1) Yes.
2) Your choice may depend on the space you have and whether you have other equally substantive leadership roles. If you have plenty of space, it would make sense to highlight the leadership component by listing it on its own (but not double counting the hours involved). If space is limited, or you need the extra characters, you would do best to make the activity "Most Meaningful," and make the inclusion of leadership clear from the title you give the activity. A last option would be to split the activity, but designate just one component of the two as "Most Meaningful."
3) JMO, but research should be listed under Research, whether paid, volunteer, or for credit. Make the employment clear, perhaps from the title you choose. If they were in the same lab/same PI, they could be combined if you need the space.
I would not state, "4 more publications in communication/prep" as this is presumptuous. Rather, say, "four manuscripts are in process of preparation" or somesuch. As this doesn't help your application, except to be thorough, I you are short on space, you can omit it.
Another way to group for you to consider which cuts down on repeating the same title/citation over and over: Each completed project/set of data should be listed under the most prestigious manner in which the data was shared with the world, with lesser presentations mentioned afterward in the same space. So if the same data was published in Nature, but also previously in a campus pub, was part of the book chapter, 3 posters at conferences of various repute, 1 abstract published in a conference's national journal supplement, and a podium presentation, then all this would be mentioned in a single space. If you are short on space, then campus events/venues can be omitted as they don't add much luster to your application. So can pubs not found in PubMed.
"Conferences Attended" category doesn't do much for you. Use Posters/Presentations if that is the highest format of presentation, choosing the most prestigious among them for the header information.
This is just an overview, as you didn't give much detail. If it doesn't suit your circumstances, feel free to provide more info.
Dear Cat, your feedback is greatly appreciated! Thank you very much.
2) I will consider listing the activity under the "Community Service/Volunteer - non Medical/Clinical" experience type and then mark it as the most meaningful. In the experience description, I will list the different roles I had on the Executive Board and in the experience summary, I will describe the type of volunteering services I've done and why.
Under "Leadership - Not Listed Elsewhere" experience type, may I list a separate organization that I'm an Advisor for since 2011 (it's an international club and I attended one of the Summits for it), one chapter that I started on campus, and I mentored high school students at the Business Program on campus for two summers?
3) I did undergraduate research in 2008 and I started volunteering in another lab w/ different PI after I graduated in 2010 and got hired in few months later as a Research Assistant.
I decided to combine my undergrad and graduate research under one experience type and marked it as the most meaningful.
Experience Type: Research/Lab
Experience Name: Research Assistant
Experience Description: I wrote that
1) Undergraduate Researcher, Department, School, Project Name. (PI name, date, x hours/week)
2) Research Assistant, Department, School, Summary/Title of Research (PI name, date, 50 hours/week).
555 characters/700
Experience Summary:
I listed the bullet point style of what the type of procedures I have performed, the title of projects...
615 characters/700
My personal statement will include my research experience and what I learned from it...etc.. So considering that, do you believe that the bullet format in the "Experience Summary" box is acceptable, even though AMCAS advices to use it to explain why you have selected this experience as the most meaningful and what you've learned from it?
Experience Type: Publications
Experience Description, I typed:
1) 1 journal publication in 2012 (second author)
2) 1 paper in communication 2012.
3) 2 publications in preparation 2012 (second author)
4) 1 book chapter publication in 2011 (second author)
195 characters /700 words
I marked it as the "most meaningful" and got extra space under the Experience Summary where I typed the actual paper names that correlated to what I typed above in the Experience Description
Experience Summary
1) authors, paper name, publication name, 2012
2) paper name, publication name, (In Communication), 2012
3) authors, paper name (In Preparation), 2012
4) authors, paper name (In Preparation), 2012
5) authors, book chapter name, publisher, 2011
1118 characters/1325 max
If I don't mark Publications as the most meaningful experience, I can fit it under the 700 character limit only if I (a) omit the authors (b) omit the book chapter - since it was an online "InTech" publishing. Do you believe that this is a better way of doing this and do you think it's necessary to list under which publications I was a second author?
I agreed with you and deleted the "Conferences Attended" experience type and instead used "Presentations/Posters".
Experience Type: Presentations/Posters
In the
Experience Descrpiton, I listed
1) title of abstract, conference name where I presented and date
2) title of abstract, symphosium name
3) I typed "Two poster presentations May, 2011 and three poster presentations April, 2012 at Hospital Name Research Week, location"
In (3), I could not fit the titles of abstracts, but I presented these abstracts at the hospital where I work at and it was during our National Research Week.
Thank you so so much.