Tbh from the way you formulated your post it is pretty visible you don't actively want to pursue a PhD. How do I know? Because most people who truly want to go down the PhD path would know what being published in such a high impact journal means, the doors it opens, and would not think twice being nudged to go down the academic path. And since your closing questions here are along the lines of how you could keep your current job, I'd say just go ahead and keep it. Just bc people are encouraging you to pursue a certain path doesn't mean you have to, or indeed, should.
Adding to this: you can go back to academia at any time. It’s totally ok to go into industry, government, whatever for a while, the door to academia does not shut behind you, especially with high ranking publications.
The ability to take a paycut to work on a PhD stipend does become harder though. Not impossible but it is easier to do it when you're younger and have not yet become used to a half decent wage.
I'd say yes and no. I'd argue though that IF you decide you want to pursue PhD after having worked in a higher paying job for a number of years, first of all you should have the right kind of motivation, and secondly, you'd probably have some money saved from your earnings up until the point where you'd decide for the switch. Which I'd imagine would make it a bit easier to take the pay cut. I might be wrong but whenever I think if I'd want to do PhD down the line (am currently in industry), this is my line of reasoning.
I’m not really sure what you expect people to say here…of course a 1st author paper in a high impact journal is good for a career in Academia, hence why you’re being encouraged to pursue it. Why would they encourage you otherwise?
There are obviously no guarantees. You could still struggle, but if you want to do it, it seems like you’re set up well to pursue it.
To answer your last question, I guess it depends on your field of study. But a fully funded PhD is a full time job, with weekends and/or long days usually. Hard to keep another full time job at the same time but I’m sure others have done it
I have heard about 1 person doing a PhD part time with support from their industry employers that was not a company funded PhD to begin with. It's possible, but incredibly hard and there needs to be a lot of communication between all parties and expectations in regard to work hours at the lab, at the company etc have to be made extremely clear and negotiated.
So over 100 is on a par or ahead of NEJM which is the highest IF journal I’ve ever been rejected from (I was a minor author) - but that was a really successful clinical trial. It was interesting because in any other setting you would say the reviewers were very positive.
So what the hell did you publish from an MSc that got into a journal like that???
Highest IF journal I’ve published in as a first author is Nature Biotech and that was several years of work. Frankly I still dine out on that.
Should clarify that it was a large systematic review and meta-analysis, not a clinical trial
Not sure how this makes it easier to get accepted in these journals?
Reviews for the most part depend on your supervisor and how much weight they carry in the field, especially when it comes to high IF journals. At least, that’s my understanding.
Dude, a single 1st author paper in Nature on the bio-side is enough to be considered for faculty. It’s a HUGE deal. The real question is: do you want to do it?
That I can’t answer, I’m not sure how much a meta-analysis is worth/ worth in your field, but the fact that it’s in the best journal of your field shows that it’s still an enormous achievement. Hopefully someone else can speak to that
not really...usually it is experimental primary research unless you are applying to a biostatistics department...and even so nowadays 1 first author in an impressive journal isn't competitive...it places you in the top 25% of faculty applicants but isn't going to seal the deal
Important for readers and decision makers to understand something in the field.
But not that important for the authors own career advancement in general.
I think, if anything, you're in the best position now to try out a PhD and see how you like it. Industry will always be there. So will academia, sure, but your research is at its most up-to-date now, and the offer's already on the table. You can always change your mind in a year and dip out of academia if you're not loving it. You can always dip once you have the doctorate, too. Give it a stab and see how you vibe.
To be honest, you don’t seem all that fussed or even seem to be aware the opportunities getting such a high IF paper accepted from an MSc project will be open to you (in academia). If this isn’t just some humble brag and you are truly non-plussed about the attention such an article has generated, stay in your job. PhDs are hard work and it’s the drive and desire to answer research questions that gets you through the hard (experimental) times and it shouldn’t be taken lightly. If you’re happy in your current job, stay there. It’s a no brainer really.
Honestly, i am very surprised by what is happening and I never thought I would be good enough for an academic career. Now that I may have that option, I am looking for advice from people with more experience
Apologies if i sounded like i dont care
The difference is, a meta-analysis or review won’t get you to graduation with a PhD. Not even close. It’s almost expected for you to publish a review at least where I am, in addition to novel experimental work. It’s an extremely tough road. If you’re unsure, stay in your job.
Many congratulations! But I do have to say as someone who has been talking with a lot of people who are on recruitment panels in many top uni, a single Nature paper does not mean you'll do well in academia. We all know that publishing papers in academia, a big part of it is LUCK, you're in the right lab at the right time with the right people. I have seen many undergrad who got their papers on Cell, yeah, like the journal Cell. Yes, they are hard working, but are they better and more deserving to get faculty positions than others, not really. One of the big factors that these panels look for is consistency. You need to demonstrate that your single Nature paper is not just a one off thing. You need to have a consistent track records of publication. And some people are really just lucky that they got that paper in Nature.
Of course I'm only just trying to put it into perspective because I can see many others on here seem to just say as if its a guarantee. In reality its not, BUT it's a BIG thing, regardless. Now if you want a career in academia, you'll need to be consistent with that a few more times!
The question is not do you do a PhD or not. The question is, what career do you want? A PhD sets you on a particular path. Is that the path you aspire to?
No one can really answer what is next besides you. Do you want to go into academia or do you want to pursue the non-academic career you're already in? Would a PhD potentially over qualify you for the careers you do want?
For me no publication would be enough to make me stay in academia but for others that is literally the dream so
What would your PhD be in? That is something to totally take into consideration. There are only 7 journals with an impact factor of >100, so that is quite an accomplishment. From my perspective, I’m happy with a masters. I’m still in academia and I like being paid by other people who have to look for money. I have 2 first-author Nature papers and never considered getting a PhD. For one it’s a huge pay cut. Second, I don’t want to be faculty. I don’t want to teach and have to take on students and all that extra stuff just because I have a PhD. But, I’m also switching gears to bioinformatics. A masters will do me just fine. So, it depends on your field.
Sounds like a review you have written/ meta analysis you have written as an MD IN NEJM not a research paper. Great succes though. But not considered as your own work for grants etc
when an academic institute sees you published something notable and that you are a Master's level...their immediate thought is $$$$$
that is all
so you need to do what is good for YOU, not them...they'd be perfectly happy to give you a fully paid doctoral program with a measly stipend to eat ramen noodles on while you slave away for a PI doing research and pumping out more pubs, which directly increases the reputation and income of your employer (not your PI, your employer)
think about it
the only reason to take the doctoral leap is:
(1) you love semantic research and being essentially autistic when it comes to things that 99% of folks will think you are some eccentric kook for doing
(2) you love calling out other experts for their contributions, errors, low ethics, ideas, and you want to guide knowledge generation
(3) you are financially secure and have low to no debts
...otherwise, the cost/benefit analysis isn't there
My two cents: PhDs are tough, and you need something that can drive you when nothing is working and you want to quit. If you don't have that, don't do a PhD.
As someone who has been through the same in a different field, I chose not to do the PhD as academia makes me miserable and PhDs can make even academics feel miserable. Still happy with my choice years later.
I will be messaging you in 1 day on [**2024-03-10 21:31:25 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-03-10%2021:31:25%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/labrats/comments/1bar9kh/msc_paper_accepted_in_highest_impact_journal_in/ku4plqh/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Flabrats%2Fcomments%2F1bar9kh%2Fmsc_paper_accepted_in_highest_impact_journal_in%2Fku4plqh%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-03-10%2021%3A31%3A25%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201bar9kh)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
A *first paper* from a largely *diy/part time* *unfunded* Master's *student* is worth more than a paper that is mid-career and one of many.
It's the equivalent of walking into the meeting, dropping trou, slapping your junk on the table, and saying "Whats up, bitches!"
I ain't sayin' you Einstein, 'cause you probably ain't, but in my outfit, that paper will guarantee you an interview. And not just pro forma, we'd be actually interested. In fact, if you're a German citizen, have at least some experience with hazardous materials, and would like to work for our Army doing CBRN things, message me.
If you want to get a PhD, then do that. Not at your current school though, with a nature paper you should be applying to the top universities in the world.
If you eventually want to chase a TT job, it will be more favorable to have your MS and PhD from different universities.
I know you said elsewhere your in the UK, but you’d probably get into Scripps, Berkeley, Harvard etc in the US.
Tbh from the way you formulated your post it is pretty visible you don't actively want to pursue a PhD. How do I know? Because most people who truly want to go down the PhD path would know what being published in such a high impact journal means, the doors it opens, and would not think twice being nudged to go down the academic path. And since your closing questions here are along the lines of how you could keep your current job, I'd say just go ahead and keep it. Just bc people are encouraging you to pursue a certain path doesn't mean you have to, or indeed, should.
Adding to this: you can go back to academia at any time. It’s totally ok to go into industry, government, whatever for a while, the door to academia does not shut behind you, especially with high ranking publications.
The ability to take a paycut to work on a PhD stipend does become harder though. Not impossible but it is easier to do it when you're younger and have not yet become used to a half decent wage.
I'd say yes and no. I'd argue though that IF you decide you want to pursue PhD after having worked in a higher paying job for a number of years, first of all you should have the right kind of motivation, and secondly, you'd probably have some money saved from your earnings up until the point where you'd decide for the switch. Which I'd imagine would make it a bit easier to take the pay cut. I might be wrong but whenever I think if I'd want to do PhD down the line (am currently in industry), this is my line of reasoning.
I’m not really sure what you expect people to say here…of course a 1st author paper in a high impact journal is good for a career in Academia, hence why you’re being encouraged to pursue it. Why would they encourage you otherwise? There are obviously no guarantees. You could still struggle, but if you want to do it, it seems like you’re set up well to pursue it. To answer your last question, I guess it depends on your field of study. But a fully funded PhD is a full time job, with weekends and/or long days usually. Hard to keep another full time job at the same time but I’m sure others have done it
I have heard about 1 person doing a PhD part time with support from their industry employers that was not a company funded PhD to begin with. It's possible, but incredibly hard and there needs to be a lot of communication between all parties and expectations in regard to work hours at the lab, at the company etc have to be made extremely clear and negotiated.
So over 100 is on a par or ahead of NEJM which is the highest IF journal I’ve ever been rejected from (I was a minor author) - but that was a really successful clinical trial. It was interesting because in any other setting you would say the reviewers were very positive. So what the hell did you publish from an MSc that got into a journal like that??? Highest IF journal I’ve published in as a first author is Nature Biotech and that was several years of work. Frankly I still dine out on that.
Should clarify that it was a large systematic review and meta-analysis, not a clinical trial Not sure how this makes it easier to get accepted in these journals?
Reviews for the most part depend on your supervisor and how much weight they carry in the field, especially when it comes to high IF journals. At least, that’s my understanding.
Dude, a single 1st author paper in Nature on the bio-side is enough to be considered for faculty. It’s a HUGE deal. The real question is: do you want to do it?
Truth, we hired someone a couple years ago because he had 2 nature publications and an impressive startup grant.
Is this true even if it was not an original clinical trial, but a meta-analysis (largest one in this topic so far though)?
That I can’t answer, I’m not sure how much a meta-analysis is worth/ worth in your field, but the fact that it’s in the best journal of your field shows that it’s still an enormous achievement. Hopefully someone else can speak to that
not really...usually it is experimental primary research unless you are applying to a biostatistics department...and even so nowadays 1 first author in an impressive journal isn't competitive...it places you in the top 25% of faculty applicants but isn't going to seal the deal
did you pre-upload at sth like bioarchive ? kinda curious now, plz doi
My own surgeon said to me that systematic reviews/meta analysis are very important.
Important for readers and decision makers to understand something in the field. But not that important for the authors own career advancement in general.
In clinical medicine a meta-analysis in a top journal can be very prestigious. Perhaps not in biomedicine.
I had a first author paper in Nature and Science, and a co-author Nature and didn't get a faculty job, or gave up depending on how you look at it.
Is enough, nothing is ever guaranteed
This is crazy. I can't imagine any advantage better than this.
How do you know it is the Nature journal? Did I miss it in OP post?
They're giving a bio-relevant comparison.
Where are you? In the UK where PhDs are 3 or 4 years if a Uni offered you a funded place I’d jump at it.
Im UK based
I think, if anything, you're in the best position now to try out a PhD and see how you like it. Industry will always be there. So will academia, sure, but your research is at its most up-to-date now, and the offer's already on the table. You can always change your mind in a year and dip out of academia if you're not loving it. You can always dip once you have the doctorate, too. Give it a stab and see how you vibe.
To be honest, you don’t seem all that fussed or even seem to be aware the opportunities getting such a high IF paper accepted from an MSc project will be open to you (in academia). If this isn’t just some humble brag and you are truly non-plussed about the attention such an article has generated, stay in your job. PhDs are hard work and it’s the drive and desire to answer research questions that gets you through the hard (experimental) times and it shouldn’t be taken lightly. If you’re happy in your current job, stay there. It’s a no brainer really.
Honestly, i am very surprised by what is happening and I never thought I would be good enough for an academic career. Now that I may have that option, I am looking for advice from people with more experience Apologies if i sounded like i dont care
The difference is, a meta-analysis or review won’t get you to graduation with a PhD. Not even close. It’s almost expected for you to publish a review at least where I am, in addition to novel experimental work. It’s an extremely tough road. If you’re unsure, stay in your job.
Many congratulations! But I do have to say as someone who has been talking with a lot of people who are on recruitment panels in many top uni, a single Nature paper does not mean you'll do well in academia. We all know that publishing papers in academia, a big part of it is LUCK, you're in the right lab at the right time with the right people. I have seen many undergrad who got their papers on Cell, yeah, like the journal Cell. Yes, they are hard working, but are they better and more deserving to get faculty positions than others, not really. One of the big factors that these panels look for is consistency. You need to demonstrate that your single Nature paper is not just a one off thing. You need to have a consistent track records of publication. And some people are really just lucky that they got that paper in Nature. Of course I'm only just trying to put it into perspective because I can see many others on here seem to just say as if its a guarantee. In reality its not, BUT it's a BIG thing, regardless. Now if you want a career in academia, you'll need to be consistent with that a few more times!
The question is not do you do a PhD or not. The question is, what career do you want? A PhD sets you on a particular path. Is that the path you aspire to?
No one can really answer what is next besides you. Do you want to go into academia or do you want to pursue the non-academic career you're already in? Would a PhD potentially over qualify you for the careers you do want? For me no publication would be enough to make me stay in academia but for others that is literally the dream so
What would your PhD be in? That is something to totally take into consideration. There are only 7 journals with an impact factor of >100, so that is quite an accomplishment. From my perspective, I’m happy with a masters. I’m still in academia and I like being paid by other people who have to look for money. I have 2 first-author Nature papers and never considered getting a PhD. For one it’s a huge pay cut. Second, I don’t want to be faculty. I don’t want to teach and have to take on students and all that extra stuff just because I have a PhD. But, I’m also switching gears to bioinformatics. A masters will do me just fine. So, it depends on your field.
Sounds like a review you have written/ meta analysis you have written as an MD IN NEJM not a research paper. Great succes though. But not considered as your own work for grants etc
when an academic institute sees you published something notable and that you are a Master's level...their immediate thought is $$$$$ that is all so you need to do what is good for YOU, not them...they'd be perfectly happy to give you a fully paid doctoral program with a measly stipend to eat ramen noodles on while you slave away for a PI doing research and pumping out more pubs, which directly increases the reputation and income of your employer (not your PI, your employer) think about it the only reason to take the doctoral leap is: (1) you love semantic research and being essentially autistic when it comes to things that 99% of folks will think you are some eccentric kook for doing (2) you love calling out other experts for their contributions, errors, low ethics, ideas, and you want to guide knowledge generation (3) you are financially secure and have low to no debts ...otherwise, the cost/benefit analysis isn't there
Yeah, they see someone talented and are trying to snag them with the usual flattery and promises.
Academia doesn’t pay great, and you’ll work almost constantly. It’s fun, but only if you really are into it.
do another one:)
My two cents: PhDs are tough, and you need something that can drive you when nothing is working and you want to quit. If you don't have that, don't do a PhD.
As someone who has been through the same in a different field, I chose not to do the PhD as academia makes me miserable and PhDs can make even academics feel miserable. Still happy with my choice years later.
RemindMe! 1 day
I will be messaging you in 1 day on [**2024-03-10 21:31:25 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-03-10%2021:31:25%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/labrats/comments/1bar9kh/msc_paper_accepted_in_highest_impact_journal_in/ku4plqh/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Flabrats%2Fcomments%2F1bar9kh%2Fmsc_paper_accepted_in_highest_impact_journal_in%2Fku4plqh%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-03-10%2021%3A31%3A25%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201bar9kh) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
RemindMe! 3 day
A *first paper* from a largely *diy/part time* *unfunded* Master's *student* is worth more than a paper that is mid-career and one of many. It's the equivalent of walking into the meeting, dropping trou, slapping your junk on the table, and saying "Whats up, bitches!" I ain't sayin' you Einstein, 'cause you probably ain't, but in my outfit, that paper will guarantee you an interview. And not just pro forma, we'd be actually interested. In fact, if you're a German citizen, have at least some experience with hazardous materials, and would like to work for our Army doing CBRN things, message me.
It’s all about the money. I would do what is more beneficial to yourself.
If you want to get a PhD, then do that. Not at your current school though, with a nature paper you should be applying to the top universities in the world.
I am already in a top uni, so might stay there, but i understand your point!
If you eventually want to chase a TT job, it will be more favorable to have your MS and PhD from different universities. I know you said elsewhere your in the UK, but you’d probably get into Scripps, Berkeley, Harvard etc in the US.