Types of publications for matching neurological surgery

[XannyFairy]

What kinds of publications are neurosurgery residencies looking for when screening applicants? I understand basic science vs. clinical and journal impact factors are determinants for ranking pubs. However, I don't understand whether they are looking for specifically neurosurgery publications, or general neuroscience papers.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[longhaul3]

Any legitimate research is good research. As a med student you don't have to worry too much about big journals, impact factor, etc. Neuroscience is fair game, especially more basic science stuff (i.e. not the cognitive/behavioral/psychological neurosciences).

Neurosurgery research is a big game for the most part. There is not a whole lot of truly meaningful, original research that will influence the future of the field. Most of it is unfortunately CV building and quantity over quality. For applicants that actually makes things a little easier, because you can churn out a bunch of fluff papers and look pretty good on the interview trail.

There are a few programs that really want accomplished researchers and will drool over applicants with more impressive publications with almost no regard for their clinical acumen or overall performance in med school. This will become even more exaggerated as Step 1 is phased out. These programs tend to be the ones that have strong academic reputations but are known within the field to produce relatively weaker surgeons.

 

[agiraffe999]

Any legitimate research is good research. As a med student you don't have to worry too much about big journals, impact factor, etc. Neuroscience is fair game, especially more basic science stuff (i.e. not the cognitive/behavioral/psychological neurosciences).

Neurosurgery research is a big game for the most part. There is not a whole lot of truly meaningful, original research that will influence the future of the field. Most of it is unfortunately CV building and quantity over quality. For applicants that actually makes things a little easier, because you can churn out a bunch of fluff papers and look pretty good on the interview trail.

There are a few programs that really want accomplished researchers and will drool over applicants with more impressive publications with almost no regard for their clinical acumen or overall performance in med school. This will become even more exaggerated as Step 1 is phased out. These programs tend to be the ones that have strong academic reputations but are known within the field to produce relatively weaker surgeons.

Would you recommend emailing one or two PI and ask to work under them? Is it possible doing two at once as well?

 

[longhaul3]

Would you recommend emailing one or two PI and ask to work under them? Is it possible doing two at once as well?

Yes, email the PI or some of the residents who have the same research interests as you do. You can work with multiple people but most applicants have one fairly strong connection to a single research group and get a letter from that PI.

 

[XannyFairy]

Any legitimate research is good research. As a med student you don't have to worry too much about big journals, impact factor, etc. Neuroscience is fair game, especially more basic science stuff (i.e. not the cognitive/behavioral/psychological neurosciences).

Neurosurgery research is a big game for the most part. There is not a whole lot of truly meaningful, original research that will influence the future of the field. Most of it is unfortunately CV building and quantity over quality. For applicants that actually makes things a little easier, because you can churn out a bunch of fluff papers and look pretty good on the interview trail.

There are a few programs that really want accomplished researchers and will drool over applicants with more impressive publications with almost no regard for their clinical acumen or overall performance in med school. This will become even more exaggerated as Step 1 is phased out. These programs tend to be the ones that have strong academic reputations but are known within the field to produce relatively weaker surgeons.

Is there any opinion on conducting neuroendocrinology research?

 

[libertyyne]

Any legitimate research is good research. As a med student you don't have to worry too much about big journals, impact factor, etc. Neuroscience is fair game, especially more basic science stuff (i.e. not the cognitive/behavioral/psychological neurosciences).

Neurosurgery research is a big game for the most part. There is not a whole lot of truly meaningful, original research that will influence the future of the field. Most of it is unfortunately CV building and quantity over quality. For applicants that actually makes things a little easier, because you can churn out a bunch of fluff papers and look pretty good on the interview trail.

There are a few programs that really want accomplished researchers and will drool over applicants with more impressive publications with almost no regard for their clinical acumen or overall performance in med school. This will become even more exaggerated as Step 1 is phased out. These programs tend to be the ones that have strong academic reputations but are known within the field to produce relatively weaker surgeons.

A side note , what are considered some of the programs that create the strongest surgeons ?

 

[longhaul3]

Is there any opinion on conducting neuroendocrinology research?

The closer to neurosurgery the better. I would choose pure neurosurgery research if your goal is to match in neurosurgery. But we do work closely with endocrinologists on a lot of cases. Anything related to (neurogenic) DI, SIADH, etc. is relevant, although neurosurgeons may or may not be super interested in the research. People get all sorts of neuroendocrine issues when we tickle the hypothalamus.

A side note , what are considered some of the programs that create the strongest surgeons ?

Any program with adequate volume, autonomy, and breadth will produce its fair share of strong surgeons because surgical training is what you make of it. That said, people will mention programs like Pitt, BNI, UW, Mayo, USC, Emory, Baylor, etc. because they are at large medical centers that are known for extremely high volume and complexity with autonomy. Note that most of these programs are not on the coasts, where there is more competition for cases and attendings are on average more hands-on (especially the northeast). The resident experience at these programs is totally different from the experience at MGH, Stanford, etc.

There was also the old guard of elite programs, like Hopkins, Virginia, and Columbia among others, with rich tradition based on the lineage of specific pioneers in the field. This has sort of petered out as the field has matured and become more modern and research-driven.