Publications -2nd or 3rd

[clash_of_ideas]

How are second and third author publications viewed ? I should have some first as well but I really enjoy working on projects with people and I feel like they have been accumulating more so that it’s taking time from me doing more 1st author. Is that bad ? would be shame really considering medicine is supposed to be collab

[IMislove]

Not negatively so you're fine. Obviously helps to have first but it also helps to have any in general, don't worry too much about it.

[robclem21]

Agree with above, that co-authorship on manuscripts is not viewed negatively, but definitely not viewed as favourably as being the 1st or senior author on a publication.

The reason 1st author is viewed in much stronger light than co-authorship is because the primary author generally has a larger role in the project and has taken responsibility for most of the main milestones including project conception, design, conduct, analysis, manuscript writing, etc. It isn't uncommon in large research groups for many co-authors to pop-up on a manuscript without having contributed much or anything to the research paper. This is obviously more true of senior researchers/large research collaborations (see 10+ authors), but does happen at all levels and even undergrads/grad students get put onto papers having done little sometimes. Being the primary vs. co-author has nothing to do with the degree or willingness to collaborate (unless you are the ONLY author), because both require a good amount of team work. Whats important at your stage is to be able to communicate your role, your skills, and what you learned from the project.