Transcript Getting your research published

How to get your research
published
(Intermediate Level)
Shahin Akhondzadeh Ph.D., FBPharmacolS
Professor of Clinical Neuroscience
Roozbeh Psychiatric Hospital,
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Planning a research project
Choose a clear research question
 Is your question of interest to others?
 Is your question original?
 Plan how you will answer your question
 Get help from others before you start

Stages in a research study
Planning the study & writing the protocol
 Carrying out the study & collecting the data
 Analysis & writing-up
 Going through the editorial process

What is Publication?

Publication is not a dichotomous event it is
a continuum

Traditionally
– Once it appeared in a paper journal

Today
– Traditional journals & “eprint”


Strong and Weak publication
ELPS
Dissemination of Findings
Scientific papers
 Posters
 Abstracts
 Letters to editors
 Case reports
 Review

Choose a Journal
Select before you write so format is
appropriate
 Focus of journal should be appropriate

– Are similar papers in this journal?

Choose the best journal
– Availability and readership
– Ranking (“impact factor”)
– Time to publication
How the BMJ handles papers
Read by an editor
Read by a second editor
Peer review
Editorial Meeting
Editorial committee
Revision
15% (650) Accepted
85% (4,000) Rejected
Analysis of papers submitted
to the BMJ
1998 1998 1999 1999 2000 2000
Submitted Accepted Submitted Accepted Submitted Accepted
All
4976 15% 5603 14% 5751 14%
UK
3182 18% 3583 16% 3517 12%
Ireland 38
11% 50
18% 43
15%
How the BMJ reaches a
decision on a paper
Originality
 Importance
 Methods correct
 Interesting to readers

What editors like about papers
Clear research questions
 Messages that matter
 Brevity and clarity in writing
 Good abstract
 Good grammar and spelling
 Clear presentation of methods and results

What editors dislike
Unoriginal research
 Very long papers (> 3,000 words)
 Incorrect or flawed research methods
 Unrepresentative samples
 Non-randomised interventions

Why papers are rejected I
Research question not important
 Study not original
 Ethical approval not obtained
 Incorrect methods used
 Unrepresentative sample
 Sample size too small
 Problems with recruiting patients

When to Write?
After you think you have a good story
 All critical experiments are finished
 Before you finish tying up all of the loose
ends

– Writing up will show you clearly what
controls/additional experiments still need to be
performed
Writing your paper
Most papers follow the IMRAD structure
 Introduction, methods, results and
conclusions
 Don’t forget other types of articles
 Editorials, education, debate, reviews
 Read the Instructions to Authors

In What Order Should Paper
Be Written?








Figures and Legends
Results
Methods (easy part!)
Introduction
Discussion
Abstract
Referencing
Letter to the Editor
Just Do It
Find a place where you will not be
interrupted
 Set down a first draft and do not worry
about style- just write! - you can edit later
 Better to write something than nothing
 Save mechanical stuff (references, methods,
figures) for the days you have brain fog

Figures and Tables

Easy to read and in logical order; not too many
small panels
– figures should not need legends to be comprehensible
– can figures be reduced severely without loss of
legibility?
– use the reducing Xerox machine to make sure fonts are
large enough
– minimize white space

Try different types of format: tables vs bar graphs
vs. figures- which is easiest to interpret?
– Tables provide exact information while figures clearly
show trends

Dependent variable goes on the inside of the table
Results I
What you found (text, tables & figures)
 Give numbers as well as percentages
 Avoid over-complicated tables and figures
 Tables and figures should stand alone
 Don’t repeat yourself
 Guide the reader to the results you want
them to know about

Results II
Response rate (< 70% considered bad)
 Characteristics of responders and nonresponders - any significant differences?
 P values & confidence intervals
 Avoid discussing results in this section

Methods I
The study design
 Ethical approval
 Was there an intervention?
 Prospective or retrospective?
 Controlled or uncontrolled?
 If controlled, was it randomised?

Methods II
Sample size calculation
 How the subjects were recruited
 Is the sample representative?
 What were the inclusion/exclusion criteria
 How was bias avoided
 Statistical methods
 Ethical approval

Introduction
Keep it short (2-3 paragraphs)
 The background to the study
 Why you have done your study
 What the research question is
 What kind of study you have done

Discussion
Main findings
 Summary of previous work and how your
results compare to this
 Limitations of methods
 What your results mean - clinical practice,
management, policy
 The need for further study
 Avoid speculation

Other elements
Title
 Abstract
 References
 Acknowledgements
 Authors

Title
Make it concise and informative
 Mention subject
 Mention design
 Don’t give the answer to the question

Abstract- write last!
Summarizes the major findings in the broad
context of the work
 Consists of two or three sentences of topic
introduction
 Selected results (not all but the most
important)
 Concludes with implications of work
 About 250 words

References
Cite references accurately - you must read
them first
 Limit to those that have a direct bearing on
your work
 Avoid citing too many papers
 Follow journal’s house style

Good writing style
Spend time acquiring a good, readable style
of writing
 Be clear and concise
 Avoid using too many long sentences
 When you have the choice of two words,
use the simpler one
 Use active rather than passive verbs
 Avoid using colloquial language

Conclusions
Clarity
 Conciseness
 Accuracy
 Read the Instructions to Authors

Editing- Global


Save the journal space by writing concisely and
by eliminating unnecessary or negative figures
and tables
Proof all text carefully for errors–

typos, omissions, inconsistencies in the data,
redundancies, or errors in referencing.
Expect to revise again and again- 10 times ?
Until language is perfect
–
Take a break between drafts to get a fresh viewpoint
Editing- Global

Major alterations- is the order correct? (easiest to
understand, most logical)
– Cut up and lay out differently




Are all the correct elements in every section?
Give your paper to colleagues for input on clarity
Never give anyone anything that is not spellchecked
If English is not your native language try to have a
native speaker look at it
Editing/Polishing
Paragraphs- does each form a cohesive unit
with a topic sentence?
 Are they the right length- neither one or two
sentences nor page-length?
 At end, a summarizing statement or intro to
next paragraph is very helpful

Writing Good Sentences
Use active voice when possible
 Use the correct tense- present means it is
true while past means it is true under a
specific set of circumstances
 Do not switch tenses frequently

Writing Good Sentences
Neither too short nor too long
 Avoid long strings of adjectives
 Avoid long strings of nouns

Writing Good Sentences and
Words





Use the best word for the job (for example,
“utilize” is overused)
Make sure punctuation is correct (semicolon
before “however”)
Omit all unnecessary words- the shortest phrasing
is usually the best
DATA is a plural word!
Limit the use of abbreviations unless standard
(ATP)
Submitting Papers
Write a simple direct cover letter to the
Editor using his/her name
 Suggest three reviewers if at all possible
 No need to plug the paper in the letter
 Submit electronically if you have a choice
as it will speed your review

Rebuttal Letter





Thank the reviewers for their time. They did not
have to spend it on your work!
Address each criticism in numbered order
Repeat or include the criticism in your answer
You are allowed to argue one or two items but
most items should be addressed precisely the way
the referee indicates
Conclude by saying that you feel the paper is
improved and you hope it is now acceptable for
publication
Further reading
How to write a paper. George Hall. BMJ
Publishing Group, 1994.
 How to read a paper. Trish Greenhalgh.
BMJ Publishing Group, 1997.
 Medical writing. A prescription for clarity.
Neville Goodman. CUP, 1996.
 An introduction to medical statistics. Martin
Bland. Oxford University Press, 1995

Any questions?