Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ExercMed

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

826 profile views
  1. Always a bad idea to look at the application again after submitting!
  2. Admissions needs to be able to verify the publication somehow. So if there is no way that they can get access to it (online or otherwise) then it's not really published by definition. A non peer reviewed abstract, if actually published, could probably go under non-peer reviewed publications in the application system. My concern is the "publication" aspect of your original question. I've done a number of poster and oral presentations of my abstracts at small conferences but I know I can't find them "published" anywhere accessible. I could find proof that I actually presented, but the abstract isn't available if someone wanted to find it.
  3. Yeah, that's not a publication that I think you can put down in your application at all. The application manual says "This may include oral and poster presentations as long as the abstract has been published in the conference proceedings." The pamphlet does not classify as conference proceedings it is just a guide to what is occurring during the conference. I.e. If I can't find a summary including your abstract on the local research day website then don't include it at all. Local research days are great and you can totally put them down of a CV but if it's not peer reviewed and published in a journal after the conference then I wouldn't put it down. My understanding is that non peer reviewed academic or non academic publications are things like undergraduate journals, fiction or nonfiction publications, poetry, etc.
  4. This is generally an interesting question and I would also love some input from anyone who has worked with admissions. Coming from a basic research background, original research papers (i.e. not reviews), hold much more weight when it comes to applying to grants and scholarships despite both being peer reviewed. And frankly the reason for this is quite valid as reviewing the literature does not fully speak to one's research ability. Going through the process of experimental design, failed experiments, and peer review is much more involved and intense when publishing an original research paper compared to a literature review paper. From what I gather, med admissions doesn't really care about this (although maybe they should) and holds all peer review publications to the same standard. Would be interested in other individual's thoughts on this.
  5. I would list as variable hours and put the reasoning in the box provided for "Flexible Schedule Description"
  6. ExercMed

    no honours

    Do you have any other research volunteering? Also, would this be basic research or something more clinical or epidemiology? All that aside, it really depends on the supervisor. All you can do is contact potential supervisors and outline your situation. On the funding side of things, no all masters programs do not have guaranteed funding. It also depends on the institution that you are going to be doing your research at. Make sure to check online policies because some programs will not accept you if you can not provide some proof of funding, supervisor or otherwise.
  7. ExercMed

    Research Hours

    Yeah it 100% still counts! I'd be pretty confused if someone said my PhD research doesn't count as research because it's not volunteer (may as well be with the amount grad students make though).
  8. Short answer is no.
  9. ExercMed

    Top 10s

    You are correct that the UofC application doesn't have a specific "ECs" section. But the point of Top 10s is not to state all the ECs that you have ever done, it is to outline the Top 10 most impactful experiences and how they have shaped you as a person. This doesn't have to be volunteer activities, it can be single moments in time that have really impacted you (family struggles, single day activities, etc). If an EC/Volunteer activity doesn't make that list then there isn't really any point in mentioning it in my opinion.
  10. Your best bet if this is something you want to do is to (1) find an established lab at your institute and talk to the PI (2) see if you can start a summer research project (3) work your butt off. As an undergrad you are going to likely get very little say in how to conduct your study (especially in basic research). More likely, your project will end up being a small part of one of the PhD students' or Post-docs' projects. Even when this stuff gets published, you would be pretty low on the author list (I'm just speaking generally here). That being said, it's not impossible for it to work out in your favour. Expanding a summer project into an honours degree could give you the time to put enough work into the project for a first author publication if you are a hard worker (i've seen it happen on rare occasion). A lot of it will also depend on how motivated your PI is to publish. Some labs are paper factories and just pump them out. Others like to take their time and just publish 1 very high impact paper a year. Before joining a lab, make sure to look at their publication productivity. Finally, don't expect this all to happen while you are still in your undergrad.... Even if the project gets finished by the time you graduate, there is still the submission/review process that takes a few months. All in all, basic research takes a LOT of time and money!!!
  11. I don't think there is any harm in including them. If anything I think it's pretty interesting. It would just have to go under "non peer-reviewed academic or nonacademic publications".
  12. ExercMed

    Previous application

    I can't speak confidently to the first point (I don't believe that it is). However, for the second, top 10 will entirely depend on the applicant pool and who is marking them. Dr Walker talks about this in his admissions podcast. Don't be surprised if your scores change for this section but If you scored well previously then I wouldn't make any drastic changes.
  13. ExercMed

    How to research

    This is how you bias your data to show what you want it to show... Clearly you want to do a literature review, have a hypothesis, and a rough experimental plan, but DO NOT "think of what data you want". You don't know what the data will show you until you start doing experiments. Those experiments probably wont tell you the full story, so then you plan to do more experiments based on that. Once you have data that you think tells a cohesive story, THEN you can start to write a paper around the data. Writing the paper first introduces MASSIVE bias as you don't know what you are going to see. 90% of the time, experiments don't work out or have insignificant results that don't merit further discussion (an unfortunate truth about our peer review system). If that's the case then your paper, that you spent all this time writing, is dead in the water and needs to be revised. To quote the article by George Whitesides that the above poster suggested, "Realize that your objective in research is to formulate and test hypothesis, to draw conclusions from these tests, and to teach these conclusions to others. Your objective is not to 'collect data'."
  14. I want to reiterate what Eudaimonia said. Do something that interests you. This is two years of your life, so you want to make sure you won't hate the project by the end of it. However, in my opinion I would pick lab 2. First author publications are king. It doesn't matter how prestigious the the lab is if you don't end up on any publications. You need to be productive in grad school if you want it to help on your med applications (not just UofT). This means conferences, publications, and student committees are a must. Reviewers want to see that you didn't just half ass a graduate degree to bide your time before getting into med.
  15. This could be the case if OP was a graduate student at UofC. If not, I don't believe that it is an option.