How rare is having a publication

  • Thread starter Thread starter 625233
  • Start date Start date
Med School Insiders
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
It's a significant accomplishment. Unfortunately, medical school admission committees are full of piles of applications with significant accomplishments. It won't overcome medicore grades and MCAT scores if that's what you are asking and it won't just carry someone into a upper echelon med school by itself if that's what you are asking as well.
 
Not rare enough. It's a major accomplishment though for an undergrad because grad students are given such a huge priority in the publication process/research process.
 
Is it worth taking a gap year for? If I don't then all I'll have is maybe a submission.
 
BasedMD said:
Not rare enough. It's a major accomplishment though for an undergrad because grad students are given such a huge priority in the publication process/research process.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what exactly is this founded on? I've been in and out of research for a decade and this is just bull****. Grad students tend to have a far bigger impact on projects than undergrads and thus tend to get more done. Is there some luck involved? Yes, the same is true in just about everything in life. Are there biases in the research community? Yes, of course, just like any community. Is it a systemic problem that undergrads are somehow slighted or discriminated against? Absolutely not. Journals do not care if you are a grad student or an undergrad, I doubt the majority will even know when you submit things to them. The people that I hear complaining about this tend to be the entitled pre-meds who think that they are producing a lot in a lab because they are doing a lot of grunt work. The reality is that hard and strong work are rewarded. Publications are a major accomplishment because they require that. Hard and strong work. Not because you had to fight off grad students for it.
 
mimelim said:
I'm sorry, but what exactly is this founded on? I've been in and out of research for a decade and this is just bull****. Grad students tend to have a far bigger impact on projects than undergrads and thus tend to get more done. Is there some luck involved? Yes, the same is true in just about everything in life. Are there biases in the research community? Yes, of course, just like any community. Is it a systemic problem that undergrads are somehow slighted or discriminated against? Absolutely not. Journals do not care if you are a grad student or an undergrad, I doubt the majority will even know when you submit things to them. The people that I hear complaining about this tend to be the entitled pre-meds who think that they are producing a lot in a lab because they are doing a lot of grunt work. The reality is that hard and strong work are rewarded. Publications are a major accomplishment because they require that. Hard and strong work. Not because you had to fight off grad students for it.
Click to expand...

I experienced it, so have many undergrads I've talked to. There has to be a reason why it's much harder for undergrads to get publications than grad students. Maybe it's because grad school emphasizing it way more, maybe it's because us undergrads don't have the lab skills or glowing qualifications or experience grad students may have, but there's definitely something that makes it harder for undergrads to be able to pursue research that'll allow them to be published. I don't think it has to do with the journals at all, so you misconstrued my comment. I don't claim to have all the answers, it just is harder for an undergrad to be published/make significant contributions that would lead to publications and be involved in fruitful (research that leads to publication) than it would be for a grad students. Connections and environment make a significant difference as well, and just comparing the average CV of an ivy league student/top 10 with an average public university shows this.

There's also a reason why undergrad research/lab work is often stereotyped as grunt work.
 
BasedMD said:
I experienced it, so have many undergrads I've talked to. There has to be a reason why it's much harder for undergrads to get publications than grad students. Maybe it's because grad school emphasizing it way more, maybe it's because us undergrads don't have the lab skills or glowing qualifications or experience grad students may have, but there's definitely something that makes it harder for undergrads to be able to pursue research that'll allow them to be published. I don't think it has to do with the journals at all, so you misconstrued my comment. I don't claim to have all the answers, it just is harder for an undergrad to be published/make significant contributions that would lead to publications and be involved in fruitful (research that leads to publication) than it would be for a grad students. Connections and environment make a significant difference as well, and just comparing the average CV of an ivy league student/top 10 with an average public university shows this.

There's also a reason why undergrad research/lab work is often stereotyped as grunt work.
Click to expand...

It is harder because your average undergrad brings far less to the table than your average graduate student. Less experience, far less time, less dedication etc etc. There is no 'priority' for graduate students. If you show up as capable as a grad student and willing to work as hard as them, you are going to produce as much. You are a lot cheaper than they are. This has nothing to do with why few undergrads publish.
 
I agree, a freshman undergrad trying to author a meaningful research publication thqt they created from scratch is like a third year medical student trying to manage a chemotherapy clinic. It is not beyong them to do so with a lot of time and learning, but the learning curve is steep because they just do not know enough of the finer points of the field to operate on that level. Most undegrads that get published were assigned a project and saw it through to completion. Their position as first author tends to depend strongly on the lab culture because technically completing an assigned project does not justify being first author or even any level authorship unless there was meaningful creative input.
 
mimelim said:
It is harder because your average undergrad brings far less to the table than your average graduate student. Less experience, far less time, less dedication etc etc. There is no 'priority' for graduate students. If you show up as capable as a grad student and willing to work as hard as them, you are going to produce as much. You are a lot cheaper than they are. This has nothing to do with why few undergrads publish.
Click to expand...
Most undergraduates don't bring as much to the table as a grad student, and I think that is the main reason that publications for undergraduates are more rare. However, I still think there is some bias among PI's when allowing an undergraduate to take a role in a project that will result in the their name on a paper. It seems fair to me since most undergraduates do not put in the effort or possess the skills to take on a role that will lead to authorship. I know personally one lab I worked in as an undergraduate refused to give me any work that basically wasn't just following a protocol. Of course, that never warranted a pub for me despite the fact that I was more than willing and capable to read/write/plan experiments/etc. that could have been publishable work. Maybe this was just a bad experience for me, but I can easily see how many other PI's could do the same. It's understandable since allowing an undergraduate to do the level of work needed for a pub is probably a greater risk than giving that same work to a grad student.
 
To follow up on my learned colleague's comments, any decent PI doesn't care if publishable data is produced by a grad student or a a UG student. It's DATA.

Few UG students publish because they're in the lab for a much shorter period of time. When I was a grad student, I worked 55-60 hr weeks, including weekends and holidays. You can't do Science full time on banker's hours.

UG students have distractions like, oh, I don't know, classes? But, in own experience, I've found them to be more trouble than they're worth, and at the end of a project, all they've done is learned how to pipette properly.

mimelim said:
It is harder because your average undergrad brings far less to the table than your average graduate student. Less experience, far less time, less dedication etc etc. There is no 'priority' for graduate students. If you show up as capable as a grad student and willing to work as hard as them, you are going to produce as much. You are a lot cheaper than they are. This has nothing to do with why few undergrads publish.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Honestly, 1st author basic science in a reputable journal (medium IF and up) as an undergrad (not non-traditional) is enough to wet yourself IMHO. Better than a Nature co-author pub as an undergrad. Of course there is a decent amount of bs out there with undergrads having 1st authors in an open source or university journal...
 
mimelim said:
It is harder because your average undergrad brings far less to the table than your average graduate student. Less experience, far less time, less dedication etc etc. There is no 'priority' for graduate students. If you show up as capable as a grad student and willing to work as hard as them, you are going to produce as much. You are a lot cheaper than they are. This has nothing to do with why few undergrads publish.
Click to expand...

Truth. I went to grad school before med school. I had 10 pubs going in, but that's because I worked my ass off for 6 years. I was there at least 40 hours a week. I was on an RAship so I knew I had to work my ass off to produce. Plus I WANTED to because I loved it. I'm not saying undergrads don't love the work we/they do, but let's get real, most are there to check that box off on their app. Undergrads know it, grad students know it, PIs know it, admissions committees know it...everyone knows it.

The undergrads in my lab (who worked pretty hard) came in for a few hours 2 or 3 times a week. They ran a PCR or two or did an immuno experiment during that time. I used to run 3 PCR experiments, an immuno experiment, and a few other things daily.

As mimelim alluded to, it's not about giving the pub to grad students just because. It's due to the fact that most of the time they are the ones working their butts off.

Grad students who go on to academia have to get a post doc, then write grant and pub after grant and pub just to HOPE that they might stay afloat and get tenure. As a resident finishing now, I get 2 or 3 unsolicited emails a day about job openings. All other things aside, it's easy for MD/DOs to get jobs in general, grad students have to work their butts off...they need those pubs way before the little pre-med trying to get into med school (however, I never condone giving work credit where it is not due).

Basically instead of the whole whiny self-entitled "I need this" pre-med act, people should instead stop and think about what others have to go through to reach their goals as well.
 
Last edited:
Dral said:
Grad students who go on to academia have to get a post doc, then write grant and pub after grant and pub just to HOPE that they might stay afloat and get tenure. As a resident finishing now, I get 2 or 3 unsolicited emails a day about job openings. All other things aside, it's easy for MD/DOs to get jobs in general, grad students have to work their butts off...they need those pubs way before the little pre-med trying to get into med school (however, I never condone giving work credit where it is not due).
Click to expand...

+1

Sometimes I feel that many undergrads with publications just get the courtesy authorship for playing a lesser role in the project.
 
Lucca said:
Damn, I was hoping figuring out a way for the Rockets to beat this Warriors defense would count. I guess I'll just stop and go do some more spectroscopy.
Click to expand...

Just teach Dwight Howard or josh smith to shoot a free throw. Do that go to Vegas bet on the game with no else knowing about what you did beat the point spread and become a millionaire over night. Sometimes it's just that easy
 
Goro said:
PIs aren't ****** giving out sympathy F's. Authors earn that right.
Click to expand...

Hmm idk I think it really depends on the PI! And how the lab is set up. I wouldn't call it "PIs giving out sympathy" but requirements for authorship are pretty variable, I think (I'm no expert, and I'll defer to your judgement if you still disagree, Goro).

Anecdote time:

I know a few people that got their names on papers just because they did sample prep. I was annoyed by this, until one day a postdoc asked to use some of my sample (I make this stuff all the time - it's super simple!) and I was like "sure." 6 months later she asks my PI to put my name on the paper and he was all for it (I tried to tell the postdoc I didn't feel what I did was worth anything but I can't stop them). On the other hand, I work closely with another postdoc and when I have time I make stuff for her - there's some troubleshooting involved and it's actually a very hit or miss synthesis, but I know that I won't get my name on anything for this because she would never think it's worthy and thus never draw it to the attention of my
PI. I do it because it's good for me to learn new things and I like this postdoc so I don't mind doing her favors (*cough*bitchwork*cough*).

Anyway, no longer in relation to your post, Goro (too lazy to make a separate one):
My lab is very "fend for yourself" no support given, either get work done, or get out. Undergrads usually don't last more than a semester because you're literally on your own from day 1, usually on some fanciful dream project of my PI that probably won't work but if it does you'll probably get into a really high impact journal because of how crazy the idea is (I've been the only one to survive and thrive in my PI's career, he said).

I think, in general, the amount of time undergrads have for lab is way less than a grad student that's done with coursework. I think good PIs give students things that are not super important/pressing or an interesting "too unreliable for a thesis" project. I have definitely felt sidelined before. I have so much motivation for research and am so willing to work long hours - it has stung to feel ignored and like my work was not important. But I just have to remind myself I'm the baby of the lab, and people just don't give the most important project to the baby who will never have more than 25 hours a week to devote to it.

At no point though, when we all realized my PI's crazy idea actually worked, did my lab just abandon me. They were excited too! We all wanted my work to get published somewhere awesome - they were never like "oh you're an undergrad so we won't even bother submitting anywhere prestigious."

Closing statements:

I always hate these publication threads because it just shows how little most pre-meds know about research and what it takes to get published. It's SO project dependent. I will have more publications than a fourth year grad student because her project is f**king hard and I could never do what she does. From my wise PI, " the most interesting, fundamental work moves the slowest because you're up against the hardest problems." Good organic chemistry publish once a month, people who do laser work (ultra fast spectroscopy, PHI, etc) is much less frequent because they're trying to build entirely new systems to find out cool things like "how can we monitor the movement of single electrons in the photo systems?" Or "what kind of structures do water molecules really form at different pressures and temperatures? How can we see how water is organized inside a virus, which is extremely packed with genetic material?" Argue that you can pull yourself up to the top by your bootstraps all you want (hard work is necessary of course!), but I will never be convinced that anyone can get published in undergrad if they work hard enough.

EDIT: just realized G and I are basically saying the same thing, and I just have a higher expectation for authorship than PI's I know (hence me trying to say I don't think all authors earn their right to be on the paper, when really it's my criteria they're not meeting). If I have a lab of my own one day I will enjoy having the final say on whether or not the undergrad did enough work to warrant authorship (and hopefully I'll attract and inspire good enough students that the answer is yes!)
 
Last edited:
Look at it this way:

If I'm an ADCOM and I see you have a publication, why the f-ck do I care? How are you different than the undergrad who doesn't have one but otherwise speaks eloquently and intelligently about his/her research experiences?
 
Goro said:
PIs aren't ****** giving out sympathy F's. Authors earn that right.
Click to expand...

lumpyduster said:
Hmm idk I think it really depends on the PI! And how the lab is set up. I wouldn't call it "PIs giving out sympathy" but requirements for authorship are pretty variable.
Click to expand...



Couldn't have said it better! That's why there is an order to the authorship! Playing a lesser role and getting a publication isn't a big deal. They contributed to the research but as stated above they just can't perform at the same level.
 
I think I have some unique perspective to give here. I am currently a rising junior. I started working in my lab about a year and a half ago. During that time not only have I contributed to the lab by doing B*** work but I also have contributed to the lab and gone above and beyond what most undergrads in my lab do. There is currently a premed bio major in our lab that is merely there to slap something on her AMCAS application. How do I know this? She barely ever comes into lab meetings, works 5 hours a week, doesn't contribute, and always complains about doing tedious tests. I can guarantee you she will not get published. I on the other hand have been there 20+ hours a week and also contribute to the project with new ideas. I also am very careful with the chemicals and help my PI with writing out the publication articles. This has landed me 3 publications in PNAS and Nature. This semester I have my own project, getting a significant amount of funding, have keys to the lab, am working independently, and even have other undergrads working under me. So IMHO there is not an inherent bias against undergrads if you are able to prove that you can operate and do research at the level of a grad student. When approaching research don't use it as a way to "check a box" but rather as a way to practice the scientific method, thought dexterity, and creativity. RANT OUT.
 
Goro said:
PIs aren't ****** giving out sympathy F's. Authors earn that right.
Click to expand...

lumpyduster said:
Hmm idk I think it really depends on the PI! And how the lab is set up. I wouldn't call it "PIs giving out sympathy" but requirements for authorship are pretty variable, I think (I'm no expert, and I'll defer to your judgement if you still disagree, Goro).

Anecdote time:

I know a few people that got their names on papers just because they did sample prep. I was annoyed by this, until one day a postdoc asked to use some of my sample (I make this stuff all the time - it's super simple!) and I was like "sure." 6 months later she asks my PI to put my name on the paper and he was all for it (I tried to tell the postdoc I didn't feel what I did was worth anything but I can't stop them). On the other hand, I work closely with another postdoc and when I have time I make stuff for her - there's some troubleshooting involved and it's actually a very hit or miss synthesis, but I know that I won't get my name on anything for this because she would never think it's worthy and thus never draw it to the attention of my
PI. I do it because it's good for me to learn new things and I like this postdoc so I don't mind doing her favors (*cough*bitchwork*cough*).

Anyway, no longer in relation to your post, Goro (too lazy to make a separate one):
My lab is very "fend for yourself" no support given, either get work done, or get out. Undergrads usually don't last more than a semester because you're literally on your own from day 1, usually on some fanciful dream project of my PI that probably won't work but if it does you'll probably get into a really high impact journal because of how crazy the idea is (I've been the only one to survive and thrive in my PI's career, he said).

I think, in general, the amount of time undergrads have for lab is way less than a grad student that's done with coursework. I think good PIs give students things that are not super important/pressing or an interesting "too unreliable for a thesis" project. I have definitely felt sidelined before. I have so much motivation for research and am so willing to work long hours - it has stung to feel ignored and like my work was not important. But I just have to remind myself I'm the baby of the lab, and people just don't give the most important project to the baby who will never have more than 25 hours a week to devote to it.

At no point though, when we all realized my PI's crazy idea actually worked, did my lab just abandon me. They were excited too! We all wanted my work to get published somewhere awesome - they were never like "oh you're an undergrad so we won't even bother submitting anywhere prestigious."

Closing statements:

I always hate these publication threads because it just shows how little most pre-meds know about research and what it takes to get published. It's SO project dependent. I will have more publications than a fourth year grad student because her project is f**king hard and I could never do what she does. From my wise PI, " the most interesting, fundamental work moves the slowest because you're up against the hardest problems." Good organic chemistry publish once a month, people who do laser work (ultra fast spectroscopy, PHI, etc) is much less frequent because they're trying to build entirely new systems to find out cool things like "how can we monitor the movement of single electrons in the photo systems?" Or "what kind of structures do water molecules really form at different pressures and temperatures? How can we see how water is organized inside a virus, which is extremely packed with genetic material?" Argue that you can pull yourself up to the top by your bootstraps all you want (hard work is necessary of course!), but I will never be convinced that anyone can get published in undergrad if they work hard enough.

EDIT: just realized G and I are basically saying the same thing, and I just have a higher expectation for authorship than PI's I know (hence me trying to say I don't think all authors earn their right to be on the paper, when really it's my criteria they're not meeting). If I have a lab of my own one day I will enjoy having the final say on whether or not the undergrad did enough work to warrant authorship (and hopefully I'll attract and inspire good enough students that the answer is yes!)
Click to expand...

There is something missing on this entire thread that needs to be pointed out. This is the intellectual work that needs to be done to be an author. It's not just "how much hours" you put, it ideally should "how much intellectual work have you put." You could be a person putting in those 55-60 hours, however if you all you have been doing is plating cultures and pipetting stuff, you don't deserve authorship. PI should not be rewarding students with authorship without intellectual contribution period! It's not a PI thing, its an unethical practice to reward grunt work with authorship.

MaybeDr said:
Couldn't have said it better! That's why there is an order to the authorship! Playing a lesser role and getting a publication isn't a big deal. They contributed to the research but as stated above they just can't perform at the same level.
Click to expand...

It's not just order, it's about the amount contribution to the project. If it warrants authorship, then it will be given. If isn't at that level, then an acknowledgement at the end of the paper is what that person gets.




If you don't believe what I am saying (both responses), then take a research ethics class and find out the truth. I have taken three of them and understand the process from those classes (also was a graduate student).
 
Last edited:
A good rule of thumb (doesn't always have to apply), is that if one put a significant amount of academic input into a project, they should be an author.

Someone who just prepares a reagent or two should just be mentioned in acknowledgements.

The statistician who works through the data should be an author.
 
I have three sole authors, two were from my undergrad days. I also have several presentations, all first authors. All of those were from my graduate days.

It's surprisingly common.
 
Are we all just bragging about our publications now?
 
lifesajoke said:
Honestly, 1st author basic science in a reputable journal (medium IF and up) as an undergrad (not non-traditional) is enough to wet yourself IMHO. Better than a Nature co-author pub as an undergrad. Of course there is a decent amount of bs out there with undergrads having 1st authors in an open source or university journal...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd take 3rd author on a Nature/Science pub over 5 first authorships
 
mmmcdowe said:
Yeah, I'd take 3rd author on a Nature/Science pub over 5 first authorships
Click to expand...

Depends on several factors. I would take a 3rd author on a Nature/Science if it had a lot of authors (I know a girl who got a 3rd in Science out of 4 including the PI) and if I already had a 1st author as an undergrad in a respected peer-reviewed journal. There is so much luck involved with landing a N/S/C paper especially at the undergraduate level; a 1st author shows much more than having a co-author on a high IF journal as an undergrad.
 
lifesajoke said:
Depends on several factors. I would take a 3rd author on a Nature/Science if it had a lot of authors (I know a girl who got a 3rd in Science out of 4 including the PI) and if I already had a 1st author as an undergrad in a respected peer-reviewed journal. There is so much luck involved with landing a N/S/C paper especially at the undergraduate level; a 1st author shows much more than having a co-author on a high IF journal as an undergrad.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And expanding on this, I would rather have a first author paper than a third author nature paper because you could have done anything to get that third authorship if your PI is lax on his requirements. First author pretty much means you did the majority of the work and have a much more in depth understanding of your system.
 
Publications are a good piece to add to your application quiver IF you're interested in research. In order to be a meaningful author, you need to put in innumerable time and effort into the scientific process. If that's not what you want to do, then you might be better served doing something different, in the hopes that it speaks to you.

To add to the humble bragging on this thread: I've been researching for 5+ years and have managed 12 publications, with 4 1st authorships. I also have many pre-medical colleagues. So, publishing something isn't exactly akin to a unicorn sighting. But, where my ResearchGate peeps at? #getatme #nerdsocialmedia #tagmebro #Idesperatelyneedfriends
 
BeachBlondie said:
Publications are a good piece to add to your application quiver IF you're interested in research. In order to be a meaningful author, you need to put in innumerable time and effort into the scientific process. If that's not what you want to do, then you might be better served doing something different, in the hopes that it speaks to you.

To add to the humble bragging on this thread: I've been researching for 5+ years and have managed 12 publications, with 4 1st authorships. I also have many pre-medical colleagues. So, publishing something isn't exactly akin to a unicorn sighting. But, where my ResearchGate peeps at? #getatme #nerdsocialmedia #tagmebro #Idesperatelyneedfriends
Click to expand...
I don't know what I would do without researchGate.
 
We don't need to speak in absolutes here. We can address all these things and how they factor in varying degrees.

1) authorship comes down to a number of things. How hard you work how much you actually intellectually contribute and how much your PI respects you and your relationship with the lab are by far and away the most important factors to undergrad publications with an emphasis on the first two
2) the standard of your PI are a factor. There are PIs who look at an undergrad and say if they worked hard showed interest and stayed a long time then they'll agree as part of an "informal contractual agreement per se" to put you in a paper even if their actual contributions to the paper don't warrant authorship. There are others Who are stingy about putting undergrads in papers and I've seen this to a greater degree when it comes to giving undergrads 1st/2nd author. The lab I used to work next to it was an open secret the PI would openly tell her undergrads she thinks it's disrespectful and disingenuous to ever put undergrads on first or 2nd author-----bear in mind 2 of her undergrads while I was there were absolutely brilliant students who ended up at duke and penn med school. Have at that as you like.
3) genuine hardwork and significant intellectual contributions by undergrads tend to get credit. Wherr the grey line alot of us undergrads bitch about is when undergrads do significant work that isn't under the category of intellectual contribution. Many many PIs will put students in papers who do work that is relevant but not under the definition of intellectual contribution. The ones that don't aren't doing anything wrong; they are just putting their students who did the same as others but didn't get published at a disadvantage but that's not their issue or some wrong doing on their part. Emphasis on generalization for this part but the overall point still has some key themes to it that are true.
4) Undergrads can blame their relationship with their PI too easily at times. @Goro stated something I've heard many say a while back; grants are often written in a way that tou can tell people in a lab working aren't on the best terms with their PI. There is a lot of questionable relationships with post-docs amongst themselves in a lab and their PI. Doesn't mean they don't all get fair acknowledge for their work. We will all work with people we don't like; doesn't mean accuse them when you don't get the credit you personally think you deserve and accuse your less than stellar relationship as the cause
5) Undergrads who join a lab who publishes frequently are more likely to get published and that's not a factor they control. Again though this isn't a particularly common reason why undergrads who do hard legitimate work that is of intellectual contribution don't get published. It can serves as a reason at times for why an undergrad who works but not in the manner of an intellectual contribution doesn't get published while those doing similar things do but again if this is what your blaming your lack of publications on as an undergrad, more likely than not you have some growing up to do.
6) Yes it is absolutely possible in theory for a PI to screw over an undergrad not giving them appropriate due for their work and for their to be little the undergrad can do about it. Fight it? Forget about getting a recommendation from that lab and it's unlikely an undergrad's word vs the PI's is a fight the undergrad will do favorably in. Like others have stated above though, this is hardly a common occurrence and very rarely valid explanation for undergrads being unsatisfied with their overall net gain from a lab.
 
Last edited:
First author in Cell? See you at the top 5.
2nd + author of a paper in Cell? See you in the top 20 at least, probably top 10 maybe top 5 (depending on other factors of course).
First author in low impact...good
2nd+ author in low impact...decent...(not necessarily much better than no pub depending on techniques used)
Clinical research "publication" in low impact journal? okay I guess? Nothing special. That's how med students get 8 publications before residency. They're easy to get.
 
resiroth said:
First author in Cell? See you at the top 5.
2nd + author of a paper in Cell? See you in the top 20 at least, probably top 10 maybe top 5 (depending on other factors of course).
First author in low impact...good
2nd+ author in low impact...decent...(not necessarily much better than no pub depending on techniques used)
Clinical research "publication" in low impact journal? okay I guess? Nothing special. That's how med students get 8 publications before residency. They're easy to get.
Click to expand...

You are just opening yourself up to ridicule and virtol, don't say you weren't warned.
 
GrapesofRath said:
You are just opening yourself up to ridicule and virtol, don't say you weren't warned.
Click to expand...
About the basic science vs clinical bit? I mean there's a reason that med students have so many publications (and can expect to get one out in a summer) whereas in basic science trying to get a publication in a remotely decent journal in a summer is insanity.

You can still have great clinical papers, but it's not exactly a secret that it's easier to get more clinical publications than basic science publications.

First author is >>>>>>> anything else because it shows you really did something. Some postdoc isn't going to do the hard work and let you swoop in and take the prized position. Adcoms know this.

EDIT: the top X "ranking" wasn't meant to be taken seriously. It's just showing vaguely the impact the EC has.
 
Last edited:
mmmcdowe said:
I stand by what I said, a paper in nature or science is a huge deal in terms of applying for funding.
Click to expand...

Certainly true but the impact on funding is more on the PI's shoulders and is not relevant to this thread.
 
lifesajoke said:
Certainly true but the impact on funding is more on the PI's shoulders and is not relevant to this thread.
Click to expand...

Undergrads can eventually become PIs through the wonders of metamorphosis. Further, you can win more than just student grants in the short term. I know several people who won >100k in funding via various funding sources in medical school. Bottom line, a high level pub will open doors now and in the future.
 
mmmcdowe said:
Undergrads can eventually become PIs through the wonders of metamorphosis. Further, you can win more than just student grants in the short term. I know several people who won >100k in funding via various funding sources in medical school. Bottom line, a high level pub will open doors now and in the future.
Click to expand...
Agree, agree, and agree with your points above...lol.
 
mmmcdowe said:
Undergrads can eventually become PIs through the wonders of metamorphosis. Further, you can win more than just student grants in the short term. I know several people who won >100k in funding via various funding sources in medical school. Bottom line, a high level pub will open doors now and in the future.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I think it's funny when people think that "well that's actually only because they had a good PI" means anything. It's like saying the only reason microsoft was created was because bill gates got to attend a fancy prep school with a computer, and then be surrounded by brilliant people at Harvard. All true, but none of that means creating microsoft or getting a nature pub isn't a huge deal!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

X0001234
Abstract in journal supplement: is this a publication?
Replies
5
Views
4K
sapphire_fire
sapphire_fire
C
How do I send an update to a school about a publication?
Replies
2
Views
954
Coolguy23
C
L
How is my application looking so far?
Replies
5
Views
446
FairEver
F
O
How bad is it? Academic IA
Replies
5
Views
963
Goro
Goro
jrlybob1
Is publication of a protocol paper for a systematic review + meta analysis a worthwhile update?
Replies
1
Views
487
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top