How do literature reviews look for MD/PhD applicants?

[O.F. Hanson]

Hello All,

Breif introduction:
An undergraduate entering second-year; major is chemistry concentrated in biochemistry; GPA: 3.99; sGPA: 4.0; no MCAT yet; biomedical research intern for Aspirnaut at VUMC in Nephrology & Hypertension department (summer 2022); attends Berea College.

I am genuinely interested in synthesizing a literature review to contribute to an area of biomedical science, and to gain further insight into the desired field of interest. I understand that synthesis research is much, much different than scientific research, but I believe I have sufficient insight into constructing strategic searches in databases, conforming to journal/review standards, documentation, citation management, usage of available resources, reporting, etc.; I learned a ton with a certificate program at Michigan (certificate). I do not plan on tackling the project alone, but with a faculty mentor and a few peers (colleagues, to be formal in this context). Before beginning, I intend on contacting all participants and establishing a “somewhat” firm agend.

With all of that being described, now my question.

How would organizing, conducting, and (if) successfully publishing a synthesis review (particular a systematic review) look on an MD/PhD applicant? I know it is not the “scientific” research intended for the PhD aspect of these programs, but I was curious if it would look appropriate, fitting, and/or outstandin?

I may ultimately attempt it for personal experience because I am so genuinely interested, but I would love to hear what everyone else thinks.

With Gratitude,

ofh

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Any publication is good. A high quality systematic review is difficult to accomplish and time consuming, but if you have appropriate mentorship it may be doable. But don’t start anything until you have a green light from a mentor.

To be clear, reviews are not “research” because they do not contribute new information or discoveries to the field (usually… in rare situations a meta analysis which pools multiple pubs might add new information). It shouldn’t be your only research output. But as long as you have evidence of traditional hypothesis-driven research it will certainly be helpful to you.

 

[O.F. Hanson]

Any publication is good. A high quality systematic review is difficult to accomplish and time consuming, but if you have appropriate mentorship it may be doable. But don’t start anything until you have a green light from a mentor.

To be clear, reviews are not “research” because they do not contribute new information or discoveries to the field (usually… in rare situations a meta analysis which pools multiple pubs might add new information). It shouldn’t be your only research output. But as long as you have evidence of traditional hypothesis-driven research it will certainly be helpful to you.

Thank you for the feedback!

Yes, I certainly wish to continue my “discovery” research over my remaining summers (and gap year, shall there be one), and I will also be insightful when conducting a lit review with my mentor.

For me, honestly, I had figured writing a review does large benefit to 1.) healthcare professionals, if summating evidence based knowledge; 2.) the immediate research audience who find the review convenient and relevant; and 3.) the authors themselves, who will certainly learn quite a bit on their own.

I, as a student, would certainly like to garner knowledge and experience from this activity as well as contribute to the field at large.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Lots of people write reviews, and the most impactful are usually invited reviews written by leaders in the field. This is the other problem with writing a review at your stage—unless it is very well done it may be difficult to publish in a respectable journal since you are unknown. This is why it’s very important you do this with a faculty mentor.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Lots of people write reviews, and the most impactful are usually invited reviews written by leaders in the field. This is the other problem with writing a review at your stage—unless it is very well done it may be difficult to publish in a respectable journal since you are unknown. This is why it’s very important you do this with a faculty mentor.

@O.F. Hanson , just to illustrate this point. *Today* I was a reviewer for a review paper, and while there was a lot of good literature cited, as someone who is actually well versed in the field it was just clear that the authors didn't have a firm grasp of the subject matter. They emphasized old studies, and while they cited new ones they failed to recognize that some of the new studies were paradigm-shifting. I provided a very negative review, and in the rejection letter, the editor specifically said that "nearly all of our reviews are solicited ahead of time and uninvited reviews are seldom accepted."

So... anyone can do a literature review. Putting it together and synthesizing it in a way that is meaningful and publishable almost always requires a senior author who is a leader in the field. If you want to do this to prepare for your own project, by all means do so as that's an important part of the scientific process. But I would not expend significant energy in trying to write a manuscript unless you have buy-in from a senior author who can guide you.

 

[O.F. Hanson]

@O.F. Hanson , just to illustrate this point. *Today* I was a reviewer for a review paper, and while there was a lot of good literature cited, as someone who is actually well versed in the field it was just clear that the authors didn't have a firm grasp of the subject matter. They emphasized old studies, and while they cited new ones they failed to recognize that some of the new studies were paradigm-shifting. I provided a very negative review, and in the rejection letter, the editor specifically said that "nearly all of our reviews are solicited ahead of time and uninvited reviews are seldom accepted."

So... anyone can do a literature review. Putting it together and synthesizing it in a way that is meaningful and publishable almost always requires a senior author who is a leader in the field. If you want to do this to prepare for your own project, by all means do so as that's an important part of the scientific process. But I would not expend significant energy in trying to write a manuscript unless you have buy-in from a senior author who can guide you.

Thank-you very much for the extensive feedback! This was great insight and was very helpful.

Yeah, I may consider other directions for “contributing to the field”. At the moment, I will be focusing on my research internship where I work in the Nephrology Department at Vanderbilt U. Medical Center (VUMC). We study the receptor tyrosine kinase, DDR1, as it relates to kidney fibrosis.

My PI and a fellow postdoc have published various reviews on the subject. For an undergrad, would it be viable for a student to contribute in this manner? For example, if I run searches, document and manage citations, write, design figure, etc. (computer-based contributions) during the academic year when I’m not a VUMC, and share works across common shareable files?

This may be a bit difficult, but I will certainly take your advice and find a different modality if this isn’t the best idea.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Thank-you very much for the extensive feedback! This was great insight and was very helpful.

Yeah, I may consider other directions for “contributing to the field”. At the moment, I will be focusing on my research internship where I work in the Nephrology Department at Vanderbilt U. Medical Center (VUMC). We study the receptor tyrosine kinase, DDR1, as it relates to kidney fibrosis.

My PI and a fellow postdoc have published various reviews on the subject. For an undergrad, would it be viable for a student to contribute in this manner? For example, if I run searches, document and manage citations, write, design figure, etc. (computer-based contributions) during the academic year when I’m not a VUMC, and share works across common shareable files?

This may be a bit difficult, but I will certainly take your advice and find a different modality if this isn’t the best idea.

Just ask your PI. If they are well known in the field then they will undoubtedly receive invitations to do reviews during the course of the year, and if you make it known you would like to be included he may well be able to do so