Research is NOT A MUST. Most of the people in my intern class have not done research. It definately does not out rank third year grades and boards, as those two are looked at for AOA. Do not sacarafice your third year grades.

My advice would be do not do research unless you actually want to. If you do research, you have to know all the details about what you are doing for your interviews as you will be grilled on it so they know you actually did the research and not just some chart checking to get your name on a paper.

Think of your application as a cake. YOur grades/board scores/letters make up the cake. Things like research and extra cirriculars make up the decorations on the top of the cake.....so you can still have a good cake with no pretty frosting flowers on top.,....but if they are there it makes the cake look better.....its like buying a house with a pool...you dont buy the house for the pool but it may influence you when it comes to make the final decision.....

Some of the academic places will really want to see a project....it was brought up in the majority of my interviews and makes nice conversation///especially if the attending is also interested in the same topic////some places have you interview with a research faculty.....so if you have no research what the hell are you gonna talk about for 15 min....


so to answer your question..... I would not sacrafice my surgery or internal med grades.....but if you said I would honor psych or have a nice little publication.....I would pick the publication in a heart beat....

hope my crazy logic helps....

I only had one research project and it was not related to ortho....but I still managed to match. So its not impossible.

But do it if you can.....I should have. Dont take any chances.

good luck

i matched and had NO ortho research, just a paper related to gen surg and helped write a USMLE STEP 1 review book that was published....but in hind site it would not hurt you on paper and may help get u an interview, however u better know your sh"t about in an interview which if u don't could hurt u.

kimball

Simple...do research. It will enhance your application and improve your chances of matching. It makes you a better candidate particularly at academic programs. Yes many people do match w/o research, but it's easy to do, it's a conversation piece during interviews, and many programs want applicants that have a least some interest in academics.

Obviously your clinical grades are first priority. Find a light part of your schedule and fit it in.

Every place I interviewed at asked about my research without exception. I knew it forwards and backwards and I think it really helped a lot. I was not someone who had top of the class grades, so I think the presence of research and the fact that I knew it well when they asked about it was a big deal.

I would advise anyone to try and find something that you're genuinely interested in, and if you can't find something you really like doing, then don't do research. If you do a project just to do one and you aren't interested, it will be potentially painful to do and it'll be obvious on interview day that you're not that into it.

I'm involved been involved in two research projects for awhile now, but speculate that either one or neither will be published by the time ERAS is due. How is that reported on the ERAS application? Can I still list research as ongoing?

I had 7 research citations to list on my CV (1 poster, 2 presentations, 4 pubs). They didn't really seem to care if the research was published or not, and actually I was asked more questions about the work which wasn't yet published and still ongoing than the work which had already been published. Maybe because it was more cutting edge?...I dont know for sure. But I was definitely asked about most every project at every single place I interviewed.

I think this research went a long way to help my less-than-stellar step 1 score which I've mentioned in earlier posts, and definitely provided plenty to talk about in every interview....no awkward pauses. I would agree with the sentiments expressed above that research isn't necessary, but it certainly helped me to stand out more than I would have without any research.

To answer Leisure Suit's question about listing ongoing research, if it's been presented at a conference, then you can definitely list this. If it hasn't been presented yet, I'm not sure I remember a place specific for that on ERAS, but I know you could squeeze it into some random text-box somewhere in the application even if it doesn't necessarily belong there (maybe under "Activities" or something like that). And certainly you can bring it up in interviews whether or not you listed it in your original application. Like I said, they didn't seem to care if it was fully completed or not as long as you knew it inside and out, and had a perspective about where it fit in to the big picture of orthopaedics. Hope that helps.

I had two research projects (both posters and presentations without publication) on my CV. Neither was ortho; one was EM - presented at a regional SAEM meeting - and the other was for my MPH - presented at the institutions annual poster/exhibit day. I was asked several questions about what I did during my interviews and was glad that I actually had a big role in both, so I knew what I was talking about. Some people did ask why I didn't have any ortho research/projects, and what my plans were after residency (since I applied to all major academic centers), and I had no problem convincing them that I was interested in academia.

So, my take on this is... if you can get involved in ortho research, do it. However, I would hesitate if you won't have much of a role. There were plenty of interviewers who stated that they see so many candidates who do nothing but ride on the PI's coat-tails and do a little typing to get their names on the publication, but in the end, that doesn't prove anything.

Get involved in something that you're passionate about, play a big role, present/publish if given the opportunity, and know your shi** for your interviews. They've been in the game for a long time and know when your research credentials actually mean something.

I have been told by several attendings and researchers that it is perfectly acceptable to list research papers that are not yet published on your CV. In fact, I was instructed to include it next to all of the published papers and presentations. If the paper has been submitted for review, instead of listing the publication journal and pages, simply write "(submitted)" or "(in review)." If it has been accepted for publication, but not yet printed, the appropriate citation would include the journal title, followed by "(in press)."

Also, I want to echo the statements of Anconeus and perpetualpriapism. One, because I like eating cake, and two, because I think they're dead on.