Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FINDING YOUR VOICEFROM PRACTICE TO PUBLICATION: An Editor’s Guide to Getting Published
M A U R E E N S H AW N K E N N E DY, M A , R N , FA A N
E D I TO R I N C H I E F, A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F N U R S I N GSHAWN .K ENNEDY@WOLTERS K LUWER .COM
American Journal of Nursing
AJN's mission is to promote excellence in nursing and health care through the dissemination of evidence-based, peer-reviewed clinical information and original research, discussion of relevant and controversial professional issues, adherence to the standards of journalistic integrity and excellence, and promotion of nursing perspectives to the health care community and the public.
QI project
EBP project
Literature review
“The theme that links these forms of scholarly experiences is the use of evidence to improve either practice or patient outcomes.”
AACN’s The Essentials of Doctoral Education for Advanced Nursing Practice
DNP Projects à Journal MS
For Today
Identify key items authors need to consider in early manuscript planning stagesDescribe the elements of an effective, publishable scholarly paperCommon problems editors seeIdentify criteria that editors and reviewers use to make publication decisions
Key Points about WritingWriting will help clarify how you think and will help you think more critically.Clear writing, like critical thinking, requires knowledge, logic, organization, accuracy, and precision.
Writing is a process, not a product.
The Basic QuestionsWhat do you want to say?
Who do you want to say it to?
How do you want to say it?
What is your purpose?
WHAT IS SCHOLARlyWRITING?
Scholarly Writing◦Objective and free of bias; balanced◦Supported by evidence◦Logical and reasoned◦Uses precise language◦Stands up to scrutiny of peers
Scholarly FormatsResearch reports
QI reports
Literature reviews
Case studies
Review articleshttp://www.equator-network.org/
Reminder - Other Avenues for Dissemination
Opinion pieces, editorialsCommentariesLettersNarrativesBlog posts
Goal is always a paper that is:AccurateCarefully written and refined
Descriptive and informative
Properly formatted & referencedFollows ethical standards (IRB, authors)
Readable
Getting Started
n Have a purposen Make a plann Enlist your
colleaguesn Pick a direction
and follow it
About Coauthorship
Decide on order of authors before starting
Agree on who will do what by when
Have a plan to resolve issues
Who is an Author?Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND Final approval of the version to be published; AND Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
ICMJE Guidelines icmje.org
Step 1: PurposeIdentify purpose of manuscript
Write purpose of manuscript in1 sentence to confirm it is
clear and focused
Step 2: Select the JournalMatch to your purpose and audienceTurnaround time for reviews and publication once acceptedAcceptance ratesReview past issues**
Ask the librarian!
Beware of Predatory Publishers
Think. Check. Submit.http://thinkchecksubmit.org/
International Academy of Nursing Editors (INANE)https://nursingeditors.com/
Step 3: Send a Query
You can query as many journals as you wish, BUT
It is unethical to submit your manuscript to more than one journal at a time.
Writing the ManuscriptReview the literatureThink about it!Sketch out main points Write the first draftWrite the second draftGet feedbackWrite the third draft…Submit! Then be prepared to work…
!"#$%&'()*$'($)+"$%"",$,"-'".$%,&/"**
!"#$%&'()*+,'-#&,$',.&++/#/0'"+.#,#%/
1++&'&+2#+3+&,'4&%2#"++54+&$')"2#.+
!"#$%&'()*+,'-#/)6'"+.#,#%/
Why do we have peer review?
To provide some objectivity for editors to judge manuscriptsTo provide expert commentary on subjects unfamiliar to the editorTo provide authors with helpful feedback - they often raise questions that readers might also ask as they read the articleTo increase the quality and accuracy of journal articles
Peer Reviewer’s AnalysisIs content accurate, timely and adequate for type of article?Is it appropriate for the journal?Is it balanced vs biased?Are any key references missing?Is there evidence of plagiarism?What might improve article/rectify issues?
Fatal Flaws• Doesn’t follow proper format• Inaccurate, missing key content, biased•Methodology issues, no IRB• Insufficient review of the literature; lacks evidence• Lacks synthesis• Plagiarism, self plagiarism• Unsalvageable writing, illogical• Conclusion doesn’t address stated purpose• Been there, done that
Common ProblemsDoesn’t follow proper format Poor sourcingLacks detail and clarityPoor use of language; disorganized; Author issues
Editorial DecisionsTypes of decisions◦Accept◦Accept with revision◦Revise and resubmit◦Reject
Criteria for AcceptanceRelevance of paper for journalImportance to readersNew content?Scientific validity of evidence Usefulness to journal in publishing range of topics? backlog of manuscripts already acceptedQuality of writing
Decision – Revise (a good thing!)Good topic, logical flow, content accurate as per reviewers, may be something missing
Fixable issues
Feel author can do revisions based on initial submission
Decision - Reject◦Good article but not a fit for journal◦Recently published on same topic◦Author isn’t saying anything new or different◦ Fatally flawed or not written at scholarly level and
don’t think author is up to revision
What do editors want?Accurate informationNew information – update, algorithm, new guideline, tips, new research, new approach, new thinkingWritten in an interesting and grammatically correct mannerScholarly ◦ Current primary source material for references
Editors know their audience◦ Clinically relevant◦ Politically relevant
Honor the BasicsWrite simply and always to your purpose, proceeding step by step.Use active voice and your words.Use primary sources.Write to explain not to impress.Eliminate jargon & pretentious prose.Be willing to be edited!
Editing for Passive à Active Voice•Upon literature review, a determination was made
that limited research was available about the variables related to the population of HF patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge.
•After reviewing the literature, the subcommittee determined that there was scant research on the population of HF patients who were readmitted within 30 days.
Editing for Clear LanguageThe diagnosis is not easy to make due to the patients inaccuracy in describing the symptoms.
vs
Diagnosis can be difficult because patients may not describe symptoms accurately.
Editing to Correct/Clarify LanguageIt has been noted that persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a high correlation with restless Legs Syndrome.
VsPersons with type 2 diabetes often have restless leg syndrome.
OrThere is a significant association between restless leg syndrome and type 2 diabetes.
Thanks for your attention!
www.ajnonline.com
Author guidelines: www.editorialmanager.com/ajn
