No publications from research

[dayman]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

You can't predict your project to work or a publication to happen. I worked a summer at a lab and got a second author. Then I've worked for two years at another lab and nothing so far. We will have 2 publications later in the year, but it could have easily gone south and ended with nothing.

 

[Stoptheclot]

Bad thing? I don't believe so - you have more experience with research than other applicants.
However, my PI and several physicians have continuously emphasized the importance of having some measurable outcome for time spent during research. When I asked why, he told me that I needed to be able to have something that objectively showed what I was doing in the lab instead of basic laboratory techniques. I usually hate analogies, but he compared it to yardwork: anyone can mow the lawn, which will always grow back and someone will always be available to do the labor. However, it takes a lot of sweat and knowledge to do the landscaping! After getting two manuscripts published, I understand why my PI pushed me to publish: it helped me learn so much more about the project/protocol that I was working on and this helped me speak to my interviewers with much more knowledge about my project. My publications made a very small splash in the area of scientific research, but it made a HUGE difference in my interviews! Also, as a reapplicant, I was able to show these two publications in addition to a better MCAT score, more volunteering, and better LoRs, which landed me an acceptance. I won't claim that it was THE reason why I got accepted, but every interviewer I had this year asked me about it.

 

[Moification]

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

After 2.5+ years, I'd expect at least a poster. If you're an undergrad, consider writing a thesis. Otherwise, why don't you just ask your PI to put you as an author on one of the projects you're working on? You should be able to make a decent case for this if you've been in the same lab for a while and made decent contributions to the project.

 

[dayman]

After 2.5+ years, I'd expect at least a poster. If you're an undergrad, consider writing a thesis. Otherwise, why don't you just ask your PI to put you as an author on one of the projects you're working on? You should be able to make a decent case for this if you've been in the same lab for a while and made decent contributions to the project.

Just to clarify the 2.5 years is total among three different labs. I researched for 1.5 year in a lab that rarely published and never had undergrads publish, had a summer research fellowship, and researched for a year in another lab on a fringe project independently that gave some interesting data but nothing publication worthy. It just seems like I had been unlucky between being in labs just following a major publication, or receiving negative results. All of my PIs were happy with my work and had a strong LOR from one of them. I am just worried that I don't have more to show for my research and that it is affecting my application negatively.

 

[Solaire]

You know, more often than not, they just want to see that you can explain your research beyond summarizing what assays you ran (think hypothesis, the overall premise, mechanisms etc). Chances are, you probably produced usable data for a publication, and if you didn't that's okay (a big part of the overall picture is knowing what doesn't work... but it's harder to write papers on that).

A lot of people perform lab assistant-type duties and label them as research (like pouring plates, culturing, etc) which raises questions on the validity of an individual's research experience... So I can see why your interviewer questioned the potential of a publication as it may imply a genuine experience.

In the end what really matters is having a high level of understanding and some enthusiasm/passion for whatever you did. That will always reflect positively, especially that second part.

 

[nellbot2000]

Are you still working in a lab? If so, I would approach your PI and ask them if you can work on a project that has a high likelihood of being published, or even ask them if you can take the work you are doing currently and put together a poster for a conference or even a local poster session. In my experience, PIs are very receptive to individuals who have a drive to publish or show off their work.

If it is a matter of having something to show for your work this application cycle, as your PI and previous PIs if they plan on or have submitted a manuscript that includes any of the work you have done. If they have, report that to the schools you have or will interview at. I sent in an update at one point to reflect a recently submitted manuscript. That at least shows the Adcoms that your work is in the process of being published. I think they realize that the world of research is pretty competitive, and often times it can take years to publish the results of a study, especially if the study is long and reviewers ask for a lot of revisions before publishing etc...

Also, to reflect @Solaire, being able to discuss the purpose of the research means a whole heck of a lot more than saying that you did a lot of pipetting. Know the hypothesis and specific aims of studies you've worked on, be able to talk about them in laymen's terms and elaborate on them scientifically if asked. Understanding and excitement for the research you worked on reflects just as positively on an applicant as a publication does.

 

[Goro]

It's hard enough for grad students and post-doc s to get publications, so relax.

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

 

[Chipster.]

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

Unfortunately, you have to pay the troll toll to get into the boys soul. And the troll loves dem pubs.

You see, in this analogy the boys soul is medical school!

 

[dayman]

Ok so point taken that pubs are good but not the end of the world as long as I can explain the purpose of my projects and show genuine interest. Hopefully I will get into the boys soul...

 

[juliuspepperwood]

Unfortunately, you have to pay the troll toll to get into the boys soul. And the troll loves dem pubs.

You see, in this analogy the boys soul is medical school!

Perfect

 

[Dr Tony T. Chopper]

I have had a decent amount of research experience, having researched in three different labs studying vastly different topics within biology. I have found each experience to be extremely beneficial and listed all three experiences on my AMCAS application.

During an interview I was asked the chances of any of my research experiences producing a publication. The interviewer seemed almost disappointed when I said I couldn't predict the chances of a future publication but I did not think I would have one in the near future. I have had presentations to the members of the lab and other labs but nothing formal and therefore left those off my application.

Is it a bad thing to have 2.5+ years of research experience without a publication or poster presentation to show for it?

It can be rough. Research endeavors that don't lead to high quality publications does not translate to a collective failure by the team, it just means the topic of interest is confounding and difficult. I was very lucky to be published in my Junior year, but only because all the stars were aligned, and I had a hand in writing and making graphics for the supplemental. Don't fret, this is by no means a deal breaker.

 

[pterygoideus]

I had 1.5 years in my last lab (Oct of junior year to June of senior year) on top of 3 summer internships, all different labs, with 0 publications. I did have poster sessions for internships 1 and 3 and 2 posters and an honors thesis for the lab, but it's not like I had to bend over backwards to do them.

The great thing about a poster is that your school will probably have low-key student research expos that you can sign up for. Work with your PI/postdoc to make a poster that discusses your current research and where you see your work going and prepare a 5-10 min spiel about your contribution. A decent poster shouldn't take more than a few weeks and a handful of drafts and practice presentations.

The honors thesis was something that I cobbled together after spending month after month on experiments and strain crosses that for the most part turned out barely not-significant results, but I had a lot of support from my mentors and readers, so if you choose to write it and you don't currently have a people to back you up, now's the time to find them. My last PI was spectacularly unsupportive, but my parents, my major department administrators and my other thesis readers were the best people I could have had on my team, God bless them.

 

[jturkel]

unless you publish a textbook chapter, chances of getting into a top 50 medical school are slim.

...all joking aside, don't think anyone expects you to have anything published as an undergrad. many don't get things published as medical students/grad students. it is more important to get the publications in medical school (if you want to match a competitive residency or program) and moreso in residency (if you want to match a competitive fellowship) than to get them in undergrad.