I am updating my CV and applying to jobs in medical research. I am wondering if I should put all the trials that I have worked on with various other doctors or just the most significant ones? I have like 40 research trials I have worked on and it seems immodest and overdone.

  • 2
    Yes, you should list all your published papers. – GEdgar Apr 25 '16 at 21:15
  • 1
    CVs are not a place for modesty. They're where all the facts go about you! – Bill Barth Apr 25 '16 at 23:06
  • Are you making a distinction between "research trials" and publications? In general, the emphasis is typically on publications and grants and less on "projects that you worked on". – Jeromy Anglim May 6 '16 at 10:34

Ah, this is a good question!

Unlike a resumé, in which one includes only the experiences/skills that are relevant to the position being applied for, a CV is meant to document all reasonable academic endeavors and accomplishments. In some cases, lines on your CV will be only loosely related to your main research interest; my CV for instance includes several co-authored papers I am not particularly keen on.

I don't know that there is any hard-and-fast 'rule' stating your CV must be complete, good and bad, but it has been my impression over the years that one includes pretty much everything. If you've ever wondered why your department chair's CV is 35 pages long, now you know why.


As far as I know, professors, senior researchers and alike have two resumes: a short one (1-3pages) listing main milestones, and a long one, which can be up to 50pages (longest I have encountered), listing all and every thing they did.

  • I have seen 200-page CVs. – JeffE May 7 '16 at 16:18
  • @JeffE Indeed, not that surprising (admirable, though). – Blue_Elephant May 9 '16 at 11:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.