Quality of research

[wizzed101]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Let say that you were very lucky to 1st authored a paper a longgggg time ago as an undergrad. But you didn't think about med school then. You did it just for fun and you had not any idea about implication of your research.

Now you just found out that your paper was actually quite interesting and there have been a lot of citations even to this date. The journal is a small journal (it's not nature and the like lol) but it is a leading journal in a particular field unrelated to medicine. Let say that similar research has a big chance to to lead to a breakthrough in a certain field.

Would that be something worth mentioning? Or adcom just see it as "just another EC?"

 

[starspells]

Yes it is totally worth mentioning.

 

[Catalystik]

Let say that you were very lucky to 1st authored a paper a longgggg time ago as an undergrad. But you didn't think about med school then. You did it just for fun and you had not any idea about implication of your research.

Now you just found out that your paper was actually quite interesting and there have been a lot of citations even to this date. The journal is a small journal (it's not nature and the like lol) but it is a leading journal in a particular field unrelated to medicine. Let say that similar research has a big chance to to lead to a breakthrough in a certain field.

Would that be something worth mentioning? Or adcom just see it as "just another EC?"

A publication "counts" forever.

 

[Goro]

Do you want the Adcom member think tou'd really like to get a PhD instead of being a doctor?

 

[wizzed101]

ugh... conflicting answers.

@Goro: no I absolutely do NOT want a PhD or do research.

But most schools gain prestige by their research. I read somewhere on this site that there were 2 types of med school: those that focus on research and those that wish they had. So I have the impression that showing off research would make my application more attractive - buyer market and everything. Or am wrong and med schools just begrudgingly list research as a desirable EC, a box to check: research x years- checked, 1st author-checked?

I want to leave an impression but I really really don't want to talk about it in an interview, if I ever have one...

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Yeah, I'm kind of confused too. I was under the assumption that publications can only help you.

 

[Goro]

Give Adcom members credit that they can read your app and note the publication. It's rare for people to have publications. It will get noticed.

ugh... conflicting answers.

@Goro: no I absolutely do NOT want a PhD or do research.

But most schools gain prestige by their research. I read somewhere on this site that there were 2 types of med school: those that focus on research and those that wish they had. So I have the impression that showing off research would make my application more attractive - buyer market and everything. Or am wrong and med schools just begrudgingly list research as a desirable EC, a box to check: research x years- checked, 1st author-checked?

I want to leave an impression but I really really don't want to talk about it in an interview, if I ever have one...

Of course they help. But there's no need to jump up and down and go "look look!!!"



Yeah, I'm kind of confused too. I was under the assumption that publications can only help you.

 

[Catalystik]

Of course they help. But there's no need to jump up and down and go "look look!!!"

I think @Goro means that pointing out the number of times your article got cited and the future implications of your ground-breaking publication would be excessively patting yourself on the back and not suitable in this venue. Describing the research and citing the paper are fine, no matter where you plan to apply.

And if you cite a publication, be prepared to discuss it in detail, particularly when you were first author.

 

[medbunny56]

I submitted a first author publication to a journal and I'm still waiting to hear back, is it worth waiting another week until I submit my primary to see if it get accepted or should I just go ahead and submit my primary now and indicate on secondaries/update letter that it has been accepted?

I just don't want the publication to go unnoticed or get lost if I don't indicate it on my primary

 

[Catalystik]

.

1) I submitted a first author publication to a journal and I'm still waiting to hear back, is it worth waiting another week until I submit my primary to see if it get accepted or
2) should I just go ahead and submit my primary now and indicate on secondaries/update letter that it has been accepted?

3) I just don't want the publication to go unnoticed or get lost if I don't indicate it on my primary

1) No.
2) Yes.
3) It isn't a publication yet, it's a manuscript submitted for consideration.
-Have you already presented any of this data in a poster or podium presentation? If so, presumably you mentioned this on the application?
-Do you have accepted pubs from other projects?

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

I think @Goro means that pointing out the number of times your article got cited and the future implications of your ground-breaking publication would be excessively patting yourself on the back and not suitable in this venue. Describing the research and citing the paper are fine, no matter where you plan to apply.

And if you cite a publication, be prepared to discuss it in detail, particularly when you were first author.

Makes sense.

 

[MaxPlancker]

I think @Goro means that pointing out the number of times your article got cited and the future implications of your ground-breaking publication would be excessively patting yourself on the back and not suitable in this venue. Describing the research and citing the paper are fine, no matter where you plan to apply.

And if you cite a publication, be prepared to discuss it in detail, particularly when you were first author.

To add further, something regarding the potential impact of your work on some current breakthrough or whatever and number of citations etc is something better mentioned by your PI in a LOR...it is a bit awkward for a pre-med applicant to mention that tbh...

 

[medbunny56]

.
1) No.
2) Yes.
3) It isn't a publication yet, it's a manuscript submitted for consideration.
-Have you already presented any of this data in a poster or podium presentation? If so, presumably you mentioned this on the application?
-Do you have accepted pubs from other projects?

I believe my PI has mentioned in his LOR that I will be submitting the manuscripts
I am taking my mcat this friday so I will send in my application on saturday/sunday the latest to be verified (i just need to look over everything once more while my brain is not thinking about the mcat)

I have presented a poster on one of the manuscripts in preparation and an abstract for the manuscript submitted has been accepted at a conference in Oct, which I indicated on my application

so my main question is that if i send in an update to schools once it has been submitted would it still carry some weight even if it wasn't on the primary?

 

[Catalystik]

I believe my PI has mentioned in his LOR that I will be submitting the manuscripts
I am taking my mcat this friday so I will send in my application on saturday/sunday the latest to be verified (i just need to look over everything once more while my brain is not thinking about the mcat)

I have presented a poster on one of the manuscripts in preparation and an abstract for the manuscript submitted has been accepted at a conference in Oct, which I indicated on my application

so my main question is that if i send in an update to schools once it has been submitted would it still carry some weight even if it wasn't on the primary?

A PI LOR is a better place for mention of a submitted manuscript than the Primary, IMO.

An update about its acceptance for publication is worthy of an update letter and will carry weight. But keep in mind all schools don't allow updates. If it happens soon enough, some Secondaries will have a prompt appropriate to mentioning this achievement, though.