. Somewhere along the interview trail they'll be looking up acronyms to figure out what everyone means when they say 'ARVO.'

Others can disagree but this is what I've gleaned from my decidedly limited experience with all of this. Please comment if I'm wrong. I'm not in Cali or NYC so things may be regionally variable but I think OP is fine.

 

[kwel]

I'm not saying an ARVO poster is better than others, although at least people generally know about ARVO. Of course presenting a paper at the AAO or something will hold more weight. But I'm saying probably 95% of applicants haven't done anything like having a poster at a conference. Few applicants I met had done stuff like that. A lot of us decided way too late in medical school to do things that were that involved and it's just not feasible.

Most attendings I talked to that were on admissions committees said they looked at research as a way to show commitment to the field. Outside of the really research-y programs, nobody expected residents to be actually doing major research anyway so they aren't looking for someone that has proven they can publish in a major journal or anything. They're just trying to make sure you really are devoted to pursuing Ophthalmology as a career. Even in the couple of top-15 programs where I interviewed it seemed most residents were doing as much research as they were required to do and not much more. Residency is busy, you just don't have time and attendings know that so they aren't necessarily looking for an applicant to be a tried and true researcher. They're looking for someone who is going to work hard for three years to become a good Ophthalmologist. A poster presentation at a major Ophthalmology conference like ARVO shows pretty real commitment and is more than most applicants have done - that's what I'm saying. A lot of applicants who match really high on their rank list probably don't even know what ARVO is about. Somewhere along the interview trail they'll be looking up acronyms to figure out what everyone means when they say 'ARVO.'

Others can disagree but this is what I've gleaned from my decidedly limited experience with all of this. Please comment if I'm wrong. I'm not in Cali or NYC so things may be regionally variable but I think OP is fine.

I see, that definitely makes sense. I'm just surprised that so few applicants have posters, not to mention papers. I always thought of ophtho as one of those fields that really encourages you to have some field-specific research (kind of like all the other competitive surgical subspecialties), and so I just thought a good portion would have papers/abstracts/posters. I myself decided on ophtho in the early/middle 3rd year and thought I was way behind research-wise. Is it pretty uncommon to see people on the interview trail with first-author pubs?

 

[Corn Dog]

I think having an ARVO poster presentation on the CV is good, but I can't imagine 95% of ophtho applicants not having even a poster presentation on their CV though. It may be true, but among people who applied into ophtho from my school, most of them had at least one publication (mostly co-author pubs) in addition to a poster presentation.

A lot of people can claim that they are working on 5+ projects and what not, but I think it's more important to actually get the study published and to publish it in a good journal. It's very difficult and time-consuming to publish in good journals, and people from my school who had just one first-author publication in journals like Ophthalmology, AJO, or Archives were able to match at "top 10" programs. Of course, this is NOT to say that one first-author pub in these journals will guarantee a match into a "top 10" program; they were all solid academically as well.

 

[ophthope]

I see, that definitely makes sense. I'm just surprised that so few applicants have posters, not to mention papers. I always thought of ophtho as one of those fields that really encourages you to have some field-specific research (kind of like all the other competitive surgical subspecialties), and so I just thought a good portion would have papers/abstracts/posters. I myself decided on ophtho in the early/middle 3rd year and thought I was way behind research-wise. Is it pretty uncommon to see people on the interview trail with first-author pubs?

When I was talking about posters in that last part I meant specifically posters presented at somewhere like ARVO. Posters at some event at your own school is definitely common. It's common to find people that had a few co-author publications, some of which were just submitted and not yet published. I think a lot of people decide around the same time in third year and that doesn't leave you much time to do any solid research or present something at a major conference. It seemed like most people were in the same boat having done as much as they could in a few months and gotten their names tagged onto a small study or some case reports in exchange for grunt work of editing, number-crunching, or research. Then you talk it up in interviews. Such is the game.

Most applicants that I got to know didn't seem like people who had known forever that they wanted to do Ophthalmology and had been doing research since day 1 or anything like that. And I didn't meet anyone who ended up not matching, so the process worked fine for them. I feel like SDN made me feel the same way about Ophthalmology - basically that you were doomed unless you had some real substantial research and ideally quite a bit of it. When I was on the trail I got the distinct impression that this was not the case. From the comments I got on my CV my amount of "research" was about like most applicants - a couple of co-authored pubs in submission but not yet published, another project where I wasn't even on the authors list, and a couple of grand rounds presentations. You just have to do what you can do with the time you have. I really think that's what matters. Show that you did what you could with the time you had. Outside of top residencies I didn't find that programs were looking for dyed-in-the-wool first author published sort of researchers.

I think having an ARVO poster presentation on the CV is good, but I can't imagine 95% of ophtho applicants not having even a poster presentation on their CV though. It may be true, but among people who applied into ophtho from my school, most of them had at least one publication (mostly co-author pubs) in addition to a poster presentation.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but I was counting a poster presentation at a major conference as a bigger deal than a co-authored publication. A lot of people on the trail were co-authors of case reports that had been submitted or published. Didn't meet too many people who had gone to ARVO or AAO with a poster or anything. A poster at their school's "research day" or something was common, but not at a larger conference. Honestly, most of the people that were talking about that level of research were re-applicants who failed to match and then did a year or more of research. Maybe it's just that they talked about it more, but I was given the impression that most applicants don't have anything like that because there's just no time to do anything like that. So anyway yeah if we're just counting a poster presentation then I'm sure way more than 5% of applicants have that. I just doubt that a lot more than that had presented it at a well known Ophthalmology conference.

A lot of people can claim that they are working on 5+ projects and what not, but I think it's more important to actually get the study published and to publish it in a good journal. It's very difficult and time-consuming to publish in good journals, and people from my school who had just one first-author publication in journals like Ophthalmology, AJO, or Archives were able to match at "top 10" programs. Of course, this is NOT to say that one first-author pub in these journals will guarantee a match into a "top 10" program; they were all solid academically as well.

It is more important to get a study published, but most applicants don't have time for anything like a first-author Archives pub unless they're in an MD/PhD program or took time off to do research. And the big majority of applicants don't do either of those. Even if you take a year off for basic science research there's no guarantee that you'll publish at that level. I agree though - people that get those publications seem to end up in top 10 programs because those top programs tend to be research heavy. But even then there's plenty of people in those programs that didn't have that level of research. And more importantly there are a lot more residency positions than the top 10 programs and I found that most applicants are just trying to be Ophthalmologists and maybe thinking about a fellowship, not trying to be researchers or end up in the best of the best of the best residency program.

 

[Hemichordate]

So what are the research credentials like for those who end up at the research heavy institutions?

*Just curious and not gunning*

 

[RestoreSight]

I heard ARVO pretty much accepts everything.. I always assumed that to mean it's pretty easy to get a poster there. Not trying to diminish the importance of an ARVO poster or anything, but what makes it so special in comparison to other conferences?

There is a movement to decrease the number of accepted posters at ARVO. There is definitely a lot of crap that gets through the committees. Currently about 85% of posters are accepted which is way to high. That doesn't mean real high level stuff is presented every year, but hopefully they start emphasizing quality over quantity in the future.

 

[RestoreSight]

So what are the research credentials like for those who end up at the research heavy institutions?

*Just curious and not gunning*

Tough to speak for other programs, but at my program the biosketches of each resident are published on the department website and its ridiculous what some of my co-residents have accomplished. Almost all of them have published in major journals, graduated with honors, volunteered abroad and received a slew of awards and honors.

 

[RestoreSight]

A lot of people can claim that they are working on 5+ projects and what not, but I think it's more important to actually get the study published and to publish it in a good journal. It's very difficult and time-consuming to publish in good journals, and people from my school who had just one first-author publication in journals like Ophthalmology, AJO, or Archives were able to match at "top 10" programs. Of course, this is NOT to say that one first-author pub in these journals will guarantee a match into a "top 10" program; they were all solid academically as well.

I agree with this. I think med students lose sight of why they are doing research in the first place. Its not suppose to just pad a CV for residency, but instead provide some benefit or insight in the field. The only way that happens is through peer review publications and presentations at conferences where finished work is allowed to be critiqued by experts and colleagues. It may not be possible to do this in med school if you decide 3rd year ophtho is your choice, but I don't think that prevents matching at all.

 

[alleyez2011]

Tough to speak for other programs, but at my program the biosketches of each resident are published on the department website and its ridiculous what some of my co-residents have accomplished. Almost all of them have published in major journals, graduated with honors, volunteered abroad and received a slew of awards and honors.

Can you provide a link to this website that contains the resident biosketches?

 

[RestoreSight]

Can you provide a link to this website that contains the resident biosketches?

If you google a few programs resident profiles are usually listed.