Elements of a Good Submission: Raising Your Chances of Acceptance. Amanda Hindle Senior Editor Edanz Group 22 March 2013

Transcription

1 Elements of a Good Submission: Raising Your Chances of Acceptance Amanda Hindle Senior Editor Edanz Group 22 March 2013

2 Session 3 How to write an Abstract Journal Selection Cover letters: How to appeal to journal editors Responding to peer review

3 Section 1 Abstracts

4 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Telling a story Similar to full manuscripts, Abstracts should have a: Beginning tell them what you did and why Middle tell them how you did it and what you found End tell them again what you did and what it means.

5 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Who s hungry? First impressions are important!

6 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Important points Relevance of your aims Importance of your results Validity of your conclusions First impression of your paper Judge your writing style Probably only part that will be read

7 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations General guide Background Aims Methods Results Conclusion Why the study was done (20%) Your hypothesis (10%) Techniques (10%) Most important findings (40%) Conclusion & implications (20%)

8 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Structured abstract PTEN mutations as a cause of constitutive insulin sensitivity and obesity BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic and genetic evidence links type 2 diabetes, obesity, and cancer. The tumorsuppressor phosphatase and tensinhomologue (PTEN) has roles in both cellular growth and metabolic signaling. GermlinePTEN mutations cause a cancer-predisposition syndrome, providing an opportunity to study the effect of PTEN haploinsufficiency in humans. Methods:We measured insulin sensitivity and beta-cell function in 15 PTEN mutation carriers and 15 matched controls. Insulin signaling was measured in muscle and adipose-tissue biopsy specimens from 5 mutation carriers and 5 well-matched controls. We also assessed the effect of PTEN haploinsufficiencyon obesity by comparing anthropometric indexes between the 15 patients and 2097 controls from a population-based study of healthy adults. Body composition was evaluated by means of dual-emission x- ray absorptiometry and skinfold thickness. RESULTS:Measures of insulin resistance were lower in the patients with a PTEN mutation than in controls (e.g., mean fasting plasma insulin level, 29 pmolper liter [range, 9 to 99] vs. 74 pmolper liter [range, 22 to 185]; P=0.001). This finding was confirmed with the use of hyperinsulinemiceuglycemicclamping, showing a glucose infusion rate among carriers 2 times that among controls (P=0.009). The patients' insulin sensitivity could be explained by the presence of enhanced insulin signaling through the PI3K-AKT pathway, as evidenced by increased AKTphosphorylation. The PTEN mutation carriers were obese as compared with population-based controls (mean body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters], 32 [range, 23 to 42] vs. 26 [range, 15 to 48]; P<0.001). This increased body mass in the patients was due to augmented adiposity without corresponding changes in fat distribution. CONCLUSIONS:PTEN haploinsufficiencyis a monogenic cause of profound constitutive insulin sensitization that is apparently obesogenic. We demonstrate an apparently divergent effect of PTEN mutations: increased risks of obesity and cancer but a decreased risk of type 2 diabetes owing to enhanced insulin sensitivity. Background/ Aims Techniques Important results Conclusion Pal et al. (2012). New England Journal of Medicine 367:

9 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Unstructured abstract Remarkable changes in behavior and physiology of laboratory mice after the massive 2011 Tohoku earthquake in Japan A devastating earthquake and tsunami hit Japan on March 11, 2011, followed by several long and intense aftershocks. Laboratory mice housed in the Tokyo, located approximately 330 km south of this earthquake s epicenter, displayed remarkable changes in a variety of behaviors and physiological measures. Although unusual pre-earthquake behaviors have been previously reported in laboratory animals, little is known about behavioral and physiological changes that occur after a great earthquake. In the present study, the effects of Tohoku earthquake on mice behavior were investigated. Earthquake-experienced mice displayed a marked increase in food consumption without gaining body weight in response to the earthquake. They also displayed enhanced anxiety, and in a formal fear memory task, showed significantly greater tone- and context-dependent conditioned freezing. Water maze performance of earthquake-experienced mice showed the quicker acquisition of the task, faster swim speed and longer swim distance than the naive mice. Serum corticosterone levels were elevated compared to the naive mice, indicating that the earthquake and aftershocks were stressful for the mice. These results demonstrate that great earthquakes strongly affect mouse behaviors and physiology. Although the effects of a variety of experimental manipulations on mouse behaviors in disease models or in models of higher cognitive functions have been extensively examined, researchers need to be aware how natural phenomena, such as earthquakes and perhaps other natural environmental factors, influence laboratory animal behaviors and physiology. Yanai et al. (2012) PLoS ONE 7:e44475.

10 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Unstructured abstract A devastating earthquake and tsunami hit Japan on March 11, 2011, followed by several long and intense aftershocks. Laboratory mice housed in the Tokyo, located approximately 330 km south of this earthquake s epicenter, displayed remarkable changes in a variety of behaviors and physiological measures. Although unusual pre-earthquake behaviors have been previously reported in laboratory animals, little is known about behavioral and physiological changes that occur after a great earthquake. In the present study, the effects of Tohoku earthquake on mice behavior were investigated.. Earthquake-experienced mice displayed a marked increase in food consumption without gaining body weight in response to the earthquake. They also displayed enhanced anxiety, and in a formal fear memory task, showed significantly greater tone-and context-dependent conditioned freezing. Water maze performance of earthquake-experienced mice showed the quicker acquisition of the task, faster swim speed and longer swim distance than the naive mice. Serum corticosterone levels were elevated compared to the naive mice, indicating that the earthquake and aftershocks were stressful for the mice. These results demonstrate that great earthquakes strongly affect mouse behaviors and physiology. Although the effects of a variety of experimental manipulations on mouse behaviors in disease models or in models of higher cognitive functions have been extensively examined, researchers need to be aware how natural phenomena, such as earthquakes and perhaps other natural environmental factors, influence laboratory animal behaviors and physiology Background Aims Techniques Important results Conclusion Yanai et al. (2012) PLoS ONE 7:e44475.

11 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Things to avoid References Abbreviations Do not include Jargon/slang Numbers & statistics

12 Writing Publisher Abstracts Adaptations Describing numbers and statistics Results Transient frictional slip between integrin and the ECM in focal adhesions under myosin-ii tension This retrograde movement was only seen in nascent adhesions, within seconds after appearance and occurred in a majority of nascent adhesions observed (65%, n FA =39, n cell =6). The magnitude of retrograde displacement was 0.67±0.33 μm (n FA =39,n cell =6)and,onceimmobilized,amajority(77%,n FA =39,n cell =6)ofadhesions elongated proximally. Abstract We find that, under low extracellular tension, newly formed adhesions near the cell periphery undergo a transient retrograde displacement preceding elongation. Aratyn-Schaus & Gardel. (2010). Curr Biol. 20: 1145

13 Section 2 Journal Selection

14 Journal Selection Factors to consider Aims and scope Readership Open access Publishing frequency Impact factor Which factor is most important to you?

15 Journal Selection Choosing a target journal Journal selection mustbe based on an honest evaluation of your manuscript Significance Aims and Scope Impact

16 Journal Selection Evaluating significance: Novelty How new are my results compared with those already published? New findings Incremental advances Conceptual advances Low to medium impact Medium to high impact

17 Journal Selection Evaluating significance: Relevance How broadly relevant is my work? Medical Biology Engineering Population specific? Restricted to geographical location? How common is the disease? Specific to cell-type or organism? Relevant to human disease? How broadly applicable is the design? Is it cost-effective?

18 Journal Selection Evaluating significance: Appeal Is my work in an area of popular appeal Examples: Stem cells Green energy Tissue engineering Higgs boson Global warming Artificial intelligence

19 Section 3 Cover Letters

20 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan Make it easy Is there a Cover Letter? Are there reviewer recommendations? Inbox Is it easy to read?

21 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan Cover letters Competition for publication space and for editors attention is very high Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled Techniques to detect circoviruses in Japanese bird species by Raye et al. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Virology Methods Online. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. Sincerely yours, Warren Raye, PhD

22 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan A good cover letter Dear Dr Graeber, Please find enclosed our manuscript entitled Amyloid-like inclusions in the brains of Huntington s disease patients, by McGowan et al., which we would like to submit for publication as a Research Paper in Neurogenetics. 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 Huntington s disease (HD) patients; however, the role of these inclusions in the disease process has remained unclear. One suspected disease-causing mechanism in Huntington s disease and other polyglutamine disorders is the potential for the mutant protein to undergo a conformational change to a more stable anti-parallel β-sheet structure Give the background to the research 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 Neurogenetics. As a wide-reaching journal publishing original research on all aspects of neuroscience What was done and what was found Interest to journal s readers Please address all correspondence to.

23 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan General rules Address editor personally Manuscript title/ Publication type Background, rationale, results General rules Why are your findings important? Corresponding author details Reviewer recommendations

24 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan General rules Original and unpublished Not submitted to other journals Authors agree on paper/journal Must-have statements Conflicts of interest Source of funding Authorship contributions

25 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan Recommending reviewers When submitting a paper authors are requested to suggest 6 international referees The following items are also required as part of the manuscript submission process: The names, addresses, phone numbers, and addresses of four or five potential independent reviewers

26 Coverage Letters and Staffing Plan Recommending reviewers From your reading and references Networking Aim for younger and mid-level scientists Editors have the final decision on reviewer choice

27 Section 4 Peer Review

28 Peer Review Improves your manuscript Rejection Major revision Acceptance Minor revision Few papers are accepted without revision Rejection and revision are integral to the peer review process

29 Peer Review Improves your manuscript Peer review is a positive process Improves science Recommend to get involved in the peer review process journal+authors/peer-review-academy

30 Peer Review Submission process Peer review Results novel? Topic relevant? Journal requirements met? Manuscript Editor Reject New experiments Improve readability Add information Revision Accepted publication!

31 Peer Review Decision letter 24-July-2012 Manuscript ID number Dear Dr. XXXXX Manuscript ID WJS : Long-term outcomes following right-lobe living donor liver transplantation." Your manuscript has been reviewed, and we cannot accept the manuscript as submitted. The reviewer concerns are included at the bottom of this letter. You can submit a revised manuscript that takes into consideration these comments. You will also need to include a detailed commentary of the changes made. Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission may be subject to re-review by the reviewers before a decision is made. Reasons for revision To revise your manuscript, log into enter your Author Center, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision. How to submit a revision

32 Peer Review Decision letter You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or colored text. Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Center. Procedure for responding When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s). IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission. Due date for resubmission Because we are trying to facilitate timely publication of manuscripts submitted to the Surgical Endoscopy, your revised manuscript should be uploaded by August 31, If it is not possible for you to submit your revision in a reasonable amount of time, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission. Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to Surgical Endoscopy and I look forward to receiving your revision.

33 Peer Review Revision Conduct additional experiments and analyses as suggested If this is impossible, you mustexplain why You can disagree with reviewers, but provide evidence (cite references)

34 Peer Review Revision Polite & professional Respond to every comment Revision Easy to see changes Refer to line and page numbers Use a different color font Highlight the text

35 Peer Review Writing a response letter John G. Hunter Editor-in-Chief World Journal of Surgery Address editor personally 16 August 2012 Dear Dr. Hunter, Re: Resubmission of manuscript reference No. WJS Manuscript ID number Thank reviewers Please find attached a revised version of our manuscript originally entitled Long-term outcomes following rightlobe living donor liver transplantation, which we would like to resubmit for consideration for publication in World Journal of Surgery. The reviewer s comments were highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. In the following pages are our point-by-point responses to each of the comments. Revisions in the manuscript are shown as underlined text. In accordance with the first comment, the title has been revised and the entire manuscript has undergone substantial English editing. We hope that the revisions in the manuscript and our accompanying responses will be sufficient to make our manuscript suitable for publication in World Journal of Surgery. Highlight major changes

36 Peer Review Point-by-point response Reviewer comment 1: There are many typos and complicated phrases. This manuscript should be corrected by a native English speaker before resubmission. Response: Thank you for your comment. The entire manuscript has undergone English editing by a native speaker.

37 Peer Review Understanding reviewer comments The English needs to be improved Your writing is difficult to understand Grammar and spelling Long, complex sentences and paragraphs Gaps in the logic Poor manuscript organization Too much information

38 Peer Review Point-by-point response Reviewer comment 2: This is an interesting discussion providing valuable data examining the long-term outcomes after living donor liver transplantation. Response: Thank you. We appreciate your kind comment.

39 Peer Review Point-by-point response Reviewer comment 3: Some additional background on the grafting technique used is required in the Introduction. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this technique? Response: In accordance with your suggestion, we have added a discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of the grafting technique used in the Introduction section of the revised manuscript (p4, lines 7 13).

40 Peer Review Incorporating your response The technique used for grafting the transplanted liver to the recipient liver in this study is the conventional method used at our institution, and in most living donor transplantation procedures currently being conducted [15]. Right-lobe grafting is the preferred technique because it offers a better position for surgery, has a decreased chance of hepatic venous obstruction, and provides greater hepatic mass than left-lobe grafting. However, this technique can be difficult for surgeons to master and care must be taken when choosing the appropriate plane of transection to avoid graft congestion [16].

41 Peer Review Point-by-point response Reviewer comment 4: Of the techniques you describe, is there a difference in outcomes between their use in young patients vs older patients? Response: Because only a small number of surgeries using either technique have been performed to date, it is not yet clear whether there is a difference in preferred technique based on the age of the patient. However, we have outlined our reasons why we consider right-lobe grafting to be superior for all ages in the Discussion section of the revised manuscript (p11, lines 12 21).

42 Peer Review Incorporating your response As explained above, we chose to examine the long-term outcomes using right-lobe grafting as it provides many anatomical advantages when performing the transplant. Because of the small number of surgeries performed worldwide to date, it is not yet clear whether right-or leftlobe grafting has a particular advantage based on the age of the patient. However, based on the long-term outcome results shown here, we consider that there is strong support for the primary use of right-lobe grafting in live donor liver transplantation for patients of all ages.

43 Peer Review Hidden questions The authors hypothesized to look for the pharmacokinetics of the insulin using this 4 mm needle; However they didn't do bioequivalence analyses for glucose pharmacodynamics. That is one of my concerns about this methodology. Questions from reviewers may not always be apparent Cosmetic changes

44 Coverage and Publish Faster Staffing Plan What happens next? Second round of review? Manuscript re-submitted Editor assigned: peer review or acceptance Manuscript sent to original reviewers Reviewers evaluate: accept, reject or revise Additional revisions Acceptance!

45 Coverage and Publish Faster Staffing Plan Publishing timeline 3 12 months Why so long? Manuscript type Availability of peer reviewers Fast tracking Number of revisions Other?

46 Coverage and Publish Faster Staffing Plan Speed up the process Update references Manuscript Editor Peer review Cover letter List reviewers Revised Manuscript Point-by-point response letter Editor Accepted Manuscript

47 Coverage Final Steps and Staffing Plan Checklist for acceptance Clear, concise, accurate writing Descriptive, stand-alone Abstract Compliance with Instructions for Authors Cover letter Suggest peer reviewers Suggest potential editors Declare conflicts of interests

48 Thank you! Any Follow us on Twitter facebook.com/journaladvisor Like us on Facebook