This presentation
Download
Report
Transcript This presentation
Writing for Publication
DR JULIE NIGHTINGALE
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF RADIOGRAPHY
Introduction
Publication options
Constructing an article
The publishing process
Why publish in Radiography?
Radiography
An international, English language, peer-reviewed
journal of radiographic imaging and radiation therapy.
Promotes excellence in the profession of radiography
by its commitment to the publication of original
research, encouragement and dissemination of best
clinical, scientific and educational practice
The official professional journal of the Society and
College of Radiographers and is published quarterly
by Elsevier Ltd.
Radiography: Background Information
Published four times a year
Regular special issues – e.g. paediatric imaging / dose
optimisation and image quality
23,000 hard copies plus on-line access
73 countries
In 2013:
Approx 130 articles submitted
Approx 475 reviewers invited to review
More than 170,000 downloads
More than ¼ articles published are non-UK
Why Publish?
Add to an evidence base to improve and expand
knowledge
Promotes deep understanding and learning
Develops confidence to challenge traditional
practice
Employer or funding body may require publication
Publication profile for CPD and CV
Key Questions
What steps do I need to take before I write my
paper?
How can I ensure I am using proper manuscript
language?
How do I build up my article properly?
Determine if you are ready to publish
Do you have information that advances understanding
in a specific research field?
This could be in the form of:
Presenting new, original results or methods
Rationalizing, refining, or reinterpreting published results
Reviewing or summarizing a particular subject or field
Successful publication is a lot more difficult if:
•
•
•
•
Your report has no scientific interest
The work is out of date
You would be duplication previously published work
Your conclusions are incorrect / not acceptable
Ready to publish?
If you are ready to publish, a strong
manuscript is what is needed next
Publishing process
Find a suitable journal (aims and scope)
Prepare your manuscript following author guidelines
Submission
Peer Review
Publication
Find a journal
- Search through Elsevier or other publishers’ journals
- Check the aims and scope of the journal to see if your
article is a good fit
- Check if the journal is invitation only
- Submit to only one journal at a time
- Check the Guide for Authors:
the type of articles accepted / article length
editorial team contacts
graphics specification
Prepare your paper - types of article
1.
Original full length research papers
(2500 words / 4000 words qualitative )
2.
Review Article
3.
Guest Editorials (1000 words)
4.
Technical notes (1000 words)
5.
Case reports
(800 words)
6.
Book Reviews
(300 words)
7.
Letters to the Editor (500 words)
(3000 words)
Full Length Research Articles
Clear but catchy title
Abstract not to exceed 250 words
Article approximately 2,500 words
Typically comprise empirical research following the
standard scientific article format
Scientific article format
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusions / Recommendations
Literature cited
N.B. Differences for some qualitative articles and
literature review articles
What is a strong manuscript?
Has a clear, useful, and exciting message
Presented and constructed in a logical manner
Reviewers and editors can grasp the significance
easily
Editors and reviewers are all busy people –
make things easy to save their time
Manuscript Language – Overview
Write with clarity, objectivity, accuracy, and brevity
Key to successful manuscript writing is to be alert
to common errors:
Sentence and paragraph construction
Incorrect tenses
Inaccurate grammar and punctuation
Inconsistent use of English
Check the Guide for Authors of the target journal
for any language specifications
Practical tips
Avoid abbreviations by writing out in full but can use
acronyms for a term that is repeated often
Avoid jargon and slang
Do not capitalise common nouns; e.g. radiologists,
radiographers, ultrasound, radiography.
Do not start a sentence with a number e.g. 12 images …
would be: Twelve images….etc
Do not shorten e.g. didn’t for did not
Note that ‘data’ is plural
Proof read and spell check
Use past tense when describing methods and results
Distinguish between ‘practice’ as a noun and ‘to practise’
as a verb
Abstract
Title and abstract - must make an impact!
‘Shortened’ version of the article – written last
what the objectives of the study were;
how the study was done;
what results were obtained;
the significance of the results.
Introduction
Why is this study of interest and what is your
objective?
Discusses the results and conclusions of previously
published studies.
Explains why the current study is of scientific interest.
Organized to move from general information to specific
information.
The last sentences of the introduction should be a
statement of objectives and a statement of hypotheses.
Method
Provides all the methodological details necessary for
another researcher to duplicate your work.
It should be a narrative of the steps you took in your
experiment or study, not a list of instructions
Provide a description of statistical tests you used
(statistics are methods!)
Confirmation that research complies with ethical policies.
Ethics Committee approval
Experiments on humans or animals must follow
applicable ethics standards
•
e.g. most recent version of the Helsinki Declaration and/or relevant
(local, national, international) animal experimentation guidelines
Approval of the research ethics committee,
university ethics committee and/or R+D
department is required, and should be specified in
the manuscript
January 2012
Results
This section presents the results of the experiment.
Do not attempt to interpret their meaning.
Know what information to include or exclude.
No need to present the raw data
Summarize the data with text, tables and/or figures.
Do not include the same data in both a table and a
figure
Discussion
Do not simply re-state the objectives.
Do not introduce new material or facts.
Make statements that synthesize all the evidence
(including previous work and the current work).
Do not make statements that are too broad
If necessary, note problems with the methods
and explain anomalies in the data
Conclusions/Recommendations
Draw out conclusions
Suggest future directions for research
Accurate citations
Check the journal referencing style, and follow closely
Medical journals follow the Vancouver style:
Example:
"The author has discussed the implications of these proposals on the
National Health Service in another paper.1 Other writers have
commented on related issues, notably Lane 2, 3 and Annas 4.”
Annas GJ. New drugs for acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J
Med. 1997;337:435-9
Common pitfalls
Badly written abstract
Inadequate or absent introduction
Raising questions which are then not addressed
Poor sentence structure
Inaccurate content
Missing or inaccurate references
Jumping from idea to idea
Making assumptions not based on the data
Inadequate or absent conclusion
Waffle!
Ethical publishing
Accurate account of work performed / objective discussion of significance
Sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works,
and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has
been appropriately cited or quoted.
Avoid multiple, redundant or concurrent publication (duplicates)
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given
Authorship limited to those who made a significant contribution to the
conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
All co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and
have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be
construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript
Obtain permission sought for copyrighted material (? Images)
Manuscript ready?
Submission – via EES system
Designated corresponding author
Submission letter – first submission or revision / statements
Title page (with author details)
Abstract saved separately
Select key words
Manuscript (without author details)
Figures and Tables saved separately
Approval – author approved PDF / journal checks
Peer review (double blind)
Decision (Minor / major corrections / accept / reject)
Copy editing / proof copies
Publication online then in print – N.B. Copyright
http://ees.elsevier.com/radiography/default.asp
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authorshome.
authors
One last word...copyright
Once your article is accepted, the publisher will hold copyright:
You can:
share your article PDF internally in your organisation
use your article in your work (eg. to support a lecture)
paste a link to your article from your own website
You can publish the final accepted manuscript (before any
copy-editing and type-setting performed)
You cannot:
post the full copy-edited PDF version on a public website or
social media – eg. university repository or Researchgate
make profit from the article (eg. sell it)
Author submits article
via the web
http://ees.elsevier.com/radiography/
Process Analysis
Elsevier staff check
article is complete
create pdf documents
email Editor in Chief
Editor in Chief
Scan-reads the work
Invites reviewers, or
Passes it to an Associate Editor, who
Invites reviewers
Reviewer(s) says “no”, cannot
review
Reviewer says “Yes”
Article is reviewed and
comments given back to
Review Editor / Editor in
chief
This continues until
enough reviewers
accept to review
Reviewer meets unexpected
time management problem and
cannot do it
Editor in chief / Associate Editor
Reads reviewer comments
Makes decision
(accept/revise/reject)
Informs author of decision and
reviewer comments
Revise - author will
Address reviewer comments
Reject - author could
rework article complete, or
submit to another journal
Process Analysis
Accept
Article is accepted in
current form
Resubmitted
Review editor /
Editor in Chief
Reads work against reviewer
comments
Article requires further revision
Editor may ask for work to be
revised again, or
Editor may ask same reviewer(s) to
review the work, if this then…
Reviewer provides comments
Author informed if further work is
required on their article
Steps to publication
type-set
proof read by author
published online immediately
published hardcopy when
space permits
Useful information sources
Manning, D. Hogg, P. (2006) Writing for publication.
Radiography 12, 77-78
A Guide to Writing in the Biological Sciences
http://classweb.gmu.edu/biologyresources/writingguide/S
cientificPaper.htm
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to
Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical
Publication
http://www.icmje.org
Instructions for authors - any journal