Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

Otago Getting Involved in Research

Bonesaw

Member
Let me start off by saying i'm studying Med in the UK not NZ.

I'll be coming home soon in my break and I was just wondering if anybody has had experience working on/getting research or even case studies within a field they're interested in; I'll be applying for a US residency and research is quite an important factor and i'm already working on several publications (not relevant to where I want to end up) but i'd love to rack up a few in either Vascular or Orthopedic surgery.

Is the approach just email them and ask basically or is this less common in NZ? (I haven't been back for awhile and I have a substantial break coming up)

Quick easy question :)

Thanks.
 

rustyedges

Moderator
Moderator
Let me start off by saying i'm studying Med in the UK not NZ.

I'll be coming home soon in my break and I was just wondering if anybody has had experience working on/getting research or even case studies within a field they're interested in; I'll be applying for a US residency and research is quite an important factor and i'm already working on several publications (not relevant to where I want to end up) but i'd love to rack up a few in either Vascular or Orthopedic surgery.

Is the approach just email them and ask basically or is this less common in NZ? (I haven't been back for awhile and I have a substantial break coming up)

Quick easy question :)

Thanks.

In my experiences, yes, emailing potential supervisors and asking is your best bet. Consultants who are also employed at universities are often more likely to have projects you can contribute to.
 

Bonesaw

Member
In my experiences, yes, emailing potential supervisors and asking is your best bet. Consultants who are also employed at universities are often more likely to have projects you can contribute to.

Great thank you :)

Edit: Any advice on how long to wait between emailing different Dr's? (If they don't reply etc)
 
Last edited:

govpop

Regular Member
Don't expect to be able to just 'rack up' a few publications in your field of choice. Even getting one project successfully published can take years.

Also beware of getting used by people who will get you to trawl though audit data for them, meanwhile the project has a snowballs chance in hell of ever getting published.
 

Bonesaw

Member
Don't expect to be able to just 'rack up' a few publications in your field of choice. Even getting one project successfully published can take years.

Also beware of getting used by people who will get you to trawl though audit data for them, meanwhile the project has a snowballs chance in hell of ever getting published.

Well since i'm applying to the US i'm mainly looking for case studies (which they count as research) otherwise I have no idea how almsot every applicant for my fields have 30+ 'research' pieces.

Thanks for the heads up!!
 

govpop

Regular Member
I hate to be a party pooper but it's not like case reports are much easier. You have to find something which is novel and even then why would someone ask you to help them with a case report if you haven't been involved in the clinical care?
 

Bonesaw

Member
I hate to be a party pooper but it's not like case reports are much easier. You have to find something which is novel and even then why would someone ask you to help them with a case report if you haven't been involved in the clinical care?

No I completely agree with you, I don't understand how applicants rack up so much either tbh.
 

chinaski

Regular Member
Are you sure that the separate items they list aren't just duplicates of the same thing? As in: 1) member of an audit team 2) helped collect data for said audit 3) got name on a poster about said audit 4) got name on paper that was written from the poster of the same audit? Ultimately that's just one item of research, but can be padded out to sound like it's much more than that.
 

Bonesaw

Member
Are you sure that the separate items they list aren't just duplicates of the same thing? As in: 1) member of an audit team 2) helped collect data for said audit 3) got name on a poster about said audit 4) got name on paper that was written from the poster of the same audit? Ultimately that's just one item of research, but can be padded out to sound like it's much more than that.

I have absolutely no idea tbh, i'll definitely research it more as I get closer to applying etc. The category is "mean # of abstracts, presentations and publications" and the average for those that got a position was 37.1 :)
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

chinaski

Regular Member
I would find that average number incredibly difficult to believe. Even by fellow and post-doc level, that number of separate achievements would be considered very high for separate items of research.
 

Bonesaw

Member
Exactly my thoughts, it took months to get my first publication alone.
Imgur

Sorry I have no idea how to insert the image it won't let me
 

chinaski

Regular Member
Wait, you cut off the top of that table. It looks like it describes a prohibitively small number of people...
 

Bonesaw

Member
Sorry, 9 are people who matched, 13 are people who didn't for my application category. It is a very small number you're correct.
 

Crow

Staff | Junior Doctor
Moderator
Mean number of research experiences = 5.3 yet mean number of abstracts, presentations and publications = 37.1? Sounds like a serious amount of padding is going on as chinaski suggested above.
 

Bonesaw

Member
Seems like it I guess, well anyway the topic of this post has been answered, thanks a lot for all your replies.
 

chinaski

Regular Member
Nine people matched to nine available places? Or were these just nine successful candidates who matched to a much bigger pool? And what is a "research experience", exactly?

Edit: What do the other two columns (to the right) describe)? Very curious now!
 
Last edited:

DrDrLMG!

Resident Medical Officer
Administrator
Mean number of research experiences = 5.3 yet mean number of abstracts, presentations and publications = 37.1? Sounds like a serious amount of padding is going on as chinaski suggested above.

I’d be willing to bet it’s the “presentations” part of that description that people pad. Even thinking about my own CV, I’ve only presented unique research at conferences three times, but I could EASILY make my CV look much more superficially impressive if I (completely over-) emphasised the significance of various presentations I’ve done.
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

chinaski

Regular Member
You could pad it out even further if you included presentations made by other people on behalf of a group or project with which you are tenuously associated. But yes, even if you're just counting work in-house presentations (say, journal club), then "presentations" can take on a very broad definition.
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

Top