Getting ready for the 2027 Match? Then you’ve probably already noticed that ERAS changed how applicants present their research. The Scholarly Work section isn’t just a list of publications anymore. It’s a place to show programs your whole academic journey. That matters for US grads, and it matters just as much for IMGs.
Program directors read through a lot of applications. The purpose of this section is to allow you to demonstrate your scholarly work, the tasks you actually contributed to, more than just citations. It’s meant to capture the research and academic work that actually shaped you, not just the work that got published under your name. ERAS added this section so applicants have room to talk about research studies, quality improvement projects, presentations, and more, not only finished publications.
There’s a real difference between listing a publication and showcasing scholarly work. A citation tells a reader what you produced. A description tells them what you contributed and why it mattered for the project. This section lets you do both. That’s the whole point: giving programs a fuller sense of who you are academically, instead of a bare list of titles.
People use these two terms like they mean the same thing. They don’t. Publications are one piece of scholarly work. Scholarly work is the bigger umbrella, and it covers a lot more ground than most applicants realize.
People think of this section first:
This one’s broader, and it includes things like:
Here’s the part worth remembering: every publication is scholarly work, but not all scholarly work becomes a publication. Say you led a quality improvement project that never got published. It still belongs here.
ERAS made a few changes worth paying attention to this cycle. The section is better organized now, so your experiences don’t all blur together into one long, messy list. There’s also more space to explain your individual contribution to each project instead of just naming it and moving on.
That’s a real shift. You now get to explain impact, not just cite it. If you were one of ten people on a research team, this is your chance to make clear exactly what you did. The updates also lean harder on quality over quantity. A handful of experiences described well can carry more weight than a dozen thrown in with no detail.
One more thing: unpublished research finally has a clearer home in this section, as long as it reflects real academic effort. Still, check the current ERAS instructions before you fill this out, since the exact formatting can shift year to year.
We help IMGs turn a bare research list into a Scholarly Work section that shows exactly what you did and why it mattered.
Here’s a practical way to work through it.
Don’t try to cram in everything you’ve ever touched. Pick the projects that actually say something about you, ones that show:
A shorter list with real substance beats a long one that’s mostly filler.
This is where a lot of applicants lose points without realizing it. “Worked on research” tells the reader almost nothing. Be specific instead. Were you doing:
Program directors go through hundreds of these. A clear, specific line is what actually gets remembered.
Once you’ve described your role, say what came of it:
Outcomes give the work somewhere to land. They show your effort went somewhere.
This one matters more than the rest combined. Don’t stretch your authorship, your contribution, or your publication status. If a paper’s still under review, don’t write that it’s accepted. The ICMJE authorship criteria spell out who actually counts as an author, and program directors do check. A mismatch here can do real damage to your application, and it’s just not worth the risk.
ERAS also asks you to flag your most meaningful activities if you have a long list. This is where you get to go deeper on the projects that actually shaped you.
Think about which ones show:
And don’t assume “meaningful” has to mean “published in a big journal.” A smaller project where you carried real responsibility and actually learned something can matter just as much as a high-impact paper. Sometimes more.
A few mistakes keep showing up, over and over:
Just avoiding these puts you ahead of a good chunk of the applicant pool.
Our editors read your Scholarly Work entries for accuracy, contribution, and voice, so nothing reads as copied, inflated, or AI-generated.
IMG research experience often looks different from a US grad’s, and that’s completely fine. A few things help:
Our research modules pair IMGs with mentors on real projects, systematic reviews, and case reports that produce genuine scholarly work, not filler.
The Scholarly Work section is more than a publication list, and it’s worth treating it that way. Focus on contributions that actually mean something, report them accurately, and describe them clearly. A section like that helps programs understand your academic interests, your research skills, and what you might bring to their scholarly work during residency, and it reads best when a second set of eyes has checked it, which is where professional editing earns its place.
Yes. Unpublished research still counts as scholarly work, as long as you’re honest about where it currently stands.
No. Plenty of valuable projects, quality improvement work especially, never get published but still deserve a spot in this section.
Anything from published papers to conference posters, quality improvement projects, and international research counts, as long as it reflects genuine academic effort.
Yes, if the current ERAS instructions allow it. Just make clear the project is still in progress.
There’s no set number. Aim for quality over quantity, and pick the activities that genuinely reflect your growth.
Applying as an international medical graduate is stressful enough on its own. IMG Helping Hands is here to take some of that weight off. From making sense of ERAS to building an application that sounds honest and sounds like you, we walk IMGs through each step of the residency journey. Reach out to IMG Helping Hands and get support built around your goals.
Articles published by IMG Helping Hands are prepared by our team using information from direct experience, publicly available resources, and educational references. AI tools may be used to assist with drafting, proofreading, and formatting; however, all content undergoes review and approval before publication.
The information provided is intended for educational purposes only. Requirements, policies, and processes may change over time. Readers should consult official sources for the most current information.
Get our most valuable tips right inside your inbox, once per month!
