How important is first author on papers vs being second author on papers?

[CuriousMDStudent]

Title sums it up. It looks like I've been accruing 2nd author opportunities throughout medical school so far and have not achieved the chance of getting first author. To be fair, I am inexperienced and have had residents/fellows guiding me but I've been doing the grunt work. Is the key to getting first author on papers by taking charge of a project from the start and not getting help from residents/fellows?

Also would it look bad if I wasn't first author on paper when I apply to residency? I have one project that will take a while to become first author but I don't know.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Lawpy]

I don't think anyone really cares (because pub count is much more important) but if you really want a first author paper, you need to talk to your PI in advance

 

[deleted50541]

The number of publications is going to look more impressive compared to having fewer but you're first author. It's not going to look bad on your application.

Generally, if you do the majority of the work (background research, collecting the data, analyzing it, and writing/editing the manuscript), then you get to be first author. There's nothing wrong with having residents/fellows help you. But you need to have clear expectations set when starting a project on how much work you will be doing and if that's enough to be considered for first author.

 

[srirachamayonnaise]

You need a couple of first author papers to just show that you can lead a project. After that, you can basically disregard that.

 

[operaman]

There’s a huge difference between the two. At the faculty level, usually only first and last author papers even count toward promotion requirements. It means a lot. What it tells programs is that you know how to move a project from A to Z. More academic programs look favorably on this because it means you can be productive without them having to teach you the basics.

You get first author pubs by discussing authorship in advance. You may still have help from residents and fellows, but it would be known in advance to be your project. The residents and fellows definitely had the authorship talk when starting the project and they frequently look to students to do the grunt work in exchange for middle authorship. This is fine in the beginning as you learn, but ideally you would progress toward taking charge of small projects of your own.

 

[SurfingDoctor]

1st author > 2nd author >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing.

 

[Lawpy]

1st author > 2nd author >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing.

How do co-first authors and co-second authors fare in your ranking?

 

[hebrewBAMmer]

I think people have a tendency to severely overstate the importance of authorship order. Is it nice to be first author? Absolutely. Will it make or break a residency application? I sincerely doubt it

 

[SurfingDoctor]

How do co-first authors and co-second authors fare in your ranking?

Co-first author is good. There's no such thing as a co-second author... your just a cog in the publication wheel. Better than nothing still though.

 

[Phloston]

Title sums it up. It looks like I've been accruing 2nd author opportunities throughout medical school so far and have not achieved the chance of getting first author. To be fair, I am inexperienced and have had residents/fellows guiding me but I've been doing the grunt work. Is the key to getting first author on papers by taking charge of a project from the start and not getting help from residents/fellows?

Also would it look bad if I wasn't first author on paper when I apply to residency? I have one project that will take a while to become first author but I don't know.

Anyone with any real credibility who looks at your research would care infinitely more about the substance of your work vs the point about 1st vs 2nd.

 

[Dr G Oogle]

As a student you don’t get to be second author without putting in a decent amount of work. I personally put students as first if they’ve done a lot of the leg work (making tables, collecting data) even if I do the actual analysis and write most of the paper. But I usually don’t have fellows or residents on those papers. For papers going into prominent journals with high impact unless student did the vast amount of work and is PI in all but name they will not be first or maybe even second author, but if you’re on that paper it does imply you did lots of work. I don’t think many programs expect students to be first author.

 

[NickNaylor]

As others have mentioned, as a medical student - particularly if you're someone that isn't interested in primarily doing research - any publication is gravy, and first vs. second author isn't going to matter. If you're planning on being a clinical researcher and are going to apply to or look for residency positions with a research focus, then it might make a difference there.

 

[Datypicalpremed]

Guess I’ll weigh in since I had a discussion about this with my school’s faculty a while ago.

overall impression I got from an academic science perspective (and thus probably in line with academic medicine) is that 1st author > 1st coauthor (aka A and B contributed equally) >> 2nd or coauthor. Having said that, I would say unless you are applying to a research track residency program, stand out at a top program (which tend to be at research heavy institutions and thus view applicants with a strong publication record more favorably), or applying to a field with strong emphasis on research (neurosurgery, rad onc, etc.), your time would almost certainly be better spent getting more coauthors than firsts. This is simply due to the sheer amount of time, effort, and LUCK needed to get a 1st author publication. You can rack up an insane amount of “research pubs” on ERAS just by contributing towards a publication. Some of my peers have gotten their names on papers just by spending a hour making graphs from data that has already been collected under the reasoning of “hey, I made a figure so I deserve some authorship.” Some have even gotten authorship for just proofreading. Makes me sad that I spent my PhD focusing on getting 1st author pubs and now some of my MD only peers have more overall publications than me 🥲

 

[Lawpy]

Guess I’ll weigh in since I had a discussion about this with my school’s faculty a while ago.

overall impression I got from an academic science perspective (and thus probably in line with academic medicine) is that 1st author > 1st coauthor (aka A and B contributed equally) >> 2nd or coauthor. Having said that, I would say unless you are applying to a research track residency program, stand out at a top program (which tend to be at research heavy institutions and thus view applicants with a strong publication record more favorably), or applying to a field with strong emphasis on research (neurosurgery, rad onc, etc.), your time would almost certainly be better spent getting more coauthors than firsts. This is simply due to the sheer amount of time, effort, and LUCK needed to get a 1st author publication. You can rack up an insane amount of “research pubs” on ERAS just by contributing towards a publication. Some of my peers have gotten their names on papers just by spending a hour making graphs from data that has already been collected under the reasoning of “hey, I made a figure so I deserve some authorship.” Some have even gotten authorship for just proofreading. Makes me sad that I spent my PhD focusing on getting 1st author pubs and now some of my MD only peers have more overall publications than me 🥲

It's definitely possible to churn out middle author papers on the side while working on first author paper.

Really the focus should not be on racking as many first authors as possible. That's a complete waste of time as a med student and even probably as a resident too.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

It's definitely possible to churn out middle author papers on the side while working on first author paper.

Really the focus should not be on racking as many first authors as possible. That's a complete waste of time as a med student and even probably as a resident too.

Does first author paper as an undergrad count for residency?

 

[Lawpy]

Does first author paper as an undergrad count for residency?

Yes

 

[Redpancreas]

Great discussion here. I like all the points made and to synthesize if you're just learning and are at the medical student level it's probably not a big deal to have the second author but as you gain experience you'll likely want to upgrade.

 

[guytakingboards]

It's definitely possible to churn out middle author papers on the side while working on first author paper.

Really the focus should not be on racking as many first authors as possible. That's a complete waste of time as a med student and even probably as a resident too.

Don't agree that it'd be a complete waste of time. People can and do look critically at the publications list. Maybe not for the interview invite but when i interviewed resident applicants I definitely noticed if there were 1st author pubs sprinkled in and if they were articles of substance vs case reports.

 

[Lawpy]

Don't agree that it'd be a complete waste of time. People can and do look critically at the publications list. Maybe not for the interview invite but when i interviewed resident applicants I definitely noticed if there were 1st author pubs sprinkled in and if they were articles of substance vs case reports.

Sprinkled in is the key term here. So something like 2 first authors in a total of say like 10 papers is a better use of the time than trying to max out on the first author count. Getting papers into strong journals takes a lot of time (sometimes even a year or two) and the overall project length can last for few years.

 

[GoSpursGo]

Locking as this thread is more or less talking about the same issues being discussed here: I collected all of the data for a database and a fellow is guiding me through analyzing the data and write the paper. Would I still be 1st author?

In general, first>second, but not so much that you need to get bent out of shape about it. First author should go to the author who contributed the most, not the person who "needs it."