Is research in med school worthless if you don't publish?

[mbeus]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Exactly as question states. Due to serious health issues, I was unable to do any research between M1 and M2. I am hoping to do some clinical research during M3 (just an easy project, done from a computer). But I'm worried it won't be done in time to publish before residency apps. If that is the case, does the research help my app at all?
[P.S. Not planning on going into a competitive specialty right now]

 

[eteshoe]

If you can't publish at least putting together a poster is helpful in showing you were somewhat "productive"

 

[sliceofbread136]

Nah it's still useful

 

[LaurenMD]

Exactly as question states. Due to serious health issues, I was unable to do any research between M1 and M2. I am hoping to do some clinical research during M3 (just an easy project, done from a computer). But I'm worried it won't be done in time to publish before residency apps. If that is the case, does the research help my app at all?
[P.S. Not planning on going into a competitive specialty right now]

It's still useful. You'll get asked about your research a lot during interviews.

 

[evilbooyaa]

You realistically should be able to get at least a poster that you can then talk about. A research experience without pubs/presentations/posters/abstracts is cool in undergrad, doesn't really cut it in medical school (if you're trying to show your interest and ability to do research)

 

[bananafish94]

Tangentially related question: do publications from undergrad "count" or is it only research that you do in medical school that helps with residency applications?

 

[sholamd]

Very little from undergrad belongs on your ERAS application. Research from undergrad should only be listed if it is directly related to research you continued in medical school or if it is part of a larger story you are trying to tell.

Also, "Submitted" status definitely counts on ERAS. Application readers like to see that you have shown some interest in a topic and explored it, so the most beneficial is if you can have a paper that ties in to an area of interest that you are prepared to talk about on the trail. Having a few submitted papers shows at least some initiative in the area of research. Published would be best, but submitted is better than nothing.

 

[evilbooyaa]

Very little from undergrad belongs on your ERAS application. Research from undergrad should only be listed if it is directly related to research you continued in medical school or if it is part of a larger story you are trying to tell.

Also, "Submitted" status definitely counts on ERAS. Application readers like to see that you have shown some interest in a topic and explored it, so the most beneficial is if you can have a paper that ties in to an area of interest that you are prepared to talk about on the trail. Having a few submitted papers shows at least some initiative in the area of research. Published would be best, but submitted is better than nothing.

I agree that submitted is better than nothing. It seemed like OP was talking about research that didn't lead to a paper (even for submission).

Otherwise, agree with the above post about undergrad pubs. I forget if they break up sections for publications/abstracts/posters, so if they don't you should go ahead and include it in ERAS, but know that when they look at publish dates they're going to know it's prior to medical school.

 

[Lawpy]

Very little from undergrad belongs on your ERAS application. Research from undergrad should only be listed if it is directly related to research you continued in medical school or if it is part of a larger story you are trying to tell.

Also, "Submitted" status definitely counts on ERAS. Application readers like to see that you have shown some interest in a topic and explored it, so the most beneficial is if you can have a paper that ties in to an area of interest that you are prepared to talk about on the trail. Having a few submitted papers shows at least some initiative in the area of research. Published would be best, but submitted is better than nothing.

I agree that submitted is better than nothing. It seemed like OP was talking about research that didn't lead to a paper (even for submission).

Otherwise, agree with the above post about undergrad pubs. I forget if they break up sections for publications/abstracts/posters, so if they don't you should go ahead and include it in ERAS, but know that when they look at publish dates they're going to know it's prior to medical school.

so i understand the higher weight given to productive research done in med school, but i'm a little confused.

if undergrad/gap year research was clinical/translational research focused on a specialty and there was a good amount of productivity from it (e.g. few publications, lots of presentations and abstracts), you wouldn't recommend listing them on ERAS? this is assuming that research is continued throughout medical school, although it may not be in the same specialty from undergrad/gap year.

i was thinking that publications and national/international abstracts + presentations are permanent (and thus will be part of your CV), so i wasn't understanding why it's better to not include them in ERAS to demonstrate long-term productivity?

 

[evilbooyaa]

Most people who ask this question talk about the 5 pubs they had in undergrad, with no subsequent medical school research (and definitely not continuation) , who then act like they have 5 pubs and are on equal footing with people who got 5 pubs WHILE in medical school.

I think it's relevant to your CV if it got published. I do agree that publications from undergrad should get listed, albeit at the bottom, of your ERAS. IMO, a publication is a publication. I do caution that PDs will likely not take it as seriously (especially in a different field) compared to work that is done during medical school.

 

[Hangry]

so i understand the higher weight given to productive research done in med school, but i'm a little confused.

if undergrad/gap year research was clinical/translational research focused on a specialty and there was a good amount of productivity from it (e.g. few publications, lots of presentations and abstracts), you wouldn't recommend listing them on ERAS? this is assuming that research is continued throughout medical school, although it may not be in the same specialty from undergrad/gap year.

i was thinking that publications and national/international abstracts + presentations are permanent (and thus will be part of your CV), so i wasn't understanding why it's better to not include them in ERAS to demonstrate long-term productivity?

Pubs never die. Always put pubs from undergrad on your app. The post you quoted was unclear, he/she was talking about listing "research experiences" from undergrad. Unless I'm misinterpreting their post too, in which case they are just wrong.

 

[KnightofBaldMt]

I think it's relevant to your CV if it got published. I do agree that publications from undergrad should get listed, albeit at the bottom, of your ERAS. IMO, a publication is a publication. I do caution that PDs will likely not take it as seriously (especially in a different field) compared to work that is done during medical school.

I have done research that has yielded some posters and pubs in medical school. However, in undergrad I also gave an oral presentation over my project at a regional ACS meeting (never resulted in a pub). Would that still be game for ERAS you think?

 

[Pepe18]

.

 

[cowme]

Unless you're gung ho for an academic career, all research is a waste of time

 

[eteshoe]

Unless you're gung ho for an academic career, all research is a waste of time

Now that's a bit extreme of a viewpoint

 

[cowme]

I guess I should have qualified it as most research. MD/phds spending 4-6 years on a project--those are vital to our profession. But I'm talking about the research that 95% of us do--the review articles, the case series, the weakly designed studies-complete waste of time.

 

[mistafab]

No publications = worth nothing

If you can't squeek out a measly poster from your research then it is worthless.

 

[evilbooyaa]

I guess I should have qualified it as most research. MD/phds spending 4-6 years on a project--those are vital to our profession. But I'm talking about the research that 95% of us do--the review articles, the case series, the weakly designed studies-complete waste of time.

Eh. A lot of large clinical trials start off with retrospective reviews of single institution data.

I agree that most medical student research is not going to be groundbreaking. However, I disagree that even most research is useless. I will agree that case reports that aren't hypothesis generating (basically anything along the lines of, "Look at this rare presentation of a common or uncommon disease, which was managed the exact same way as it would've been otherwise) are useless, but they're mostly in their own specific journals which can be ignored en masse.

 

[SunsFun]

Productivity is one important part of your application. Another part is LORs. Ideally you should attempt to get both. But, even with productivity component missing, research experience can still be valuable.

In my experience working long-term with established faculty in your field who will then write you an excellent letter, even if the project is far from coming to fruition, is definitely worth the time.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Daodejing]

Getchu on some QI projects. That'll make errybody wanna be your frand (aka interview you)




*sarcasm

 

[cowme]

Eh. A lot of large clinical trials start off with retrospective reviews of single institution data.

I agree that most medical student research is not going to be groundbreaking. However, I disagree that even most research is useless. I will agree that case reports that aren't hypothesis generating (basically anything along the lines of, "Look at this rare presentation of a common or uncommon disease, which was managed the exact same way as it would've been otherwise) are useless, but they're mostly in their own specific journals which can be ignored en masse.

I did a lot, LOT of research in the past decade with a lot of famous academics. All I can tell you is every single one fudged numbers/p-hacked or changed the design of the "methods" retrospectively when their hypothesis proved wrong.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but it's very hard for me to read any literature anymore without rolling my eyes.

 

[Daodejing]

I did a lot, LOT of research in the past decade with a lot of famous academics. All I can tell you is every single one fudged numbers/p-hacked or changed the design of the "methods" retrospectively when their hypothesis proved wrong.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but it's very hard for me to read any literature anymore without rolling my eyes.

Wow...RIP scientific integrity and personal ethics.

 

[PL198]

Wow...RIP scientific integrity and personal ethics.

does it surprise you that those whose career progression is tied to their academic production would would fudge numbers or change stuff after the fact?

in other news, water is wet

 

[Daodejing]

in this day and age, nothing much surprises me anymore. still pretty awful and ****ed up to hear about.

 

[.hematoma.]

I did a lot, LOT of research in the past decade with a lot of famous academics. All I can tell you is every single one fudged numbers/p-hacked or changed the design of the "methods" retrospectively when their hypothesis proved wrong.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but it's very hard for me to read any literature anymore without rolling my eyes.

Seems like you've been working with the wrong people...

 

[RooibosTea]

I did a lot, LOT of research in the past decade with a lot of famous academics. All I can tell you is every single one fudged numbers/p-hacked or changed the design of the "methods" retrospectively when their hypothesis proved wrong.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but it's very hard for me to read any literature anymore without rolling my eyes.

I am not the least bit surprised.

 

[failedatlife]

Yeah I guess it is pretty worthless. BUT if you have a high step score, all you need is a little interest in research and you can match well. The converse of course, and you are screwed (like me).

 

[RooibosTea]

Yeah I guess it is pretty worthless. BUT if you have a high step score, all you need is a little interest in research and you can match well. The converse of course, and you are screwed (like me).

Quit being so hard on yourself. You are not a failure at life nor are you screwed.

 

[evilbooyaa]

I did a lot, LOT of research in the past decade with a lot of famous academics. All I can tell you is every single one fudged numbers/p-hacked or changed the design of the "methods" retrospectively when their hypothesis proved wrong.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but it's very hard for me to read any literature anymore without rolling my eyes.

I think you're in Radiology, right? I'm not familiar with the research world of Radiology (and even if there are clinical trials for radiology) so I can't speak to your feelings. Unfortunate that you've had to deal with people like that. There's people who farm for significance in every field, but given the number of negative clinical trials (at least in Oncology) I'd like to think that it's not a bunch of people ignoring all fact to pursue scientific 'evidence' of their biases.

Don't mean to hijack, but have a question about undergrad research. I worked on a research project pretty independently in undergrad (wrote the proposal, did data collection, data analysis, lit review, etc.) and more data was collected by a master's student after I graduated. The PI plans to have us write up the project and publish in the next couple years (hopefully while I'm still in med school). It's bench research, but related to ecology/environmental science from a microbiology perspective. Since it will be published during med school, is this something I should put on my CV for residency apps?

If it makes a difference, I will have at least two other public health projects entirely during med school on there - one qualitative project with underserved populations in my city and one survey-based global health project. So yes other research, but nothing strictly clinical or bench research. I'm only an M2 but leaning pretty heavily towards less competitive primary care specialties at the moment.

Published in medical school means on ERAS. Doesn't matter when you did the majority of your work. You will still spend time in medical school formulating the paper. Can't guarantee it'll help a bunch given that it's ecology (and not biology) , but it most likely can't hurt.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Exactly as question states. Due to serious health issues, I was unable to do any research between M1 and M2. I am hoping to do some clinical research during M3 (just an easy project, done from a computer). But I'm worried it won't be done in time to publish before residency apps. If that is the case, does the research help my app at all?
[P.S. Not planning on going into a competitive specialty right now]

Yes, there is a whole section in ERAS applications called "Research Experience" where you get to write about what you did, irrespective of publication status.

On a side note... writing "submitted" on anything (ERAS, CV, whatever), is a meaningless designation. You could type the letter "X" 5000 times, title it "The Trivial Journey of X-dependent Research into Unknown Destinations" and "submit it" to a predatory journal. That's not going to help you in your residency application.

 

[.hematoma.]

On a side note... writing "submitted" on anything (ERAS, CV, whatever), is a meaningless designation

I've heard the exact opposite of this from docs/recently matched students.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

I've heard the exact opposite of this from docs/recently matched students.

Well, I suspect that each person approaches it differently, but if I see "submitted" I pay it no mind because anyone can submit anything. The designations "in preparation" or "in submission" are meaningless. I have several papers in preparation and in submission, but until they are accepted, I don't note them (no one should).

I value the "Research Experience" part far more on an application because one gets to explain how they actually contributed and what they learned.

 

[evilbooyaa]

I've heard the exact opposite of this from docs/recently matched students.

So, most submitted projects won't hold the same value as one that is published. I think of ERAS as telling a story. If you have a research year that you discuss in detail in research experience and have a main project from that which is 'submitted', I think that gets more credit than having no or minimal research experience and having something be submitted.

I doubt most people are making up bogus papers that have been submitted.

Here's what my outlook would look like in terms of significance:
Published > Submitted (with an abstract/poster/presentation already performed) > Abstract/Poster/Presentation > Submitted (with no other inclusion) > In preparation

 

[SurfingDoctor]

Don't forget the standard of significance when it comes to written work is peer review. Published papers, oral presentation and most poster presentations have been peer reviewed. Submitted and in preparation whatevers have not.

 

[.hematoma.]

Well, I suspect that each person approaches it differently, but if I see "submitted" I pay it no mind because anyone can submit anything. The designations "in preparation" or "in submission" are meaningless. I have several papers in preparation and in submission, but until they are accepted, I don't note them (no one should).

I value the "Research Experience" part far more on an application because one gets to explain how they actually contributed and what they learned.

I do agree that "in submission" is meaningless, but I mean I'd hope that someone who has a paper in submission has written about it in their research experience section as well, no? Hand in hand I hope.

 

[TheStallion16]

Very little from undergrad belongs on your ERAS application. Research from undergrad should only be listed if it is directly related to research you continued in medical school or if it is part of a larger story you are trying to tell.

Also, "Submitted" status definitely counts on ERAS. Application readers like to see that you have shown some interest in a topic and explored it, so the most beneficial is if you can have a paper that ties in to an area of interest that you are prepared to talk about on the trail. Having a few submitted papers shows at least some initiative in the area of research. Published would be best, but submitted is better than nothing.

What about research that was done in undergrad, but not published until you were in med school. I have been involved in 2 clinical research projects during my junior and senior year of UG. The projects will be completely finished before I graduate, but will not be published until I'm an MS1. Is that relevant to include in residency apps?

 

[SunsFun]

What about research that was done in undergrad, but not published until you were in med school. I have been involved in 2 clinical research projects during my junior and senior year of UG. The projects will be completely finished before I graduate, but will not be published until I'm an MS1. Is that relevant to include in residency apps?

IMO, any paper with authorship indexed in PubMed, even if done in high school, is ERAS-worthy. I would draw a line at presentations/posters done before Med school that are not medically relevant and didn't result in publication (e.g. you presented a poster on ants/corn/lizards at a school conference).


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app