9:00-10:15 am: - introduction - what should be considered before writing? dscussion 10:15-11:45 am:...

9:00-10:15 am: - Introduction - What should be considered before

writing? Dscussion

10:15-11:45 am: - The content and format of paper

- Discussion

11:45am-12:45pm: - Writing and revising - You and the journal

- Discussion12:45-13:00 pm: Coffee and end of the workshop.

BYProf. Ehab S. EL Desoky

Professor of PharmacologyFaculty of Medicine

Assiut University

•PART I

Introduction

• We get to believe that writing is effortless!effortless!

• We forget that good scientific writing is a hard workhard work even for experienced authors.

• We all have a head full of thoughtsfull of thoughts floating around, but these thoughts are not formulated in a way or a frame to be scrutinized by othersscrutinized by others.

Introduction, Cont..

• Morton Grossman is an eminent Gastro-enterologist who published 400 scientific papers, 134 editorials and 71 books or chapter in books. He said:

“I have not found writing one bit I have not found writing one bit easier today than it was 30 years easier today than it was 30 years agoago”

Introduction, Cont..

• Scientific papers are not just basketsbaskets carrying unconnected factsunconnected facts like the telephone directory. They are instruments for persuation.

Introduction, Cont..• What the readers need?What the readers need?

= = Why do we read scientific papersWhy do we read scientific papers??

keep aware of what is going onwhat is going on in our

fields?!

get a sense of new developments that

may become important to us?!

looking for answers to questions or

solution to problems

• But, What about CLOSE READERS?But, What about CLOSE READERS?

1- They are kind of readers who are looking for looking for more than just answers to questions and more than just answers to questions and solutions to problems.solutions to problems.

2- They need to be convinced that: * the message of the paper, * its answer to the proposed question * its solution to raised problems

Before Writing

• What should be considered ?What should be considered ?

• Q1-What do you have to say in your paper?

• Q2- Is the paper worth writing?

• Q3- What is the right journal?

• Q4- What is the impact factor of the chosen journal?

• Q5- Do you have a literature search strategy?

• Q6- Did you decide on authorship?

• Do you still feel paralyzed to Do you still feel paralyzed to start writing?start writing?

Q1-What do you have to say? (message of the paper)?!

• If you are able to state the answer in a single short sentence, then,

you have a clear and strong message.

• Examples:

Is antibiotic A more effective than antibiotic B in treating an X disease?.

Q2- Is the paper worth writing? (=Is there a need for your paper to be published?)

• You have a green light to go ahead in your paper if:

• 1- no paper of the kind you are planning to is available in literature.

• 2- the message of your paper is new to the medical literature or at least to the journal audience.

Q2- Is the paper worth writing? (Cont..)

• 3- the message is not new, but it expands on or firms up a previously published message.

• 4- Therefore, deciding to write a paper may depend in part on what you find in a new search of the literature.

Q2- Is the paper worth writing? (Cont..)

• If you want to know whether your paper is worth writing or not, think about the

following TWO TESTSTWO TESTS:

The “so-what” test? A measure of the importance of yourimportance of your messagemessage What may happen if the paper is published?! May the paper change conceptschange concepts of a disease or its treatment?! May the paper stimulate further researchstimulate further research in the same field?! Will you be multiplying publication not for the sake of readers but for selfish• motives

The “Who-cares” test A test that answer the question: WHO are the audienceWHO are the audience? Who will see the paper when it is in reprint?Who will see the paper when it is in reprint? practitionerspractitioners, specialistsspecialists in a small field OR technicianstechnicians?

Please remember that papers are read mainly Please remember that papers are read mainly by persons who by persons who need answer to questions.need answer to questions.

The “Who-cares” testAny author is likely to think that his paper

will attract the attention of far more readers than in fact it will get.

Q3- What is the right journal?

• 1- Choosing the right journal is an early step in planningearly step in planning the paper.

• 2- Few journalsFew journals may be appropriate choices if you are working in a nnarrow arrow specialty or subspecialtyspecialty or subspecialty

• 3- For better choice, ask yourself the following questions:

Q3- What is the right journal? (Cont..)• (i) Is the topic of the paper within the scope of

the selected journal?

• (ii) Is the topic represented in it frequently or only rarely?

• To get the answers: Look closely through recent issues of the journal (at least a year back) OR

Look in the journal main page at the section of “the journal information for authors”

Q3- What is the right journal? (Cont..)

• (iii) What format does the journal accept?

Reply: You may select a right journal for your topic, but it does not publish papers with the format you have chosen!

• Example 1:

You are planning to write a detailed

critical review of diagnosis and

treatment of “Gonococcal Urethritis”.

• A journal with a style of publishing:

long, detailed, heavily referenced long, detailed, heavily referenced

reviews reviews but not

short summaries of diagnosis and short summaries of diagnosis and

treatmenttreatment

will be suitable for your paper.

• Example 2: A PhD candidate in clinical psychiatry have written a long-term review on: ‘ assessment of emotional problems in women with breast cancer.

He had to choose between 5 journals5 journals in the field:

a) 2 journals publish only original research papersoriginal research papers b) 2 journals publish some reviews, but mostly some reviews, but mostly researchresearch paperspapers and all authors are pre-eminentpre-eminent in their field, NOT NOT ACADEMIC NOBODIESACADEMIC NOBODIES..

c) One journal then left publishes short reviews of currently important topics.***** Of course this is the target journal.

Q4: What is the impact factor of the chosen journal?

• (i) Impact factor indicates how many times, on average, a journal’s papers are cited in other journals.

• (ii) It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a relative importance of a journal within its fieldjournal within its field.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(statistics)

Q4: What is the impact factor of the chosen journal? (Cont..)

• (iii) Calculation: based on a three-year period, IF 2010 for a journal would be calculated as follows:

A = the number of times articles published in 2008-9 were cited in indexed journals during 2010

B = the number of articles, reviews, proceedings or notes published in 2008-2009

impact factor 2010 = A/B


• (iv) Be aware of the following as regards IFas regards IF:

Publishing in a journal with high ranking

raises your reputation.

Submitting a paper to high rank high rank journalsjournals

in your field, also raises the risk of:

rejection of paper and sometimes the

months the journal needed to process

the paper before rejecting


high prestige journals have high rejection rate because they receive 1000-4000 manuscripts/year and can publish only a fraction of these papers. So, their rejection rate may reach rejection rate may reach up to 90%!!.up to 90%!!.


some journals with high impact factor

have relatively small circulationssmall circulations, they are usually journals that publish:• Highly important papers, & • very sophisticated materials of interest mainly to small group of investigators.


• (V) Please don’t consider these facts as an invitation not to publish in high prestigious journals.

But also you should be aware that high impact factor means that competition competition for publishingfor publishing in the related journals is high and super-qualitysuper-quality of written paper is required!!!!!.


Therefore, You are not obligednot obliged to choose the most prestigious journal in your field to publish. Don’t forget that a normal and leadingnormal and leading motive for publishingmotive for publishing is to build one’s reputation among peers.


A journalA journal in the list of your field, known by:known by:

your intended audience,

wide circulation

below the top two or three

journals

possible faster publication

Q5- Do you have a literature search strategy?

• 1- You should review the relevant relevant literatureliterature ,Then,

from time to timefrom time to time as the research proceeds until you prepare the final version of your paper,

Q5- Do you have a literature search strategy? (Cont…)

• 2- Select the proper termsthe proper terms that could represent aspects of the subject of your paper.

• Then, you should think about other possible terms that are inter-relatedterms that are inter-related including even techniques.

Q5- Do you have a literature search strategy? (Cont…)

• Example: you wish to review the clinical problems of :

“cytomegalo virus (CMV) infection of gastro-cytomegalo virus (CMV) infection of gastro- intestinal tract (GIT) in persons with acquired intestinal tract (GIT) in persons with acquired immnune-deficiency syndrome (AIDS)”.immnune-deficiency syndrome (AIDS)”.

• Your first list may look like this: “CMV, GIT, AIDS”• The second step is to use other possible terms that are inter-related e.g. “Treatment, diagnosis, dudenoscopy, gastric

aspiration”

Q6- Did you decide on authorship?

• 1- If you are not the sole author, come to an agreement with other potential authors on “who will be the authors?”. “who will be the authors?”.

• 2- Then, come to an agreement on the the order of authors’ namesorder of authors’ names on the published paper.

3- Then, the coauthors should also agree on who will be the Author of Author of correspondence.?correspondence.?

Q6- Did you decide on authorship?(Cont…)

• 4- Who is the author?

Q6- Did you decide on authorship?(Cont…)

• Collectively:

participation (writing/practical)

reviewing (revising)

responsibility

SUMMARY

• When you decide to write a paper, think When you decide to write a paper, think about:about:

• 1- The message of your paper and its importance

• 2- The target journal & target audience for your paper

• 3- Literature search strategy

• 4- The coauthors

•PART II

The content and format ofThe content and format of

Research paperResearch paper

1- General principles

• A conventional format for research papers is called “IMRAD”“IMRAD” format which includes Introduction, Material and Methods, Results and Discussion.

• Bradford Hill, an eminent biostatistician advised any writer to ask himself theask himself the following questionsfollowing questions

that might help him to define the content of each section of his paper:

• Q1: Why did he start? = Where did the question come from?

The hypothesis to be tested &

Make up the paper’s IntroductionIntroduction

Q2: What did you do?

Material & MethodMaterial & Method

Q3: What answer did you get?

The ResultsThe Results

Q4: What does it mean any way?

The Discussion & ConclusionThe Discussion & Conclusion

1- Introduction• 1- When you go to an interview for a

job, your clothes and behavior may

determine right a way you get hired.!

• Similarly, the “Introduction” to your paper may influence how the paper is:

looked at and judged by the editor and by the reader .

1- Introduction

• 2- The “Introduction” quickly gives an impression of your skill as an investigator and writer!

• 3- If the “Introduction” is too long, it can irritate or bore, if it is too short, it may not make clear why the research was needed.

1- Introduction• 4- The “ RULES” to be considered to

decide what to put into the “Introduction” can be summarized as follows:

1- Introduction

• Rule 1: Tell the reader why the research was started?

• Rule 2: Don’t explain what can be found in any textbook in the field.!

• Rule 3: Don’t elaborate on terms in the title of your paper!

1- IntroductionRule 1: Tell the reader why the research was started?

= What was the gap in knowledge to be filled by your research?

= What question has not been settled by previous research?

1- Introduction

• Examples:

• (i) A study of pharmacokinetics of a new antibiotic in patient with impaired impaired renal functionrenal function may have been launched because a serious side effect of the drug had been found to occur only in patients with renal disease. This is an example of new phenomenon to be discussed.

1- Introduction• (ii) A drug for treatment of congestive heart failure

has been described:→ in one paper: highly effectivehighly effective

→ in another paper: as effective in onlyas effective in only about one half about one half of the patientsof the patients.

To what is the difference ascribed??? * different doses of the drug, * difference in the severity of the disease?.

• This is an example of filling a gap in knowledge as regards previous conflicting observation.

1- Introduction• Rule 2:

Don’t explain what can be found in any textbook in the fieldtextbook in the field.!

= Don’t use the “Introduction” to try to show off wide knowledgewide knowledge

= The audience for the paper should be expected to know know almostalmost as much as you!

= Don’t explain the problem than than is neededis needed by the intended audience!

1- Introduction • Example:• Your paper reports a comparative trialcomparative trial between

two drugs for treatment of metastatic breast metastatic breast cancer.cancer. :

You need notneed not to explain to the intended audience:

* the frequency,

* clinical characteristics

* danger of the clinical problem.

To be logic, you may start the “Introduction” simply by reviewing why a new treatmentwhy a new treatment is needed and why the drugs studieddrugs studied were selected selected.

1- Introduction• Rule 3:• Don’t elaborate on terms in the title of your paper!

• Example, If the title of your paperis: “the prevalence of hypercalcemia in patients With sarcoidosis

Be careful, the readers of the title who do not

know what you mean by hypercalcemia or sarcoidosis are not likely to be interested in reading the paper

1- Introduction• How to close the “Introduction”?• 1- use a statement of research purpose.

• 2- You may focus on the central question(s) to be answered.

• 3- You may include a brief summary of the study design

• 4- For Subsidary questions, include them in the “Result” section

Summary of “Introduction”

• 1- Tell the reader: why the research was started? What was the gap in knowledge to be filled by your research?

2- Be clear and specific in your message.

3- Avoid Too long (irritative and boring) and Too short (not make clear) introduction.

2- Material and Methods

• It defines how did you carry out how did you carry out your researchyour research

• It should have a logical sequence: e.g.

• 1- Study design & protocol• 2- Subjects• 3- Intervention (Treatment)• 4- Measurements• 5- Statistical analysis.


• 1- Study design:

• New designs New designs should be described in should be described in detailsdetails,

• Designs previously describedDesigns previously described in literature, describe very briefly plus citation of the reference.

2 -Material and Methods• 2- Subjects:

* Select the subjects carefully to minimize carefully to minimize variationsvariations caused by subject characteristics accurate interpretation of the results.

*Control subjectsControl subjects should be matching with the subjects of the study as regards demographics for proper comparisonfor proper comparison.


• 3- Intervention (Treatment):

• * If a drug is given or tested, full full description is neededdescription is needed e.g.: commercial source, trade name, drug vehicle, and administration method

2- Material and Methods• 4- Measurements and other observations:

* Standard methods need to be identified only by name and citation.

* Variations from these methods should be described in enough details to enable another investigator to duplicate your results.

* Previously unpublished methods must be described in details with evidence that they have been validated.

2- Material and Methods• 5- Statistical analysis:

* Specify the statistical methods

* For known methods in your field, name them in a simple way.

* For unfamiliar methods describe in details.

2- Material and Methods• Suggested Question?:• What should you do if your methodology in

the paper is too long because of the required vital details?

• Suggested answer:• The reader of your paper may not want to

go through all of the details?! • So, one solution is to contact the editor to

put it as an appendix at the end of the paper.

Summary of“Material & Methods”

• 1- Keep the logic sequencelogic sequence of

events

• 2- Minimize the variations in subjectsvariations in subjects

selected for the study vs. control

• 3- Explain in details the new designsnew designs in

methodology

4- Statistical sectionStatistical section is a must

3- Results

• 1- Don’t forget the reader of your paper asks “what answer did you get for the question posed for the trial ?”.

• Example: Is the new drug more effective than the current standard drug?, Are the side effects fewer and less serious?

3- Results• 2- Be sure of the following:

your trial worked out in the light of the protocol described in the methods section,

If it did not,

3- Results

• 3- Numeric data is preferably presented in tablestables or graphsgraphs better than in text.

• 4- Critically important data that strengthen your findings can be can be also expressed in the textalso expressed in the text. e.g.

mean values, P-value, correlation coefficient, etc..

3- Results• 5- The known findings come before the The known findings come before the unknown findingsunknown findings :

.

3- Results• 8- Don’t hide the meanings of your

results by using phrases like:• tended to be greatertended to be greater• showed promising trendsshowed promising trends to support your results.• 9- If there were many outcome

measures, movemove in your presentation from:

the most importantthe most important outcome to the least importantthe least important.

Summary of “The Results”

• 1- Your findings should answer the question posed for the trial.

• 2- Move from :

“OLD” to “NEW”

“KNOWN” to “UNKNOWN”

“Most Important” to “Least

Important”

4- Discussion & conclusions

• 1- The opening of the Discussion and The opening of the Discussion and first paragraphfirst paragraph :

* should define clearly what you have

concluded about at least for the main

outcomes of your study.

i.e.

give the answer to your research give the answer to your research question drawn from the data question drawn from the data presented inpresented in “Results section”.

4- Discussion & conclusions

• 2- Support your answer by additional evidence from research findings published in literature.

• 3- Any counterevidence of your results must be presented and assessed.

Don’t ignoreDon’t ignore,

Don’t worryDon’t worry

Try to find an explanationTry to find an explanation

4 -Discussion & conclusions

• Suggestions how to deal with counterevidence!

I- The other trial tested the compared drugs in patients at different stages of at different stages of the diseasethe disease

• II-The other trial possibly tested different tested different experimental animalsexperimental animals, so the results were different from your results


III-

BUT:BUT:

4- Discussion & conclusions• 4- Readers in clinical practice are eager to know

your view on: how widely applicable are your how widely applicable are your findings?findings?

Can they be generalized from your Can they be generalized from your population population

sample to all clinical practice?sample to all clinical practice?

Is there any limitation for Is there any limitation for generalizability of thegeneralizability of the

Results that may need further Results that may need further research?research?

4 -Discussion & conclusions• How to close the Discussion?

• 1- By “Conclusions”. It is usually a clear summary of findings that will answer your research question.

• 2- Don’t extend implications implications and speculationspeculation of your results too fartoo far,


• 3- If your clinical trial report has dealt with a large and complex triallarge and complex trial,

some readers may be pleased to find a closing summing-upclosing summing-up at the end of the “Discussion”

Summary of “The Discussion”

• 1- OpenOpen the discussion with at least the main outcomesmain outcomes of your study.

• 2- SupportSupport your findings by literature citations

• 3- DiscussDiscuss the counterevidence for your study (Don’t hide!!!!)

• 4- CloseClose your discussion by conclusions, implications and limitations of your study.

The “TITLE”• 1- Be aware that “TITLE”“TITLE” is a

highly condensed version of the abstracthighly condensed version of the abstract..

• 2- Be sure that “TITLE”“TITLE”

describes accurately the content ofdescribes accurately the content of

the paper,the paper,

otherwiseotherwise,

it will not be detected in it will not be detected in bibliographic searchbibliographic search.

The “TITLE”

• 1- Types of title:• (i) Indicative i.e. it tells the reader what the paper is about, but not its message. e.g.

“ A new multidrug regimen for treatment of metastatic breast cancer”. This title says only what the paper is what the paper is

reportingreporting

The “TITLE”

• (ii) Informative i.e. it tells briefly in sentence

form the message of the paper. e.g.

“A new multidrug regimen for treatment of metastatic breast cancer produces greater survival at one year than Standard regimen”.

• Yes, it is too long and some journals do not accept.

• But notice its elements can be expanded into a full paper.?!!! HOW????????????

The “TITLE”• * The IntroductionThe Introduction should tell the reader:

why “A new RegimenA new Regimen” is needed

• * The Material and MethodThe Material and Method will give us: - the details of “Multidrug regimenMultidrug regimen”- the comparison with “standard regimen” standard regimen” to detect “Metastatic breast cancerMetastatic breast cancer.. * The ResultsThe Results will give us: the data on “the data on “Survival at One year with Survival at One year with thethe

New multidrug regimen and with “standard New multidrug regimen and with “standard regimenregimen””

The “TITLE”• 2- At the beginning of writing, informative TITLEinformative TITLE is more helpful. It forces you to come to an unequivocal decision

on the paper’s main message.

• You may change the title later to the indicative typeindicative type which is more widely used than the informative type.

• I personally suggest a MIXED FORM of “TITLE”

The “TITLE”

• 3- Looking at the most recent issues published which are close to your topic may gives you:

a clue on choosing the titlea clue on choosing the title.

• 4- Sequence of title terms: The most important elements should be placed first.

Summary of “The Title”

• 1- It is a highly condensed version of the “abstract”

• 2- It should be:

understandable, specific, clear &

reflects the message of the paper

3- The most important elements are

placed first

The “Abstract”• 1- It is a highly condensed versionhighly condensed version

of the full text.

• 2- Most journals put limits on the limits on the lengthlength of abstracts they will accept.

• 3- Even if they do not, keep in mind that bibliographic databases like MEDLINE may cut off abstracts at an arbitrary limit (250 words).

The “Abstract”

• 4- Informative abstractInformative abstract is the most common form and it concisely represents the main content of each the main content of each section of a papersection of a paper.

• 5- Be sure to represent each section of the paper (Introduction, Methods, and so on) by at least one sentence in your at least one sentence in your abstractabstract

The “Abstract”• 6- Try to draw outlines of what elementswhat elements you think

should be present and in a descending order of a descending order of importance. importance.

Example:• A) Background justifying the trial

• B) the main objective of the trial

• C) the study design & main methods

• D) Results (most important findings)

• E) conclusion (on the main objective) & important implications and limitations.

•PART III

Writing and Revising

• Are you are ready now to start writing?!

• You have decided on the following

Writing and Revising• Let us now to start writing the FIRST DRAFTFIRST DRAFT:• 1- Pick the time of the day you prefer• 2- Avoid any source of interruption • 3- Write in a place where you like to work and lock

the door• 4- Even professional writers rarely write for more

than two or three hours at a stretch!.• 5- Jot down (make quick short note) your thoughts

as they come.• 6- Organize your start of writing by drawing outline

of the first draft.• 7- Your first outline might run in the order of the

paper sections (title, abstract, introduction,etc..)

Writing and Revising• The outline of first draft is not a formal

outline. • It may be a mixture of: phrases half sentences full sentences abbreviations• Now, your writing is under way! • Don’t worry about the content of the first

draft, a first draft is only a first first draft is only a first draftdraft

and subsequent drafts will take care of its inevitable defects.

Writing and Revising• What if you sit down to write and can not get

started?!!!!!!! • Do you have then “WRITER’s BLOCK?” • What are you going to do then?!What are you going to do then?! ?! Chew your nails ?! Stare out the window ?! Get up for a coffee ?! Go shopping to relax Any of these is not a real solution.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Any of these is not a real solution.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


• Try one of the following solutions:• (i) non-stop:

- you repeatedly sit down and you repeatedly sit down and write non-stop for fixed but write non-stop for fixed but short timeshort time

e.g. 15 minutes about any aspect e.g. 15 minutes about any aspect of your topic.of your topic.

- Then, these bits can be revised and gathered together for a first draft that may be crude, but is a start.

Writing and Revising• (ii) Start writing the sections you already

know best

e.g. Material and Methods & e.g. Material and Methods & Results.Results.

• (iii) Satisficing:

-Try to satisfy yourself with Try to satisfy yourself with the first draft irrespective the first draft irrespective the defects it includesthe defects it includes.

Again, a first draft is only first draft, and it will not go to the journal.

Writing and Revising• Should the first draft include tables?

• Of course YES!

• Include tables that you believe at that point should be used.

• To delete some of them before you get to the final version of the paper is easier than to add them then.

Writing and Revising• How many table you can involve in your

paper?• You may get the limits from the journal You may get the limits from the journal

information –for-authors pages.information –for-authors pages.

• You can also make a look at the papers in You can also make a look at the papers in some recent issues of the journal. some recent issues of the journal.

• A suggested general rule isA suggested general rule is: 1 table (or illustration) / 1000 words in the

text. OR 1 table (or illustration) / 4 page of manuscript

text.

Writing and RevisingShould the first draft include Figures?

Of course YES!

BUT:

1- Be carefulBe careful; illustrations should not duplicate dataduplicate data presented in tables.

2- When you are in doubtin doubt to use an illustration, leave it out.leave it out.


• REVISINGREVISING:• 1- Most experiencd authors expect to

work through no less than TWO TWO DRAFTSDRAFTS of a paper before the final revision.

• 2- The more experienced you become, the more you continue to see DEFECTSDEFECTS that need to be corrected even in third third and fourth drafts.and fourth drafts.

Writing and Revising• 3- Familiarity with the content of a paper

often dulls the eyedulls the eye. You may fail to pick up or see defects seen

by others. So, give a chance to your coauthors to coauthors to

make a look make a look !.

• 4- Even someone (but honest colleague),(but honest colleague), who does not understand every detail in your paper may be better able than the authors to see what is not clear.what is not clear.

Writing and Revising• Sequence for revising the content &

structure:

1- Write the first draftWrite the first draft Put the first draft aside for a weekaside for a week before you look at it again2- Work on the second draftWork on the second draft

a) Distribute copies to coauthors & to colleagues for thorough criticismthorough criticismb) Read this draft and make your own

notes for changes plus notes from coauthors and colleaguescoauthors and colleagues.

Writing and Revising• 3- Work on the third draftWork on the third draft:

same as the second draft

4- Work on later draftsWork on later drafts:

a) confineconfine readings to coauthors

b) continue to concentrateconcentrate on structure

and sequence of content

c) when satisfied with content, move to

revising for PROSEPROSE ((النشرالنشر)) structure

and style.


• Did you finish the final draft?Did you finish the final draft?• What does it mean for you?What does it mean for you?

• The paper says thatThe paper says that: - no more than it must sayno more than it must say

- it says all that it should sayit says all that it should say

- all of its content are in the all of its content are in the right sequenceright sequence

- every detail is clear to other every detail is clear to other readersreaders.

Summary ofWriting & Revising

• 1-Write the first draft whatever it will be!

• 2- First draft is the first draft!. It is not the version sent for the editor of the journal.

• 3- Accept and/or discuss the criticism and suggestions from other coauthors

• 4- At least two to three drafts are tried before the final draft is achieved

•PART IV

• YOU and the JOURNAL

YOU and the JOURNAL• 1- Submission letter: It should include:

- Full title- Full names of all authors (but not their(but not their

institutional affiliations)institutional affiliations) - Description of paper’s content (very

briefly). - Selection of category appropriate for your paper (e.g. review,research report)

- The paper’s content is not currently submitted to another journal.

- Corresponding author (Full address)(Full address)

YOU and the JOURNAL

• 2- What determines editorial decision?

RelevanceRelevance of the paper to the journal’s

scope & audience ImportanceImportance of the paper’s message to

journal’s audience NewnessNewness of the paper’s message

YOU and the JOURNAL

ValidityValidity of the evidence supporting the paper’s conclusions

UsefulnessUsefulness of the paper to the journal in its maintaining a desirable range of topics.

Quality of presentationQuality of presentation:

Two papers with equal potential importance, but

one of them is carelessly preparedcarelessly prepared and poorlypoorly

writtenwritten, OF COURSE, the second is accepted.

YOU and the JOURNAL

YOU and the JOURNAL• 3- What Editors Ask of Peer Reviewers?What Editors Ask of Peer Reviewers? What would be the potential importance of

the paper if being published? What is the strength of evidence for the

paper’s conclusions? Is the paper clear enough? Properly

structured and sequenced? What criticisms and recommendations

would you wish to pass on to the authors?Do you suggest acceptance? Possible

acceptance after revision? Rejection

YOU and the JOURNAL• 3- Acceptance vs. Rejection: If your paper is accepted, CONGRATULATIONSCONGRATULATIONS

But, don’t expect in the acceptance letter an But, don’t expect in the acceptance letter an

explanation why your paper was accepted.explanation why your paper was accepted.

If rejected,If rejected, - the letter is likely to carry at least one reason for - the letter is likely to carry at least one reason for

rejection e.g. rejection e.g.

The topic is The topic is outsideoutside the journal’s scope the journal’s scope

The message is “The message is “stalestale” (= not sufficient new)” (= not sufficient new)

WeakWeak design and /or weak scientific validity design and /or weak scientific validity

YOU and the JOURNAL• 4- What should I do when paper is rejected? Don’t get angry and take a rash step Keep in mind how editors are competing for limited space in journals Consider carefully the comments from reviewers The better step is to send the paper to another journal after full consideration of the first journal’s reviewers comments

Summary of “You & the Journal”

• 1- Submission letter to the editor should be clear with adequate information.

• 2- * Relevance of your paper, * Imprtance & newness of its message, * Validity of its method

are main parameters for acceptanceare main parameters for acceptance 3- Rejection of your paper is not the

END of THE GAMEEND of THE GAME & You can try another journalYou can try another journal

9:00-10:15 am: - introduction - what should be considered before writing? dscussion 10:15-11:45 am:...

Documents