MD/PhD and publication question

[Ziggy08]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi,

I went to a premed info session today and heard from our school's health careers evaluation committee that we practically *need a research publication to be competiive in the MD/PhD admissions to top 20 schools?

How true is that? Although I've been involved in research, I'm not definite that I can get a publication by the time I apply.

 

[QofQuimica]

Hi,

I went to a premed info session today and heard from our school's health careers evaluation committee that we practically *need a research publication to be competiive in the MD/PhD admissions to top 20 schools?

How true is that? Although I've been involved in research, I'm not definite that I can get a publication by the time I apply.

I'm doing my degrees separately, so I don't have much direct experience with applying MD/PhD. But my understanding is that no, you do not have to have published a paper in order to be admitted to any MD/PhD program. I am going to move your thread to the physician scientist forum; I think you'll get some more answers there. 🙂

 

[antinomian]

This is not true. Though many of my classmates had publications, many of their publications came to fruition after they were accepted, and some did not have any. I fell into the latter category, and like many in my position, I had a wealth of choices at the end of the application process.

-antinomian

Tri-I Student

 

[gbwillner]

Hi,

I went to a premed info session today and heard from our school's health careers evaluation committee that we practically *need a research publication to be competiive in the MD/PhD admissions to top 20 schools?

How true is that? Although I've been involved in research, I'm not definite that I can get a publication by the time I apply.

One day you'll learn that most teachers don't know squat, especially guidance councellors. "we practically *need a research publication to be competiive in the MD/PhD admissions to top 20 schools" Is completely false. Of the 20 or so MSTPs I know well, only two of them that had such a publication, and yes, I am in a top 20 school.

 

[Maebea]

Having reviewed multiple thousands of MD-PhD applications over the years, I can confirm that this statement is not true. Even among individuals offered admission to our "top-twenty" program, only 10-15% have a publication at the time the offer is made. While a having a publication will not hurt your application, it is certainly not required. If you pm the name of your school to me, I will contact the premed advisor to reiterate this message.

 

[Neuronix]

I went to a premed info session today and heard from our school's health careers evaluation committee that we practically *need a research publication to be competiive in the MD/PhD admissions to top 20 schools?

My advisor in undergrad told me "If you want to get into a MD/PhD program like Hopkins or Penn you will need at least two first or second authored publications." I got into one of those schools with 0 publications. It's all the bad advice I got as an undergrad that makes me post here even though I'm well past the admissions process.

 

[nugget3]

I am also curious about this. I have been with a lab for almost 4 years. My post doc and I(first co author) haven't gotten our paper published in a journal. I expect that the paper will be out later this year, but I won't have it in time for my application. Is it going to hurt my application since i haven't produced a paper within 4 years? Is it bad that i'm not first author?
I've read else where its not about the publication or the time its more about the characteristic and skills required to be a successful scientist. Which most likely will be reveled during a med school interview. Just curious to see what people's thoughts are.

 

[SilverBvllet]

I am also curious about this. I have been with a lab for almost 4 years. My post doc and I(first co author) haven't gotten our paper published in a journal. I expect that the paper will be out later this year, but I won't have it in time for my application. Is it going to hurt my application since i haven't produced a paper within 4 years? Is it bad that i'm not first author?
I've read else where its not about the publication or the time its more about the characteristic and skills required to be a successful scientist. Which most likely will be reveled during a med school interview. Just curious to see what people's thoughts are.

Don't worry about it, it's the experience and being able to speak about your research that counts. 4 years and 1 pub...totally understandable. Publishing is very field dependent and project dependent. Also if you did mostly summer REU programs then this is also understandable because it's hard to publish something in 10 weeks. Again, most applicants even MSTP will not have publications. I say this from people I met on the interview trail. Only one guy had like an insane amount of papers, but there is always one crazy exception. You having a co-first-author pub will already put you at the front of the pack. I know I did not have publications (two in review) when I applied, but it did not hurt me since one program has taken me. Many of the current MSTP students have their papers come out after they join the program so this is common. Also you can update your schools and bring it up during interviews if it comes out after you submit AMCAS (except Stanford which doesn't accept updates until you get an interview invite...that's the only exception I remember).

 

[chutzpah]

I'll have three second author publications by the time I matriculate. I feel like it doesn't hurt, but is certainly not a requirement. Adcoms care more about how you can demonstrate understanding about the research you took part in more so than a published manuscript.

 

[Neuronix]

Publishing as an undergrad is about luck and connections. We all know it. Some PIs aren't going to include you as an author for your work, while others will stick you in as second author. Some projects don't work out, and that might be the ones you were put on as the undergrad. Who knows. Who cares. It's simply not important.

Your research is assessed from (in no particular order):
Amount of time served in labs
Letters of recommendation
Your MD/PhD essay
Your interview

 

[BarmyArmy]

Publishing as an undergrad is about luck and connections. We all know it. Some PIs aren't going to include you as an author for your work, while others will stick you in as second author. Some projects don't work out, and that might be the ones you were put on as the undergrad. Who knows. Who cares. It's simply not important.

Your research is assessed from (in no particular order):
Amount of time served in labs
Letters of recommendation
Your MD/PhD essay
Your interview

Neuronix is 100% right. But if you are like me (mediocre undergrad gpa + 33 on the MCAT) then having a publication at least in review will be key to get into a top 20 program.

 

[phatlineman]

.

 

[BarmyArmy]

I got into Pitt. I think it has to do with my research interest matching what the program was looking for, and having a big shot PI doing the online supplemental recommendation form helped.

 

[chutzpah]

I think Pitt is one of the more forgiving MSTPs, I got an interview as well (I just bombed it :/) but they have an amazing program.

 

[Neuronix]

Neuronix is 100% right. But if you are like me (mediocre undergrad gpa + 33 on the MCAT) then having a publication at least in review will be key to get into a top 20 program.

I find this misleading on several accounts.

1) Anyone can submit any junk they want to a journal and have it reviewed. This encourages people to submit papers that are incomplete and gives people false hope that such incomplete papers will increase their chances at MSTP admissions. Adcoms know this about in review papers, and as such I contend that the vast majority do not necessarily consider them as major positive notes on one's application (or positive at all).

2) The most important factors are GPA, MCAT, and research EXPERIENCE. I don't know what your undergrad GPA was, but a 33 MCAT is not so low as to preclude one from obtaining an interview. Combined with sufficient experience and some of the factors you listed in your later post, you may very well get an interview or acceptance to a top-20 program. I seriously doubt it has much to do with a submitted paper.

That being said, adcoms have varying opinions and one might disagree with me. I still don't at all agree with your assertion that an in review manuscript (or even a published one) is the key to being accepted to a top program. As for competitiveness of programs, it has only a loose association with ranking and I will again bash US News research rankings as an indicator of where you should attend. The idea of "top 20" being the most desirable is thus misleading to me. The MSTPs make up most of the top-50 USNews ranking schools (and indeed the ones that aren't usually have fully funded programs), and I would thus make getting into a top 50 program your priority.

 

[BarmyArmy]

I find this misleading on several accounts.

1) Anyone can submit any junk they want to a journal and have it reviewed. This encourages people to submit papers that are incomplete and gives people false hope that such incomplete papers will increase their chances at MSTP admissions. Adcoms know this about in review papers, and as such I contend that the vast majority do not necessarily consider them as major positive notes on one's application (or positive at all).

2) The most important factors are GPA, MCAT, and research EXPERIENCE. I don't know what your undergrad GPA was, but a 33 MCAT is not so low as to preclude one from obtaining an interview. Combined with sufficient experience and some of the factors you listed in your later post, you may very well get an interview or acceptance to a top-20 program. I seriously doubt it has much to do with a submitted paper.

That being said, adcoms have varying opinions and one might disagree with me. I still don't at all agree with your assertion that an in review manuscript (or even a published one) is the key to being accepted to a top program. As for competitiveness of programs, it has only a loose association with ranking and I will again bash US News research rankings as an indicator of where you should attend. The idea of "top 20" being the most desirable is thus misleading to me. The MSTPs make up most of the top-50 USNews ranking schools (and indeed the ones that aren't usually have fully funded programs), and I would thus make getting into a top 50 program your priority.

Haha... hold your horses. I was just giving the guy my 2 cents. I do not assert that manuscript is most important, I only suggest that if the GPA/MCAT is not too stellar THEN a manuscript can be key. It might just sway the adcom enough to get you an interview, which is where they can really assess if you know your stuff. So you are right that GPA/MCAT is #1. It was also not my intention to mislead kids into submitting POS into journals. I do hope decent PIs wont allow their student submit half finish stuff because that is just irresponsible and embarrassing. Again, everything will come out in interviews. Also i was using t20 because it was mentioned in the post, frankly what really matters to me is location and research strength in my department.

Damn... getting flamed is that last thing I imagined after getting home at midnight. So... Neuronix, I will refrain from commenting unless I've got 20min to cover my bases. peace ? 🙂


EDIT:

Reading my previous posts, it really does seem that i am giving ****e advice to kids. My apologies!

 

[Neuronix]

BA,

I have not been posting with the intention to flame you. I apologize if it looks that way to everyone and I am sorry if I offended you. I speak bluntly with my opinions, and I am quick to criticize other opinions when I disagree. But, I never mean to attack the character or intelligence of other posters. We are all speaking from anecdotes and opinions because we usually have limited data to back up anything we say. My goal on SDN is always to create an open environment for discussion and so I hope we can continue to do that.

In this case you struck a nerve so I should explain myself. The idea of needing a publication to get into an MD/PhD program or even of one being tremendously helpful is an idea I have been fighting in this forum and in pre-allo for years. My own undergraduate institution strongly discouraged me from applying to MD/PhD programs since I did not have a publication. From the beginning of my research experience, I was told that I should (and more or less needed to) publish, and this discouraged me from applying at all. As a first-gen college graduate, I was a nobody, and struggled through minimally funded labs, while several other MD/PhD-bound students were the children of professors or physicians who had connections and got their names on big name papers. It turns out every MD/PhD faculty knows this is the reality of undergrad life. .

Likewise, the idea of the necessary publication has discouraged many qualified applicants from applying. It breaks my heart every time I talk to someone on this forum and in the real world who did not apply MD/PhD but who really wanted to because they were misled in this fashion. Conversely, the idea that "I have published, so I am a shoo-in" has given false hope to many others.

The idea of the necessary publication is not steeped in any sort of fact and would go against the opinions of the adcoms I have spoken with and the adcoms that have posted on this forum. In this thread alone we have seen several qualified commentators post against the idea.

I should disclaim that one should always get experience within research. It is my opinion that is far more helpful as an undergrad to produce first authored work. Go to conferences, present posters/abstracts, write grants, and generate first-authored work, whatever your work may merit. This is the real preparation you need--not generating one figure (or one sentence) for a manuscript that gets written by a grad student or post-doc and gets published with your name on it.

But just because one manages to get their name on a paper or even publishes their own first-author manuscript, it does not make the application tremendously stronger. Similarly, just because one does not manage to publish, it does not make it impossible to get into a top MD/PhD program.

Yes, there are exceptions to this post. There is the occasional applicant with a first-authored paper in a big journal. There is the occasional applicant who has published a ton. These are rare cases. The GPA and MCAT are still important even then.

 

[phatlineman]

I think Pitt is one of the more forgiving MSTPs, I got an interview as well (I just bombed it :/) but they have an amazing program.

dammit! should have applied to pitt 🙄
are there any other MSTPs (in the top 20 or otherwise) that are known to be more forgiving of mediocre to low gpa/mcat scores if you have an otherwise strong research background (publications, time spent, good letters from PIs, etc)?

 

[phatlineman]

Does anyone else think the MSTPs that are not in the top 20 may not like to take applicants with strong research but low GPA/MCAT, in order to inflate their averages so that they can improve their reputation?
One instance from my application cycle that kind of pissed me off happened at a MSTP ranked 20-something..two people I know that had 3.9+ GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores but mediocre to weak research backgrounds (judging by Neuronix's sticky; one did research for like 1 year and 1 summer and the other one for 2 years) got accepted while I got flat out rejected after the interview with 4 years of experience and publications.

Edit: I also thought my interview went well, but you can never really tell what the interviewers think about you...

 

[Lil Mick]

Had a couple interviews (Hopkins...) with low gpa and low MCAT (low-average, I guess) but good research. I

t's about the experiences in your research, though. I didn't have a publication at the time I applied, but I had several years of research experiences and had led a study. Publication is really a crap-shoot in some areas of study, and programs know this, hence looking for substantial experience, rather than publications.

Along this line of reasoning, I think that interviews are a crap-shoot, too. I can't figure out any reasoning behind which schools interviewed me and which schools didn't...

 

[tortuga87]

Does anyone else think the MSTPs that are not in the top 20 may not like to take applicants with strong research but low GPA/MCAT, in order to inflate their averages so that they can improve their reputation?
One instance from my application cycle that kind of pissed me off happened at a MSTP ranked 20-something..two people I know that had 3.9+ GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores but mediocre to weak research backgrounds (judging by Neuronix's sticky; one did research for like 1 year and 1 summer and the other one for 2 years) got accepted while I got flat out rejected after the interview with 4 years of experience and publications.

Edit: I also thought my interview went well, but you can never really tell what the interviewers think about you...

Yes, but screw them. That's why you should apply to a bunch and hopefully have the freedom to pick a good program with nice people 👍

But then again, there are a lot of amazing people in the applicant pool who have the grades, MCAT, research and ECs. I don't think anyone can say that the guy with a 3.8 GPA is going to be a better physician scientist than the guy with a 3.7. Maybe there is a slight mean difference in large populations, but the variability is too huge to make an accurate judgment about any one person. Anyways, if you could only interview one of the two, you would just have to go with the 3.8 guy (all other things being equal). So, in the end, it necessarily becomes mostly a numbers game

 

[emiko]

Also.. don't forget that the quality of your research doesn't equal the amount of time you put into it. I don't believe the number of years you have spent in the lab as an undergrad tells people how talented you are when it comes to research. Of course it will be hard to judge a student's potential if he/she only spent a short time in the lab. However, I would think that most of the top MD/PhD programs are interested in admitting students who can potentially become prominent scientists and thus they would try to evaluate your potential from multiple layers. Of course it will be very impressive if you get a first author paper in a good journal as an undergrad, but other characteristics such as creativity, ability to present your research, your enthusiasm and curiosity toward science, and communication skills....etc etc are important factors as well.

I personally don't have any publication yet (but I *might* have 3 by the time I graduate this May)and my app cycle has been going pretty smoothly. I applied to 11 programs (all top 25) and was invited to 8 interviews. I have good GPA and MCAT and honestly I was pretty worried that having no publication would hurt me. Would I have been invited to these 2 programs that rejected me pre-interview? Maybe.. maybe not! You never know what's going on in those admission committees and it is true that perhaps certain schools/committee members feel very strong about publication but that's not going to be ALL schools. So I would say chill out and do a good job in lab instead of thinking to put your name in the middle of a long list of authors. It's great if you start to think about how to organize your manuscript and start to make figures, but there's no reason to stress out about having no publication as long as you are doing quality work!

 

[BarmyArmy]

fair play to you neuronix. After reading your post and rereading my posts, I am actually pretty embarrassed at myself getting all defensive towards your insightful criticism. My poorly thought out responses didnt do me any favors either. So no hard feelings 🙂

 

[Caristra]

This guidance counselor is really spreading possibly the worst premed paranoia rumor out there.

I almost did not apply to programs because I was told similar things that are not true.

If you have good research experience and solid grades you should not let yourself be discouraged from applying.

 

[Guero]

First, I'd like to thank everyone for yet another splendiferous post. (Dude, I love that splendiferous is an actual word!)

Neuronix, I wish I would’ve stumbled upon your post years ago. Until very recently, I subscribed to this publications = “shoo-in” myth. Much of my scientific productivity has been serendipitous; but as I pinned down the MSTP as my ultimate route, I dove head-first into these opportunities and put all of my effort into having my hand in as many projects as possible, often times feeling way over-extended. At the time, my goals were to (1) have as many coauthored and first-authored manuscripts/posters as possible, with the hopes of having one senior-authored manuscript at the time of application, and (2) to transition into a lifestyle that mimicked the level of work germane to the leadership-heavy lifestyle that the MSTP tends to espouse in its students (and, from what I’ve seen, sometimes coerce).

While not necessarily a bad thing, 2/3 of my work has been clinical and won’t quite give me that same push that the other 1/3 of basic science will when I apply. And now I learn that the molecular neuro pub I’ll coauthor as we complete our year’s worth of experiments, while high impact, may not even be as helpful as I originally thought—ugh.

Regardless, the experiences themselves have been more than worth the trouble. I’ve learned so much about modeling, various methods, scientific patience and problem solving, and most of all, more about my areas of interest than can come from any other experience. I just wish I knew that I never had to kill myself staying up all hours of the night writing papers and following-up with new projects while I simultaneously worked a full-time job, pursued post-bac pre-meds, and volunteered. And now I’m stuck finishing what I started. Ugh. I can't wait to focus on school and not work. 🙄

Well, Neuronix, you’ve successfully proselytized me to spread the “Good Word.” F***K! Seriously, though, hindsight is always 20-20. What can you do?

I'm going to go get a drink...

 

[phatlineman]

First, I'd like to thank everyone for yet another splendiferous post. (Dude, I love that splendiferous is an actual word!)

Neuronix, I wish I would’ve stumbled upon your post years ago. Until very recently, I subscribed to this publications = “shoo-in” myth. Much of my scientific productivity has been serendipitous; but as I pinned down the MSTP as my ultimate route, I dove head-first into these opportunities and put all of my effort into having my hand in as many projects as possible, often times feeling way over-extended. At the time, my goals were to (1) have as many coauthored and first-authored manuscripts/posters as possible, with the hopes of having one senior-authored manuscript at the time of application, and (2) to transition into a lifestyle that mimicked the level of work germane to the leadership-heavy lifestyle that the MSTP tends to espouse in its students (and, from what I’ve seen, sometimes coerce).

While not necessarily a bad thing, 2/3 of my work has been clinical and won’t quite give me that same push that the other 1/3 of basic science will when I apply. And now I learn that the molecular neuro pub I’ll coauthor as we complete our year’s worth of experiments, while high impact, may not even be as helpful as I originally thought—ugh.

Regardless, the experiences themselves have been more than worth the trouble. I’ve learned so much about modeling, various methods, scientific patience and problem solving, and most of all, more about my areas of interest than can come from any other experience. I just wish I knew that I never had to kill myself staying up all hours of the night writing papers and following-up with new projects while I simultaneously worked a full-time job, pursued post-bac pre-meds, and volunteered. And now I’m stuck finishing what I started. Ugh. I can't wait to focus on school and not work. 🙄

Well, Neuronix, you’ve successfully proselytized me to spread the “Good Word.” F***K! Seriously, though, hindsight is always 20-20. What can you do?

I'm going to go get a drink...

....are you for real?

 

[soundnin]

....are you for real?

my sentiments exactly regarding the first bolded text lol 😕

 

[Guero]

Clarification: all of my pubs were the result of hard work (data collection, experimental design, and always writing part of or the entire manuscript). None of my pubs were hand-me-downs or BS. Granted, the undergrad stuff was at a beginner level and not as high-impact as the later projects, as would be expected from an undergrad doing his or her own research.

....are you for real?

Is that an incredulous for real or an innocuousy surprised for real? :-\ I can't make this stuff up, man.

RE: the work, yes.

I've been fortunate to work under physicians, so they're flexible with my schedule considering my goals. I freakin' get up at 5a every day, get to work at 6a, leave at various points to go to class and return at various points to finish my work. I volunteer in all of my basic science labwork. I also volunteer as an EMT and as a clinic nurse.

I'm married, too. I'll tell ya, you really value your time together when you're this pressed.

RE: the thought process, somewhat.

I mean, I wasn't totally ignorant. I knew, and still know, that my grades and MCAT were essential aspects of my app along with volunteering and the gamut of other ECs. I've worked very hard to develop a well-rounded app with awesome grades and have been studying for my 8/23/11 MCAT seat since last year.

RE: Senior author

I approached my neurosurgery mentor about a project that he suggested I take all the way. It's been written, but needs a spin to sell itself. It's a radical DBS idea.