Posters

[tastybeef]

For med school application, would clinical research posters be considered publications? These posters will be presented at several research conventions and it'd be awesome if they count as publications.

Also, how are LOR's from PhD candidates compared to those from PhDs/professors?
I ask this, because I've only been in huge lecture classes so far. My TA's (known as GSI's at my school) know me well, but none of my professors know me. Surely, I will put in some effort to get to know my professors better in the future, but as it stands, I might get a LOR from a TA.


Thanks for the help.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Maxwell Edison]

Can't speak to the posters bit, someone else will have to step in on that one. Regarding letters, I believe that conventional wisdom says that a strong letter from someone without prestige who knows you is miles ahead of a meager letter from someone with prestige who does not. The perfect storm, obviously, is a mix of both familiarity and a decent title (I wonder if the Pope ever wrote a MD school LOR) but failing that, familiarity wins.

 

[beachblonde]

Posters are posters. They're not peer-reviewed and are not physically published, so no, they don't count as publications. It's way easier to make a poster than it is to get published.

And double check with schools about that TA LOR. Most med schools require faculty letters, and I doubt a TA counts as true faculty. I would shy away from getting a letter from somebody who doesn't have their PhD yet (usually it's recommended that not even post-docs write letters, because the PI is the one in charge).

 

[punkindrublic]

I included my posters under publications.

The way I see it my name and the title are printed in the journal associated with the groups the poster was submitted to. That's publication in my book (my book is obviously very very liberal).

 

[Pinkertinkle]

I believe it goes under abstracts or presentations.

 

[jyw003]

I believe it goes under abstracts or presentations.

thats where i put mine---

oh and btw, in this poster does it contain an abstract? if the abstract is published, i think the poster should be included...but if its just a poster without any indication of publicity...i would not put it

 

[xiaoyi666]

I didn't include mine especially since I didn't go to present it and was the 4th author. only the PI and another professor went. It had an abstract and was invited to the conference to be presented. I just briefly mentioned it in my AMCAS under the research I did.

 

[beachblonde]

I included my posters under publications.

The way I see it my name and the title are printed in the journal associated with the groups the poster was submitted to. That's publication in my book (my book is obviously very very liberal).

The reality is that anybody reading your AMCAS will see right through that. If they can't go to pubmed and find the article, they won't count it as a publication. Having your name in print somewhere and a scientific publication are not the same thing.

A poster should be classified either under research or presentations. If you actually presented the research with the poster, list it separately; if not, just lump it in with your research section (unless you're looking to fill more slots, in which case go ahead and make it separate).

 

[punkindrublic]

The reality is that anybody reading your AMCAS will see right through that. If they can't go to pubmed and find the article, they won't count it as a publication. Having your name in print somewhere and a scientific publication are not the same thing.

A poster should be classified either under research or presentations. If you actually presented the research with the poster, list it separately; if not, just lump it in with your research section (unless you're looking to fill more slots, in which case go ahead and make it separate).

Well, the reality is that anybody reading your AMCAS will see right through 90% of it. And now that I think about it, they probably were under presentations (since, you know, I actually did present my findings). It's been a while since I looked at my app.

And also thank you for clarifying the difference between having my name in print and a scientific publication, perhaps I can return the favor by explaining the difference between a serious statement and a joke.

 

[StayingSteady]

If your abstract is published at a conference, does that make any difference (or is that just the same as a poster)? I know it's not a peer-reviewed publication or anything, but I figured it would hold SOME sort of merit. How about if you actually presented at the conference??

and is there a big difference between first/second author? I've published one paper, but I'm just second author boooo (haha jk about the "boooo", but still, does it matter?)

 

[StayingSteady]

oh and by the way, beachblonde, loads of peer-reviewed publications aren't listed on pubmed... so you can be published in a peer-reviewed journal, perhaps an online journal (yes, they exist; everyone's going green nowadays), and it still won't appear on pubmed. but it does count as a peer-reviewed pub. just fyi

 

[BluePhoenix]

If your abstract is published at a conference, does that make any difference (or is that just the same as a poster)? I know it's not a peer-reviewed publication or anything, but I figured it would hold SOME sort of merit. How about if you actually presented at the conference??

and is there a big difference between first/second author? I've published one paper, but I'm just second author boooo (haha jk about the "boooo", but still, does it matter?)

Publications are generally only those that are in peer reviewed journals. Abstracts are simply that....abstracts. I'm pretty sure there's a category for that on AMCAS, but they're not really peer reviewed for their scientific merit. I'm pretty sure posters and presentations are a category in AMCAS as well. When I listed mine, I marked down if it was a poster presentation or an oral presentation along with all the useful information about the conference and whatnot.

The difference between first and second author depends on the number of authors and the field of research, first author is usually better as it's typically the person that did everything but there can be co-first authors and being second doesn't necessarily mean you just played a tiny role. You're applying for med school, it's not going to make a huge difference in your application, I'd imagine that it matters more what you can say about your research and what you did (i.e. if you're on a publication but can't seem to talk about it...they may question if someone just added your name, where if you can talk in detail about your research and why you did what you did, then they'll see you played a big role and were really involved in the project).