Research letter in NEJM/JAMA/Lancet

[LJN Ltd.]

Looking for wisdom from people who know what they're talking about with research & pubs!

Just heard today that I'll be getting a research letter placed in one of the top 3 journals as a middle author. The piece still needs to go through revise & resubmit, but the editors told my PI it will be published after we go through the motions. It's original research (even cutting edge & novel, some would argue 😛 ), but for complicated reasons we didn't see fit to write an entire 4000-word thing about it.

Obviously I'm very excited that the work will be in a high-impact journal. However, I also know research letter ≠ research article. My school app list is realistic, but I'm aiming high.

Three questions:
1) How are 800-word research letters in high-impact journals viewed? In the context of med school admissions and research more broadly.
2) Worthy of mention on my AMCAS (will submit on 6/2)? I have 1 other middle author pub and 1 non-peer reviewed NGO report.
3) If mentioning, should I put it under my pubs but just say that it's under R&R at NEJM/JAMA/Lancet?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[VitaminVater]

Definitely worth mentioning if you feel it reflects on your skills/success as a young scientist.
Go into a bit of detail of your contribution to the letter to convince adcoms your role was significant though, as this is something that may be asked of you during interviews.

 

[lifetothefullest]

Very good, but keep in mind that top journals also have the highest rates of irreproducible work. While it's definitely a good thing, getting published in, say, Nature or Science requires a lot of sensationalizing and PIs realize that. So what happens is many scientists overreach in the interpretations of their work and so that's why there is such a high rate of "correction" or withdrawal from those journals. But if your work is really solid, be ready to talk about it, defend it, and express why it's important if you put it on your application.

 

[samsunimomo]

Very good, but keep in mind that top journals also have the highest rates of irreproducible work. While it's definitely a good thing, getting published in, say, Nature or Science requires a lot of sensationalizing and PIs realize that. So what happens is many scientists overreach in the interpretations of their work and so that's why there is such a high rate of "correction" or withdrawal from those journals. But if your work is really solid, be ready to talk about it, defend it, and express why it's important if you put it on your application.

This is true, but this is also neither here nor there in the context of this thread. You jelly?
Congrats to the OP! I would definitely take the time to know those paper in and out.

 

[lifetothefullest]

That's neither here nor there in the context of this thread. You jelly?

Nah, I've had Science pubs and it's not that big of a deal even just a few months down the line. My main point is that the OP should be conscious of putting it on his/her app and not get caught up in the prestige of being published in a "high impact journal." You still have to be able to defend it and your interpretation.

 

[samsunimomo]

Nah, I've had Science pubs and it's not that big of a deal even just a few months down the line. My main point is that the OP should be conscious of putting it on his/her app and not get caught up in the prestige of being published in a "high impact journal." You still have to be able to defend it and your interpretation.

Cool story, bro.

And back to the point, congrats to the OP! 🙂 It definitely helps for your app. Plus only a few other journals have the separate article/letter format (Nature is the only one that I can think of at the top of my head) and considering that you're an incoming applicant, the prestige of the publication (which, let's face it, does matter and is highly desirable in context of research-focused schools) is a positive, to boot.

 

[lifetothefullest]

^what is your problem? Now I'm started to think you jelly, bruh.

 

[samsunimomo]

^what is your problem? Now I'm started to think you jelly, bruh.

You undercut the OP's accomplishments by bringing out the subject of irreproducibility in C/N/S, and when called out, whip out your own *shiny* pubs. This is playground level of one-upmanship. Good for you, but more to the point, really good for the OP.

 

[lifetothefullest]

You undercut the OP's accomplishments by bringing out the subject of irreproducibility in C/N/S, and when called out, whip out your own *shiny* pubs. This is playground level of one-upmanship. Good for you, but more to the point, really good for the OP.

Never said it wasn't good for OP. Actually, the first thing I said was "very good." It's definitely a great accomplishment to be published in a top journal and I did not bring up my own publications until you asked "You jelly" in a "playground level" of language. But what I see is many pre-meds, perhaps even yourself back then, trying to ride the prestige wave into job interviews, grad school admissions, med school, etc. I'm suggesting the OP not fall into this trap because it seemed to me in his/her initial statement that he/she was really overemphasizing the prestige factor. If I produce amazing work and then publish it in an open-access journal, that doesn't take away from the quality of the work. What OP should be asking instead of "How are 800-word research letters in high-impact journals viewed? In the context of med school admissions and research more broadly" is "How are 800-word research letters viewed?" That's more relevant and a better mindset to be in.

 

[samsunimomo]

Never said it wasn't good for OP. Actually, the first thing I said was "very good." It's definitely a great accomplishment to be published in a top journal and I did not bring up my own publications until you asked "You jelly" in a "playground level" of language. But what I see is many pre-meds, perhaps even yourself back then, trying to ride the prestige wave into job interviews, grad school admissions, med school, etc. I'm suggesting the OP not fall into this trap because it seemed to me in his/her initial statement that he/she was really overemphasizing the prestige factor. If I produce amazing work and then publish it in an open-access journal, that doesn't take away from the quality of the work. What OP should be asking instead of "How are 800-word research letters in high-impact journals viewed? In the context of med school admissions and research more broadly" is "How are 800-word research letters viewed?" That's more relevant and a better mindset to be in.

Fair point on the jelly, but I don't think that OP's question demonstrate that he/she is "trying to ride the prestige wave," and I think that this is an unfair judgement of you to make on "many pre-meds" as well. It seemed as if you were putting down the OP, especially now that you've taken to suggest what you think OP should have said to begin with.

More to the point, OP will have to provide citation for his/her publication on AMCAS and some secondaries, which will reveal where the paper was published in any case. Is a publication from a highly regarded medical journal going to wow the adcoms? Absolutely! There are tasteful ways to accentuate these accomplishments to bolster one's candidacy, and if one has such an advantage, one should use it. Over and over again, SDN (and Allo especially) has demonstrated that prestige, while intangible and difficult to measure, is real. Like begets like; prestige breeds prestige. There is nothing shameful about milking a system that already exists, however imperfect it may be.

I'm not quite sure what open-access vs. high-prestige journals has to do with anything, especially considering that Cell, Nature, and Science have published their own open access journals for a couple of years now, and even some subsections PLOS (esp. Genetics and Medicine) have become quite selective.

 

[lifetothefullest]

Fair point on the jelly, but I don't think that OP's question demonstrate that he/she is "trying to ride the prestige wave," and I think that this is an unfair judgement of you to make on "many pre-meds" as well. It seemed as if you were putting down OP for being haughty, especially now that you've taken to suggesting what you think OP should have said.

I'm not trying to put down the OP. I'm merely suggesting another way to look at it. That is, quit looking at impact factor and just look at the quality of the work. Is it good work? Can you defend it? If so, phenomenal. The journal (unless you're going MD/PhD) matters marginally.

More to the point, OP will have to provide citation for his/her publication on AMCAS and some secondaries, which will reveal where the paper was published. Is a publication going to wow the adcoms? Absolutely! And there are tasteful ways to accentuate these accomplishments to bolster one's candidacy, and if one has such an advantage, one should use it. I think over and over again, SDN (and Allo especially) has demonstrated that prestige, while intangible and difficult to measure, is real. Like begets like; prestige breeds prestige.

Trust me, I understand prestige. And I think that the OP should definitely mention it. The next logical step (which is what I am emphasizing here) is to again quit looking at the impact factor of the journal and start looking at the work itself. It seems to me from the original post that the OP is falling into the "prestige" trap - he/she mentions top journal and "high impact" twice. I'm not saying that prestige doesn't matter at all - as I said above, it probably matters marginally. But what will really "wow" people is that you can coherently express what you did, why you did it, and defend your interpretation.

I'm not quite sure why you're bringing up open-access vs. high-prestige journals, especially considering that C/N/S has made published their own versions of open access journals for a couple of years now, and even PLOS has now gotten to be quite selective.

I don't want to start another discussion about open-access versus not but Nature and Science are still not open access and I'm sure you'd agree that publishing in their open access versions is not as "prestigious." The point was to get the OP thinking about the merits of the work rather than where it is published.

As a summary, I'm not going to sit here and swoon over the OP getting published in a "high-impact journal." He/she has friends who can do that. I'm just pointing out where to go from there and what to avoid.

 

[hoihaie]

letters are still viewed as 10/10. Definitely put on your app.

 

[NickNaylor]

Absolutely include it. Even if it hasn't been accepted for publication by the time you submit AMCAS, at least include it as "submitted" and list the journals it has been submitted to.

 

[lifetothefullest]

About the only good point you've made is for OP to be sure to know the work cold and be able to explain it well, because it's going to come up at just about every interview.

This is actually the only point I wanted to make.

You may want to sit here and act all pure science bro about it, but the adcoms will swoon over it. It's a rare accomplishment for an undergrad.

Not as rare as you think. It's actually becoming even more common for undergrad admissions at top universities. We're getting more and more science people who have published prior to even coming to college - at the very least, they've worked in labs. The world is getting more competitive.

 

[lifetothefullest]

I trust my finger is on the pulse on this issue. You are being absurd.

I trust you think your finger is on the pulse on this issue as well. Look at some of the work coming out of labs at Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, and Columbia. Guarantee you'll see quite a few undergrad authors. Personally know a few people who published papers/books before coming uni. That's the level of competition now. Not typical probably of state unis but this is the level of competition applicants face when they apply.

Oh, and you're being absurd as well. See? I can do that too. Doesn't really convince anybody.

 

[Goro]

Concur!

1. Still darn good. Funnily, the further out you get from it the better it will look, since ultimately it will end up as a line on your CV and no one will know its a letter vs a full article

2. Definitely put on your app.

3. Hopefully they get it turned around and you get a formal acceptance before then but otherwise yes be clear about its current publication status. At JAMA and NEJM revise and resubmit is not a guarantee of acceptance pending revisions.

 

[Goro]

2x concur.

Selection/sample/observation/confirmation bias.

In the applicant pool, it is an uncommon enough feat as to be a very positive boost to the application. And while cell/science are certainly impressive in their own right, there is still something different about publishing in one of the top medical journals.

Most academic physicians never publish in these journals in their entire careers.

 

[lifetothefullest]

Selection/sample/observation/confirmation bias.

In the applicant pool, it is an uncommon enough feat as to be a very positive boost to the application. And while cell/science are certainly impressive in their own right, there is still something different about publishing in one of the top medical journals.

Most academic physicians never publish in these journals in their entire careers.

1) Sure, but your entire applicant pool is biased towards the highest achieving students. High-achieving students at many schools get published as well, just not as much compared to students at other universities. I think we can agree to disagree on that point, unless you can produce data showing otherwise.

2) Yes, but I'd argue that the "difference" in publishing in a top journal vs. a not top journal is negligible compared to everything else. If you had a huge part in the work and you can defend it/your interpretation of it, then yes, there may be a small boost from publishing in a top journal. Otherwise, unless you're applying to an MD/PhD program, it doesn't matter as much as the merit of your work (and top journal does necessarily equal top quality - a point many people outside of academia seem to not understand).

3) Do you have stats backing that up? I'd be surprised if academic physicians never publish in a top journal in their whole careers. Do they not have the resources?

 

[lifetothefullest]

You really have no clue what you're talking about

You're a doofus. See? I can do that too.

Of the academic physicians I know, at state unis as well as Ivies, all have published at least once in at least one N/S journal. Biased sample? Perhaps. But to say that many never publish in a "prestigious" journal is an overreach and you know it.

 

[lifetothefullest]

No, it's really not.

You lack perspective regarding med school admissions and academic productivity.

You came in here to act like an elitist and talk down the OPs accomplishment. It was uneccessary and inaccurate.

Sure, you know me so well.

The first thing I said to OP was "very good." My point was to give solid advice on the next step - to not ride the "prestige wave" going forward. If that's not accurate, then it looks like you have some problems you should work out first. You came on here to act like an ass to someone - dinguses gonna be dinguses. Peace.

 

[22031 Alum]

Sure, you know me so well.

The first thing I said to OP was "very good." My point was to give solid advice on the next step - to not ride the "prestige wave" going forward. If that's not accurate, then it looks like you have some problems you should work out first. You came on here to act like an ass to someone - dinguses gonna be dinguses. Peace.

As someone just encountering this thread, your point was pretty obviously to allude to your own publications at the first opportunity you could. Perfunctory congratulations to OP aside. I see you're still pre-med, so you'll most likely get over that need for one-upmanship as you advance, and are surrounded by more and more impressive peers with each passing year. If you don't, people will continue to see right through it.

 

[JVav]

Sure, you know me so well.

The first thing I said to OP was "very good." My point was to give solid advice on the next step - to not ride the "prestige wave" going forward. If that's not accurate, then it looks like you have some problems you should work out first. You came on here to act like an ass to someone - dinguses gonna be dinguses. Peace.

This guy. You act like publishing in Science, especially as an undergrad, is "not that big of a deal." It is a big deal, and OP should be proud. Please quit trying to steal someone else's thunder.

 

[LJN Ltd.]

letters are still viewed as 10/10. Definitely put on your app.

I see what you did there *nudge nudge*

 

[Dwan]

Very good, but keep in mind that top journals also have the highest rates of irreproducible work. While it's definitely a good thing, getting published in, say, Nature or Science requires a lot of sensationalizing and PIs realize that. So what happens is many scientists overreach in the interpretations of their work and so that's why there is such a high rate of "correction" or withdrawal from those journals. But if your work is really solid, be ready to talk about it, defend it, and express why it's important if you put it on your application.

While what you say is mostly true, this comes out of nowhere and isn't really the place to rant about the flaws of prestige and the publication process. Why don't you go over to the MCAT forums and tell people who recently scored a 36+ (or the new eq.) that their score doesn't mean anything b/c the MCAT doesn't have much correlation with med school success, and isn't even everything in terms of getting into med school? Or to the people with 3.8-4.0 GPAs in 'what are my chances' that GPA has no correlation with actual intelligence, and to people who get accepted to their dream med schools that it gets much harder afterwards, prestige is irrelevant to being a good doctor, etc. While all of these have truths, it doesn't make it right to bring it up at inappropriate times. You downplaying your own Science publications makes it even worse, as you not only put down the OPs accomplishment, but also all of those who can't even get a publication, or into a top-tier journal. It doesn't matter if you have better accomplishments now. If you're not proud of it, that's ok, but don't go trying to convince others it doesn't matter when it clearly does to many and will be a great asset to his application, which was all he was asking.

 

[LJN Ltd.]

Thank you Southern Surgeon, Tired, and Goro!

Even if I put it as an R&R, which it will most likely be in a month, should I really expect it to be brought up at every interview? Not that it's a problem, but just so I know to prepare. That is interesting to me. Is this a general "research will be brought up" point or "this piece is in NEJM so let's make sure you're not full of BS"?

 

[Winged Scapula]

Users are reminded to keep their comments professional, civil and avoid personal attacks.

 

[Long Way to Go]

I'll tell you what I would do in your shoes (and I'm by no means an expert on anything, so take it with a grain of salt): I would ask whoever is the corresponding author to send you a copy of the reviewer comments, and read them carefully. Then, when you are asked the usual stock question in your interview ("So tell me about this article you published in NEJM"), you briefly summarize it. But then, say something like, "One of the criticisms the reviewers had was that ______. However, we argued that ______."

Maybe this is just the way my lab(s) have functioned, but every author always had to explicitly sign off on all submissions and the response to reviewers letter. It was always clear who read the article more closely than others, but it would be strange to me if LJN hadn't seen the reviewers comments before.

Not to say that I disagree with anything you said, I was just surprised on that one point. Great job getting this far, LJN, and best of luck for the future!

 

[Long Way to Go]

Not sure where you've submitted, but this has not been my experience in the dozen or so journals I've submitted to. Generally there is one corresponding author who manages all communication with the journal. In some cases, all authors will need to sign copyright releases and disclosure statements, but even that is not always required. Reviewer comments and revisions typically only go through the corresponding author, and I have never seen a journal that required explicit authorization from all authors on responses. That would be very difficult for the journals to manage, and would prolong an already long peer review process.

Certainly not a requirement imposed by the journal but it is something that both of my PIs have done (for both flagship society journals and PLoS One). I guess I thought it was more common of a practice. It saves a bit of headache later when you're writing down which ICMJE criteria everyone met at the end. This way in case it gets accepted straight from the "major revision" stage, you can still say that every author gave "final approval of the version to be published".

It is a huge pain in the ass, especially if some of the authors are full-time clinical folks who don't really have a stake in the research.

 

[LJN Ltd.]

I don't know for sure, but I would expect probably will be. Publishing in NEJM is a big deal, and very uncommon to see from a residency applicant (much less a med school applicant). This will likely catch the eye of every person who looks at your app. Accordingly, I would make sure you know everything about that article backwards and forwards. Having a huge publication and being able to discuss it competently (showing that you were actually very involved in it) will go a long way to getting you what you want.

I'll tell you what I would do in your shoes (and I'm by no means an expert on anything, so take it with a grain of salt): I would ask whoever is the corresponding author to send you a copy of the reviewer comments and his responses, and read them carefully. Then, when you are asked the usual stock question in your interview ("So tell me about this article you published in NEJM"), you briefly summarize it. But then, say something like, "One of the criticisms the reviewers had was that ______. However, we argued that ______."

I think that would be some second- or third-level stuff there, and would really knock their socks off. If I heard that in an interview of a prospective intern, I'd be impressed.

Wow, that's a great idea. Really, really appreciated. Never thought of offering up that stuff proactively! 👍
The first author (PGY2) sends out every update to all 5 authors and asks for comments, revisions, etc., so I have the comments and will be posted on the replies as well. I don't contribute so much as to have many substantial things to add at this stage, but I definitely understand all the chatter back and forth that I'm copied on.

 

[cs24]

I'll tell you, there are few things that get me as spun up as dealing with reviewers.

Truth. I don't know why, but I take all their comments way too personally. I'm sure it goes away with more experience, but right now I get a massive inferiority complex every time I read reviewer comments. I have to keep telling myself "its not that bad, if it was that bad they would have just rejected it..."

 

[cs24]

1) Sure, but your entire applicant pool is biased towards the highest achieving students. High-achieving students at many schools get published as well, just not as much compared to students at other universities. I think we can agree to disagree on that point, unless you can produce data showing otherwise.

2) Yes, but I'd argue that the "difference" in publishing in a top journal vs. a not top journal is negligible compared to everything else. If you had a huge part in the work and you can defend it/your interpretation of it, then yes, there may be a small boost from publishing in a top journal. Otherwise, unless you're applying to an MD/PhD program, it doesn't matter as much as the merit of your work (and top journal does necessarily equal top quality - a point many people outside of academia seem to not understand).

3) Do you have stats backing that up? I'd be surprised if academic physicians never publish in a top journal in their whole careers. Do they not have the resources?

I don't normally feel the need to pile on after a bunch of people have called out your comments already, but you do realize that SouthernSurgeon has been involved in admissions at both highly ranked medical schools and residencies? He knows what a "high achieving applicant pool" looks like. The burden of proof should be on you here, showing us all the undergrads getting published left and right in Nature/Science/Cell whatever, when multiple adcoms with years of reviewing applications disagree with your position.

 

[Amba]

That's good that he does that. I typically don't, but that's because I don't want to handle four different opinions on how to answer them. I just write my responses, run them by the senior author, and keep the process moving along.

I'll tell you, there are few things that get me as spun up as dealing with reviewers.

Completely agree with every statement here.

 

[hoihaie]

Agree with all this.

I've never had to list out authorship criteria, and I don't send out the reviewer responses to all authors. I wonder if this is a difference between basic science journals and medical ones...

And most of all, agree that responding to reviewers often makes my blood boil.

Didn't have to do that for PNAS either - we just addressed reviewer comments ourselves without asking every single author for their opinion

 

[Long Way to Go]

Truth. I don't know why, but I take all their comments way too personally. I'm sure it goes away with more experience, but right now I get a massive inferiority complex every time I read reviewer comments. I have to keep telling myself "its not that bad, if it was that bad they would have just rejected it..."

The worst thing in the world is seeing "This is a timely paper employing cutting-edge methods to answer an important clinical problem" then followed by multiple pages of blunt comments, half of which you agree with. Because you know they really do care, and you know from the points that you agree with that they think your research was worth doing and done well. And you still feel terrible about it.

I dunno, maybe this is something that gets better after you've been in it for a while.

 

[Long Way to Go]

Didn't have to do that for PNAS either - we just addressed reviewer comments ourselves without asking every single author for their opinion

Again, I want to make it clear that this wasn't the journal requiring this - it was my PIs' preferences on how to proceed. Interesting to note the differences in how different researchers practice. I'm guessing that it's more how you were taught to do things than anything else, plus as Tired hypothesized, someone getting burned at one point.