How important is first author on papers vs being second author on papers?

Title sums it up. It looks like I've been accruing 2nd author opportunities throughout medical school so far and have not achieved the chance of getting first author. To be fair, I am inexperienced and have had residents/fellows guiding me but I've been doing the grunt work. Is the key to getting first author on papers by taking charge of a project from the start and not getting help from residents/fellows?

Also would it look bad if I wasn't first author on paper when I apply to residency? I have one project that will take a while to become first author but I don't know.

Lawpy

42% Full Member
Verified Member 7+ Year Member Rocket Scientist SDN Ambassador Silver Donor Joined Jun 17, 2014 Messages 63,099 Reaction score 154,732

I don't think anyone really cares (because pub count is much more important) but if you really want a first author paper, you need to talk to your PI in advance

Reactions: 2 users

deleted50541

The number of publications is going to look more impressive compared to having fewer but you're first author. It's not going to look bad on your application.

Generally, if you do the majority of the work (background research, collecting the data, analyzing it, and writing/editing the manuscript), then you get to be first author. There's nothing wrong with having residents/fellows help you. But you need to have clear expectations set when starting a project on how much work you will be doing and if that's enough to be considered for first author.

srirachamayonnaise

Membership Revoked
Removed Joined Mar 30, 2021 Messages 901 Reaction score 1,001

You need a couple of first author papers to just show that you can lead a project. After that, you can basically disregard that.

Reactions: 2 users

operaman

Full Member
Verified Member 10+ Year Member Physician Joined Jun 7, 2010 Messages 3,189 Reaction score 10,333

There’s a huge difference between the two. At the faculty level, usually only first and last author papers even count toward promotion requirements. It means a lot. What it tells programs is that you know how to move a project from A to Z. More academic programs look favorably on this because it means you can be productive without them having to teach you the basics.

You get first author pubs by discussing authorship in advance. You may still have help from residents and fellows, but it would be known in advance to be your project. The residents and fellows definitely had the authorship talk when starting the project and they frequently look to students to do the grunt work in exchange for middle authorship. This is fine in the beginning as you learn, but ideally you would progress toward taking charge of small projects of your own.

Reactions: 1 users

SurfingDoctor

"Good news, everyone"
Verified Member Physician Faculty Verified Expert 15+ Year Member Joined Oct 20, 2005 Messages 17,139 Reaction score 52,155 1st author > 2nd author >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing. Reactions: 1 users

Lawpy

42% Full Member
Verified Member 7+ Year Member Rocket Scientist SDN Ambassador Silver Donor Joined Jun 17, 2014 Messages 63,099 Reaction score 154,732 1st author > 2nd author >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing. How do co-first authors and co-second authors fare in your ranking?

hebrewBAMmer

Full Member
10+ Year Member Joined Sep 8, 2012 Messages 599 Reaction score 1,340

I think people have a tendency to severely overstate the importance of authorship order. Is it nice to be first author? Absolutely. Will it make or break a residency application? I sincerely doubt it

SurfingDoctor

"Good news, everyone"
Verified Member Physician Faculty Verified Expert 15+ Year Member Joined Oct 20, 2005 Messages 17,139 Reaction score 52,155 How do co-first authors and co-second authors fare in your ranking?

Co-first author is good. There's no such thing as a co-second author. your just a cog in the publication wheel. Better than nothing still though.

Reactions: 1 user

Phloston

Osaka, Japan
Removed Lifetime Donor Verified Member 10+ Year Member Physician Gold Donor Joined Jan 18, 2012 Messages 3,880 Reaction score 1,675

Title sums it up. It looks like I've been accruing 2nd author opportunities throughout medical school so far and have not achieved the chance of getting first author. To be fair, I am inexperienced and have had residents/fellows guiding me but I've been doing the grunt work. Is the key to getting first author on papers by taking charge of a project from the start and not getting help from residents/fellows?

Also would it look bad if I wasn't first author on paper when I apply to residency? I have one project that will take a while to become first author but I don't know.

Anyone with any real credibility who looks at your research would care infinitely more about the substance of your work vs the point about 1st vs 2nd.

Reactions: 1 user

Dr G Oogle

Full Member
Verified Member Physician 7+ Year Member Joined Mar 8, 2017 Messages 672 Reaction score 1,071

As a student you don’t get to be second author without putting in a decent amount of work. I personally put students as first if they’ve done a lot of the leg work (making tables, collecting data) even if I do the actual analysis and write most of the paper. But I usually don’t have fellows or residents on those papers. For papers going into prominent journals with high impact unless student did the vast amount of work and is PI in all but name they will not be first or maybe even second author, but if you’re on that paper it does imply you did lots of work. I don’t think many programs expect students to be first author.

NickNaylor

Thank You for Smoking
Moderator Emeritus Lifetime Donor Verified Member Physician Faculty Verified Expert 15+ Year Member Gold Donor Joined May 22, 2008 Messages 17,394 Reaction score 9,139

As others have mentioned, as a medical student - particularly if you're someone that isn't interested in primarily doing research - any publication is gravy, and first vs. second author isn't going to matter. If you're planning on being a clinical researcher and are going to apply to or look for residency positions with a research focus, then it might make a difference there.

Reactions: 1 users

Datypicalpremed

Feed me Seymour!
10+ Year Member Joined May 7, 2013 Messages 110 Reaction score 126

Guess I’ll weigh in since I had a discussion about this with my school’s faculty a while ago.

overall impression I got from an academic science perspective (and thus probably in line with academic medicine) is that 1st author > 1st coauthor (aka A and B contributed equally) >> 2nd or coauthor. Having said that, I would say unless you are applying to a research track residency program, stand out at a top program (which tend to be at research heavy institutions and thus view applicants with a strong publication record more favorably), or applying to a field with strong emphasis on research (neurosurgery, rad onc, etc.), your time would almost certainly be better spent getting more coauthors than firsts. This is simply due to the sheer amount of time, effort, and LUCK needed to get a 1st author publication. You can rack up an insane amount of “research pubs” on ERAS just by contributing towards a publication. Some of my peers have gotten their names on papers just by spending a hour making graphs from data that has already been collected under the reasoning of “hey, I made a figure so I deserve some authorship.” Some have even gotten authorship for just proofreading. Makes me sad that I spent my PhD focusing on getting 1st author pubs and now some of my MD only peers have more overall publications than me 🥲

Lawpy

42% Full Member
Verified Member 7+ Year Member Rocket Scientist SDN Ambassador Silver Donor Joined Jun 17, 2014 Messages 63,099 Reaction score 154,732

Guess I’ll weigh in since I had a discussion about this with my school’s faculty a while ago.

overall impression I got from an academic science perspective (and thus probably in line with academic medicine) is that 1st author > 1st coauthor (aka A and B contributed equally) >> 2nd or coauthor. Having said that, I would say unless you are applying to a research track residency program, stand out at a top program (which tend to be at research heavy institutions and thus view applicants with a strong publication record more favorably), or applying to a field with strong emphasis on research (neurosurgery, rad onc, etc.), your time would almost certainly be better spent getting more coauthors than firsts. This is simply due to the sheer amount of time, effort, and LUCK needed to get a 1st author publication. You can rack up an insane amount of “research pubs” on ERAS just by contributing towards a publication. Some of my peers have gotten their names on papers just by spending a hour making graphs from data that has already been collected under the reasoning of “hey, I made a figure so I deserve some authorship.” Some have even gotten authorship for just proofreading. Makes me sad that I spent my PhD focusing on getting 1st author pubs and now some of my MD only peers have more overall publications than me 🥲

It's definitely possible to churn out middle author papers on the side while working on first author paper.

Really the focus should not be on racking as many first authors as possible. That's a complete waste of time as a med student and even probably as a resident too.