What the editors want: How to get your findings published Martin O Flaherty Lecturer in Epidemiology and Health Services Research, Division of Public Health. University of Liverpool
Methodology for today The Publishing Game How our publication process looks like, right now? Positives Negatives What the editors want and how to adapt to that
PUBLISHING TODAY The Publishers Publishing is a big bussiness: We are here to make money. There is a genuine market need for us: The accepted way of publicizing research As with any publication what is important to us: Market share (attracts adverts) Prestige as a function of our editorial decisions (attracts adverts) Be associated with winners and leaders Keep costs low: Most of the work SHOULD be done by others. Not in the content producing bussiness Keep customer contacts in a standard way and keep it to a minimun Measuring success: IF and bibliometrics We want to keep our readers happy: we want to give them stuff they like
The Publishers PUBLISHING TODAY Fairness and Transparency is an increasing feature of our bussines. The OPEN ACCESS movement is anew kid in the blcok, need to watch them : Offers higher visibility to authors at a direct moderate price to them. We offer prestige and visibility is decidiedby the size of our subsrcriberbase,
The Content Producers PUBLISHING TODAY The only way to justify the money we are being paid to do research, most of the time. Best way to prove our Track Record to get more money. An important and accepted way to make a contribution to the ongoing scientific debates It has direct and indirect costs to us, need to factoring into our budget plans.
Motivation to do research to publish our research Exercise 5 minutes: Our processes today How focused are our research efforts? How do we plan a research study? Funding Dissemination plans Do we have publication targets? What parts of the submission are critical? How much we know about the journal we select for publication (list things you are looking at when selecting a journal) When published, what are we going to do with that?
What the editors want: Path to a Do we have a message? successful submission Who needs to know our message Who can carry our message to the wider possible audience Risks and opportunities assessment What, who, how, when for the submission documents
1. Do we have a message You should be able to summarize your paper in one sentence.: What we found in where or whom, and how we did it. Hey, wait a minute. THIS LOOKS LIKE THE TITLE! THERE IS ONLY ONE CHANCE FOR A FIRST IMPRESSION: Title is the first thing an editor will look at. COOL: The Flattening of CHD mortality in Australia 1976-2006 is continuing: A time trend study NOT COOL: A study of CHD Mortality rates trends in Australia 1976-2006.
2. Audience Who could be interested in what we are saying? List possible audiences. Many people around the world need your research. You are not alone. One message, multiple audiences: More than one way of delivering the message. Typical Audiences: General medical readership Topic specific readership Method specific readership: American, European, Local, Global.
3. Who can carry our message Know your journals and classify them by audience Every journal has an statement about what they are willing to publish The TOCs showed in what they are actually interested. The TOCs can help in deciding if your finding are novelty for their readership. Know your journals: Visibility IF, citations and papers half life important, inform but they are not by themselves the only criteria Online first facilities Open access journals: Formal bibliometry, web 2.0 metrics (clicks) Who is the Editor? What is he/she doing? Always address your submission to the editor, by name. Always tell the editor why your paper will make his or her journal more successful (importance, novelty, originality) The editor )or associate editors have a lot of manuscripts: the cover letter, the title and the abstract are the things they look at to reject directly, without peer review. Who can review our papers? Friends, experts, or we leave to the editor that decision?
4. Risks and opportunities Undesirable outcomes for your manuscript Dead manuscript Manuscript without a home syndrome. Delayed manuscript Evaluate risks Chance of rejection Turn-around time for first and subsequent decisions. Opportunity costs. Evaluate opportunities: Chance of having a big impact Chance of getting A)editors comments, B)reviewers comments
5. What, who, how, when for the submission documents A manuscript submission is a process that needs management: Explicit lead Explicit timetable Explicit deadlines Efficiency is key: Minimum amount of work to keep moving the manuscript from journal to journal is the key factor to decide next step after rejection. Reviewers comment generates work: Are they worth the effort or we simply move on? Motivation is key: Believe your message Your work will find a home (perhaps not the one you dreamed about)
5. More nuts&bolts Cover letter: Establish personal communication. A way to deliver your message in a clear way to the guys that control the process. Allow you to explain things that are not possible to explain in the formal manuscript.
Sexy cover letter I know who you are Prof XXX, Editor Journal of Improbable Research Dear Prof XXX: Reducing the risk of Y using X in Z: A randomized controlled trial involving 3 million persons Is this interesting to you? We want to publish this manuscript in your journal. As you now, Y is an increasingly worrying disease that affects a large quantity of people globally, IN this study, we used the drug X that showed some What effects is know in reducing Y risk factor levels but no effect in risk, despite previous level 1-3 studies. Our study was conducted in a larger population, with more accurate case ascertainment We were able to find a XX% risk reduction that lasted What for this the entire study duration adds of the study. We hope that this study will be a useful contribution to the ongoing debate on disease Y therapy, particularly about the potential for drug x to become the standard of care. Yours sincerely Prof XXXX Dr XXXX Address, phone. So What?
Should fit into one side of A4 I know who you are. Is this interesting to you? What is know What this study adds So What?
Manuscript The KISS principle: 1. KEEP IT SHORT & SIMPLE 2. KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID
The Story Line You are telling a story in a structured way. BUT REMEBER, YOU ARE TELLING A STORY. Include a beginning, a middle, and an end Why should the reader be interested? What did you find? Why is it important? How this fit with the rest of the evidence What are the STRENGHTS? What are the LIMITATIONS? What to do next? Exclude anything not relevant to the story A common theme throughout aids the reader Create an OUTLINE WITH YOUR STORY LINE STRUCTURE IN THEMES EACH THEME=A PARAGRAPH.
Paragraph Structure First Sentence: KEY It concisely states the THEME. You can skip the rest of the paragraph, and still get the theme. Subsequent sentences: Related to the theme presented in the first sentence. Offers context, material, details, support Linking words essential (however, moreover, First, More later,) The Last Sentence: KEY: Wrap-up: What s wrong. What s good or reminder for first sentence Introduce the next theme Keep with the theme, but in a new track.
Paper Sections Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion
INTRO 1. Set the stage: address the title, frame the big picture. Use the last sentence of the first paragraph to attack/defend/justify your research 2. Summarize what has been done. 3. State what is needed/missing from the state of Knowledge 4. State the objectives of the paper 5. This should be your most fluid writing
Methods KISS principle IF more detailed needed: Make good use of appendices and Additional web materials Reference previous work describing methods. Examples written on plain language of how the method works useful for general audience journals., but not for mainstream methods.
Results 1. Keep to the results 2. No speculation 3. No apologies 4. Present the results in the order that maintains the thread being woven 5. Logical flow from one paragraph to the next 6. Follow the objectives stated in the introduction.
Discussion First paragraph: Summarize your findings that support the main message. Subsequent paragraphs: How this compare with other papers: My result vsthe evidence base. What are the strengths: Sometimes useful when discussing the wider literature or as a separate paragraph. What are the limitations: Acknowledging the limitations will fend-off reviewers. But phrase them in a way thayshowed that you cared and you understand what it means for your results. Not be to harsh on you! Implications for action and your speculations What s next in terms of the next steps in the story, Last paragraph: Wrap up
Grammar and Style Check the English. British or American?
If you got it right Your first sentences and the last sentences should provide an adequate summary of your paper. Your Title is the shortest possible summary of your article. Your Outline is the headings of your poster Your first sentences are the main materials for the cover letter and abstract.
Answering Reviewers queries KISS principle. Principle of minimum work needed : to please the EDITOR, and then the reviewer. Principle of keeping your paper moving: IF substantial rewriting/queries asked, considered tweaking and send to another journal Be grateful and polite. BUT if you disagree, politely do so and explain in full your reason. Is the EDITOR who decides. Address every single point, describe what you did and how you modified the manuscript. If it is a genuine opportunity to improve the paper: IF they are willing to publish after corrections, the editor will tell (most of the time). IF you can do it without running the whole project again and submit somewhere else (if rejected)
Happy publishing!