Virginia Research Day 2025

Medical Student Research Education and Simulation

10 Publication Misrepresentation in Residency Applications: A Discussion and Possible Solution

Gabrielle Moore, MBE, MSc; Kim Edhegard, MD Corresponding author: gmoore01@vcom.edu

Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine - Virginia Campus

The selection criteria for residency programs are encompassed by grades, recommendations, board scores, awards, extracurricular activities, publications, and personal statements. Though, arguably, one of the most difficult criteria of residency applications to complete is obtaining research publications. In general, the number of publications needed ranges from 1-20 depending on the specialty and the residency program. Although many students seem to be publishing at high rates to meet demands and be a competitive applicant, studies have shown that a range of 20% to 45% of publications listed on residency applications show publication misrepresentation. This means there was evidence of medical students falsely claiming authorship of non-existent and existing articles, elevating author rank, and incorrectly reporting abstracts and articles as provisionally accepted. While this is a common occurrence, publication misrepresentation is ethically impermissible, violating justice, non-maleficence, and beneficence.

Although unethical, the main counterargument is that medical students do not have much time to complete research due to supererogatory requirements bestowed upon them. Additionally, residency applications are expensive and strenuous, with no guarantee that a student will match into a residency program, leading to acts of cheating and lying. In this research, we examine the causes for publication misrepresentation and develop a possible solution to this chronic issue. It is proposed that to prevent publication misrepresentation, The Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) should cap the number of publications that can be entered in the application to allow for valid, quality publications. For those with more research, students would have the opportunity to talk about their research endeavors during an interview. In addition, although there is an option to

enter an article URL into ERAS, a more effective addition would be a mandatory upload of a PDF or URL to ensure the validity and existence of a publication. If the publication is in the process of being submitted or is accepted, there should also be evidentiary documentation from the respective journal as evidence. In conclusion, the act of publication misrepresentation is ethically impermissible but could be avoided with a change in the system. By reducing the burden on medical students to complete a large volume of publications and developing a constraint to deter those who would participate in this act, we can decrease rates of publication misrepresentation, thereby improving the validity of residency applications.

39

2025 Research Recognition Day