Transcript Document
Research Paper Technical Writing and Editing
“Increasing the chances of a research manuscript to be accepted for publication”
June 6, 2008
Dante P. Bornales, MD, MHPEd, FPNA
Editor-in-chief, Philippine Journal of Neurology
Why think of publishing a research work?
intellectual curiosity
contribute in the local and global health care delivery systems
disseminating information to the greatest number of readers
to assure utilization in the health sciences
“publish or perish!!”
work value of documenting one’s
personal and professional growth
The Status of Neurology Research in the Philippines Collantes EV, PhilJNeurol vol 9 no 2 (Nov 2005) 740 submitted researches to the PNA (1989-2004)
Only 10% were published
(8.5% in various local journals; 1.5% international journals)
The Status of Neurology Research in the Philippines Collantes EV, PhilJNeurol vol 9 no 2 (November 2005) 740 total # of submitted researches to the PNA (1989-2004): Only 10% were published (8.5% in various local journals; 1.5% international journals)
lack enthusiasm/support to publish the research outputs?
quality of research materials?
lack of knowledge and rigorous “technical” training on research paper writing?
Outline of this presentation:
1.
Increase the awareness of the PNA Fellows on the present status of the PhilJNeurol
where is our journal now?
2.
Using the PhilJNeurol evaluation standards and the guidelines of the ICMJE, discuss the technical details of research paper writing and editing
what to look for in a manuscript for it to be worthy of publication 3. Enumerate some operating procedures on matters about “duplication of publication”
Choosing the right biomedical journal for the publication of researches:
wide circulation, preferably beyond the local/regional geographical area
“always think big!” “always go global” established peer review system published regularly accepted and generally referenced
PhilJNeurol
wide circulation, preferably beyond the local/regional geographical area
“always think big!” “always go global”
established peer review system published regularly accepted and generally referenced
Philippine Journal of Neurology (PhilJNeurol)
regularly published
circulated locally and in the ASEAN region
peer reviewed journal with an established “blind” peer review process
published papers are uploaded in the
WPRIM
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (International Committee of Medical Editors, ICMJE)
Western Pacific Region Index Medicus (WPRIM)
a project of the
WHO Western Pacific Regional Office
in collaboration with several institutions in its member states
this is the region’s contribution to the
Health Library (GHL) initiative Global
which aims to extend to all - the benefits of the knowledge that is essential to the fullest attainment of health
Western Pacific Region Index Medicus (WPRIM)
WPRIM will be deployed and hosted with the index medici of other WHO Regions, at the Global Index Medicus portal under the
Global Health Library platform
, where searches can be conducted individually or simultaneously through federated search engine
Western Pacific Region Index Medicus (WPRIM)
Goal: The creation of an online index of medical and health journals published in member states of the WHO Western Pacific Region which can be accessed on the internet thus ensuring global accessibility of medical and health research done in the region.
WHO-WPRIM Philippine Focal Team PCHRD (February 2006) >140 local medical and health journals 18 journals selected on the basis of regularity of issues and peer review process 13 journals were finally chosen to be included in the database uploading for WPRIM PhilJNeurol was included
Philippine Journal of Neurology (PhilJNeurol)
MOA
partnership with the PCHRD 79 research articles and abstracts in the PhilJNeurol from 1991 to 2006 November are already uploaded in the WPRIM website database http://wprim.wpro.who.int
How to increase the chances of a research paper to be accepted for publication in a biomedical journal Preparing a manuscript for submission to a biomedical journal Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (International Committee of Medical Journals Editors, ICMJE; updated Feb 2006) Title and authorship Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion and Conclusion References
Title and Authorship What constitute a good title?
“fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of the paper”
Common errors: too short too long poor syntax
Analyze the evolution of this title: “The effects of a neuroprotectant in Stroke” “Preliminary findings on the effects of a neuroprotectant in Stroke” “Preliminary findings on the effects of Citicholin on the size of ischemic penumbra in cases of Stroke” “Preliminary findings on the effects of Citicholin on the size of ischemic penumbra in cases of large vessel ischemic stroke”
Title and Authorship Syntax
•
most grammatical errors in titles are due to faulty word order
“Alteration of mice’ non-transmissible encephalitis course induced by Newcastle disease virus”
Title and Authorship Avoid:
use of abbreviations chemical formulae hanging titles questions proprietary name of drugs
“Use of interferon in chronic relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: Is it necessary?”
Title Page (ICMJE) 1. Title of the article 2. Author/s name (with the academic degree/s) and affiliation 3. Disclaimers 4. Corresponding author/s with the address for reprints 5. Source of support or grants 6. Word count Conflict of Interest Notification Page
a separate page
Authorship Participation in the research process
each author should have participated sufficiently in the work represented by the article and able to take responsibility for the intellectual content
participation solely in the collection of data (or evidence) does not justify authorship
(Rosales, R: Principles of Authorship; Research Center for the Health Sciences, UST)
Authorship Content
each part of the content of the paper and each step that led to its publication must be attributable to at least one author a. conception or design or analysis and interpretation of the data, or both; b. drafting the article or revising it for critically important content; c. final approval of the version to be published
(Rosales, R: Principles of Authorship; Research Center for the Health Sciences, UST)
Authorship Contributors who “do not justify” authorship
contributors may be named and their contribution must be described in separate paragraph “advise” “critical review proposal” “data collection” “participation in clinical trial” “comments on the research content from a senior staff of a department”
Abstract Abstracts are the only substantive portion of the article indexed in many electronic databases, and the only portion many readers read!!! Authors need to be careful that the abstracts reflect the content of the article accurately. Unfortunately, many abstracts disagree with the text of the article (Pitkin RM et al, JAMA 1999).
Abstract
•
length and structure vary by journal, should follow the title page
•
should not be more than 200 words (some journals: not more than 250 words)
•
“structured” form
•
should be factual
presenting the reason for the study, main findings, and conclusions
•
3 to 10 “key words”
ideally should follow the Medical Subjects Headings (MeSH) list of the Index Medicus
Sample structured Abstract Endovascular Coiling for Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysm Objective: To present the clinical outcome of 23 patients who underwent endovascular coiling for ruptured aneurysm in a local tertiary center.
Methods: Chart review of all consecutive patients more than 18 years old with ruptured intracranial aneurysm admitted or co-managed by the Section of Neurology of a local tertiary hospital from August 2003 to July 2006 who underwent endovascular coiling.
Results: Of the 154 patients with non-traumatic aneurysm SAH, only 25 patients underwent endovascular coiling, but 2 were excluded because of incomplete chart data. Demographic and clinical characteristics were … Of the 4 patients who died, 3 had pulmonary embolism.
Conclusions: This study showed that: 1)Most (65%) of the patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysm who underwent endovascular coiling in this institution were discharged functionally trials…Therefore endovascular coiling promises to be a viable alternative to aneurysm management especially for cases when surgical management may not be ideal.
Leonardo Z, Picar R; PhilJNeurol vol 11 no 1 (2007)
Introduction
•
Define the problem being studied - Background info on what is currently known - Indicate: Significance Relevance Rationale
•
Include statement of the
purpose/objectives
the study and the delimitations of
Introduction What should a good introduction contain?
Look for: 1.
a background on the nature and scope of the research problem and its significance 2.
orientation on part of the reader
by reviewing pertinent literature 3.
Statement/s of the objectives of the study 4.
May include: method of investigation “principal” results of the investigation
Introduction
Avoid:
1. “book description” of the subject
impertinent information lack of relevant info on the subject 2. excessively lengthy and verbose
“the nobela type” “squid technique” 3. the objectives: too broad excessive to become realistic!
overly ambitious
Methods “…should include information that was/were available at the time the plan or protocol for the study was written.” “… all info obtained during the conduct of the study belongs in the Results section.”
Methods Guiding principle: how and why the study was done Look for: a. research design b. selection and description of participants inclusion/exclusion criteria description of the source population c. study site/s and time period covered/duration d. operational definitions eg.
“… late Parkinson disease was operationally defined as those patients falling under stage 3 or 4 of the Hoehn and Yahr staging”
Methods Look for : e. study procedure
copies of
IRB or ERB approval Randomization done, blinding subject selection data gathered, etc, etc.
f. Data analysis statistical tests level of significance actual computer program used (registered software!) outcome measures g. for experimental studies involving non-humans - include scientific nomenclature (Genus and species) - indicate the guide for the care of lab animals based on national or institutional committees
Methods Look for: h. for drugs, use generic names followed by the trade name and the manufacturer i. for equipment: state the equipment used manufacturer’s name and address j. for experiments using certain techniques, state full details (in order to permit replication for others to utilize) k. for studies involving human subjects or patients: observe strict confidentiality copies of the written informed consents for publication pedigrees should have written consent photographs – masking and with written consents should indicate if authors followed the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, revised 2000
Results
Look for: 1. demographics and outcome measures 2. results!!! (continuous variables, percentages)
reserve the correlation and interpretation for the discussions 3. statistical analysis - use of numerical data and not generalizations - use of actual p value (followed by the actual test that was used) eg.
p=0.005, chi square 4. others: spell out “per cent” be consistent on decimal places
Results
•
use tables if there are many categories - no need to state in the textual part of the results all the contents of the tables - simple format with complete title - put p values (if applicable) - observe: 1 double-spaced table per page
•
use figures and graphs sparingly!
efficient when illustrating “trends” - less useful than tables - no need to repeat in figure or graphs what has already been shown in tables!
don’t forget the complete title of the figure - no 2-D or 3-D figures please!
Sample table: Table 2. Radioimmunoassay techniques used in the diagnosis of Japanese encephalitis Sensitivity (%) Plasma ELISA Acute 84 89 Convalescent HI test CSF ELISA Cell IFA 68 84 58 Specificty (%) 40 50 18 40 20 Sensitivity (%) Plasma ELISA Acute 84 89 Convalescent 68 HI test Specificty (%) 40 50 18 CSF ELISA Cell IFA 84 58 40 20
Discussion … it is useful to begin by summarizing briefly the main findings, then explore possible mechanisms or explanations for the findings … compare and contrast the results with other relevant studies, state the limitations of the study, and explore the implications of the findings for future research and for clinical practice
Discussion Look for: 1.
generalizations derived from the results 2.
limitations, exceptions and any lack of correlation 3. elaboration on the unsettled points 4.
relationship of the new information with the previous “published” works 5.
applicability of the results (theoretical and practical implications of the results; relate present findings that were argued in the introduction) 6.
conclusion/s with brief summary of the evidences (should clearly answer the research questions!)
Discussion Avoid:
1. Repetition of the statements results 2. Too verbose, theoretical texts that are irrelevant to the research problem* 3. Inadequate discussions on the significant results 4. Failure to justify negative results 5.
Failure to end with a brief “climax”
References PhilJNeurol’s “Instructions to Authors” Avoid:
o o o o
personal communications Abstracts unpublished data “in press” or “forthcoming” ICMJE Standard style: NLM
Submitting the paper to the PhilJNeurol Submission Letter (printed or electronic)
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
address the letter to the editor-in-chief intention for its publication some description of the manuscript include names of all authors willingness to undergo review and editing
¤
attach:
“good” copies of the manuscript “Manuscript Submission Agreement” (Conflict of interest; IRB approval; informed consents; Copyright Transfer)
Summary:
In order to get the better chances of getting your work published in a biomedical journal: organize be simplistic logical
From the time of drafting the research proposal until the final editing of the manuscript!!!
Manuscripts already published (or undergoing review) in a locally circulated biomedical journal
will not be accepted for PhilJNeurol publication
Manuscripts already published (or undergoing review) in an international peer-reviewed biomedical journal
may be accepted for PhilJNeurol publication provided that there is a written permission from the editorial board of the journal where the paper was first published
Manuscripts already published (or undergoing review) in the PhilJNeurol, wherein the author/s intend/s to submit the same in: a. a locally-circulated biomedical journal
may not be allowed by the PhilJNeurol editorial board
Manuscripts already published (or undergoing review) in the PhilJNeurol, wherein the author/s intend/s to submit the same in: b. to an international peer-reviewed medical journal
permission may be granted provided that the author/s can justify such intention
Outline of this presentation:
1.
Increase the awareness of the PNA Fellows on the present status of the PhilJNeurol
where is our journal now?
2.
Using the PhilJNeurol evaluation standards and the guidelines of the ICMJE, discuss the technical details of research paper writing and editing
what to look for in a manuscript for it to be worthy of publication 3. Enumerate some operating procedures on matters about “duplication of publication”
PhilJNeurol Editorial Board
Dante P. Bornales, MD, MHPEd Editor-in-chief Raquel M. Alvarez, MD Associate Editor Ma. Epifania V. Collantes, MD, MSc (cand) Carissa Paz C. Dioquino, MD, MPH Paul Matthew D. Pasco, MD, MSc (cand) Maria Lina D. Renales, MD Gerardo Carmelo B. Salazar, MD Maria Cristina Z. San Jose, MD Madeleine Grace M. Sosa, MD, MSc