How To Write A ManuscriptGet Your Paper Accepted Daniel McGowan

How to write a manuscript Get your paper accepted
Daniel McGowan, PhD Science Director, Edanz Group Limited Spring 2010
Presentation
Introduction Section One: Preparations before writing Section Two: Manuscript structure Section Three: Tips for getting accepted
Edanz Group Limited| 2
Why publish?
To share your research findings and opinions with the international research community Publication success is linked to funding success and career advancement Many PhD programs require candidates to achieve a set number of peer-reviewed publications
Edanz Group Limited | 3
Publish or perish
Funding Bodies
Grant Writing Journal Publication Regularly publishing research findings ensures ongoing grant support for new research
Scientists / Clinicians
Increased competition
1400 1200 1000 800
Journal numbers Journal submissions
600 400 200
0
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Year
Relative growth from 100% baseline in 1990

Section One Preparations before writing

How to identify hot topics
Study design
What do journal editors want?
Choosing an appropriate journal

Ethical issues
How to identify hot topics
Look for clues unexplained findings, controversies
Read the literature, including related fields
Attend international meetings
Greater interest = Greater competition

Identify your advantages and use them
Study design Get it right first time

Have an hypothesis or research question Use appropriate methods and controls Ensure sample sizes are large enough Use appropriate statistical tests Remove investigator/researcher/patient bias Comply with ethical requirements
What do journal editors want?

Good quality science Robust to peer review Well designed and executed original research Findings of interest to the journals readership Work in an active research area (=citations!) Work that advances the field in some way
Compliance with ethical regulations

Clear, concise writing
Journal Selection
Can be the difference between success and rejection What is the main focus of your research and who will be interested in it? What are its strengths and weaknesses?
How significant are your findings?

Are your findings preliminary or are they sufficient to make a story?
How widely will your research appeal? To researchers in the same field or to the broader scientific community?
Journal Selection
What should you consider?
Publishing frequency Impact factor Target audience Aims and scope Rejection rate Lead times Access (open or subscriber) Prior publications Publication fees Publication types
How do these relate to your publication needs?

Publication ethics
Unethical behavior could lead to rejection and a possible ban from a target journal. Multiple submissions Redundant publications Plagiarism Data fabrication and falsification Improper use of human subjects and animals in research Improper author contribution
Section Two Manuscript structure

The write order Title Abstract and keywords Introduction Materials and Methods Results Display items Statistics Discussion and Conclusions References
The write order

IMRaD manuscripts: for maximum clarity and consistency, write in this order:
Methods Results
Write during the research Write after selecting your target journal
Introduction
Discussion Title Abstract
The importance of your title
Hook to catch readers
Sells your manuscript to the editor
Relevant readers increase citations
Journal editors like citations

A good title
Convey the main findings of the research
Be specific and concise without focusing on only one part of the content Avoid jargon, non-standard abbreviations and unnecessary detail Comply with character limits Some journals also require a short running title
A good title
Poor Degeneration of neurons in the CA3 and DG following OA administration: involvement of a MAPK-dependent pathway in regional-specific neuronal degeneration Better Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration MAP kinase-dependent neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration
Abstract
Many researchers will only read the abstract so must be able to stand alone Must give an accurate summary of your research, and enough information so that readers can understand:
What you did Why you did it What your findings are Why your findings are useful and important
Abstract
General rules for abstracts:
Within the word limit
Avoid technical jargon

Avoid abbreviations unless necessary Avoid references Always consult the target journals Guide for Authors to determine allowable length, style and abbreviations
Keywords
Abstracts are often followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. Choosing appropriate keywords is important for indexing purposes. Your manuscript can more easily identified, read and cited. Keywords should be specific to your manuscript General terms should be avoided.
Keywords
Manuscript title: Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration
Poor keywords:
neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, signaling Better keywords: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling
Introduction
Must give the reader enough background information to put your work into context Enough information to understand the rationale for your study is all that is required Do not write a comprehensive literature review of the field Do cite reviews that readers can refer to if they want more information
Introduction
Define technical and non-familiar terms Present the problem, research question and/or hypotheses to explain the rationale for the study Briefly explain how you addressed this problem and what was achieved (12 sentences for each) Citations must be balanced, current and relevant
A complement-dependent balance between hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury and liver regeneration in mice
Songqing He, Carl Atkinson, Fei Qiao, Katherine Cianflone, Xiaoping Chen and Stephen Tomlinson
Introduction
Liver resection has become an increasingly safe procedure, but certain procedures remain high risk, such as massive liver resection and small-forsize (SFS) liver transplantation. Massive hepatic resection is the only option for some patients.
Statement of the problem
The failure of a partial liver to regenerate is considered a critical contributing factor in postsurgical primary liver dysfunction and liver failure, and minimal viable liver volume required for regeneration, following either massive liver resection or SFS transplantation, is an important concept...
Thus, although the studies outlined above indicate that complement inhibition represents a potential therapeutic strategy to protect against hepatic IRI, the important role of complement in liver regeneration would appear to be a contraindication for such a strategy in the context of liver resection and SFS liver transplantation, even though IRI is associated with impaired regeneration In the current study, we investigated the role of complement in the relationship between hepatic IRI and liver regeneration using 3 murine models: a warm total hepatic IRI model (similar to the Pringle maneuver), a 70% PHx model, and a combined IRI/PHx model designed to recreate clinical massive liver resection under the Pringle maneuver. In these studies, we used the complement inhibitor CR2complement component
The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCT38289; reproduced with permission)
Background
Rationale
What was done
Materials and methods What You Did

Clear subheadings for methods/materials Describe methods in the past tense Novel methods must be described in sufficient detail for a capable researcher to reproduce the experiment Give manufacturers/suppliers and their locations
Describe any statistical tests used

Established methods can be referenced
Proapoptotic signaling induced by RIG-I and MDA-5 results in type I interferon-independent apoptosis in human melanoma cells.
Robert Besch, Hendrik Poeck, Tobias Hohenauer et al.
Materials described first
Reagents and antibodies. Anticaspase-3, anticaspase-8 (1C12), anticaspase-9, antiBcl-xL, antiBcl-w, and HRP-conjugated secondary antibodies were obtained from New England Biolabs. Anticytochrome c (clone 7H8.2C12) was from BD Biosciences. Anti-Noxa (N-15) antibody was from Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc. AntiBcl-2 (Ab-1) and anti-p53 (Ab-6) antibodies were from Merck Biosciences. AntiIPS-1 antibody was obtained from Bethyl Laboratories Inc. Anti-actin (AC-15) and anti-Puma (bbc3) antibodies were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. PCR primers and siRNAs were purchased from MWG Biotech. Immunostimulatory and siRNAs. Poly(I:C) was purchased from Amersham Biosciences. 5-Triphosphate conjugated RNAs (pppRNAs) were transcribed in vitro from DNA templates as described in ref. 6. They contained a T7 RNA Polymerase consensus promoter sequence followed by the sequence of interest to be transcribed (MEGAshortscript Kit; Ambion). Reactions were treated with DNAse I (Ambion siRNAs were designed according to published guidelines (48, 49) 3 Overhangs were carried out as two deoxythymidine residues (dTdT). Sequences of specific siRNAs are listed in Supplemental Table 1. Nonsilencing control siRNAs were designed to contain random sequences that do not match within the human genome... Cell culture. Human melanoma cell lines were a gift of M. Herlyn (Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) Analysis of lung metastasis. For metastasis analysis at day 10, we isolated genomic DNA from lungs. Mouse lungs were reduced to small pieces and digested overnight at 56C in a buffer containing 10 mM Tris, pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% SDS, 0.5 mg/ml Pronase E (Sigma-Aldrich), and 150 g/ml Protease K (Sigma-Aldrich). Genomic DNA was purified by phenol/chloroform extraction. The amount of human and murine DNA was determined by quantitative PCR using the LightCycler TaqMan Master Kit (Roche) together with the Universal Probe Library system (Roche). A 72-bp portion in the second intron of the human -actin Statistics. For statistical analysis, 2-tailed Students t test was used to assess the significance of mean differences. Differences were considered significant at a P value of 0.05 or less.
The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI37155; reproduced with permission)
Suppliers
References to save space Clear subheadings
Statistical test information
Detailed information given
Results What did you find?

Assemble your findings in a logical order to make a story Present your findings in subsections (the same as those in your methods section) Present complementary evidence when possible Describe results in the past tense Refer to figures and tables in the present tense Do not discuss implications do that in the discussion section Do not duplicate data among figures, tables and text Show the results of statistical analyses, (e.g., p values) in the text
Proapoptotic signaling induced by RIG-I and MDA-5 results in type I interferonindependent apoptosis in human melanoma cells
Robert Besch, Hendrik Poeck et al
Clear subheadings
Graphics used to show data with only brief descriptions in text
pppRNA and poly(I:C) induce apoptosis in melanoma cells. We tested the ability of RIG-I and MDA-5 ligands to induce cell death in human melanoma cell lines. Five cell lines derived from advanced melanomas (vertical growth phase or metastatic origin) were analyzed. Activation of RIG-I and MDA-5 by pppRNA1 and poly(I:C) strongly reduced viability from 100% in controls to 20%50% within 24 hours (Figure (Figure1A).1 A). Viability was reduced due to induction of apoptosis as determined by staining with annexin V. Apoptosis strictly required intracellular delivery, as neither pppRNAs nor poly(I:C) without transfection were active (Figure (Figure1B).1 B). Different pppRNAs were tested, and all reduced cell viability (Figure (Figure1C).1 C). The 5-triphosphate moiety was required, since synthetic RNAs carrying a free OH group at the 5 end (e.g., OH-RNA1) had no effect (Figure (Figure1C,1 C, left panel). Strong dose-dependent reduction of viability was observed for poly(I:C) (Figure (Figure1C,1 C, right panel). Reduced viability was reflected in an increased number of cells undergoing apoptosis (Figure (Figure1D).1 D). Confirming the onset of apoptosis, caspase-3 was activated in cells transfected with pppRNAs or poly(I:C) but not in cells exposed to pppRNA or poly(I:C) in the absence of transfection reagent (Figure (Figure1E).1 E). Together, these results show high sensitivity of human melanoma cell lines toward apoptosis induction by pppRNAs or poly(I:C) when delivered to the cytosol. Apoptosis induction by pppRNA and poly(I:C) involves IPS-1 but is independent of IFN signaling. The RNA ligands pppRNA and poly(I:C) both induced IFN- expression in melanoma cells (Figure (Figure3A).3A). Silencing of RIG-I and MDA-5 confirmed that induction of IFN- by pppRNA and poly(I:C) required RIG-I and MDA-5, respectively, and that both required
It is clear what was compared with what
Melanoma cells are more sensitive to RIG-I and MDA-5induced apoptosis than primary cells. We next compared healthy primary cells of the skin with melanoma cells to evaluate tumor specificity of apoptosis induction by RIG-I and MDA-5. Primary human melanocytes, primary fibroblasts, and primary keratinocytes were significantly less sensitive to pppRNA and poly(I:C) compared with melanoma cells (Figure (Figure7A).7A).
Display items Tables and figures

Some readers will only look at the figures and their legends Figures and tables are the best way to present your results Data shown in figures and tables must be easy to interpret use separate panels if necessary Avoid redundancies or duplication Clearly label all components
Show trendlines, scale bars and statistical significance

Legends must be able to stand alone: write them in the present tense (except when describing methods)
Comply with journal guidelines on display items

Tables are a great way to present large amounts of necessary data with minimal description required
Clear concise heading
Data divided into categories for clarity
Percentages as well as absolute values
Part of a table in a paper published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI37622; reproduced with permission)

Trend lines Clear, stand alone legend
Figure 5 RCP knockdown attenuates tumor formation and metastasis. Effects of RCP inhibition on tumor growth using (A) MCF7 cells in nude mice and (B) MB231 cells in NOD-SCID mice are shown. (A) Left panel shows mean tumor volume plotted as a function of time (mean SEM). Right panel shows tumor weight plotted at 5 weeks; mean weight indicated by solid line. (B) Left panel, tumor weight plotted at indicated number of weeks; mean weight indicated by solid line. Right panel, the average number of lung micrometastases per section is shown. (C) Representative lung sections and fluorescently imaged whole lungs (right panel) of NOD-SCID mice are shown. Micrometastases are indicated by arrows. Scale bars: 200 m.
Multi-panel: different kinds of data grouped together in a single figure

Complicated data separated into simpler components
Scale bars
Statistics
Today, few professional activities are untouched by statistical thinking, and most academic disciplines use it to a greater or lesser degree Statistical thinking is a way of recognizing that our observations of the world can never be totally accurate; they are always somewhat uncertain.
Rowntree D (1981). Statistics without tears. A primer for non-mathematicians. Penguin Books Ltd., London, England
Statistics
Statistical analysis is at the heart of scientific inquiry Consider statistical analysis when you design your study. Before you start your research.
Data collection
Data analysis
Interpretation
Statistics
Reporting statistics in your manuscript:
Indicate the parameters described, e.g., meansS.D Indicate the statistical tests used to analyze data Give the numerator and denominator with percentages, e.g., 40% (100/250) Report p values, e.g., use p=0.0035 rather than p<0.05 Only use the word significant when describing statistically significant differences
A complement-dependent balance between hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury and liver regeneration in mice
Songqing He, Carl Atkinson et al
Methods Data type defined Statistical tests clearly described
Results
Statistics. Data are expressed as mean SD. Significant differences between groups were determined by ANOVA, with a Bonferroni correction for continuous variable and multiple groups. Two-tailed Students t test was used for the comparison of a normally distributed continuous variable between 2 groups. For the survival studies, Kaplan-Meier logrank analysis was performed. P values of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
ALT levels were significantly lower at 24 and 48 hours after PHx in low-dose CR2-Crrytreated mice compared with those in salinetreated controls. Compared with WT mice, surviving C3/ mice had significantly increased hepatic injury and an impaired proliferative response (Figure 7, BE)...
Significance threshold defined
significant only used for statistical significance
Figure 7 Opposing effects of high- and low-dose complement inhibition on hepatic injury and regeneration in a model incorporating both IRI and PHx. Mice were treated with normal saline or CR2-Crry at a dose of either 0.25 mg or 0.08 mg immediately after surgery. C3/ mice received no treatment. All determinations made 48 hours after I/R and PHx. (A) Mouse survival. (B) Serum ALT levels. (C) Histological quantification of hepatic necrosis and injury determined on a scale of 04. (D) Assessment of regeneration by BrdU incorporation. (E) Restitution of liver weight. (F) MPO content in liver samples. #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.01 versus WT group; **P < 0.01 versus WT group (similar to WT normal saline group); P < 0.01 versus all other groups; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 versus WT group. Results are expressed as mean SD; n = 610.
Significance indicated in figure/table legend

Discussion What does it all mean?

Restate your research question and/or any hypotheses presented in the introduction Summarize your main findingsmake it clear how your study has advanced the field Begin with your most important finding Past tense to describe results (current and published) Present tense to describe their implications Minimize repetition with other sections Describe inconsistencies with other papers Describe the limitations of your study
Discussion
Be humble Dont overstate the importance of your results
Our findings prove that

Our findings show that Our findings suggest that
Conclusions
Restate key findings and their significance Propose future studies that might follow on from your current study Give the reader a take-home message
RCP is a human breast cancerpromoting gene with Ras-activating function

Jinqiu Zhang, Xuejing Liu et al
Restate the question/problem Restate main findings Put in context of previous work Use suggests and may
Discussion Genome-wide microarray analysis of primary tumors has enabled the discovery of novel, clinically relevant tumor subtypes defined by unique patterns of gene expression. More recently, however, the inverse of this concept has been explored through bottom-up analytical strategies that seek to identify gene subtypes with functional roles in tumorigenesis In the present work, we have built on this concept of data integration and functional discovery and identified RCP, located on the 8p1112 recurrent breast cancer amplicon, as a novel breast-cancer promoting gene with Ras-activating potential. Amplification of the 8p1112 locus has been observed in approximately 10%25% of breast tumor cases and 15% of breast cancer cell lines and has been associated with poor patient survival and short interval to distant metastasis. Recently, this amplicon has been the focus of several functional genomics investigations involving primary breast tumors and cell lines. Using a highresolution BAC microarray specific for chromosome 8p, Gelsi-Boyer and colleagues However, that the growth and metastatic properties of the tumor xenografts were dependent on the endogenous expression of RCP suggests an oncogene addictionlike scenario, whereby RCP may play a vital role in the maintenance and potentiation of the malignant and metastatic phenotype In conclusion, through integrated genomic analysis, we identified RCP as a candidate oncogene at the 8p1112 amplicon, with expression levels significantly correlated with aggressive breast cancer behavior The broader involvement of RCP in the pathogenesis of human cancers and the mechanisms underlying its oncogenic effects will be the focus of future investigations.
Restate main findings Future research plans
Acknowledgments
Your chance to acknowledge anyone who has helped with the study: Individuals who did not qualify for authorship based on ICMJE criteria Any researchers that supplied materials or reagents Anyone who provided technical assistance Anyone who helped with the preparation of the manuscript or provided a critical assessment of it Funding bodies State why each individual is being acknowledged
References
Always format your references: check your target journals Guide for Authors for the appropriate format Harvard style or Vancouver style or APA Formatting is required both in text and in the references section Use a reference manager like Endnote. Makes it easy to edit, reformat, add or remove references Some journal limit the number of references: check your target journals Guide for Authors
Section Three Tips for getting accepted

Your cover letter Recommending reviewers Language Good writing Common language problems What do reviewers look for? Submission Final checks Post-referee revisions Checklist
Cover letters
Journal Editors receive hundreds of manuscripts each month They dont have time to read each manuscript Society journal editors are especially busy they are usually practicing researchers too
Your cover Letter is an opportunity to get the journal editors attention

Cover letters
Competition for publication space and for editors attention is very high It is not enough to send a manuscript to a journal editor like this:
Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled Large Scale Analysis of Cell Cycle Regulators in bladder cancer by A. Honda, K. Tanaka, J. Suzuki, and myself. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Pathobiology. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. With my best regards, Sincerely yours, Shinsuke Izumi, PhD
Your cover letter

General rules for cover letters:
Address to the editor personally

Begin by giving your manuscript title and publication type Give a brief background, rationale and description of results Explain why your findings are important and why they would be of interest to the journals target audience Consult the journals Guide for Authors for cover letter requirements (e.g., disclosures, statements, potential reviewers) Give corresponding author details
Your cover letter

Dear Dr Lisberger, Please find enclosed our manuscript entitled Amyloid-like inclusions in the brains of Huntingtons disease patients, by McGowan et al., which we would like to submit for publication as a Research Paper in Neuroscience. Recent immunohistochemical studies have revealed the presence of neuronal inclusions containing an N-terminal portion of the mutant huntingtin protein and ubiquitin in the brain tissues of Huntingtons disease (HD) patients; however, the role of these inclusions in the disease process has remained unclear. One suspected disease-causing mechanism in Huntingtons disease and other polyglutamine disorders is the potential for the mutant protein to undergo a conformational change to a more stable anti-parallel -sheet structure To confirm if the immunohistochemically observed huntingtin- and ubiquitin-containing inclusions display amyloid features, we performed Congo red staining and both polarizing and confocal microscopy on post-mortem human brain tissues obtained from five HD patients, two AD patients, and two normal controls. Congo red staining revealed a small number of amyloid-like inclusions showing green birefringence by polarized microscopy, in a variety of cortical regions.... .detected inclusions observed in parallel sections, suggesting that only a relatively small proportion of inclusions in HD adopt an amyloid-like structure. We believe our findings would appeal to a broad audience, such as the readership of Neuroscience. As a wide-reaching journal publishing original research on all aspects of neuroscience We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with submission to Neuroscience. We have read and have abided by the statement of ethical standards for manuscripts submitted to Neuroscience. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Please address all correspondence to.
Give the background to the research

Explain what was done and what was found Explain why this is interesting to the journals readership Conforms to the journals requirements
Reviewers Recommendations and exclusions

Recommend Your work supports their hypotheses and ideas
Your research builds on their work

International collaborators in the same field Exclude Researchers working on the same research question Your study refutes their work
The findings in your manuscript are are opposite to their findings or ideas
Language
Journal editors are overloaded with quality manuscripts. They may make decisions on manuscripts based on formal criteria, like grammar or spelling. Don't get rejected for avoidable mistakes: make sure your manuscript looks perfect
A senior executive at a large international publishing house
Language screening
Introduction of language screening protocols to check submissions
Editors dont want to send poorly written manuscripts for peer review Editors receive enough well written submissions to reject poorly written manuscripts
Language
Some journals are very clear regarding their English requirements, and about what happens to manuscripts that do not meet their standards European Polymer Journal Language and Style: Manuscripts should be written in English in a clear and concise manner. Manuscripts which are not written in fluent English will be rejected automatically without refereeing.
Scientific writing
Good scientific writing possesses the following three Cs:
Clarity
Conciseness
Correctness (accuracy)
Key points:
Be as brief as possible without omitting essential details Be as specific as possible
Scientific writing Common problems

Avoid:
Spelling and grammatical errors

Insufficient detail/vagueness Repetition Redundancy Ambiguity Inconsistency They annoy editors, peer reviewers and readers
Language Common English problems

Tense Articles Plural or singular Proper nouns Hyphen or dash That/which Making comparisons Respectively Between or among Nomenclature Numbers Punctuation Such as/namely Etc. Asian fonts UK or US spelling
Language Dash or hyphen

Hyphenation: for joining usually separate words Incorrect use can lead to ambiguity twenty-four hour reactions is different to twenty four-hour reactions
Language Dash or hyphen

En dash (): means through. October 2829; pp. 25. (dont use ~) Em dash (): Used to break a sentence, introduce something, or introduce an afterthought. These two metalsthat is, titanium and magnesium are very light.
Language Asian fonts

Be careful of Asian fonts such as MS Mincho and SimSum Do not use Asian fonts in your manuscripts For example:

Why not?
Because they look like this on some computers: or ?
Simple is best
Use simple language: it is often clearer, more precise and more concise than using more complex language Say what you mean in as few words as possible
Delete unnecessary words Avoid circular sentences, redundancies and repetition One sentence: one idea
Language UK or US spelling
Be consistent
Check the journals Guide for Authors Generally, American journals require US spelling and British journals require British spelling, but many accept either form as long as the spelling used is consistent
fibre centre labelling colour or or or or fiber center labeling color
Language Comparisons
Frequently made in the results sections of papers Compare like with like
Do not be vague
Use with, not to
The material from the river bank was compared with the landfill.
The material from the river bank was compared with that from the landfill.
Expression levels of p53 in smokers were compared with nonsmokers
Expression levels of p53 in smokers were compared with p53 levels in non-smokers
Expression levels of p53 in smokers were compared with those in non-smokers
Relative terms, such as more, higher and greater, require a reference for comparison
Use than or compared with

Reactions with the new machine were faster. than what?
Reactions with the new machine were faster than those with the old machine
62 Edanz Group Limited | 62
Language Between or among

Use between for comparisons of two groups the only difference between the original molecule and the new molecule is... Use among for comparisons of more than two groups ..significant differences were observed in the H values among bio, fully- and semi-synthetic
Language Respectively
Use to refer to two corresponding lists, but not more For example:
Oxygen detector flow 85 mL/min Nitrogen detector flow 7 mL/min Hydrogen detector flow 4 mL/min
Oxygen, Nitrogen and Hydrogen detector flows were set at 85, 7 and 4 mL/min, respectively.
Language Such as or namely

such as: to give examples .there were other factors, such as nutrient status, primary production, microbial biomass, and coagulation processes. namely: to define we used certified reference materials, namely C36 n-alkane and phenanthrene, obtained from
Language Colon or semicolon

The colon : is used to introduce a list or a clause that explains what precedes it Semicolon ; is used to separate the items in a list too long for commas or where commas could be ambiguous. Use and before the last item in the list.
There are a number of journals for organic chemistry manuscripts: Organic Electronics, produced by Elsevier; The Journal of Polymer Science, produced by Wiley; The Journal of
Language Minimizing errors

The internet can help you Google Scholar to check for word usage Check your target journals home page for full instructions MS Word Track changes function Comment function Find (and replace) to check for consistency Word Count function Spell Check (but be careful) Custom Dictionaries (provided by some academic societies for specific fields) Online glossaries provided by academic societies
Reviewers What do they look for?

Is the manuscript sufficiently novel? Is the manuscript of broad enough interest?
Aims and Scope Impact Factor

Novelty Significance
Reviewers About the research

Are the methods used appropriate? Are any additional experiments/analyses necessary? Are the statistical tests used appropriate? Are all possible interpretations of the data considered?
Reviewers About the manuscript

Are the rationale and objectives defined? Is enough background given to understand the rationale? Could a capable researcher reproduce the experiments? Are the results clearly explained and in the best format? Are the findings described in context? Are the limitations discussed? Are the conclusions supported? Is the literature cited appropriate?
Submission Final checks

Critically self-evaluatecould anything be done better? Double check the Guide for Authors Are all files in the correct file format and of the appropriate resolution or size? Is your spelling/grammar correct? Do you have contact information for all authors? Have you completed online registration? Or have you prepared the requested number of print copies plus CD? Have you written a persuasive cover letter?
Revisions Post-referee revisions

Rejection from journals is an important part of the publication process It is not a negative experience
It exists to ensure that your paper is as scientifically robust and complete as possible before joining the collective knowledge as part of the literature

Reasons for rejection: Inappropriate target journal Poor study design
Poor written language

Inappropriate or incompletely explained methodology Inappropriate statistical tests Incorrect description or overstatement of results Lack of balance or detail in introduction and/or discussion
Lack of novelty

Only 1.5% of papers are immediately accepted without need for any revisions
Complete rejection Journal editor decision Rejection with major revisions Rejection with minor revisions Acceptance

When revising your manuscript: Address all points raised by the editor and/or reviewers Describe the revisions in your response letter Perform any additional experiments or analyses requested (unless you feel that they would not add to the strength of your paper: explain why not in your response letter) Provide a polite and scientific rebuttal to any points or comments you disagree with Differentiate comments and responses in your letter Clearly show the major revisions in the text Return revised manuscript and response letter within the requested time period
Summary Checklist for acceptance

Appropriate study design Compliance with ethics guidelines Appropriate statistical tests Novel and interesting results Clear, concise, accurate writing Compliance with the Guide for Authors Significance of findings explained Appropriate choice of journal

How To Write A ManuscriptGet Your Paper Accepted Daniel McGowan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

How To Write A ManuscriptGet Your Paper Accepted Daniel McGowan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

How to write a manuscript Get your paper accepted

Edanz Group Limited| 2

Journal numbers Journal submissions

600 400 200

Relative growth from 100% baseline in 1990

Section One Preparations before writing

Choosing an appropriate journal

Edanz Group Limited | 6

How to identify hot topics

Look for clues unexplained findings, controversies

Read the literature, including related fields

Attend international meetings

Greater interest = Greater competition

Study design Get it right first time

Edanz Group Limited | 8

What do journal editors want?

Compliance with ethical regulations

How significant are your findings?

How do these relate to your publication needs?

Edanz Group Limited | 12

Edanz Group Limited | 13

Section Two Manuscript structure

Edanz Group Limited | 14

The write order

The importance of your title

Hook to catch readers

Sells your manuscript to the editor

Relevant readers increase citations

Journal editors like citations

Avoid technical jargon

Edanz Group Limited | 20

Edanz Group Limited | 23

Edanz Group Limited | 24

Statement of the problem

What was done

Edanz Group Limited | 25

Materials and methods What You Did

Describe any statistical tests used

Edanz Group Limited | 26

Materials described first

References to save space Clear subheadings

Statistical test information

Detailed information given

Edanz Group Limited | 27

Results What did you find?

Edanz Group Limited | 28

Graphics used to show data with only brief descriptions in text

It is clear what was compared with what

Edanz Group Limited | 29

Display items Tables and figures

Show trendlines, scale bars and statistical significance

Comply with journal guidelines on display items

Edanz Group Limited | 30

Display items Tables and figures

Data divided into categories for clarity

Percentages as well as absolute values

Edanz Group Limited | 31

Display items Tables and figures

Multi-panel: different kinds of data grouped together in a single figure

The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI37622; reproduced with permission)

Edanz Group Limited | 32

Edanz Group Limited | 33