Publication Strategy - Quantity vs Quality?

[m3ds]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

• Is research completed prior to medical school as relevant on residency applications, or relevant at all?
• Would clinical psychology publications be viewed as medical publications?
• I have the opportunity to relatively easily complete a few more public health/psychology publications through a former workplace - would it be better to focus my efforts here (quantity), or try to start from scratch with a new lab (quality/medical focus)?
• I am still somewhat uncertain about my intended specialty am worried about (for example) applying to anesthesiology with a few random psychology and cardiology publications. How critical is it that the subject matter of your publications match your intended specialty? I understand this may be more critical for more competitive specialties, but is it an absolute must?
• Should I focus on figuring out my specialty before taking on any research at all?

Thanks for any insight!

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Quantity > Quality unfortunately with the caveat being that publishing in a top journal in the field to which you’re applying might be seen as more impressive. But say you do ortho research, publish in a top journal, then end up applying IM, quantity would probably supersede quality

 

[psyspy]

Quantity and it’s not even close. Unless all of the work is obviously trash, PDs are NOT going to peer into a so called higher impact journal unless it’s a journal title that really jumps out at them. They’ve got so much other stuff to read that psychologically, we can guess that they’re just looking for a long CV, if at all. To be honest, if it’s not a super competitive specialty, I feel like research is overrated for matching benefit, and won’t help past 5 pubs or so

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Quantity and it’s not even close. Unless all of the work is obviously trash, PDs are NOT going to peer into a so called higher impact journal unless it’s a journal title that really jumps out at them. They’ve got so much other stuff to read that psychologically, we can guess that they’re just looking for a long CV, if at all. To be honest, if it’s not a super competitive specialty, I feel like research is overrated for matching benefit, and won’t help past 5 pubs or so

Does 5 include case reports?

 

[Dral]

I don't think there is a great answer here. It really depends. I personally prefer quality over quantity when I review apps for our residency and fellowship programs. However, there may be someone else who is more impressed with quantity. They may feel that will translate to the program and would rather see their name get put out there often.

Also, consider that while 10 whatever pubs looks better than one quality pub, three quality pubs will look better than five case reports.

Also consider that there will be people who review your app by skimming over it but don't do a deep dive on it. For them, seeing eight pubs regardless of what they are, will look better than three pubs regardless of what they are.

 

[GoSpursGo]

• Is research completed prior to medical school as relevant on residency applications, or relevant at all?

Yes

• Would clinical psychology publications be viewed as medical publications?

Yes

• I have the opportunity to relatively easily complete a few more public health/psychology publications through a former workplace - would it be better to focus my efforts here (quantity), or try to start from scratch with a new lab (quality/medical focus)?

It depends. I agree with @Dral that the quantity>quality thing is overstated on SDN—it is charting outcomes, not PDs who are just adding up the pubs and stratifying applicants. I was reviewing a fellowship application today in preparation for an interview, and when I saw all of the pubs were case reports I just skipped right past that part of the CV. To me those are better than having nothing at all, but there is essentially no difference between having 2 case reports vs 5 vs 10. Honestly, if someone has something stupid like 10 case reports on their CV I wonder why they didn't bother redirecting some of that effort to something more impactful.

That said, the bottom line is that you want to be productive. When you say you're considering starting a new "lab" I would just be careful that you're actually joining a group that can get you something to show for your efforts by the time you apply. If this is a wet lab that seems like a very high risk for something that will not bear fruit by the end of med school. On the other hand, I would not continue with psychology research during med school--while they certainly "count" I would not continue that line of research now that you're in med school. Public health research would be fine.

• I am still somewhat uncertain about my intended specialty am worried about (for example) applying to anesthesiology with a few random psychology and cardiology publications. How critical is it that the subject matter of your publications match your intended specialty? I understand this may be more critical for more competitive specialties, but is it an absolute must?

Depends on the specialty. For highly competitive specialties like derm and surgical subspecialties, you absolutely need to publish in the field. For less competitive things like anesthesia, research is not a requirement, so having anything at all is a plus.

• Should I focus on figuring out my specialty before taking on any research at all?

Not if you like research. Any medical research will certainly help, regardless of whatever you ultimately apply to.

 

[MedicineZ0Z]

Quantity by far. Anything in Pubmed is pretty much legitimate in terms of helping you hit numbers.

For certain fields/institutions, quality does matter too but it does not replace quantity. Someone with 80 papers, of which maybe 3 are of quality, looks more impressive than someone with just 7 quality papers.

Just avoid predatory journals, make sure it's in pubmed and you should be good.

 

[Dwan]

I think quality tends to be underrated because it's so rare so the data is minimal. But I've never seen an applicant with a first author original manuscript (not case/review) in a top tier journal have a poor match in a specialty field (pubs are less valued in general fields like IM/peds); all the ones I know have matched at tip top programs in competitive specialties, even with few overall publications. Then again, if the quality difference is just an IF 5 journal vs IF 2, this is less noticeable by PDs, and it is highly unlikely for med students or residents to publish a first author in a truly big name journal. So it is a much more feasible goal to go for quantity in general. I just wouldn't overdo it with clear low quality items that any PD can see through, like having billions of case reports or presenting the same project at multiple conferences.

 

[aldol16]

For your general question: quantity over quality. But don't write anything that is false or gets retracted.

• Is research completed prior to medical school as relevant on residency applications, or relevant at all?

Yes. Any publications you have will stay with you forever.

• Would clinical psychology publications be viewed as medical publications?

Yes. They are publications for ERAS. Ideally they would be Pubmed indexed but even if they are not, they are still considered scientific publications as long as it was driven by the scientific method (i.e., hypothesis testing). Case reports, reviews, and meta-analyses count as well.

• I have the opportunity to relatively easily complete a few more public health/psychology publications through a former workplace - would it be better to focus my efforts here (quantity), or try to start from scratch with a new lab (quality/medical focus)?

If you have the bandwidth, both. It sounds like the effort-to-publication ratio is pretty low for the former, so grab the low-hanging fruit. If you then have bandwidth for new lab, do that too. Otherwise wait til you're doing with the low hanging fruit and then do the new lab. The caveat is that you shouldn't start too late with finding a medical lab. You need mentors for whatever field you're going into and you want to develop those mentorships early on. The easiest way to do so is through research.

• I am still somewhat uncertain about my intended specialty am worried about (for example) applying to anesthesiology with a few random psychology and cardiology publications. How critical is it that the subject matter of your publications match your intended specialty? I understand this may be more critical for more competitive specialties, but is it an absolute must?

For competitive specialties, research in specialty > research in other specialties >> no research at all. For less competitive specialties, it doesn't really matter but you should have at least some research experience in the specialty to show interest.

• Should I focus on figuring out my specialty before taking on any research at all?

The earlier you figure out your specialty, the easier it will be to direct your research efforts. Nobody can do everything. So you should probably start with the most competitive specialty you're considering and aim for that with respect to research output. Then if you later decide to do something else, you haven't burned any bridges for yourself versus if you start off with research in a non-competitive specialty but then end up going into a specialty that essentially requires research and then have to take a research year.

 

[mvenus929]

Quantity by far. Anything in Pubmed is pretty much legitimate in terms of helping you hit numbers.

For certain fields/institutions, quality does matter too but it does not replace quantity. Someone with 80 papers, of which maybe 3 are of quality, looks more impressive than someone with just 7 quality papers.

Just avoid predatory journals, make sure it's in pubmed and you should be good.

This may apply to applications, but does not necessarily translate to life. For instance, in order to get 'points' for publishing in a paper (which is tied to my productivity and bonuses), the IF of the journal 100% matters. If I publish a bunch of case reports in low impact journals, they aren't going to matter. They also probably aren't going to get cited, and for promotion, your h-factor absolutely matters. Sure, the person with 80 papers probably is going to be cited a lot, but for argument's sake, let's say only quality papers get cited. The person with the 80 papers will only have an h-index of 3 (3 papers cited 3+ times), compared to an h-index of 7 for the other person (7 papers cited 7+ times). In that case, the latter is 100% going to be more impactful.

In terms of ERAS applications, the person with more publications is generally going to be seen as more academically productive, though people who really know about research will be able to see through a dozen case reports and will value someone who participated in an actual study more, especially if they can actually describe their study.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Maybe I’m misremembering but IIRC @operaman said that sometimes basic or translational is looked at more favorably but not sure if that is just in smaller fields like ENT

 

[GoSpursGo]

Maybe I’m misremembering but IIRC @operaman said that sometimes basic or translational is looked at more favorably but not sure if that is just in smaller fields like ENT

They are, but only if you publish. Doing basic science research is very risky as there's a good chance it will never get published, or at least not on your timeline.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Most basic science focused labs at my school tend to also pump out lit reviews so maybe this would be a good hedge? This is assuming that one only has an opportunity for specialty specific research that is basic science

 

[operaman]

Maybe I’m misremembering but IIRC @operaman said that sometimes basic or translational is looked at more favorably but not sure if that is just in smaller fields like ENT

Yeah generally speaking basic/translational stuff takes longer and is more involved, so if you are able to publish in those areas it certainly carries more weight.

Unfortunately it’s rare to find such projects that you can both have a meaningful role AND get it published in time for residency apps.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Yeah generally speaking basic/translational stuff takes longer and is more involved, so if you are able to publish in those areas it certainly carries more weight.

Unfortunately it’s rare to find such projects that you can both have a meaningful role AND get it published in time for residency apps.

In your opinion, would it be possible for projects started in M1 or is it still pretty unlikely

 

[operaman]

In your opinion, would it be possible for projects started in M1 or is it still pretty unlikely

Oh very possible. Just gotta be careful and hedge your bets a little. I’ve only done a little bit of basic science but in my limited experience, there’s a lot of volatility and some projects may go on for a long time and then go absolutely nowhere. Same thing can happen in clinical research but it’s at least a more compressed timeline.

So yes it’s possible, but definitely worth a talk with the PI about the timeline and anticipated milestones. Also check and make sure that PI is publishing consistently. Everyone knows how important publication and authorship are in academia so there’s nothing wrong with discussing this candidly.

 

[MedicineZ0Z]

This may apply to applications, but does not necessarily translate to life. For instance, in order to get 'points' for publishing in a paper (which is tied to my productivity and bonuses), the IF of the journal 100% matters. If I publish a bunch of case reports in low impact journals, they aren't going to matter. They also probably aren't going to get cited, and for promotion, your h-factor absolutely matters. Sure, the person with 80 papers probably is going to be cited a lot, but for argument's sake, let's say only quality papers get cited. The person with the 80 papers will only have an h-index of 3 (3 papers cited 3+ times), compared to an h-index of 7 for the other person (7 papers cited 7+ times). In that case, the latter is 100% going to be more impactful.

In terms of ERAS applications, the person with more publications is generally going to be seen as more academically productive, though people who really know about research will be able to see through a dozen case reports and will value someone who participated in an actual study more, especially if they can actually describe their study.

Yeah aware, just talking about applications.

What do you think about statpearls? Some authors can literally rack up a lot of citations through that.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I'll agree that quality becomes really important for a tenure case, so med students really need to remember... they're minor leaguers at the lowest rookie division/league. Get hits, and it doesn't matter if they are singles, bunts, doubles, or home runs. Get outs, and style points don't matter as long as you don't make errors. Understand what it takes to get published, and associate yourself with productive people.

I would think that if I were reviewing residency applications, yes, I would probably take a highlighter and note how many case studies and lit reviews are among the publication count, and once I get to a certain threshold, I'd make a judgment on the research experience.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Yeah aware, just talking about applications.

What do you think about statpearls? Some authors can literally rack up a lot of citations through that.

I have not heard of the statpearls strategy, but I would not count anything from statpearls personally.

I'm going to repeat what I and most of the attendings on this thread are saying: quantity matters, but only to a point. If you have 10+ pubs but they're all case reports or lit reviews in garbage journals or in Cureus... we're not dumb. We're all in academia and know what is and is not meaningful research output. You really should have at least one or two more meaningful projects that serve as "anchors" of your research portfolio and are worth talking about in an interview setting. It is fine to play the game to prove your productivity, but if all your productivity is crap you're not going to get as much credit as you think you should.

 

[m3ds]

On the other hand, I would not continue with psychology research during med school--while they certainly "count" I would not continue that line of research now that you're in med school.

I have a really great former mentor from a psych job who offered me the chance to be first author on what would be a psychology paper in a legitimate journal and eventually in PubMed. I am intending to pursue this, but in light of this message am cautious about further digging myself into psych. I have a handful similar publications as second/third author. Is there any chance this would harm me if I ultimately applied to a totally unrelated specialty? My background to date is almost exclusively psych, and it's definitely in my top 3 specialties to consider, but I am really enjoying exposure to other specialties from school so far and am no longer so certain about this path.

 

[GoSpursGo]

I have a really great former mentor from a psych job who offered me the chance to be first author on what would be a psychology paper in a legitimate journal and eventually in PubMed. I am intending to pursue this, but in light of this message am cautious about further digging myself into psych. I have a handful similar publications as second/third author. Is there any chance this would harm me if I ultimately applied to a totally unrelated specialty? My background to date is almost exclusively psych, and it's definitely in my top 3 specialties to consider, but I am really enjoying exposure to other specialties from school so far and am no longer so certain about this path.

It certainly won't hurt you, it's just a question of whether you could better spend your time doing something else. Specifically, if this is a psychology paper as opposed to psychiatry, I really would try to focus on publications within the medical sphere (rather than clinical psychology, which as you know is an entirely different discipline and is what I understood you were talking about).

If you have nothing better to do with your time and are still working to establish new research connections, then sure go ahead and do this. It isn't going to hurt.

 

[Lawpy]

Also, consider that while 10 whatever pubs looks better than one quality pub, three quality pubs will look better than five case reports

What if the case reports are published in high impact medical journals?

 

[Lawpy]

and it is highly unlikely for med students or residents to publish a first author in a truly big name journal.

Not that unlikely if connected with a powerful PI

 

[Med Ed]

What if the case reports are published in high impact medical journals?

Find me someone who has published multiple case reports in high impact medical journals.

 

[GoSpursGo]

What if the case reports are published in high impact medical journals?

In order to get them into a high impact journal, you generally are going to need strong correlates that explain the mechanism underlying the phenomenon observed in the case or you're describing an extremely novel treatment. Both of these require a level of work that goes well beyond the sort of "quick" case report that a med student normally thinks of doing.

As an example, I probably spent ~9ish months to do correlates on a case series to get it into a medium impact journal.

Not that unlikely if connected with a powerful PI

I've seen you say this a few times, and I just don't think this is true for med students. Unless it's an MD/PhD student, a research year student, or someone coming in with significant prior research experience, these sorts of plum first authorships are not going to random med students who just reached out at the beginning of MS1 year.

Yes, possible for residents and definitely fellows.

 

[Lawpy]

Find me someone who has published multiple case reports in high impact medical journals.

In order to get them into a high impact journal, you generally are going to need strong correlates that explain the mechanism underlying the phenomenon observed in the case or you're describing an extremely novel treatment. Both of these require a level of work that goes well beyond the sort of "quick" case report that a med student normally thinks of doing.

As an example, I probably spent ~9ish months to do correlates on a case series to get it into a medium impact journal.


I've seen you say this a few times, and I just don't think this is true for med students. Unless it's an MD/PhD student, a research year student, or someone coming in with significant prior research experience, these sorts of plum first authorships are not going to random med students who just reached out at the beginning of MS1 year.

Yes, possible for residents and definitely fellows.

There is this letter in a top journal where the first author is a med student

https://www.jacc.org/doi/abs/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.001

I don’t have examples of med student-driven case reports on the top of my head but i’ll revisit this once i find them. I just don’t think it’s unlikely when connections and knowing the right people can help a lot with this

Although i freely admit the average student at HMS is more able to churn out high quality papers than average student from most schools simply because of the vast amount of resources and connections offered

 

[GoSpursGo]

There is this letter in a top journal where the first author is a med student

https://www.jacc.org/doi/abs/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.001

You mean this guy? Ishan Paranjpe, MD - Magnetic Ventures

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ishan-p-47212a67/

Looking at that page and at his LinkedIn, he graduated UC Berkeley in 3 years, then spent his gap year doing machine learning at UCSF. Looks like he did a concurrent biotech internship during MS1. Does that sound like the skillset that most med students bring to the table in research? No doubt connections helped, but he was undoubtedly the driver of the project in a way that would not be possible for 99.9% of students.

As I said... if someone is getting that kind of high-impact first author publication, they have some significant prior research experience or are getting protected time in med school. I have no doubt that if you look around you will manage to cherry pick a few case reports that have a med student as a first author. These sorts of rock stars obviously know who they are and know how to publish high quality research. I don't think that a typical med student who is grappling with a basic question like "quality vs quantity" is really going to be bringing high powered machine learning into their lab.