160316 Eanz Tokushima PM

Trevor Lane, PhD Eri Kinoshita, PhD

Author Success Workshop:

Effectively Communicate Your Research

Tokushima University

16 March 2016

S

Be an effective communicator

Your goal is not only to be published, but also to be widely read and highly cited

Planning well and developing your writing skills

Logically communicating your ideas in your manuscript

Making the best first impression

Confidently navigating the peer review process

Section 1

Planning well for academic publishing

Skills needed on the path to publication success

Preparation

Journal Selection

Writing

Submission

Peer Review

Publication Success

• Training in reading papers, ethics, writing, presenting

• Expert Scientific Review

• Expert Scientific Review

• Journal Selection & submission strategy

• Training in ethics, writing, presenting

• Revising • Editing • Reformatting

• Training in ethics, writing

• Editing • Abstract

Development • Cover Letter

Development • Reviewer

Recommendation

• Training in navigating peer review

• Review Editing • Point-by-point

checking • Response

Letter Development

• Reformatting

• Press release, news writing

• Media & presentation training

• Training for early career researchers

• Training in writing grant proposals

• Grant proposal editing

Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well

Increase impact

High quality research

Logical, engaging, useful message for

readers

Original and novel research

Well-designed, well-reported,

transparent study News value, importance, timeliness

What editors want

High scientific & technical quality, appropriate & clear methods,

sound research & publication ethics

High readability & interest; clear, real-

world relevance

Impact factor (past 2 years) = No. of citations / No. of articles


Know your impact and study design

Systematic

reviews of RCTs

Randomized controlled

trials (RCTs)

Other controlled trials

Observational studies (cohort, case-control,

surveys/audits/interviews, diagnostics)

Hypothesis

testing

{ Descriptive/

Qualitative/

Hypothesis

generating

Methodological {

{

Secondary

research

Primary

research

{ } Experimental (exposure assigned)*

}

} Non-

experimental

*

Register clinical trials in advance!

Case studies, case series, technical notes,

computer models (in silico), animals (in vivo), in vitro

Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well Use reporting guidelines

PRISMA Systematic reviews & Meta-analyses

STROBE Observational studies

CARE Case reports

CONSORT Randomized controlled trials

ARRIVE Animal studies

http://www.equator-network.org/

QOREC Qualitative studies

clinicaltrials.gov; who.int/ictrp/network/en; controlled-trials.com; umin.ac.jp/ctr


Where to start?

Your findings form the basis of your manuscript

First organize your findings

Logic, then English language

Figure 1

Figure 2

Table 1

Figure 3

Logical flow • Chronology • Most to least

important • General to

specific • Whole+parts

Is anything missing?

? Additional analyses?

Your illustrations guide your story

Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well Prepare an outline

I. Introduction A. General background B. Related studies C. Problems in the field D. Aims

II. Methods A. Subjects/Samples/Materials B. General methods C. Specific methods D. Statistical analyses

III. Results A. Key points about Figure 1 B. Key points about Table 1 C. Key points about Figure 2 D. Key points about Figure 3 E. Key points about Figure 4

IV. Discussion A. Major conclusion B. Key findings that support conclusion C. Relevance to published studies D. Limitations E. Unexpected results F. Implications G. Future directions

Write key ideas in bullet points, as IMRaD (=Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion)

No need for full sentences Draft title/abstract; draft article by

IMRaD section Get feedback & revise each section Revise content/logic before language Get help: presubmission peer review

& editing by a native English speaker

When using information from other articles:

Paraphrase with citations!


Choose your journal early!

Author guidelines • Manuscript structure • Word limits, References • Procedures, Copyright

Aims and scope • Topics • Readership • Be sure to emphasize

• Learn writing style • Check relevant references • Check originality, importance & usefulness!


Factors to consider when choosing a journal

Aims & scope, Readership

Publication speed/frequency

Online/Print, Open access

Indexing, Rank, Impact factor

Acceptance rate/criteria

Article type / evidence level

“Luxury” / Traditional / Megajournal

Online first, Supplemental materials, Cost, Copyright

Cascading review, Fast track


Submissions

Plagiarism

Data manipulation

Authorship

Submit to only one journal at a time; do not republish the same paper; no salami

Paraphrase and cite all sources

Do not fabricate or falsify data Do not manipulate parts of images

Study design or data acquisition/analysis; Writing/revising; Approval; Accountability

Publication ethics

Conflicts of interest

Disclose funding and any financial/personal relationships that could bias the work

Safety Ethics approval; animal & environmental

safety; humans: signed consent, data privacy

Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE


Filter/sort by: • Field of study • Impact factor • Indexed in SCI • Open access • Publishing frequency

Journal’s aims & scope, impact factor,

publication frequency, open access/

subscription/hybrid

• Author guidelines • Journal website

Similar abstracts

Journal Selector www.edanzediting.co.jp/journal_selector

Insert your proposed abstract/title or keywords into text box


THINK Trusted and appropriate?

SUBMIT Only if OK

thinkchecksubmit.org

CHECK Do you know the journal?

Trustworthy journals

Section 2

Developing your writing skills

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills

Nature’s guide to authors:

Nature is an international journal covering all the sciences. Contributions should therefore be written clearly and simply so that they are accessible to readers in other disciplines and to readers for whom English is not their first language.

www.nature.com/nature/authors/gta/index.html#a4

“I should use complex words to make my writing more impressive.”

Modern scientific writing


Keep it simple!

Use short sentences 15–20 words; one idea per sentence

Prefer simpler/shorter words

Use active voice Simpler, more direct, and easier to read

Most writing style guides and journals prefer it… “Nature journals prefer authors to write in the active voice”

www.nature.com/authors/author_resources/how_write.html

Modern scientific writing

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Keep it simple 1

Prefer Enough Clear Determine Begin Attempt, Try Size Keep After Enough End Use

Avoid Adequate Apparent Ascertain Commence Endeavor Magnitude* Retain Subsequent to Sufficient Terminate* Utilization *OK in certain fields (magnitude of earthquakes, to terminate gene expression)


“A number of studies have shown that the new regimen...”

“...as described in our previous study.”

“...at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min.”

“As a matter of fact, such an adverse drug reaction…”

“That is another reason why, we believe…”

“It is well known that most of the trial participants...”

Keep it simple 2

Delete extra words!

“It is well known that Most of the trial participants...”

“As a matter of fact, such a This adverse drug reaction…”

“A number of studies have shown that The new regimen...”

“That is thus another reason why Therefore, we believe…”

“...as described previously in our previous study.”

“...at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min.”


Avoid At a concentration of 2 g/L At a temperature of 37C In order to In the first place Four in number Green color Subsequent to Prior to Future plans; past history Extremely unique At the present time

Prefer At 2 g/L At 37C To First Four Green After Before Plans; history Unique Now

Keep it simple 3


1. You deserve the funding, but the study design is not perfect.

Which sentence suggests that you

will get funding?

2. The study design is not perfect, but you deserve the funding.

Improving readability 1


The study design is not perfect, but you deserve the

funding. The grant will be awarded in two stages.

Stress position

Topic position

Readers focus at the end of the sentence for what is important. Information in this stress position can also introduce

the topic of the next sentence (useful for explanations and processes).



The local government has been striving to introduce Information

and Communication Technology (ICT) in education. In medical

education, technology was introduced through the ICT-Connect-TED

project. The program aimed at improving the quality of lecturers

through the use of ICT. ICT-Connect-TED recently provided

computers and a networking infrastructure to all medical colleges.

idea idea idea idea

Topic link

sentence

Adapted from: Kafyulilo et al. Educ Inf Technol. 5 May 2015; DOI 10.1007/s10639-015-9398-0



Almost all participants indicated a high level of satisfaction with the content, sequence and relevance of the ICT professional development program they attended. Only a few lecturers reported that the duration of the professional development program was too short. However, the majority of the lecturers reported that they developed an understanding of what TPACK is, and the way technology can enhance teaching and learning of difficult medical concepts through the collaborative design of technology-enhanced clinic sessions in teams. “I developed an understanding of how TPACK can be applied in the design and teaching of a technology-enhanced lesson” said one of the pre-service lecturers. A lecturer from College C said if it was not the professional development he attended, he would not know how to use technology in teaching.

The pre-service lecturers had the opportunity to further develop learning about technology integration in teaching after the professional development program had finished. They were invited to use their TPACK knowledge in workshops organized by the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training…

Topic sentence

Stress sentence Topic sentence

Supporting sentences




Lecturers were positive about the effectiveness of technology in teaching. They reported the effectiveness of technology on students’ learning, and on simplifying their teaching process. Most of the lecturers reported to be comfortable and satisfied with the outcomes of the technology-integrated lessons they had developed and taught during the professional development program. One of the lecturers from College A said,…

idea idea idea idea

Topic link


Information in the topic position can introduce the topic of the next sentence

(useful for definitions, descriptions, and narratives).



Findings in this study are presented in four sections. The first section presents the continuation of technology use in teaching. The second section presents the factors affecting the continuation of use of technology in teaching among lecturers who participated in the study. The third section presents the college management view on the impact of the professional development program and the institutional challenges on using technology in teaching. Finally, the enabling and hindering factors affecting the continuation of technology are summarized.

idea idea idea idea

Topic link


Information in the stress position can introduce the topic of the next few sentences

(useful for lists and describing whole/parts).


Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Improving readability 4

Logical connectors

Sequential

Causal

Adversative Although, Even though, Whereas, However, In contrast, Despite (+noun or verb -ing),…

Because (of), To (+verb), Owing to, So that, Therefore, Thus, Hence, Consequently,…

Until, After, Before, While, Since, When, Then, Next, First/Second/Third, Finally,…

Conditional If, Even if, Unless, Whether (or not), Except, Provided that, Until, Without, Otherwise,…


Estimate Estimation

Decide Decision

Assess Assessment

We made a/an… We conducted a/an… Extra verb

We decided… Clear, short, and direct

Avoid mistakes 1

Don’t hide verbs inside nouns!


Readers expect…

Verbs to closely follow their subjects Heavy ends (not starts) of clauses

Subject

The viral infection that the patient caught on a trip to an outbreak-prone area in Africa spread among the hospital staff quickly.

The patient caught a viral infection on a trip to an outbreak-prone area in Africa. This infection spread quickly among the hospital staff.

Verb

Avoid mistakes 2


Compared with is for saying how things are different

The toxicity of the new scaffold was reduced

compared to the previous scaffold.

The toxicity of the new scaffold was reduced compared with that of the previous scaffold.

The toxicity of the new scaffold was lower than that of the previous scaffold.

Avoid mistakes 3

Activity 1

Please see Activity 1 in your workbook

Section 3


Manuscripts with impact The ‘write’ order

How does your study contribute to your field?

What did you find?

What did you do?

Why did you do the study?

Title/Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Manuscripts with impact

Title/Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Title/Abstract

Methods

Results

Discussion

Introduction

Abstract /Title

write

The ‘write’ order

Manuscripts with impact Introduction


Current state of the field

Background information

Specific aim/approach Aim

Problem in the field

Previous studies

Current study

General

Specific Importance/Hypothesis

Worldwide relevance? Broad/specialized?

Up-to-date, International Not too many self-cites

Manuscripts with impact Problem/knowledge gap

However, …an alternative approach… …a challenge …a need for clarification… …a problem/weakness with… …has not been dealt with… …remains unstudied …requires clarification …is not sufficiently (+ adjective) …is ineffective/inaccurate/inadequate/inconclusive/incorrect ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Few studies have… There is an urgent need to… There is growing concern that… Little evidence is available on… It is necessary to… Little work has been done on…

Key phrases

Manuscripts with impact Writing the Introduction

Currently, the standard procedure used to evaluate hepatic steatosis is the histopathological examination of cross-liver sections… …this is an invasive practice that presents inherent risks... Therefore, it is essential to establish new non-invasive approaches to accurately determine hepatic fat concentration…

Aims

The purpose of our prospective study…was to evaluate the potential of multi-echo MRI to quantitate the hepatic triglyceride concentration.

Problem

Jiménez-Agüero et al. BMC Med. 2014; 12:137.

The aims should directly address the problem


How the study was done

• Processes, treatments, measurements, follow-up

• Variables (direct/proxy) • Outcome/endpoints (1o, 2o)

• Conversions/calculations • Statistical tests (& P level) • Consult a statistician

Who/what was studied

• Participants, controls • Enrollment, N & “power” • Materials, databases

How the data were analyzed

What did you do?

Methods

Manuscripts with impact Methods

Established techniques

• Cite previously published studies • Briefly state modifications • Use flow chart/table* if needed

• Explain purposes; justify choices • Give enough detail for reproducibility • Use Supplementary Information

Organization • Arrange in (titled) subsections • Keep parallel to the display items • Use topic sentences

New techniques

*Summary of study settings, flow of participants, text selection, variables, chronology of analyses…

Manuscripts with impact Results

• Efficacy/safety • Group/subgroups • Uni-/bi-/multivariable

• Each (titled) subsection corresponds to one figure and method

• Describe factually what you found, not what it means

• Use Supplementary Information

• Data accessibility

Logical presentation

Subsections

Factual description

What did you find?


Drug A reduced tumor volume by 32.7%, increased blood pressure by 12.3%, and increased the patient’s weight by 7.3 kg. Drug B reduced tumor volume by 22.3%, increased blood pressure by 15.6%, and increased the patient’s weight by 2.4 kg. Drug C reduced tumor volume by 38.1%, increased blood pressure by 6.9%, and increased the patient’s weight by 9.2 kg.

Describe relationships among your results


Patients treated with Drug C showed the greatest reduction in tumor volume (38.1%) compared with those treated with Drug A (32.7%) or Drug B (22.3%). Drug C also had the lowest increase in blood pressure (6.9%) compared with that seen after treatment with Drug A (12.3%) or Drug B (15.65). However, patients treated with Drug C had the highest weight gain among the three groups (Drug A, 7.3 kg; Drug B, 2.4 kg; Drug C, 9.2 kg).

Describe relationships among your results

Manuscripts with impact Discussion

Summary of findings

Relevance

Conclusion

Similarities/differences Unexpected/negative results Limitations (validity, reliability)

Implications

Previous studies

Current study

Future studies

Specific

General

How do you advance your field?


Important limitations of our study include an inadequate sample size and duration to detect differences in the incidence of diabetes complications, such as myocardial infarction, stroke, or death. The protocol specifies further follow-up at 5 years for all patients, which should allow additional assessment of even longer-term efficacy and safety. Despite these limitations, we conclude that bariatric surgery represents a potentially useful strategy for the management of type 2 diabetes, allowing many patients to reach and maintain therapeutic targets of glycemic control that otherwise would not be achievable with intensive medical therapy alone.

Identify limitations

Discussing limitations

Modified from: Schauer et al. New Engl J Med. 2014; 370: 2002–2013.

Address limitations

End positively: put the bad news first


Important limitations of our study include an inadequate sample size and duration to detect differences in the incidence of diabetes complications, such as myocardial infarction, stroke, or death. The protocol specifies further follow-up at 5 years for all patients, which should allow additional assessment of even longer-term efficacy and safety. Despite these limitations, we conclude that bariatric surgery represents a potentially useful strategy for the management of type 2 diabetes, allowing many patients to reach and maintain therapeutic targets of glycemic control that otherwise would not be achievable with intensive medical therapy alone.

Identify limitations

Modified from: Schauer et al. New Engl J Med. 2014; 370: 2002–2013.

Address limitations

End positively: Good news last & in long, main clause!

Discussing limitations

Manuscripts with impact Discussion – End

In conclusion, we found an independent, graded association between lower levels of the estimated GFR and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. These risks were evident at an estimated GFR of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 and substantially increased with an estimated GFR of less than 45 ml per minute per 1.73 m2. Our findings support the validity of the National Kidney Foundation staging system for chronic kidney disease but suggest that the system could be further refined, since all persons with stage 3 chronic kidney disease (GFR, 30 to 59 ml per minute per 1.73 m2) may not be at equal risk for each outcome. Our findings highlight the clinical and public health importance of chronic kidney disease that does not necessitate dialysis.

Conclusion

Key result

Implications

Future directions

Importance

Go et al. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 1296–1305.

Why is your study important?

Manuscripts with impact Story line and consistency

General background

Aims

Methodology

Results and illustrations

Summary of key results

Conclusion & implications

Relevance of findings

Problem in the field

Current state of the field Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Solution

Situation/Problem

Evaluation/Comment

Activity 2


Section 4


Customer Service Marketing your work Title and abstract

First impression of paper: clear/concise/convincing

Importance of your results

Validity of your conclusions

Relevance of your aims

It sells your work: Readers judge your style & credibility

Often first/only part that is read by

readers & reviewers

Your title & abstract summarize your study

Customer Service Marketing your work Your title

Important points

Only the main idea Accurate, simple Population/model Include keywords Fewer than 20 words Hanging title:

method/study type

Avoid

Unneeded words (“A study of”) Complex or sensational words Complex word order Abbreviations “New” or “novel”

Customer Service Marketing your work Your title

Interrogative Can ischemic preconditioning

improve prognosis after coronary artery bypass surgery?

Indicative/ Descriptive*

Prognostic effects of ischemic preconditioning in coronary artery

bypass patients

* + Method (subtitle)

Xxxxxxx: randomized controlled trial

Assertive/ Declarative*

Ischemic preconditioning improves prognosis after coronary artery

bypass / Improved prognosis after coronary artery bypass by ischemic

preconditioning

Question form

Key finding

Key topic/aim

Customer Service Marketing your work Keywords

Search Engine Optimization

Identify 7–8 keywords (try to use standard terms*)

Use 2 in your title, 5–6 in the keyword list

Use 3 keywords 3–4 times in your abstract

Use keywords in headings when appropriate

Be consistent throughout your paper; include synonyms

Cite your previous publications when relevant

*Or standard terms from PsycINFO, BIOSIS, ChemWeb, ERIC Thesaurus, INSPEC, GeoRef, MeSH etc

Customer Service Marketing your work Structured abstract

Context Background, problem, aim

Results Outcomes, effects,

properties, statistics

Conclusion Relevance, implications Learning points, future

Methods Patients/materials/animals Treatments, measurements

No references, unusual abbreviations, figures/tables Clinical: funding & trial registration number after abstract

Customer Service Marketing your work Unstructured abstract

Modified from: Cannegieter et al. Blood. 2015; 125: 229‒235.

Numerous systemic treatment options exist for patients with mycosis fungoides (MF) and Sézary syndrome (SS); however, the comparative efficacy of these treatments is unclear. We performed a retrospective analysis of our cutaneous lymphoma database to evaluate the treatment efficacy of 198 MF/SS patients undergoing systemic therapies. The primary end point was time to next treatment (TTNT). Patients with advanced-stage disease made up 53%. The median follow-up time from diagnosis for all alive patients was 4.9 years (range 0.3‒39.6), with a median survival of 11.4 years. Patients received a median of 3 lines of therapy (range 1‒13), resulting in 709 treatment episodes. Twenty-eight treatment modalities were analyzed. We found that the median TTNT for single- or multiagent chemotherapy was only 3.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.2‒5.1), with few durable remissions. α-interferon gave a median TTNT of 8.7 months (95% CI 6.0-18.0), and histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) gave a median TTNT of 4.5 months (95% CI 4.0‒6.1). When compared directly with chemotherapy, interferon and HDACi both had greater TTNT (P < .00001 and P = .01, respectively). In conclusion, this study confirms that all chemotherapy regimens assessed have very modest efficacy; we recommend their use be restricted until other options are exhausted.

Customer Service Marketing your work

Modified from: Cannegieter et al. Blood. 2015; 125: 229‒235.

Numerous systemic treatment options exist for patients with mycosis fungoides (MF) and Sézary syndrome (SS); however, the comparative efficacy of these treatments is unclear. We performed a retrospective analysis of our cutaneous lymphoma database to evaluate the treatment efficacy of 198 MF/SS patients undergoing systemic therapies. The primary end point was time to next treatment (TTNT). Patients with advanced-stage disease made up 53%. The median follow-up time from diagnosis for all alive patients was 4.9 years (range 0.3‒39.6), with a median survival of 11.4 years. Patients received a median of 3 lines of therapy (range 1‒13), resulting in 709 treatment episodes. Twenty-eight treatment modalities were analyzed. We found that the median TTNT for single- or multiagent chemotherapy was only 3.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.2‒5.1), with few durable remissions. α-interferon gave a median TTNT of 8.7 months (95% CI 6.0‒18.0), and histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) gave a median TTNT of 4.5 months (95% CI 4.0‒6.1). When compared directly with chemotherapy, interferon and HDACi both had greater TTNT (P < .00001 and P = .01, respectively). In conclusion, this study confirms that all chemotherapy regimens assessed have very modest efficacy; we recommend their use be restricted until other options are exhausted. How does your study contribute to your field?

What did you find?

What did you do?


Unstructured abstract


Dear Dr Lippman,

Please find enclosed our manuscript entitled “Evaluation of the Glasgow prognostic score in patients undergoing curative

resection for breast cancer liver metastases,” which we would like to submit for publication as an Original Article in the Breast

Cancer Research and Treatment.

The Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) is of value for a variety of tumours. Several studies have investigated the prognostic value of the GPS in patients with metastatic breast cancer, but few studies have performed such an investigation for patients undergoing liver resection for liver metastases. Furthermore, there are currently no studies that have examined the prognostic value of the modified GPS (mGPS) in these patients. The present study evaluated the mGPS in terms of its prognostic value for postoperative death in patients undergoing liver resection for breast cancer liver metastases.

A total of 318 patients with breast cancer liver metastases who underwent hepatectomy over a 15-year period were included in this study. The mGPS was calculated based on the levels of C-reactive protein and albumin, and the disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival rates were evaluated in relation to the mGPS. Prognostic significance was retrospectively analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Overall, the results showed a significant association between cancer-specific survival and the mGPS and carcinoembryonic antigen level, and a higher mGPS was associated with increased aggressiveness of liver recurrence and poorer survival in these patients. This study is the first to demonstrate that the preoperative mGPS, a simple clinical tool, is a useful prognostic factor for postoperative survival in patients undergoing curative resection for breast cancer liver metastases. This information is immediately clinically applicable for oncologists treating such patients. As a premier journal covering the broad field of cancer, we believe that the Breast Cancer Research and Treatment is the perfect platform from which to share our results with the international medical community.

Give the background to the research

What was done and what was found

Interest to journal’s readers

Cover letter to the editor

Editor’s name Manuscript title

Article type

Customer Service Marketing your work Cover letter to the editor

This study is the first to demonstrate that the preoperative mGPS, a simple clinical tool, is a useful prognostic factor for postoperative survival in breast cancer patients undergoing curative resection for liver metastases. This information is immediately clinically applicable for surgeons and medical oncologists treating such patients. As a premier journal covering breast cancer treatment, we believe that Breast Cancer Research and Treatment is the perfect platform from which to share our results with all those concerned with breast cancer.

Why your study is interesting to the journal’s readership (para 4)

Target your journal – keywords from the Aims and Scope

Conclusion/importance

Relevance


Other important information:

Recommended reviewers Author’s contact information

We would like to recommend the following reviewers to evaluate our manuscript: 1. Reviewer 1 and contact information 2. Reviewer 2 and contact information 3. Reviewer 3 and contact information 4. Reviewer 4 and contact information Please address all correspondence to:

Reviewers

Contact information

Can also exclude reviewers


We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with submission to the Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. This study was funded by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Last paragraph:

Declarations related to publication ethics Source of funding Conflicts of interest

Ethics

Funding

Conflicts of interest


Recommending reviewers

Where to find them?

From your reading/references, networking at conferences

How senior? Aim for mid-level researchers

Who to avoid? Collaborators (past 5 years),

researchers from your university

International list: 1 or 2 from Asia, 1 or 2 from Europe, and 1 or 2 from North America

Choose reviewers who have published in your target journal

Section 5


Peer review

The submission process

Accepted—publication!

Editor Author

Peer review

Reject

Results novel? Topic relevant? Clear English? Properly formatted?

Revision • New experiments • Improve readability • Add information • Revise figures

Peer review Peer review

Blinded/ masked?

Other models

• Single-blind: Reviewers’ names not revealed to authors

• Double-/Triple-blind: Anonymous • Open: All names revealed • Transparent: Reviews published with paper • Fast Track: Expedited if public emergency

• Portable/Transferable/Cascading: Manuscript & reviews passed along

• Collaborative: Reviewers (& authors) engage with other

• Post-publication: Online public review • Pre-submission: Reviews passed to editor

Peer review What reviewers are looking for

The science

The manuscript

Relevant hypothesis Good study design & appropriate

methodology Good data analysis Valid conclusions

Logical flow of information Manuscript structure and formatting Appropriate references High readability

Peer review is a positive process!

Innovation & Importance, Information, Interest, Influence =

IMPACT

Coverage and Staffing Plan Peer review Decision letter

“Slush pile” desk review: Rejection (not novel, no focus or rationale, wrong scope or format) / Resubmit after editing

Peer review: Accept / Accept with minor revisions / Revise & resubmit / “Reject” • Hard rejection

o Flaw in design or methods, ethics o Major misinterpretation, lack of evidence

• Soft rejection o Incomplete reporting or overgeneralization o Additional analyses needed o Presentation problem

Interpret the decision letter carefully (& after a break)

Peer review Decision letter

Ideas are not logically organized; Poor presentation Purpose and relevance are unclear Cited studies are not up-to-date Topics in the Results/Discussion are not in the Introduction Methods are unclear (variables, missing data); Ethics Wrong (statistical) tests; statistical vs clinical significance Unclear statistics: Power, Need exact P values, 95% CI,

Association ≠ Causation, Confounders, Fishing expeditions Not discussed: Negative results, limitations, implications Discussion has repeated results or new results Conclusions too general, confident, precise; not supported

Common reviewer complaints

Peer review

Patient parameters …improved significantly; it is significant that… X was correlated with Y The risk* of developing X in this case-control study…

Patient variables …improved considerably/markedly; it is important that… X was associated with/related to/linked to Y The odds of developing X in this case-control study…

Don’t misuse statistical words!

Common complaints – Statistics

* OK in a retrospective study if disease is rare and causality is assumed; risk=x/total, odds=x/(total–x)

Coverage and Staffing Plan Peer review Reviewer response letter

Respond to every reviewer comment

Easy for editor & reviewers to

see changes

• Revise and keep to the deadline; be polite • Restate reviewer’s comment • Refer to line and page numbers

Use a different color font

Highlight the text

Strikethrough font for deletions

Peer review Reviewer response letter

Reviewer Comment: In your analysis of the data you have chosen to use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In my opinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed. Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier to compare to previous results.

Response: We agree with the Reviewer’s assessment of the analysis. Our tailored function, in its current form, makes it difficult to tell that this measurement constitutes a significant improvement over previously reported values. We describe our new analysis using a Gaussian fitting function in our revised Results section (Page 6, Lines 12–18).

Agreement

Revisions Location

Why agree

Peer review

Reviewer Comment: In your analysis of the data you have chosen to use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In my opinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed. Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier to compare with previous results.

Response: It’s very clear that you’re not familiar with the current analytical methods in the field. I recommend that you identify a more suitable reviewer for my manuscript!!!

Reviewer response letter

Peer review

Reviewer Comment: In your analysis of the data you have chosen to use a somewhat obscure fitting function (regression). In my opinion, a simple Gaussian function would have sufficed. Moreover, the results would be more instructive and easier to compare with previous results.

Response: Although a simple Gaussian fit would facilitate comparison with the results of other studies, our tailored function allows for the analysis of the data in terms of the “Pack model” [Pack et al., 2015]. Hence, we have explained the use of this function and the Pack model in our revised Discussion section (Page 12, Lines 2–6).

Evidence

Revisions

Location

Reviewer response letter

Agree or disagree with evidence

Activity 3


S

Be an effective communicator

Your goal is not only to be published, but also to be widely read and highly cited

Planning well and developing your writing skills




Thank you!

Any questions?

Follow us on Twitter

@EdanzEditing

Like us on Facebook

facebook.com/EdanzEditing

Download and further reading edanzediting.co.jp/tokushima1603

Trevor Lane: [email protected] Eri Kinoshita: [email protected]