How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal.

Transcription

1 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Jaroslav Rosenberger, PhD, MD 1,2 Assoc. Prof. Andrea Madarasova Geckova, PhD 1,3 Medical Faculty, PJ Safarik University in Kosice 1 Kosice Institute for Society and Health - Graduate School 2 1 st Internal Clinic 3 Health Psychology Unit, Public Health Institute

2 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Journal selection Manuscript submission Review Communication with journal

3 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Journal selection Manuscript submission Review Communication with journal

4 Journal selection How to choose a journal? The topic should be interesting for the readers of the journal! Examples: Car accident in Zlata Idka: Košice Marathon: Slovaks voted for EÚ: Zlata Idka monthly paper SME The Times

5 Journal selection the choice of some topic defines the journal the choice of some journal defines topic sometimes the choice depends on data, study design, statistics... Examples: Nutritional habbits of 15 children during winter time in Slovak Paradise slovak journal Nutritional habbits of 2500 slovak adolescents in 1995 and 2005 international journal

6 Types of articles scientific article (standard) original scientific article brief report preliminary report review review systematic review editorial review case report other (letter to editor, reply)

7 Excercise Do you think that article A renal transplant patient with intractable hiccups is suitable for journal Transplantation reviews?

8 Journal selection aim: journal should be in English and should have Impact Factor! we want: our results to be part of intenational research To be cited (Social) Science Citation Index (SSCI a SCI) journal IF number of citations / number of pages absolute IF relative IF

9 Journal selection How to proceed: choose the journal depending on the topic and IF (RIF) compare topic, method and measures (name, key-words): with scope of the journal with instructions for the authors with the content of the last issues of the journal with key-words specific methods did they ever published something like this? specific topics did they ever published something like this?

10 Journal Summary List Journal Title Changes Journals from: subject categories TRANSPLANTATION Sorted by: Impact Factor Journals 1-20 (of 21) [ 1 2 ] Page 1 of 2 Rank Abbreviated Journal Title (linked to journal information) Ranking is based on your journal and sort selections. ISSN Total Cites Impact Factor 5-Year Impact Factor JCR Data Immediacy Index Articles Cited Half-life 1 AM J TRANSPLANT CELL TRANSPLANT LIVER TRANSPLANT TRANSPLANTATION NEPHROL DIAL TRANSPL BONE MARROW TRANSPL BIOL BLOOD MARROW TR J HEART LUNG TRANSPL STEM CELLS DEV TRANSPL INT TRANSPL INFECT DIS XENOTRANSPLANTATION X ARTIF ORGANS X CLIN TRANSPLANT TRANSPL IMMUNOL PEDIATR TRANSPLANT ASAIO J INT J ARTIF ORGANS TRANSPL P CURR OPIN ORGAN TRAN Journals 1-20 (of 21) [ 1 2 ] Page 1 of 2

11 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Journal selection Manuscript submission Review Communication with journal

12 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

13 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

14 Manuscript submission 1. Basic conditions Authorship vs. acknowledgement Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications

15 Authorship vs. acknowledgement Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content. Authorship credit should be based only on a. Substantial contributions toconception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data b. Substantial contributions to drafting the article or revisingit critically for important intellectual content c.final approvalof the version to be published Conditions a, b and c must all be met. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of datadoes not justifyauthorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficientfor authorship. Criteria of authorship agreed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors

16 Multicentric studies Group title Acknowledgement, appendix,...

17 Acknowledgement The authors would like to thank Andy Billingham for revision of the English language in the manuscript. This work was supported by the Research and Development support Agency under the contract No. APVV This survey was performed by Harris Interactive adn funded by Pfizer Inc. Editorial support in the form of proofing the manuscript and preparing for submission was provided by Aideen Young, PhD, of Envision Pharma Ltd and funded by Pfizer Inc. The authors would like to thank the Tobacco Prevention Fund for funding this study. We also thank the following persons for their support: JB (statistical analyses), FG (questionnaire development and scaning), GJ and SD (proposal writing) and AE and KL (data collection and project cooperation).

18 Order of authors ;

19 Manuscript submission 1. Basic conditions Authorship vs. acknowledgement Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications

20 Conflict of Interest When authors submit a manuscript, they are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. (see International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain or personal rivalry) (BMJ declaration of competing interest,

21 Conflict of Interest Statement MH has no conflicts of interests related to this manuscript. HT is an executive of Harris Interactive, which received financial support from Pfizer Inc. to conduct this study and prepare the manuscript. Conflict of interest: None I have no proprietary, financial, professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in the manuscript entitled "...".

22 Manuscript submission 1. Basic conditions Authorship vs. acknowledgement Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications

23 Ethical issues Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research: Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 Regulation in each particular country Regulation of particular journal (e.g. obligatory registration prior the study) Approval by EC, informed consent, voluntary participation, privacy and confidentiality...

24 Statement on approval by EC The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Science at P.J. Safarik University in Kosice in August The study was done according to the ethical requirements formulated by Agreement on Human Rights and Biomedicine (40/2000 Z.z.). The Science and Technology Assistance Agency in April 2002 approved in its decision on APVT also the ethical aspects of the study.

25 Statement on informed consent All patients signed and informed consent statement before interview. Participation on study was voluntary. Parents were informed prior to the study via the school administration in a regular meeting of parents with the staff of the school and could opt out if they disagreed with their child s participation. Children were informed prior to the study; participation in the study was fully voluntary and anonymous with no explicit incentives provided for participation.

26 Manuscript submission 1. Basic conditions Authorship vs. acknowledgement Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications

27 Overlapping publications Duplicate submission Redundant publication (a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published paper/ not rejected paper, report which follows a preliminary report, or manuscript which follows abstract or poster) Acceptable secondary publication (agreement from both journas + additional conditions e.g. highly important message, different audience, language)

28 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

29 Manuscript submission 2. Final checking of content STROBE Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, 2004, CONSORT The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, 1996, QUOROM Improving the Quality of Reports of Meta- Analyses of RCT MOOSSE The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology

30 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

31 Manuscript submission 3. Final layout, language proof Guideliness for authors type of contribution (length of manuscript, abstract, number of references, etc) manuscript submission (basic conditions, how to submit) title page abstract (structure, lenght, language), key-words text (structure, headings, abbreviations, footnotes, numbering of pages,. acknowledgement,...) citations in text...(abel et al. 2003)...[34] list of references tables and figures Language proof

32 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

33 Manuscript submission 4. Cover letter - aim Sell your paper to editor! Fit with journal scope!

34 Manuscript submission 4. Cover letter - structure Corresponding address, official , date Introduction

35

36 Manuscript submission 4. Cover letter - structure Corresponding address, official , date Introduction Brief description of paper selling points

37

38 Manuscript submission 4. Cover letter - structure Corresponding address, official , date Introduction Brief description of paper selling points Other information Statement of authors on basic conditions

39 Manuscript submission 4. Cover letter All Authors have substantially contributed to the paper as submitted. Each of them has seen and agreed to the submitted final version of the paper. The authors do not have any conflict of interest in connection with current paper. The materials presented are original and unpublished, and are not under consideration for public elsewhere. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Medical Faculty PJ Safarik University under the decision 34/2009.

40 Manuscript submission Basic conditions Authorship Conflict of Interest Ethical Issues Overlapping publications Final checking of content Final layout, language proof Cover letter Submission, archiving

41 Fig. 1

42 Fig. 2

43 Fig. 3

44 Fig. 4

45 Fig. 5

46 Fig. 6

47 Fig. 7

48 Fig. 8

49 Fig. 9

50 Fig. 10

51 Fig. 11

52 Fig. 12

53 Fig. 13

54 Fig. 14

55 Fig. 15

56 Archiving

57 Manuscript submitted Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected yes Prescreen by editor 3 months Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

58 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Journal selection Manuscript submission Review Communication with journal

59 What is peer review? Review by peers Includes: internal review (by editorial staff) external review (by experts in the field)

60 What do editors want from papers? Originality Importance Relevance to readers Usefulness to readers, patients, policy makers Truth Clear and engaging writing Excitement/ wow factor

61 What do editors want from reviewers? Be courteous and constructive Remember you are advising us: we ll decide what to do To improve what we publish Maintain confidentiality Declare competing interests Be timely (if you can t do it on time, say so) Do as you would be done unto

62 Importance of the research question Has the research addressed a question that had to be answered, or is it just another brick in the wall? The question matters more than the answer. If the question was important and the answer is valid, then it doesn t matter if the answer is negative or boring. Is this something that clinicians, policy makers, patients or the public need to know, remembering that there s more for them to know than they can possibly know? Is this a POEM (patient oriented evidence that matters)?

63 Originality of the research I Ideally, you will do a literature search. Almost all of a series of RCTs described as the first in major journals were not the first. Has this never been done before? If the question has been addressed before, does this add importantly? (for example, a much bigger or better designed study)?

64 Originality of the research II Remember that some things that are well known are not based on any evidence. If you think the research unoriginal please give us references to previous work. Don t just say it s unoriginal. If there are other important studies that the authors don t reference, please provide references

65 Validity of the research I Identify the strengths as well as the weaknesses of the study It isn t possible to capture all the ways that you might help us with a few questions or guidelines Is the design right for answering the research question?

66 Validity of the research II But don t let the best be the enemy of the good is this the best that is possible? Were the data collected adequately? Was the sampling right? Are the methods described adequately? Are the analyses right? Should they be redone? Remember to try and be constructive

67 Validity of the research III If you are not strong on statistics say so; don t pretend that you are when you aren t Ideally you might add up some of the tables. You probably can t do this for them all, but if one or two are wrong it raises important questions Do you think that the conclusions are supported by the data? Do the authors go beyond the evidence in their conclusions? (This is very common.)

68 Presentation of the research I Don t bother telling us about spelling mistakes (except perhaps ones we might miss: e.g. misspelt names) In the results is the balance of text, tables, and figures right [text tells the story, tables provide the data, figures illustrate the story] Do you have any suggestions on what might be in paper and what on the web?

69 Presentation of the research II Do the abstract, TWIB, what this study adds fit with the paper? (They often don t.) Is the number of references about right? Should we commission any accompanying commentaries or editorials?

70 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Journal selection Manuscript submission Review Communication with journal

71 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

72 Communication with journal 1. Delivery confirmation The editor gratefully acknowledges the receipt of your manuscript No.02/067 entitled The effect of happiness on health. It will received the prompt and full attention of the editorial board. Thank you for submitting the above paper for consideration for publication in PH. You will be informed as soon as possible whether it is suitable for publication in this journal.

73 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

74 Reminder Could you be so kind to inform me about manuscript No.02/067 entitled The effect of happiness on health, authors Šťastný et al. I sent it for submission to SPM in May and I did not receive any statement from editorial board yet. At the end of January 2002, I submitted the manuscript Impact of SES, parent and peer on smoking behaviour of adolescents, Šťastný et al. with the aim to publish it in Substance Use and Misuse. Not receiving any answer except acknowledgement of receiving the manuscript from Marcel Dekker, Inc. make me a little bit insure and I decided to contact you in June I am sorry to inform you, that I did not receive any response yet. I will appreciate very much any information about the submitted article. Thank you very much in advance.

75 Dear Dr. Šťastný, Answer on reminder I regret that the reviewing process is so long. Some of the reviewers need much time and need to be reminded. I hope though that you did receive my acknowledging receipt of your article and informing you that it was going to be reviewed? I expect that I will be able to give you further information very soon now. Sorry again for any inconvenience. With kind regards,...

76 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

77 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

78 Communication with journal 2. Rejected Our reviewers have now an opportunity to comment on your paper. Considering these reports and in light of the increased pressure for space in the journal, we regret to inform you that we are unable publish the manuscript. With regret, I must to inform you that Prof. A. Hofman feels that your manuscript cannot be accepted for publication in the journal EJE as it does not fall within the scope of the journal. After careful consideration, I feel that your paper is unsuitable for publication in PH. Therefore, I regret that I am unable to publish your work on this occasion. I wish you luck with future submission of your work.

79 Communication with journal 2. Rejected 1. INFORM your co-authors, supervisors 2. TAKE DAY OFF! 3. READ COMMENTS ONCE AGAIN carefully and pick up what might be important, usefull 4. DISCUSS with co-authors, supervisors 5. Rewrite a manuscript DO NOT REPEAT MISTAKES! 6. SUBMIT ELSEWHERE! Re-submitting to the same journal is sometimes possible. Sometimes you might ask for revision of editor statement.

80 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

81 Communication with journal 3. Revision Thank you for submitting your paper to Health & Place. Referees have now examined it, and their clear opinion is that in its present form, it would not be suitable for publication. The comments below contain suggestions as to how it might be rewritten to render it acceptable. If you decide to resubmit, please supply a covering letter detailing how you have responded to the referees' concerns. Please remember to check that you have included key words for the article (maximum 6). Resubmissions should be made as described below. To submit a revision, please go to and login as an Author. Your username is Your username is: stastny and your password is Your password is: stastny On your Main Menu page is a folder entitled "Submissions Needing Revision". You will find your submission record there. Finally, I would appreciate if you could submit your revised paper by Dec 19, 2009.

82 Communication with journal 3. Revision 1. INFORM your co-authors, supervisors 2. TAKE DAY OFF! 3. READ COMMENTS ONCE AGAIN carefully and pick up what might be important, usefull 4. DISCUSS with co-authors, supervisors 5. REWRITE a manuscript including COVER LETTER. 6. Language proof, co-authors approval, formal layout 7. RE-SUBMIT, KEEP DEADLINE or ask for prolongation

83

84 Cover letter (thanks for revision) Thanks for comments We would like to express our gratitude to the Editor and the Reviewers for their review of our manuscript and for providing us with their comments and suggestions and to the Editor for her decision to give us the Emphase opportunity strong to points improve the quality of the manuscript. As you already said, the data are very interesting and should Inform about be published. changes In the following responses we address each point made by the Editor and the Reviewers with an indication of where it has led to a modification in the manuscript (a "tracked changes" version of our paper was uploaded as a supplemental file). As an enclosure you will find the list of changes which have been made. I would greatly appreciate if if you could consider this manuscript appropriate for publication in SSM Summary statement

85 Communication with journal 3. Revision Address EACH POINT made by editor or reviewer! Indicate ALL MODIFICATION in the manuscript! Keep DEADLINE!

86 Communication with journal Delivery confirmation no Send reminder! Rejected Prescreen by editor Reviewers Editor s decision Accepted Major revision Minor revision Proofs Published

87 Communication with journal 4. Accepted.. I have also read the paper, and I agree that it is definitely worth publishing in the JOA. The subject matter is important, and I am sure it will prove a valuable addition to the literature in this field. As you will see the referee is concerned about the English in the paper. Once you have done this I will be happy to have another look at the paper. When you do return it can you please send a covering letter indicating the changes you have made. We are pleased to accept your manuscript in the present form for publication. Thank you for a fine revision. Unfortunately, we can not tell you the exact schedule for publication yet. You will receive the proofs for correction directly from publisher in due time. I have the pleasure to inform you that your article "Influence of socio-economic status, parents and peers on smoking behaviour of adolescents" has now been accepted for publication and is scheduled to appear in a future issue of European Addiction Research. The editors particularly asked me to thank you for the very careful revision and the clearness with which you presented the changes that had been carried out.

88 Communication with journal 4. Accepted 1. INFORM your co-authors, supervisors 2. CELEBRATE! 3. READ LETTER ONCE AGAIN carefully and follow instructions - Minor revision, language correction - Copyright transfer agreement - Writen approval by co-authors - Proofs - Online first

89 How to publish manuscript in a scientific journal. Jaroslav Rosenberger, PhD, MD rosenberger.jaroslav@gmail.com Assoc. Prof. Andrea Madarasova Geckova, PhD geckova@upjs.sk THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!!!