What counts as research hours?

[hiiiihi]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have yet to obtain a research position at a laboratory, which would count as research hours...

However, based on what I search up, any research where you're conducting original research and not a review counts for research hours. In that sense, I have an online mentor that has let me work on his papers remotely. Although this includes things like systematic reviews, there instances where I was able to work on experimental/clinical original research. Actually I've done this with two seperate mentors.

So like what should I do? Does the time I work on the original research specifically counts?

What about case reports? If I'm working on case reports, would that count as well?

If this is the case, should I make a google sheets and write down specifically how much hours I put into original research and case reports (if that counts)?

Finally, how should I word this on AMCAS? I have questions regarding the two activities:

• The first one is at a specific program. However, how should I put a total hours of that includes both hours working on systematic reviews and original research? Should I elaborate in the description?
• the second one is just me and a medical student working together. How should I word this?

 

[LizzyM]

Case reports are not research.
If you are doing chart review studies or similar work that tests a hypothesis (do patients with A1c below 6 have better outcomes after x procedure than patients with A1c above 8? ) then that is research. It often requires IRB oversight to be sure that human subjects are protected. That would be legit research.

For better or worse, some adcom members value wet lab experience more highly than something that involves just the analysis of the literature.

 

[Goro]

Research is anything where you're learning something about the scientific method, even if it's studying clams in Fiji.

I agree with my learned colleague that lit reviews aren't research.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Various AI-bots now exist that help scholars comb the literature. I'm not sure how reliable they are, but if you are using one, it's becoming less likely your work would be considered "research." You need to be creating knowledge in any research that you are doing, so I emphasize more analysis and communication open to debate/deliberation. You may be helping someone with writing a book chapter or a grant through word-smithing or summarizing articles, but now a chatbot can do that.

Short: what you do is important, not just the hours.

 

[hiiiihi]

Case reports are not research.
If you are doing chart review studies or similar work that tests a hypothesis (do patients with A1c below 6 have better outcomes after x procedure than patients with A1c above 8? ) then that is research. It often requires IRB oversight to be sure that human subjects are protected. That would be legit research.

For better or worse, some adcom members value wet lab experience more highly than something that involves just the analysis of the literature.

Thank you. I’m very confused because I work under a mentor virtually. Through this mentorship, we’ve done reviews but we’ve also done experimental research papers with IRB approval and etc.

How should I list this on AMCAS? As you stated I don’t think the hours would all be correct if I list it as research. Maybe I can list it as research and include only hours where I was working on systematic reviews/original research?

Then everything else like case reports can go into publications.

 

[hiiiihi]

Research is anything where you're learning something about the scientific method, even if it's studying clams in Fiji.

I agree with my learned colleague that lit reviews aren't research.

Oh I see thank you! I still have the same question that I have regarding LizzyM question then. Should I list the mentorship as research hours and only include hours I’m working on original research??

Then everything else can just be publications and not add to hours?

I truly appreciate everyone’s help. Thank you so much!

 

[hiiiihi]

Various AI-bots now exist that help scholars comb the literature. I'm not sure how reliable they are, but if you are using one, it's becoming less likely your work would be considered "research." You need to be creating knowledge in any research that you are doing, so I emphasize more analysis and communication open to debate/deliberation. You may be helping someone with writing a book chapter or a grant through word-smithing or summarizing articles, but now a chatbot can do that.

Short: what you do is important, not just the hours.

Sorry, I’m not too sure what you’re talking about and how it applies to me because I don’t really do that. I’m not aware of ai that can currently do systematic reviews and original research. Based on what LizzyM and Goro stated, maybe I can put my work with this mentor as research hours only for original research and then put everyone else as just publications?

Or maybe I can just put wetlab as research and everyone else is publications only

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Sorry, I’m not too sure what you’re talking about and how it applies to me because I don’t really do that. I’m not aware of ai that can currently do systematic reviews and original research. Based on what LizzyM and Goro stated, maybe I can put my work with this mentor as research hours only for original research and then put everyone else as just publications?

Or maybe I can just put wetlab as research and everyone else is publications only

Their advice is solid. I think you need to focus on what you did and what you learned (not just about the topic, but about the scholarship process if it's what you want to continue doing as a medical student).

No AI can't do high-level systemic reviews for peer-reviewed publications (yet), but it can summarize articles. I also think publications are critical to include in your list of 15 W/A for AMCAS.

 

[hiiiihi]

Their advice is solid. I think you need to focus on what you did and what you learned (not just about the topic, but about the scholarship process if it's what you want to continue doing as a medical student).

No AI can't do high-level systemic reviews for peer-reviewed publications (yet), but it can summarize articles. I also think publications are critical to include in your list of 15 W/A for AMCAS.

Thank you so much! I’m glad that publications are also critical. I will add all the publications. I guess my question now is how I should phrase the mentorship. Should I call it research and include hours from original research? Or maybe I should call it internship? Or maybe I can just not include it at all?

How should I show what I got from the publications of the acitivty to get them dont get counted on AmCas

 

[Goro]

Thank you so much! I’m glad that publications are also critical. I will add all the publications. I guess my question now is how I should phrase the mentorship. Should I call it research and include hours from original research? Or maybe I should call it internship? Or maybe I can just not include it at all?

How should I show what I got from the publications of the acitivty to get them dont get counted on AmCas

This mentorship business still isn't research. You were not testing a hypothesis, were you? At best, you were involved in the writing of manuscripts.

 

[hiiiihi]

This mentorship business still isn't research. You were not testing a hypothesis, were you? At best, you were involved in the writing of manuscripts.

Hi, to clarify, I just call it a mentorship I’m not sure what it is. I’m just getting mentored by a professor/doctor. For the original research, I was just writing. For systematic reviews I was testing hypothesis. I also did one retrospective chart reviews where I was testing hypothesis

 

[LizzyM]

A chart review study could be research. You could count the time you spent writing the protocol and acquiring IRB approval including any ethics training you completed to be qualified to do the work. Then the time spent acquiring the data, cleaning it, coding it, writing a code book, doing the data analysis, writing up the results (and, of course, the introduction, methods and discussion portions of the paper that resulted, as well as the tables, graphs, etc).