Paper accepted vs. published by September 15th - Is there a difference?

[DNA 105]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Greetings. I'm a candidate for the upcoming match and my query is straightforward.

Scenario 1 - A paper is "published" in a good pubmed indexed journal before September 15th. Scenario 2 - A paper is "accepted" to be published in a good pubmed indexed journal but not yet published.

I know scenario 1 would be ideal but is it a big deal? I mean would PDs reviewing my application really care about the paper not being published when they know it is just a matter of time it will be. Is there any real practical difference between these two scenarios or is scenario 2 just as good as scenario 1?

I know it's a subjective question as not all PDs are clones of one another but I want to have a general idea. I also know scores are more important but I'm just asking you to compare the 2 given scenarios. I have some decisions to make and your opinion would be valuable in making them. Cheers!

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

If it is truly accepted? Then there is no practical difference.

The problem is that a lot of applicants misclassify submitted or under review as "accepted" (either maliciously or through misunderstanding of the terms) - so thorough PDs who review peoples CVs will be skeptical of anything they can't find - since they've been burned before.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Published >> In Press >> Accepted >> Under Review >>> Submitted

As southernIM notes, Submitted may never be accepted for publication so it may be viewed with a certain amount of side eye.

 

[DNA 105]

Sorry for the late reply, been traveling. Thank you both for your inputs. I completely understand what you said. I was indeed talking about being "truly accepted" or "in press" (even though ERAS mentions it as two options, I don't see a practical difference between these two). I'm talking about the state when the peer-review has been complete, article has been revised (if required) and then eventually accepted for publication; only pending the publisher's typesetting and the actual publishing. (I don't know if the publisher can deny publishing an accepted paper on any grounds.)

I'll make sure the point about being "truly accepted" gets through to the PDs somehow through my ERAS application. Thanks again!

 

[michigangirl]

If the article has been accepted, meaning that the journal editor has sent a letter that says they are pleased to publish your manuscript-- at that point the article is "in press"-- in press is just as good as published. In fact, many journals take a LONG time to get from the accepted/in press stage to actually "published". if all revisions are complete and editor has said "yes" but typesetting hasn't been done, it's "in press"-- no need to belabor/emphasize. "in press" with the journal name and year is sufficient.