Art of Writing a Paper

Barriers to Publication Success:

There are numerous challenges encountered by authors attempting to publish in peer-
review journals

PUBLICATION
SUCCESS
JOURNAL PEER
WRITING SUBMISSION REVIEW
SELECTION

• When should I •How do I develop •Using the submission •What does this
choose a journal? an effective outline? system is not intuitive comment mean?

•Should I submit to
•How should I •The formatting a different journal ?
choose a journal ? requirements are
confusing. •It is unclear exactly •Was I rejected?
what information must
•Would an open be provided before I
access journal be •Writing in English start the submission
suitable? is difficult for me process
 How do I choose a Journal?

• Journal scope, reach, readers

• Indexed

• Peer review

• Impact Factor

• Open Access

• Rejection Rate

• Time to decision/publication

• Article Length restriction

• Charges (open access fee, page, colour)

 What does Research Journals priorities ?

Original, Robust research studies that can improve doctor’s decision making in
medical practice, policy and education or future research and will be helpful to
general medical readers Internationally.
 An Editor’s Triage

• Is the article interesting and relevant to the readers of the journals

• Is the research questions original and important?

• Are the methods appropriate and valid to answer the research questions ?

• If all the above are true then the results are largely irrelevant to the decision to
peer review /publish?
 The Peer Review Process

External
Research Screen Review Editorial Accept
submitted meeting

Approximately 500 with 4-7% with

1000 for open Editors and open Access
Up to 4000 3000 review advisors, no word
annually Rejected Statisticians, limits certain
500 then Editorial pico
rejected Team Editorials
 Manuscript Preparation Difficulties

Factors identified as the “Most difficult” aspects of Manuscript preparation by authors preparing
manuscripts for peer-reviewed journals

Formatting according to Instructions for 19

%
Authors

22
%
Understanding the Journal’s Guide for Authors

24
Expressing thoughts clearly in English %

35
%
Choosing a journal

Proportion of Respondents
 What do you see as the main barrier in getting Clinical Research
Published ?
Using appropriate research methodology

Writing up research

Use of English Language

Choosing the right Journal

Understanding
journals acceptance
requirement

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Answer Choices Responses

Using appropriate Research Methodology 37.61% (88)

Writing up Research 22.65% (53)

Use of English Language 39.74% (93)

Choosing the right Journal to submit Research 42.31% (99)

Understanding Journal Acceptance Requirement 21.37% (50)

Total respondents: 234

 What is Impact factor ?

• Impact factor is used as a proxy measure of the academic usefulness of a

journal

• IF=recorded number of citation in a year(eg 2014) to scholarly articles in

the journal in preceding two years (eg 2012 and 2013)

• Impact factor is an imperfect measure

 Be confident at Resubmission

Most reviewers & editors wants to be helpful

Follow journal instructions

Address all comments; but need not agree with all

Avoid easy fixes/shortcuts

If rejected; tell next journal how you addressed reviewer’s comments

 What is a Research Question ?

The researcher asks a very specific question and tests a specific

hypothesis. Broad Questions are usually broken into smaller, testable
hypotheses /questions.

Often called an objective/aim , though calling it a question help to focus

on the hypothesis and think about how to find answer.
 General Guidance on Writing papers

International Committee of Medical Journals Editors recommendations for

manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals
http://www.icmje.org/

Reporting guidelines for research, at the EQUATOR Network

http://www.equator-network.org/
 IMRaD Structure for Research Papers

Introduction: Why ask this research Questions ?

Methods: What did I do?
Results: What did I find?
And
Discussion: What might it mean?
 Match the research questions to the Study Design

Descriptive Studies Answer “What’s Happening” research questions

(Survey, Cross Sectional Study)

Analytic observational Studies answer “Why or How it is happening ?”

(Case Control Study, Longitudinal Studies)

Analytic Experimental Studies answer “can it work” (Randomized controlled

style, meta-analysis)
 Basics of Writing a paper

• Beginning , Middle and End

•Tell people what you are going to say, say it, tell them what you have said

•I have just said tell people what you are going to say, say it, tell them what
you
have said
Most scientist regard the new streamlined peer review process as “quite an
improvement”
IMRaD Format Scientific Method

Introduction Ask questions, Do background research, develop

Hypothesis

Methods
Test Hypothesis

Results
Analysis your Data

Discussion
Interpret your findings
 Methods

Like a recipe
Most important section for informed readers

Describe:
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Outcomes measures: Define primary outcomes(s)
Intervention or exposure
Randomization/stratification
Sample Size Calculation

Give reference for Lab/Stats Methods

Following reporting guidelines ed CONSORT, at

http://www.equator-network.org/

Describe measures to ensure Ethical Conduct

 Results

• Report results fully and honestly, as per pre-specified

• Text(story), tables(evidence), figs(Highlights)

• Report primary outcomes first

• Give confidence intervals for main results

• Essential Summary Statistics

• Leave out non-essentials tables and figures

• Don’t Start Discussion here

 Abstracts for BMJ papers

•300-400 words

•Structured format

•Active voice

•Results plus p values

•% s with denominators

•No reference

•Trials registration Details

 Pre-submission Enquires

Always consider inquiring when you’re:

• Unsure about suitability for the journal
• Seeking rapid review/publication
• Wanting to explain special circumstances

Provide sufficient study information:

• Article abstract
• Perceived value to journal audience
• Relationship of study to existing body of work
 Structured Discussion

Don’t simply repeat the Introduction

Include:

• Statement of Principle Findings

• Strength and Weakness of The Study
• Strength and Weakness in relation to other Studies (especially systematic
review). & key Differences

• Possible Mechanisms & Explanations for Findings

• Potential implications for Clinicians or Policymakers
• Unanswered questions and Future Research
 Clear Writing

•Never use a Metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to

seeing in print (a cliché)

•Never use a long word where a short one can do the job

•It is possible to cut out a word, always cut if out

•Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think
of an everyday (English) equivalent
 The Seven Stages of Ignorance

Enkin, M. The Seven Stages of Ignorance, September 2008

First Stage: Innocence

You Know You don’t Know

But you are Sure You Can Learn
Second Stage: The Facts

You know you Still don’t know

But facts are facts
Third Stage: Naivety

You Know What to Do,

But Don’t Know How to Do it
Fourth Stage : Frustration

You Know You Don’t Know

But Know That Others Know
Fifth Stage: Expertise, The Danger
Stage

You Think That You Know,

And Others Think That You Know
Sixth Stage: Pyrrhic Success

You Think That You Don’t Know,

And Others Think That You Know
Seventh Stage: Ignorance

You Know that You Don’t Know,

Others Know that You Don’t
Know,
And it Doesn’t Matter
Misconduct:
Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording/reporting them

Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipments, or

processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the
research is not accurately represented in the research record.

Plagiarism: The appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes,

results or words without giving appropriate credit.

US Office of Research Integrity: http://ori.hhs.gov/handling-misconduct

 ICMJE
authorship rules, used by Journals worldwide
Authorship credit must be based on substantial contribution to:

Conception or design of the work: or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data

for the work: AND

Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content

Final approval of the version to be published; AND

 Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions
related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately
investigated and resolved.

Authors:
•Should be able to identify which co-author are responsible for specific other parts of the
work
•Should have confidence in the integrity of the contribution of their co-author
•Must fulfill the criteria, no one who fulfils the criteria should be excluded
•Should have participated sufficiently to take public responsibility for appropriate portions
of the content.
•Acquisition of the funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group
alone does not constitute authorship.
Thank You