Type of Publication?

[Dreemer005]

Assuming equality in the impact factor of the journal, in what order do these publications fall in terms of career advancement in academic medicine for someone that does both clinical and basic research?

1) Prospective randomized clinical trial
2) Original basic science research
3) Clinical outcomes research (Cohort)
4) Meta-analysis
5) Clinical review
6) Basic science review
7) Case report/series
8) Editorial

Do you agree with this order? If not, approximately how much do each of these matter when applying for academic positions for fellowship, etc.?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[RxnMan]

Eh, I might switch 2) and 3) depending on the work, and I'd knock down 4). But that's my opinion - what does it matter, or what are you trying to do with this information?

 

[Dreemer005]

Thanks for the input.

I'm hoping to stay in academics and have matched into an academic cardiology fellowship for next year. Like many programs, research is preferred/required during the fellowship. I've done basic (mostly) and clinical (only retrospective cohort) research through my (brief) career thus far and enjoy both. I haven't decided which I want to pursue long-term, but chances of getting a faculty position partially weigh my decisions short-term.

 

[RxnMan]

If you're trying to decide who to work with based on what projects they've got going on, then realize that most of the stuff at the top of the list has a significant time investment involved - basic science, depending on the project, takes 1.5 to get the lab work done, and another year to write up. A RCT may take five years to complete the leg work, and about another year to write up. Ask whom ever you're working with what their deadlines or expected mile markers are, and see how that fits with your time-frame.

 

[Oceaner]

full time research that goes on for 2+ years (a typical masters here) normally publishes 3-5+ papers. If your work is taking longer than that, you're on the wrong track (with the exception of long term studies) A report/thesis compiles all these papers, and that typically takes a long time.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

full time research that goes on for 2+ years (a typical masters here) normally publishes 3-5+ papers. If your work is taking longer than that, you're on the wrong track (with the exception of long term studies) A report/thesis compiles all these papers, and that typically takes a long time.

Wow 3-5 papers typical of a 2 year masters? I don't think so buddy, especially if you're talking first author papers.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Wow 3-5 papers typical of a 2 year masters? I don't think so buddy, especially if you're talking first author papers.

I think it depends on the subject matter and how much the PI is willing to let you split hairs when it comes to writing things up.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

I think it depends on the subject matter and how much the PI is willing to let you split hairs when it comes to writing things up.

Yeah I'm sure it's possible, but it's far from typical.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

Yeah I'm sure it's possible, but it's far from typical.

Point taken.

 

[Oceaner]

Yeah I'm sure it's possible, but it's far from typical.

You're right, I was wrong to imply that. It's just I've grown up around universities and so I've become very acquainted and aware of the academia politics. One of the professors I worked in was a "paper-mill" so to say... One of his masters students had nearly 10 papers published (you can imagine how easily she got into a PhD program) because he had a lot of half written papers, data collected which hadn't been written up etc. (even unrelated to their thesis) which the students developed for about two-three months, stuck their name on (as 1st/2nd authors) , and sent away to be published (at great journals nonetheless... to my great surprise). This is not to mention another prof in the same dept. who had the same type of thing going on except the papers from his lab (I had to read a few to get a hold of the jist of the field) were absolute crap/contradicted each other. Universities are funny places... I've become jaded though.

Anyways, I've definitely heard of other guys who definitely split hairs and fuss and barely produce a research paper a year though... so you're definitely right.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

I've definitely heard of other guys who definitely split hairs and fuss and barely produce a research paper a year though... so you're definitely right.

When I made the hair splitting comment, I was referring to subdividing a project into as many papers as possible. However, I do see where you're coming from and know profs like that.