What is the Correct Format for entering the Authors of a Publication?

[rendezvous14]

---

Members don't see this ad.

This is a little bit of nitpicking, but I just want to be sure..

Below the "authors" box on ERAS is a small note about how to format the authors. For peer reviewed journal articles, the note says the format should be:

For multiple authors: LastName FirstInitialMiddleInitial, LastName FirstInitialMiddleInitial

But then for oral and poster sessions, the note says the format should be:

For multiple authors: LastName, FirstInitial., LastName, FirstInitial

These formats are radically different
1) The oral/poster format has a comma after both the last name and the first initial.
2) The oral/poster format only requires the first initial and not the middle initial.
3) In the oral/poster format after the first initial of the first author there is a period, but there is no period after subsequent authors' first initials.


Why are these formats so radically different, and will programs reading my application be able to see the ERAS note about how to format? I am worried that if programs cannot see that note, the lack of standardization between the different types of publications will come across as type-o's and/or carelessness, but at the same time I want to follow directions.

Should I follow the format suggestions, or just standardize everything to look the same?

 

[NotAProgDirector]

Apparently you and I have different definitions of "radically different"

The first format is pubmed compliant, as that's how the authors would be listed. Posters are not in Pubmed, so it matters less. regardless, no one is going to care how exactly you list the authors. I would favor using the first format for everything. But, no one is going to care nor notice.

 

[rendezvous14]

Right, I guess "radically" is a bit too strong of a word..thanks for the answer, it certainly looks cleaner keeping it all standardized as you suggested..I was just concerned because you here all of this gibberish about the importance of following directions on these kinds of standardized apps, so I wanted to make sure that this wasn't a case of that.

 

[alittlestory]

Is it the general consensus not to list publications for which we are not the first author? I'm not a senior researcher or anything, but I would like to mention my efforts- since that's what I've been doing in the past few months.

 

[atsai3]

Is it the general consensus not to list publications for which we are not the first author? I'm not a senior researcher or anything, but I would like to mention my efforts- since that's what I've been doing in the past few months.

When you are describing a publication, it is appropriate to list publications where you are listed as an author, irrespective of authorship order.

If you would like to describe research contributions that did not or have not yet resulted in publication, you can describe those in the experiences section.

-AT.

 

[twilightdoc]

Is it the general consensus not to list publications for which we are not the first author? I'm not a senior researcher or anything, but I would like to mention my efforts- since that's what I've been doing in the past few months.

If the paper is published in a peer-reviewed journal and you are listed as an author, you definitely should list it on your application. The list of authors should be the same as it appears in the publication. I doubt if there are many med students who are "first authors" on a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal; students in combined degree programs such as MD/PhD programs would probably have the most. And you should also include the publication in your CV. Some of us "old school" types still look at the CV section of ERAS when reviewing applicants to our program.

 

[alittlestory]

thanks for the feedback.