How well do conferences look? On semi-par with "research"?

[Aharon1010]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I've attended some conferences that are medical and biology related. Luckily I have a stipend from my school to travel, and I'm close friends with a very noted professor who gets ample funding and always offers to tag me along.

Some of the topics are about STEM cell research, new prosthesis, etc. etc. I've presented at two, and I keep on getting more offers to go from this professor and from my institution via separate e-mails.

If I apply to a research heavy institution, will this set me apart from the pack?

These conferences are out of state. As a Texas resident, I've traveled to Los Angeles, Portland, Las Vegas, and New York all in the name of academia. I understand lab work is one aspect of research, but so is having an integrated academic network. What do you guys think?

 

[Abstractions]

Attending conferences: not so much.
What did you present at two? Did you have your own poster?

 

[Being]

Conferences don't have eyes or any sort of sensory hardware, so I don't see how they could look at all.

 

[DrEnderW]

If you presented a poster that you authored or gave a podium talk on research you've conducted, then it's a great thing.

Attending a conference without a poster/talk means less than nothing. What exactly are you presenting at a science conference if it isn't research you've conducted? I'm assuming you're not giving expert opinions on a subject.

 

[Aharon1010]

Attending conferences: not so much.
What did you present at two? Did you have your own poster?

I presented some limited computational simulation in biology that I was a part of at the NIH one summer, I won the "best speaker award" for one (the one in LA). Kind of curious, why do research professors list the conferences they attend to on their CV, even if they don't present? I though showing passion for networking in the sciences is relatively important.

 

[gyngyn]

I presented some limited computational simulation in biology that I was a part of at the NIH one summer, I won the "best speaker award" for one (the one in LA). Kind of curious, why do research professors list the conferences they attend to on their CV, even if they don't attend? I though showing passion for networking in the sciences is relatively important.

They don't.

 

[Aharon1010]

If you presented a poster that you authored or gave a podium talk on research you've conducted, then it's a great thing.

Attending a conference without a poster/talk means less than nothing. What exactly are you presenting at a science conference if it isn't research you've conducted? I'm assuming you're not giving expert opinions on a subject.

Not all of the research at these conferences are expert opinions. In fact, most of the research is, "This is what we've done...here are limited results, here are future paths that we'd like to take and limitations we ran into in constructing this model/hypothesis/experiment". Very little have I seen research at these conferences where some guy walks up with a poster or a PPT and goes, "Well, we started with this unsolved problem and we did everything we could to fix it and I got a patent from the NCBI. Yeehaw." Most are undergraduate and MS student friendly. Most of the time, it's just an opportunity to understand academia and research, and get a feel for what's going on in the scientific community from the guys that are doing it. Some speakers are very noteworthy though. One of the listed speakers in this upcoming conference is a PhD Mathematical Microbiologist from Yale Medical School (Dr. A. Galvani).

 

[Aharon1010]

They don't.

Lol there's 2 guys from my department with 10+ page CVs that have theirs listed. They're racking up air mileage apparently.

EDIT: Sorry, I meant "even if they don't *PRESENT*" in my original post.

 

[gyngyn]

Lol there's 2 guys from my department with 10+ page CVs that have theirs listed. They're racking up air mileage apparently.

This would be embarrassing at a promotions committee meeting.

 

[Aharon1010]

This would be embarrassing at a promotions committee meeting.

They're both really sharp guys and they get mountains of funding, lol.

One has a PhD in CS from UWash and worked for Microsoft. He did a design for something in Windows Vista (Hahaha, Windows Vista sucks, but still! It's pretty impressive). Then he did something on the LHC with programming. But then again, like 3098420948203 guys worked on that LHC project, so IDK how much weight it holds.

 

[gyngyn]

They're both really sharp guys and they get mountains of funding, lol.

One has a PhD in CS from UWash and worked for Microsoft. He did a design for something in Windows Vista (Hahaha, Windows Vista sucks, but still! It's pretty impressive). Then he did something on the LHC with programming. But then again, like 3098420948203 guys worked on that LHC project, so IDK how much weight it holds.

I'm sure they are just brilliant. This is still embarrassing.

 

[hoihaie]

maybe they were invited speakers

 

[Aharon1010]

maybe they were invited speakers

They are invited. And they accepted. Hence the nature of the conference and the level of respect it commands. I don't think YMS and HMS staff are going to fly in from their office to go to a run down garage full of teenagers who each want to be the next Francis Collins.

 

[lmn]

If you presented a poster that you authored or gave a podium talk on research you've conducted, then it's a great thing.

Attending a conference without a poster/talk means less than nothing. What exactly are you presenting at a science conference if it isn't research you've conducted? I'm assuming you're not giving expert opinions on a subject.

I would say presenting a poster means very little as well, great you are sharing your work, anyone who has been to a poster presentation session at a major conference knows it is entirely probably for you to have not even talked to anyone about your work in a real serious manner.

Giving a talk is more impressive imo.

 

[DrEnderW]

I would say presenting a poster means very little as well, great you are sharing your work, anyone who has been to a poster presentation session at a major conference knows it is entirely probably for you to have not even talked to anyone about your work in a real serious manner.

Giving a talk is more impressive imo.

Yes, a podium presentation would be better than a poster and a publication would be better than both.

However, presenting your research at a major conference is CV worthy and something you would absolutely continue to do as a medical student and resident. It would be something as a medical student you would list on a residency app. It validates your research experience, demonstrates the data you've compiled is worth sharing with the community, and is often used to incorporate feedback and opinions before a publication.

Early in your career, it's almost always worth presenting at conferences. It's better than having research with no pub and no poster presentation, which many students have.

Not all of the research at these conferences are expert opinions. In fact, most of the research is, "This is what we've done...here are limited results, here are future paths that we'd like to take and limitations we ran into in constructing this model/hypothesis/experiment". Very little have I seen research at these conferences where some guy walks up with a poster or a PPT and goes, "Well, we started with this unsolved problem and we did everything we could to fix it and I got a patent from the NCBI. Yeehaw." Most are undergraduate and MS student friendly. Most of the time, it's just an opportunity to understand academia and research, and get a feel for what's going on in the scientific community from the guys that are doing it. Some speakers are very noteworthy though. One of the listed speakers in this upcoming conference is a PhD Mathematical Microbiologist from Yale Medical School (Dr. A. Galvani).

Yes, I am quite aware of how conferences work - I was trying to gauge what your experience was. It sounds like you did do research and present it. You should absolutely list it. Will it help? Maybe. There will of course be students with publications and tons of basic science research, but presenting at a conference is going to do nothing but help.

 

[lmn]

Yes, a podium presentation would be better than a poster and a publication would be better than both.

However, presenting your research at a major conference is CV worthy and something you would absolutely continue to do as a medical student and resident. It would be something as a medical student you would list on a residency app. It validates your research experience, demonstrates the data you've compiled is worth sharing with the community, and is often used to incorporate feedback and opinions before a publication.

Early in your career, it's almost always worth presenting at conferences. It's better than having research with no pub and no poster presentation, which many students have.

Oh I definitely agree that it should be listed on your CV's, I listed my poster presentations as part of my research activities on AMCAS, but I learned going to those poster presentation sessions that it could very easily be you just standing by your poster for an hour or two in a sea of posters. It is of course very important to share you work and poster presentations are a great step for publishing or further sharing your work within the scientific community, but due to the nature of presentation, and presentation is much more impressive in my book.