What is the value of a review paper in comparision to other research papers?

[forsparta]

I will be publishing two first author review paper on a gene in a cancer field and one second author paper..they will be my only publications most likely at residency time.

Will this make me stand out during residency time and put me above other candidates? or will it be just a starting point that no one cares about? And could it help me with grant applications down the road?

Thanks
Mike

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

I will be publishing two first author review paper on a gene in a cancer field and one second author paper..they will be my only publications most likely at residency time.

Will this make me stand out during residency time and put me above other candidates? or will it be just a starting point that no one cares about? And could it help me with grant applications down the road?

Thanks
Mike

Probably not much, unless you have a number of your own research papers and the review is in a prestigious journal, like NEJM.

 

[Neuronix]

Will this make me stand out during residency time and put me above other candidates? or will it be just a starting point that no one cares about? And could it help me with grant applications down the road?

No, yes, probably not.

If you are an MD/PhD student who graduates with only review articles and no first authored research, that is a large negative on your application. Anyone can write a literature review. What matters is novel research.

If you are an MD or MD/MS student with only review articles this is rather neutral. Even a clinical article would be better.

 

[forsparta]

No, yes, probably not.

If you are an MD/PhD student who graduates with only review articles and no first authored research, that is a large negative on your application. Anyone can write a literature review. What matters is novel research.

If you are an MD or MD/MS student with only review articles this is rather neutral. Even a clinical article would be better.

Thank you for your response,

I am an MD only student going towards a competitive field (rad/onc) and my papers are oncology based.

You are right in that review papers are not novel research; I tried to get a basic lab position this summer but it did not pan out. Instead I was offered a position to write 2-3 review papers on fields I was very knowledgeable about that would be published. I figured it would put me in a better spot that most candidates because I had some papers under my belt but I guess not

 

[Neuronix]

Dedicate a future month to rad onc clinical research. Even in rad onc the most important factors for matching are step 1 and clinical grades.

If you want basic research take at least a year out. A summer is a joke for basic research.

 

[forsparta]

Dedicate a future month to rad onc clinical research. Even in rad onc the most important factors for matching are step 1 and clinical grades.

If you want basic research take at least a year out. A summer is a joke for basic research.

That's what I hear...Thanks. Ill get onto that.

 

[forsparta]

No, yes, probably not.

If you are an MD/PhD student who graduates with only review articles and no first authored research, that is a large negative on your application. Anyone can write a literature review. What matters is novel research.

If you are an MD or MD/MS student with only review articles this is rather neutral. Even a clinical article would be better.

Do many MD track students publish as first author? If so, what type of research (clincial or basic science)?

 

[Neuronix]

Do many MD track students publish as first author? If so, what type of research (clincial or basic science)?

See Charting Outcomes for some rough idea but I couldn't be more specific about how many people publish and as what author. Of course many publish to get a competitive residency only. Basic science papers take at least a year out, while clinical research you can publish in a month or two. So most MD only types only have clinical research, but frankly I think the two types are roughly equivalent when applying to residency.

 

[Ombret]

Plenty of MD students applying to our residency program had a clinical article or two. A handful, maybe 10-15%, had some basic science papers on their application. Not always first author. We saw review articles on occasion, but honestly not all that often, maybe because it would be a little unusual for a med student to truly be knowledgeable enough to review a topic. I was the chief one year, so I interviewed all the applicants for that cycle and was involved in making the rank list. The discussion of applicants' publications was very gestalt oriented. I usually did a Pubmed to see if the people were full of crap and sometimes they were. Honestly, all these types of first author scholarship sort of showed the same thing: that you had your act together enough to both start AND finish the task of writing a paper. A review article also shows this. I cannot remember any situations where we got into any kind of balancing act--"this person's one review was better than that other person's two clinical articles in lower-tier journals." Now if the person comes in talking about wanting to be a research maven, but their only pub is a review... THAT would raise flags.

 

[tiedyeddog]

I have a question related to MD/PhD students and review articles.

I know of a few people who are finishing their PhD portion and have 4+ review articles. Is there a reason for doing so many? Does it actually help later on or did the PI pressure them to do it or what am I missing? Seems like a waste of time. Assume these imaginary people have 2+ 1st person authorships in mid-impact journals.

 

[StIGMA]

I have a question related to MD/PhD students and review articles.

I know of a few people who finishing their PhD portion and have 4+ review articles. Is there a reason for doing so many? Does it actually help later on or did the PI pressure them to do it or what am I missing? Seems like a waste of time. Assume these imaginary people have 2+ 1st person authorships in mid-impact journals.

Are these all independent review articles or are some of them 1-3 page summaries of another group's article (eg; a preview)? The latter are quite a bit less work and of little (or no) importance.

 

[snobored18]

4+ full-length reviews is probably overkill. Most likely these folks are in labs that get a substantial number of requests to furnish reviews/commentaries and it's pretty tough to turn down another line in pubmed/your CV when you're starting out. For the PhD having 1 or 2 good reviews (particularly if you can hold out for one in the Nature Reviews family where they perform a full developmental edit and assign an illustrator to clean up your figures) is fantastic as you can quickly re-work these articles into a sparkling intro.

 

[forsparta]

For the PhD having 1 or 2 good reviews (particularly if you can hold out for one in the Nature Reviews family where they perform a full developmental edit and assign an illustrator to clean up your figures) is fantastic as you can quickly re-work these articles into a sparkling intro.

Sorry for being a naive medical student, but what do you mean by this? What does Nature Reviews do differently from other jounrals? is it the same prestige as the regular nature family?