Research for 4+ years and no pub, no poster, no presentation

[Fdsa2495]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi,

I started volunteering in a lab during my freshman year of college and its been more than 4 years in the same lab. I have learned many molecular biology techniques, bioinformatics, cell culture work, etc. I did both computational and wet lab research but my lab really separates out grad students from undergrads. Of the 4+ years I have always helped out and not had my own project therefore never got a pub, poster, or presentation etc. I did however present in front of the grad students if that makes a difference? Will this look odd especially for a pre-MD/PhD applicant?

I finally have my own project but am no where near to getting results and compiling all the data to get a pub out before app cycle this year. Any thoughts on how adcoms might perceive???

 

[ready2go2]

Why did it take 4 years for you to finally jump on an independent project? That's really odd. MD-PhD track is super competitve, doesn't really sound like you have the research experience necessary to compete

 

[Fdsa2495]

Why did it take 4 years for you to finally jump on an independent project? That's really odd. MD-PhD track is super competitve, doesn't really sound like you have the research experience necessary to compete

Because my PI doesn't believe that undergraduates should take on an independent project. Once I graduated my PI allowed me to start my own project

 

[deleted781806]

Because my PI doesn't believe that undergraduates should take on an independent project. Once I graduated my PI allowed me to start my own project

Sounds like you don't have the best PI, honestly. You definitely should be able to handle a somewhat "independent" project as an undergraduate student, that's such a weird policy to take. Also, if you've been helping out with other experiments and data collection/analysis, why aren't you on a pub/presentation? Just because you weren't the first author on something doesn't mean that you shouldn't get any credit whatsoever for the publication if there have been people you've been working with/for that have published. That's some awful lab politics if you've been getting snubbed on pubs/presentations just because you were an undergrad.

 

[ready2go2]

Because my PI doesn't believe that undergraduates should take on an independent project. Once I graduated my PI allowed me to start my own project

That's pretty terrible, you probably should have sought out a different PI who was more invested in developing your skills as a scientist. But alas it's too late! Can you expand more on your role in the lab? Did you just wash dishes/pour gels/be a pippet monkey or what?

 

[Fdsa2495]

Sounds like you don't have the best PI, honestly. You definitely should be able to handle a somewhat "independent" project as an undergraduate student, that's such a weird policy to take. Also, if you've been helping out with other experiments and data collection/analysis, why aren't you on a pub/presentation? Just because you weren't the first author on something doesn't mean that you shouldn't get any credit whatsoever for the publication if there have been people you've been working with/for that have published. That's some awful lab politics if you've been getting snubbed on pubs/presentations just because you were an undergrad.

Lots of lab politics, sometimes papers with 3 first authors

That's pretty terrible, you probably should have sought out a different PI who was more invested in developing your skills as a scientist. But alas it's too late! Can you expand more on your role in the lab? Did you just wash dishes/pour gels/be a pippet monkey or what?

I hardly ever did lab tech stuff. Most of it was actual research, given a task and have it done, discuss why I did it a certain way and how could it be done better. This was usually for computational and I learned a lot of techniques being a bio major and no previous computational experience. For wet lab, I would sometimes perform experiments on my own and never really just washed dishes etc. I mean I guess it doesn't matter complaining now but I'm just afraid this will be asked about a lot by adcoms.

I did receive independent study hours every semester, but I feel like calling this independent research means it was my project (and this would question even more on why I don't have any results, pubs etc.)

Basically, I was always supervised by a grad student but did perform experiments on my own for their projects.

 

[Fdsa2495]

This is making me feel even worse, I feel so stupid for sticking with the same lab for all these years 😢

 

[precisiongraphic]

This is making me feel even worse, I feel so stupid for sticking with the same lab for all these years 😢

It's water over the dam, sunk cost, nothing to do about it now...except to focus on what you did learn/do. Above you said perhaps not calling it "independent research" would be helpful. And if you're ever asked why you didn't change to another lab or get new PI, be ready to answer the question truthfully - you trusted your PI, they treated you well and learned x, y and z.

 

[ToastCrunch]

This is making me feel even worse, I feel so stupid for sticking with the same lab for all these years 😢

Hey some of these posts are trying to make you feel bad. "too late!" is that really necessary, ready2go2?
Maybe you won't gain a lot of research points with your application, but don't say it was a "most valuable experience," emphasize what you did learn, and make sure your PI will write a good letter. 4 years of research certainly never hurt anyone! PM me if you wanna talk more....spent years in really terrible lab environment -- also accepted to multiple ivy Med schools.

 

[deleted781806]

Lots of lab politics, sometimes papers with 3 first authors

They really threw you under the bus if they weren't even willing to give you the second-to-last spot after contributing to their projects, I'm really sorry to hear that. I think that you can still definitely spin it in such a way to talk about what you learned about the research process and the techniques learned through your work, even though you didn't have your own independent project.

But I would be a little hesitant about going the MD/PhD route, but I'm not too familiar with the expectations of schools on that front, they might prefer a lot more of your own work (plus pubs, etc.) to really be considered. Thankfully they generally shift you over to the MD pool if they determine they aren't going to interview you for the MD/PhD positions. Also, a lot of schools are beginning to have the MD/PhD route still available for med students to apply for entrance *after* their first or second year of med school, which might help you out greatly too!

Just focus on what you were able to learn throughout the process and that will be more than enough for AdComs when it comes to application time. Research isn't a huge determinant of admissions decisions (unless it's an MD/PhD track), so if your application is strong in the other necessary areas then I think you will do just fine. Most undergrads applying to med school don't have a single pub either, to be fair. Heck, I've been on an "independent" project for 2.5 years (working closely with a post-doc) and we've *just* submitted a manuscript for publication and will finally present in April, well after the application season haha.

 

[Daenerys Targaryen]

I wouldn't be too quick to discount the MD/PhD route just because of this lab experience! Much of the application/interview seeks to find out if you understand the scientific process and are passionate about research, and much of that is up to if you communicate it well. Head over to the Physician Scientists forum. There are some MD/PhD adcoms there who may have some more insight about how to talk about this lab experience.

 

[deleted781806]

Yeah, definitely go check out the Physician Scientist boards to see how your experience stacks up with others. I'm sure there are plenty of aspiring MD/PhD posts on the pre-med forums as well that you can check out! Not having pubs and presentations definitely isn't an app-killer, as most people applying don't have any anyways, but as the above have said, just know how to articulate what you did and why you did it, as well as any kinds of soft skills you learned through your research involvement.

Also, what is up with all of these PIs who refuse authorship to undergraduates? If you make a scientific contribution to a project, you merit co-authorship. You'll be placed at the back of the list, but you should still get your name on a paper that you helped produce and analyze data. Being second-to-last author is very clearly a small contribution and I really don't see what the point is denying undergraduates the opportunity to be placed in such a position. Putting a graduate student or a post-doc in that position is absolutely unthinkable due to the politics of co-authorship but an undergrad can definitely be thrown there because their position doesn't matter.

 

[deleted781806]

Totally agree. My PI who I spoke about is really weird in terms of adding authors to papers. Almost every paper we've published in the last 15 years is 1 first author and him as last author. I hate it. :/

Ew. I mean it makes sense that he's the last author because he is the PI, my lab does it that way too, but you can definitely have non-equal first, second, third, nth authors before that. Maybe my PI is just a lot nicer to undergrads than most haha

 

[aldol16]

Also, what is up with all of these PIs who refuse authorship to undergraduates? If you make a scientific contribution to a project, you merit co-authorship. You'll be placed at the back of the list, but you should still get your name on a paper that you helped produce and analyze data. Being second-to-last author is very clearly a small contribution and I really don't see what the point is denying undergraduates the opportunity to be placed in such a position. Putting a graduate student or a post-doc in that position is absolutely unthinkable due to the politics of co-authorship but an undergrad can definitely be thrown there because their position doesn't matter.

In principle, just doing some experiments or analyzing some data does not grant you the right to be co-author on a paper. In practice, we as post-docs and graduate students generally understand that papers help undergrads and put you on the paper, but this has led to some unfounded idea on here and elsewhere that just because you were in lab and doing experiments gives you the right automatically to be included on a paper. Putting you on our papers is neither our job nor our responsibility. We are there to train you to do research.

What co-authorship on a paper means is that you had input into the conception and design of the experiment - that is, you had intellectual input into it. You don't credit authorship if you only collected some data that I told you to collect and didn't think about the project at all. The most you should get out of that is an acknowledgment.

 

[aldol16]

OP, publications are really not required for anything MD or even MD/PhD-related. I would say that a strong letter from your PI combined with your four years of lab experience does put you in a good position to speak intelligently about why you want to pursue the MD/PhD pathway. I would assume that over the past four years, you've been involved in various research projects even though you didn't get publications out of it. It's very important in your case that you are able to speak about your role in those projects as well as contextualize those projects in terms of the broader literature in your MD/PhD essay.

 

[deleted781806]

What co-authorship on a paper means is that you had input into the conception and design of the experiment - that is, you had intellectual input into it. You don't credit authorship if you only collected some data that I told you to collect and didn't think about the project at all. The most you should get out of that is an acknowledgment.

This is what I had in mind when I said "scientific contribution", but I suppose I should have been clearer. I had made an assumption that OP was doing a little more than just "take X and put it into Y, okay?" kind of involvement with the experiments. Because yes, that should technically be in the Acknowledgements section rather than co-authorship. I would however extend the idea of co-authorship if there was input and discussion/interpretation of the results/conclusions of the project as well rather than just the conception and design of the experiment. It does need to be an intellectual contribution to the work, for sure, rather than blindly carrying out instructions.

My PI was definitely on the very liberal side of this, and included any and all undergraduates on papers/presentations produced by the lab if they were involved in one way or another. Although there was a large emphasis on contributing intellectually to the project.

 

[aldol16]

This is what I had in mind when I said "scientific contribution", but I suppose I should have been clearer. I had made an assumption that OP was doing a little more than just "take X and put it into Y, okay?" kind of involvement with the experiments. Because yes, that should technically be in the Acknowledgements section rather than co-authorship. I would however extend the idea of co-authorship if there was input and discussion/interpretation of the results/conclusions of the project as well rather than just the conception and design of the experiment. It does need to be an intellectual contribution to the work, for sure, rather than blindly carrying out instructions.

Ah, yes, here we run into the problem of interpreting results as opposed to conception and design of the study. Surely, interpreting one's results is a part of intellectual input. Most of us agree and so do the undergraduates and PIs. So the vast majority of people would include an undergraduate if he or she was told to perform experiment X and interpret the results. The undergraduate performs the experiments, interprets the results, and contextualizes it within the overall goals of the study. The vast majority of post-docs, graduate students, and PIs would the put student on the author list for that. The problem is, authorship is supposed to convey that the authors each contributed original thought into creating new science. In this case, the undergraduate helped to create new science but the original thought behind that science did not belong to him or her. That's the problem I'm talking about.

As I said, in principle such an undergraduate should not be included but in practice, he or she is 99.9% of the time.

 

[honey0102]

Hi,

I started volunteering in a lab during my freshman year of college and its been more than 4 years in the same lab. I have learned many molecular biology techniques, bioinformatics, cell culture work, etc. I did both computational and wet lab research but my lab really separates out grad students from undergrads. Of the 4+ years I have always helped out and not had my own project therefore never got a pub, poster, or presentation etc. I did however present in front of the grad students if that makes a difference? Will this look odd especially for a pre-MD/PhD applicant?

I finally have my own project but am no where near to getting results and compiling all the data to get a pub out before app cycle this year. Any thoughts on how adcoms might perceive???

I also had a PI who was reluctant to have undergrads publish anything, and most undergrads in the lab did only get their own project in senior year (if at all). Before that, it was difficult.
Have you done any literature reviews? Even if they aren't publications, if you have done significant lit reviews you might be able to take about that in an interview. I know in my lab undergrads would do lit reviews, even really big, independent ones, not published but nonetheless shows you have some scope for serious work.

Do consider a gap year. More and more applicants take a gap year(s) anyway. Whether in this lab or in another position-consider it. When evaluating positions see if they'll let you do independent projects.

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

@LizzyM @gyngyn I'd like to hear your thoughts on this?

 

[ready2go2]

Hey some of these posts are trying to make you feel bad. "too late!" is that really necessary, ready2go2?
Maybe you won't gain a lot of research points with your application, but don't say it was a "most valuable experience," emphasize what you did learn, and make sure your PI will write a good letter. 4 years of research certainly never hurt anyone! PM me if you wanna talk more....spent years in really terrible lab environment -- also accepted to multiple ivy Med schools.

It's too late in the sense that they cannot go back in time obviously. But this information can be useful to others just starting out. I phrased it that way not to make them feel bad but rather to tell them not to dwell over it and move forward.

 

[coffeeandcodeine]

Hey! I was in a lab for 4 years without a single pub, and honestly, it hasn't hurt me at all as an MD applicant at research-heavy schools. I will say that it is likely to have more impact at the MD/PhD level -- that said, it's not the app killer that some make it out to be. If you get excellent letters from your research advisors, you should be in good shape to apply. Also, if you would like to increase odds at top schools, you can always apply MD and then later (after matriculation) affiliate with the MD/PhD program. You may not get MSTP funding, but at the very least your PhD should be funded.

Again, I have to emphasize that this is not as big of a deal as you probably think it is. If the rest of your app is solid, you'll have a good shot at some great programs!

Hi,

I started volunteering in a lab during my freshman year of college and its been more than 4 years in the same lab. I have learned many molecular biology techniques, bioinformatics, cell culture work, etc. I did both computational and wet lab research but my lab really separates out grad students from undergrads. Of the 4+ years I have always helped out and not had my own project therefore never got a pub, poster, or presentation etc. I did however present in front of the grad students if that makes a difference? Will this look odd especially for a pre-MD/PhD applicant?

I finally have my own project but am no where near to getting results and compiling all the data to get a pub out before app cycle this year. Any thoughts on how adcoms might perceive???

 

[Fdsa2495]

Hey! I was in a lab for 4 years without a single pub, and honestly, it hasn't hurt me at all as an MD applicant at research-heavy schools. I will say that it is likely to have more impact at the MD/PhD level -- that said, it's not the app killer that some make it out to be. If you get excellent letters from your research advisors, you should be in good shape to apply. Also, if you would like to increase odds at top schools, you can always apply MD and then later (after matriculation) affiliate with the MD/PhD program. You may not get MSTP funding, but at the very least your PhD should be funded.

Again, I have to emphasize that this is not as big of a deal as you probably think it is. If the rest of your app is solid, you'll have a good shot at some great programs!

I think that's what I'm going to do. I'm going to apply just for MD and then later on think about if I really want a PhD. MSTP is a very long and committed step to take and I think it would be best to wait since right now I'm questioning if I want to take that route.

 

[Fdsa2495]

Thank you everyone for your replies, I will for sure check out the MSTP forums.