Research

[bustedgrill]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

So Last month I started doing neuro research. I enjoy it and feel I'm learning a lot. Who else is doing research? What kind. Also- How much is enough- how much do adcoms look for predents who publish their research. Your feedback is appreciated.

Mike

 

[topdent1]

I was also wondering how important is research. I go to a huge research school and if you haven't done a couple of semesters of research, people look at you funny. Do other students get the same chance at doing research or is it much harder at other schools?

 

[laundry]

Bustedgrill,

Research is not like shadowing hours...there isn't such a thing as "enough research". If you really enjoy doing it, try to get a research assistantship in that lab and keep doing it.

As for publishing, it depends on type of research. If it's just a summer reseach program, then no, you don't need a paper. But if you've been working in a lab since your freshman year, you might wanna push for a pub by the time you apply.

 

[Pat Kelly]

you just started doing research AND you want to think about publishing? good luck with that.

 

[laundry]

you just started doing research AND you want to think about publishing? good luck with that.

lol at Pat, I'm guessing you're not much of a researcher...

Bustedgrill...yes, you damn right better be thinking about publishing. You have to set a goal, research similar topics, find the amount of data that a given journal accepts as a publication, and gauge your project according to that and time allowed!

 

[Pat Kelly]

lol at Pat, I'm guessing you're not much of a researcher...

Bustedgrill...yes, you damn right better be thinking about publishing. You have to set a goal, research similar topics, find the amount of data that a given journal accepts as a publication, and gauge your project according to that and time allowed!

You think a supervisor will be gun-ho about getting a new person in the lab published when he/she doesn't know what the lab is about, don't have any previous data, no funding, and maybe no experience in that particular field? I want to work with you, considering if your supervisor is that nice about it.

 

[UCSF2012]

Just write a review article in an issue of Genetics. That's a publication.

 

[Svart Aske]

I did a diabetes-related clinical research last summer, and am currently applying for a volunteer research position in the plastic and reconstructive surgery department at my school. I want to do the latter mostly because it sounds like it could be interesting; I don't think research is that crucial to application.

 

[Pat Kelly]

Just write a review article in an issue of Genetics. That's a publication.

I think you should write one just to prove me wrong. I don't think "anyone" can just write a review article and get accepted for publication, but I may be wrong.

 

[laundry]

You think a supervisor will be gun-ho about getting a new person in the lab published when he/she doesn't know what the lab is about, don't have any previous data, no funding, and maybe no experience in that particular field?

Are you reading what I'm writing????

"You have to set a goal, research similar topics, find the amount of data that a given journal accepts as a publication, and gauge your project according to that and time allowed!"

Not publish now, as in submit a paper now, but think about publishing his future work now.

get it this time? I'll try to say it more clearly for you. He is given a project in this lab. So he will be doing bench work and lit reviews to understand what the hell it is that he's going. By doing the lit review he will understand how much work is appropriate for a publication in the journal of the field he's in. The whole purpose of this research project, by the way it TO GAIN EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD. As for funding, he's an undergrad, and unless he's really good, he won't be able to get grants. But it's not his project, it's his PI's. He is just a research associate. So, by the time he has enough data and has read enough stuff to know when he has enough data, he'll be experienced enough for a co-authorship. But to get there, he needs a gameplan and a goal, so HELL YES he needs to think about that gameplan now!

You should know this, considering you are doing your PhD. I don't know if you personally have had any paper published but you shouldn't tell people to think about publishing when they haven't done anything to contribute to the lab yet.

For the love of Darwin get a clue. oh..and...do NOT tell me what I should or shouldn't tell people about research. trust me, I have waaaaay more experience in it then you will if you triple your experience now and then cube it. 😉

 

[Pat Kelly]

Are you reading what I'm writing????

"You have to set a goal, research similar topics, find the amount of data that a given journal accepts as a publication, and gauge your project according to that and time allowed!"

Not publish now, as in submit a paper now, but think about publishing his future work now.

get it this time? I'll try to say it more clearly for you. He is given a project in this lab. So he will be doing bench work and lit reviews to understand what the hell it is that he's going. By doing the lit review he will understand how much work is appropriate for a publication in the journal of the field he's in. The whole purpose of this research project, by the way it TO GAIN EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD. As for funding, he's an undergrad, and unless he's really good, he won't be able to get grants. But it's not his project, it's his PI's. He is just a research associate. So, by the time he has enough data and has read enough stuff to know when he has enough data, he'll be experienced enough for a co-authorship. But to get there, he needs a gameplan and a goal, so HELL YES he needs to think about that gameplan now!




For the love of Darwin get a clue. oh..and...do NOT tell me what I should or shouldn't tell people about research. trust me, I have waaaaay more experience in it then you will if you triple your experience now and then cube it. 😉

Are you an internet detective? How do you know your research experience is more than what I have? There's no point in thinking about a gameplan if you don't know ANYTHING. I would be more concerned about producing good data and actually following instructions of my PI instead of "thinking about publishing". Learning how to do research and thinking about publishing is two totally different things. I never said anything about him wanting to publish now, but even thinking about it is just stupid because you don't HAVE any data and nothing to show for it. Why are you encouraging people to fly when they don't even know how to walk?

 

[laundry]

I don't have to assume anything. I know a researcher, and you ain't one.

 

[Shunwei]

Are you reading what I'm writing????

"You have to set a goal, research similar topics, find the amount of data that a given journal accepts as a publication, and gauge your project according to that and time allowed!"

Not publish now, as in submit a paper now, but think about publishing his future work now.

get it this time? I'll try to say it more clearly for you. He is given a project in this lab. So he will be doing bench work and lit reviews to understand what the hell it is that he's going. By doing the lit review he will understand how much work is appropriate for a publication in the journal of the field he's in. The whole purpose of this research project, by the way it TO GAIN EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD. As for funding, he's an undergrad, and unless he's really good, he won't be able to get grants. But it's not his project, it's his PI's. He is just a research associate. So, by the time he has enough data and has read enough stuff to know when he has enough data, he'll be experienced enough for a co-authorship. But to get there, he needs a gameplan and a goal, so HELL YES he needs to think about that gameplan now!




For the love of Darwin get a clue. oh..and...do NOT tell me what I should or shouldn't tell people about research. trust me, I have waaaaay more experience in it then you will if you triple your experience now and then cube it. 😉

Well, I have more experience than you do--you wouldn't argue that, would you?😛

Pat Kelly is right. When someone like the OP is just getting to thinking about research, the initial goal is not publishing--instead, he/she should find a topic that is at least mildly interesting and get a PI that can at least be supportive when it comes to getting a LOR. I think most dental schools value research in the sense that it provides some analytical training and some bench knowledge; whether one publishes or not is actually not that important. If you do, great. If not, no big deal. Basically, I consider research just an EC and a source of LOR. Just go in with a mindset of learning something, and you'd be OK. Most of the time you'd be paird with a grad student or postdoc, so you won't be truly independent. And that's the way it should be, because being an independent scientist takes a lot of training and time.

 

[Bruinlove]

because being an independent scientist takes a lot of training and time.

That's why I wonder how anyone can manage dual degree program in 7 years. I personally think you need at least 2 more years than that unless you already have masters in oral biology.

 

[Pat Kelly]

I don't have to assume anything. I know a researcher, and you ain't one.

Great comeback. You just contradicted yourself. You assumed that I am not doing research work, without knowing who I am and what I do. 👎 🙄

To the OP: I think it's great that you are doing the research job. Just learn everything you can from your co-workers, and things will come when you are ready. It's good to learn how to publish papers, write grants, how to do experiments, but it's another thing to actually THINK about publish one. That's what you say when you actually HAVE some data, and you go up to your supervisor and say - oh, I think I may have something here that would be good for a paper.

 

[laundry]

Dr. Shunwei We've awaken the elders....

nope, won't argue with that 😉

I still think that it's never too early to think about a paper. takes the same process that you need when getting familiar with research - read, read, ask your PI, read, etc... if you start thinking about publishing now, you'll be more motivated in doing well with your project. 👍

 

[Shunwei]

Dr. Shunwei We've awaken the elders....

nope, won't argue with that 😉

I still think that it's never too early to think about a paper. takes the same process that you need when getting familiar with research - read, read, ask your PI, read, etc... if you start thinking about publishing now, you'll be more motivated in doing well with your project. 👍

It depends on your goals. My suspicion is that most pre-dents on here see research as just a feather in their cap. They want to have something put on their CV, a referee for a letter, and maybe something to talk about during interviews. We know that you are one of the DDS/PhD candidates, so maybe that's why you are thinking differently. For you, should you continue on your academic road, publcations will be paramount for your existence. For others though, it is just a stepping stone for something else.

Besides, even if you publish, your impact or fame level is likely low. In research, it is recognized that the first and last authors generally share about ~45% of the credit each, with the other 10% doled out among the other authors, with the second author slightly more imporant for the rest. So say if you get a 3rd authorship--in the grand scheme of things that is quite trivial. Of course it is a nice stroke of the ego for it, but knowledgeable folks won't put much stock in it.

Really, publishing is a lot more complicated than most people realize. You start with an idea and polish it down to a hypothesis. You then make predictions, devise experiments, and carry them out. Data are collected and interpreted and finally manuscript drafts are written. These are then submitted for peer review, and most of the time the reviewer will be asking for revision experiments on the moon. You either do these or you don't; in the optimal case your revisions are taken, in the worst case you start the process over again with another journal after rejection. Typically, each paper takes a good 2-3 years, and most people don't realize that even a sentence "we carried out experiment X and it didn't work" may have taken months or years in itself.

So, no, publishing is too grand a goal for your average pre-dent. I suggest just getting some experience and cultivating a good relationship with the PI. Any papers that come out of the experience is simply a bonus.

 

[Pat Kelly]

Dr. Shunwei We've awaken the elders....

nope, won't argue with that 😉

I still think that it's never too early to think about a paper. takes the same process that you need when getting familiar with research - read, read, ask your PI, read, etc... if you start thinking about publishing now, you'll be more motivated in doing well with your project. 👍

I respectfully disagree. Speaking from my own experience - I looked into this side project that was really interesting for me and relevant to my lab, and I spent weeks putting together a project proposal. Half an hour of lab meeting later, my supervisor rejected my idea because he didn't think it was the direction the lab was going for. In essence I wasted a couple of weeks when i could have been doing more analysis of the data I had and helping my postdoc finish his paper. I would say that you only think about doing a paper when you actually have a shot - ie worked in the lab for a couple of years, doing your Masters/PhD, otherwise almost no supervisor will give you the opportunity to do so. There's just not enough funding to go around. Then again, I apparently am not a researcher, so what do I know right?

 

[Shunwei]

That's why I wonder how anyone can manage dual degree program in 7 years. I personally think you need at least 2 more years than that unless you already have masters in oral biology.

The common sentiment in the Ph.D. community is that the "specialized" Ph.D.'s like MD/PhD, DDS/PhD, PharmD/PhD, are "watered-down" versions of the degree. I won't get into this myself since I have no interest in putting down other people'e credentials, but that is the prevalent feeling in the field. Most of the time, these programs can manage this because they have what's called "McDonald" projects--prepared projects with established ideas that have a high probability of getting presentable results when carried out. This is why a program like UCSF can pump out DDS/PhDs in just three years of PhD work (theoretically), whereas your typical biomedical Ph.D. at a top university will take about seven years nowadays to do so. Personally, I think the latter case is too drawn out for my taste, but there is no disputing the fact that the usual Ph.D. route is vastly different than the dual-degree ones. Which one is better is up to each person's own interpretations.

 

[bustedgrill]

Sorry to start an uproar I just wanted to know how publishing looks to the adcoms. Like would they take your time spent researching serious if you didn't publish?

Pat Kelly- Are you saying I can't publish! WTF do you mean dude. My supervisor just told me to scribble some notes down and it would be used in teaching YOUR next master's level neuro class. Great for me- sucks for you and your class! (I understand you may have been doing this for a while and I am very sorry I am not equipped with the knowledge that you have on this subject but people have to start somewhere. I am not trying to take anything away from you nor did say I was thinking about publishing.)

Laundry- You're right. We are given studies to work on. I get no grants nor would I expect to get one. Most people in the lab have published their findings with the assistance of the Doc we work under. Very cool people in the lab and my supervisor is very down to earth and welcoming. You seemed to know this right off the bat! Good stuff and thanks for the advice man.

 

[Bruinlove]

Most of the time, these programs can manage this because they have what's called "McDonald" projects--prepared projects with established ideas that have a high probability of getting presentable results when carried out.

That makes sense. Imagine how much time you can save if you get things in the first or second trial. Thanks! 🙂

 

[bustedgrill]

Shun- thanks you answered my question completely 👍