Is there a point after which more research doesn’t add anything ?

[clash_of_ideas]

I’ve heard very different amounts from friends. Some have like 5-6 pubs some have 10+. For competitive specialties is there a point where it’s “enough” - more won’t add much?

[bearded frog]

8 hours ago, clash_of_ideas said:

I’ve heard very different amounts from friends. Some have like 5-6 pubs some have 10+. For competitive specialties is there a point where it’s “enough” - more won’t add much?

Everything is relative. Residency is unfortunately zero sum, you're competing with others for finite spots. So assuming all other aspects of an application are equal, research experience will be considered relative to other applicants. Therefore, say to match at all, you need as much research experience to make you compeditive enough to be in the top N of applicants, N being number of available spots. And obviously the other aspects of an application are considered too. But if you want to match to a compeditive program within that specialty you may need to have a better research background, especially for programs/residencies with a higher research focus. Also, while quantity of publications is considered, quality is also important.