151218 Edanz Kumamoto (Medical and Life Science)

Kumamoto University

18 December 2015

Trevor Lane, PhD Eri Kinoshita, PhD

Author Success Workshop: Effectively Communicating Your Research

S

Be an effective communicator

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

Develop good writing skills

Write your ideas clearly

Logically present your research

Publish ethically

Promote your research to your journal

Section 1


Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills

Publication success = Academic success

S

Publication Metrics and Success on the Academic Job Market van Dijk et al. Current Biology. 2014; 24: R516-R517.

• >25,000 researchers in PubMed • Which factors predict academic success?

• Number of publications • Impact factor of the journal • Number of citations • University ranking • Male vs Female

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Impact and study design

Systematic

reviews of RCTs

Randomized controlled

trials (RCTs)

Other controlled trials

Observational studies (cohort, case-control,

cross-sectional surveys/audits, diagnostics)

Computer models (in silico), animal models (in vivo),

in vitro, case studies

Case studies, anecdote, opinion, technical,

simulation

Hypothesis

testing

{ Descriptive/

Qualitative

Methodological {

{

Secondary

research

Primary

research

{ } Experimental (exposure assigned)*

}

} Non-

experimental

*

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Use reporting guidelines

PRISMA Systematic reviews &

Meta-analyses

STROBE Observational studies

CARE Case reports

CONSORT Randomized controlled

clinical trials

ARRIVE Animal studies

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


Research Article

Short Communication Case Study Technical Note Review Article Editorial Letter to the Editor

Brief report about a specific finding

Most common; full-length paper

Brief report about a specific situation

Brief report about a new methodology

Summary of recent advances in a field

Brief discussion about an interesting topic

Brief discussion about a published article

Types of articles


Start with your illustrations

Where to start?

Your findings form the basis of your manuscript

First step: logically organize your display items

Logic, then language

Figure 1

Figure 2

Table 1

Figure 3

Logical flow (Chronology, Least to most

important, General to

specific, Whole+parts)

Is anything missing?

? Additional analyses?

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills 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 down key ideas in bullet points, as IMRaD

No need for sentences or correct

English yet

Use reporting guidelines

Then, draft the title/abstract

List information from your reading in the appropriate section: Paraphrase with citations!

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Get feedback

Write your manuscript section-by-section – Less stressful – Get feedback after each section; set deadlines – Easier for your colleagues to review

Revise for content, overall logic, and journal style (see guidelines/past papers)

Edit for conciseness, clarity, consistency & accuracy

Get feedback from pre-submission peer review

Get language assistance

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Manuscript structure

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


Title/Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Title/Abstract

Methods

Results

Discussion

Introduction

Abstract /Title

write

The ‘write’ order

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Improve readability

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”

(http://www.nature.com/authors/author_resources/how_write.html)


To ascertain the efficaciousness of the optional language program, we interrogated the optional

language program participants.

To determine the success of the program, we questioned the participants.

Avoid mistakes 1

Use simple words!

Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Avoid mistakes 1

Prefer Enough Clear Determine Begin Try Very Size Keep Enough End Use

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


“A number of studies have shown that demographic factors...”

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

“...at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min.”

“As a matter of fact, such a genetic mutation…”

“That is another reason why, we believe…”

“It is well known that most of the interviewed informants...” “It is well known that Most of the interviewed informants...”

“As a matter of fact, such a This genetic mutation…”

“A number of studies have shown that Demographic factors...”

“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.”

Delete extra words!

Avoid mistakes 2


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

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

Avoid mistakes 2


Estimate Estimation

Decide Decision

Assess Assessment

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

We decided… Clear, short, and direct

Avoid mistakes 2

Delete extra words: 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 3

Plan well

Section 2

Before you start …

Increase impact

High quality research

Logical, engaging, useful message

Original and novel research

Well-designed, well-reported,

transparent study News value, importance, timeliness

What editors want

High scientific & technical quality, sound research/publication ethics,

registered human trials

High readability & interest; clear, real-

world relevance

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


Always follow ethics guidelines

Good publication ethics

State conflicts of interest

No plagiarism or redundancy

Clear author contributions

No fabrication or falsification

Study design/data analysis, Writing, Approval, Responsibility

Possible financial, personal bias

Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE Good Publication Practice 3, GPP3

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors , ICMJE)

Before you start … Good publication ethics

Human studies (including surveys, education programs)

• Pre-approval from ethics committee for ethical collection of data

• For studies with prospective assignment into groups: register your trial before enrollment

• Informed consent for enrollment and for publication

Protect personal information

• Keep good records/back-ups • Anonymize patient data; anonymize reports • Keep patient data secure (password protect files/disks;

avoid USB sticks)

Before you start … Data manipulation

Never

Fabricate data Move data on

a graph

Manipulate images

Hide bad results

Before you start … Altering images

What kind of changes can be made to images?

Processing (such as changing brightness and contrast) is appropriate only when it is applied equally across the

entire image and is applied equally to controls. http://www.nature.com/srep/journal-policies/editorial-policies#digital-image

You cannot:

• Enhance brightness/contrast of only part of an image • Cannot crop out/remove “unwanted” artefacts

You may be asked to submit all raw files

Before you start … Four criteria for authorship

1. Substantial contribution to study design, or data collection/analysis/interpretation

2. Writing or revising the manuscript

3. Approval of final version

4. Responsible for all content (accuracy and integrity)

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html


Acknowledgements

Nugraha et al. Biomaterials. 2011; 32: 6982–6994.

Thank those who have made positive contributions

Funding agencies (some journals have a

separate Funding section)

Before you start … Choose your journal early!

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

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

• Check relevant references • Check originality, importance & usefulness!

Before you start … Evaluating impact

How new/important are your findings? How strong is the evidence?

Incremental or large advance? Low or high impact journal

Novelty

Assess your findings honestly & objectively

How broadly relevant are your findings? International or regional journal

General or specialized journal

Relevance/Application

Before you start … 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

Fast track

Before you start … Predatory journals

Some Open Access journals are not good

Easy way to get money from authors

• Promise quick and easy publication • Often ask for a “submission/handling” fee • May copy name of real journal; false IF • May not exist, or may be of low quality • Beware of spam e-mails!

If you are ever unsure, please check Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers

http://scholarlyoa.com/2015/01/02/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2015/


Reputable publisher Springer, Elsevier, Wiley, PLoS, etc.

Editorial board International and familiar

Indexed Indexed by common databases

Authors Do you recognize the authors?

Fees Paid only after acceptance

Trustworthy journals


THINK Trusted and appropriate?

SUBMIT Only if OK

thinkchecksubmit.org

CHECK Do you know the journal?

Trustworthy journals

Before you start … Journal Selector www.edanzediting.co.jp/journal_selector

Insert your proposed abstract or keywords


Matching journals

Journal Selector www.edanzediting.co.jp/journal_selector

Filter/sort by: • Field of study • Impact factor • Open access • Publishing

frequency

Journal’s aims & scope, IF,

and publication frequency

Before you start … Journal Selector www.edanzediting.co.jp/journal_selector

• Author guidelines • Journal website

Are they currently publishing similar articles?

Have you cited relevant ones?

Similar published articles

Structure your manuscript

Section 3

Coverage and Staffing Plan Manuscript

structure Introduction

Current state of the field

Background information

Specific aim/approach/contents Aim

Problem in the field

Previous studies

Current study

General

Specific Importance/hypothesis

Worldwide relevance? Broad/specialized?

Recent, International Not too many self-cites

Why is your study needed?

Check journal if Results can be previewed


structure Writing the Introduction

Your aims must directly address the problem

So far, most research has focused on the negative psychological impact of myocardial infarction. However, trauma can also produce psychological benefits. The identification of factors associated with post-traumatic growth after myocardial infarction is of importance.

Aims The present study investigated the relative contribution of three possible factors to post-traumatic growth after myocardial infarction: personality, psychological health, and cognitive coping.

Problem

Modified from: Garnetski et al. J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2008; 15:270–277 .


structure

Common mistakes in the Introduction

Ideas are not logically organized

Important topics in the Introduction are not mentioned again in the Results/Discussion

Important topics in the Results/Discussion are not mentioned in the Introduction

Cited studies are not up-to-date

Cited studies are geographically biased

Why study needs to be done?

Keep focused

Write last

<5 years

International


structure

Study design

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

Methods


structure Methods

What did you do?

What was done

• Processes, treatments, measurements, questionnaires

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

• Quantification/models/text analysis • Statistical tests (& P level) • Consult a statistician

Who/what was studied

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

Data analysis


structure

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

Methods


structure

What did you find?

Results

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

• Each subsection corresponds to one figure and method

• Remember to refer to all figures

• What you found, not what it means

• Use Supplementary Information

• Data accessibility

Logical presentation

Subsections

Factual description


structure

Describe relationships among your results

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.


structure

Describe relationships among your results

Patients treated with Drug C showed the greatest reduction in tumor volume (28.1%) 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).


structure Common mistakes in the Results

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!

*Also: don’t confuse statistical with clinical significance!


structure

Some teachers reported that they developed an understanding of what ICT is and the way technology can enhance teaching and learning of difficult science concepts through the collaborative design of science lessons in teams. “I developed an understanding of how ICT can be applied in the design and teaching of a technology-enhanced lesson,” said one of the pre-service teachers.

• Match qualitative data to the claim • “Tell” and “Show”

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

Topic sentences are unsupported!

Common mistakes in the Results


structure Discussion

Summary of results

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?

Answer of hypothesis test


structure

Describe limitations and negative results

Why?

Reporting transparency

• Allows complete evaluation of your study • Prevents others from repeating those experiments • Allows others to modify those experiments • Prevents funding agencies from wasting money

Data repositories

Writing the middle of your Discussion


structure

What do you want people to remember?

Writing the end of your Discussion

May be a separate section

May be a “Future work” section

We have demonstrated here that genes explain a larger proportion of differences between children in second language achievement than do shared environmental influences of school and home. Our bivariate results for twins demonstrate a general genetic factor of language achievement in the sense that achievement in English and second language is influenced to a large extent by the same genes. It is important to note that genes not only influence aptitude and achievement, but also appetite for knowledge. Such genotype–environment correlation may be increasingly important during adolescence. Our future research thus involves longitudinal study of second language achievement.

Conclusion

Key result

Implications

Future directions

Modified from: Rimfeld et al. Transl Psychiatry. 2015;5:e638.


structure

Common mistakes in the Discussion

Do not restate your results

We showed that tumor volumes in Groups A, B, and C were 34.6, 74.2, and 53.9 mm3, respectively, after a 4-month drug treatment, reflecting only a 8.6% decrease. However, after a 12-month drug treatment, the tumor volumes in Groups A, B, and C were 16.3, 18.7, and 16.9 mm3, respectively, which reflects a 45.2% decrease (p<0.05). The results demonstrate that 12 months of treatment is necessary for Drug X to effectively reduce tumor size among the three groups.

The results presented in this study demonstrate that Drug X more effectively reduces tumor size after 12 months of treatment (45.2% reduction) than it does after 4 months (8.6% reduction).


structure

Common mistakes in the Discussion

Do not overgeneralize your findings

In this study, we demonstrated that Drug A effectively reduced tumor growth. Therefore, this drug should have therapeutic applications in breast cancer treatment.

In this study, we demonstrated that Drug A effectively reduced the growth of various breast cancer cell lines. Our findings suggest that this drug may have therapeutic applications in breast cancer treatment.

Result: Drug A reduced breast cancer cell growth in vitro


structure Link your ideas

General background

Aims

Methodology

Results and figures

Summary of findings

Implications for the field

Relevance of findings

Problem in the field

Current state of the field Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Solution

Situation/Problem

Evaluation/Comment


structure Link your ideas

Problem-based learning is an instructional method in which problems are the focal part of learning.

However, it is unclear which particular aspect of the problem is essential for student learning.

In conclusion, this study is among the first to shed more light on the causal interactions of specific problem characteristics at the micro level.

Background

Problem

Conclusion

Discussion

Modified from: Sockalingam et al. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2011;16:481–490.

We tested a model in which we hypothesized that problem input variables would be related to problem process and outcome variables.

Objective

Make the best first impression

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

Your title & abstract should attract readers

It sells your work: Readers judge your style & credibility

Often first or only part that is read by readers/reviewers


Title

Important points

Only main idea/s Accurate, simple Population/model Include keywords Fewer than 20 words Include method/

study type

Avoid

Unneeded words (“A study of”) Sensationalism, journalistic style Complex word order Abbreviations, jargon “New” or “novel”


Interrogative Do biochar blends affect microbial composition of sandy soil?

Indicative/ Descriptive

Effects of modern fertilizers on nutrient leaching and legume crop yield

… + Approach (subtitle)

Melamine contamination of milk: A southern China perspective

Assertive/ Declarative

Health literacy does not narrow the education-based e-health gap / Education-based e-health gap not narrowed by health literacy

Title

Customer Service Marketing your work Structured abstracts

Aim Objective, hypothesis

Results Most important findings

Conclusion Relevance, implications

Methods Techniques, measurements

No references, jargon, unusual abbreviations, figures/tables Human studies: include funding source and trial registration number after abstract

Background Context, problem

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?

Why did you do the study?

Unstructured abstract

Customer Service Marketing your work

Dear Dr Struman,

Please find enclosed our manuscript entitled “Evaluation of ICT in Glasgow prognostic scoring in patients undergoing curative

resection for liver metastases,” which we would like to submit for publication as an Original Article in the International Medical

ICT Journal.

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) using an ICT platform in these patients. The present study evaluated the mGPS using ICT 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 using ICT 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 via a simple ICT tool is a useful prognostic factor for postoperative survival in cancer patients undergoing curative resection. This information is immediately clinically applicable for surgeons as well as hospital information and patient record systems and health care protocol developers. As a premier journal covering ICT in health care, we believe that the International Medical ICT Journal is the perfect platform from which to share our results with all those concerned with ICT use in cancer management.

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

Declarations on publication ethics Suggested reviewers Contact information

Customer Service Marketing your work Cover letter to the editor

This study is the first to demonstrate that the preoperative mGPS via a simple ICT tool is a useful prognostic factor for postoperative survival in cancer patients undergoing curative resection. This information is immediately clinically applicable for surgeons as well as hospital information and patient record systems and health care protocol developers. As a premier journal covering ICT in health care, we believe that the International Medical ICT Journal is the perfect platform from which to share our results with all those concerned with ICT use in cancer management.

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

Target your journal – keywords from the Aims and Scope

Conclusion & importance

Relevance

Customer Service Marketing your work Cover letter to the editor

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 International Medical ICT Journal. This study was funded by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The lead author is currently a consultant for the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.

Must include:

Declarations related to publication ethics Source of funding Conflicts of interest

Ethics

Funding

Conflicts of interest

Navigating peer review

Section 5

Customer Service 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

Customer Service Peer review Peer review models

Blinded/ masked?

• 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

Customer Service Peer review Peer review models

Other models

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

• Collaborative: Reviewers (& authors) engage with each other

• Post-publication: Online public review

• Pre-submission: Reviews may be passed to editor

Customer Service Peer review What reviewers are looking for

The science

The manuscript

Relevant hypothesis Good experimental 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!

Customer Service Peer review Decision letter

Ideas are not logically organized; Poor presentation

Purpose and relevance are unclear

Topics in the Results/Discussion are not in the Introduction

Methods are unclear (variables, missing data)

Not discussed: Negative results, limitations, implications

Discussion has repeated results; Conclusions too general

Cited studies are not up-to-date

Common reviewer complaints

Customer Service 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 or language revisions / Revise & resubmit / “Reject”

Hard rejection (“decline the manuscript for publication”) Flaw in design or methods Major misinterpretation, lack of evidence

Soft rejection (“cannot consider it further at this point”) Incomplete reporting or overgeneralization Additional analyses needed Presentation problem

Interpret the decision letter carefully (& after a break)

Customer Service Peer review Decision letter example

10 January 2015

Dear Dr. Wong,

Manuscript ID JOS-11-7739: “Prediction of the largest peak nonlinear response of brain structures under bilateral excitation”

Your manuscript has been reviewed, and we regret to inform you that based on our Expert reviewers’ comments, it is not possible to further consider your manuscript in its current form for publication in the Journal of Brain Excitation Imaging.

Although the reviews are not entirely negative, it is evident from the extensive comments that the manuscript, in its current form, does not meet the criteria expected of papers in the Journal of Brain Excitation Imaging. The results appear to be too preliminary and incomplete for publication at the present time.

The reviewer comments are included at the bottom of this letter. I hope the information provided by the reviewers will be helpful to revise your manuscript in future. Thank you for your interest in the journal.

Decision

Reason

Comments

Customer Service Peer review

The Reviewer comments are not entirely negative.

It is not possible to consider your manuscript in its current form.

I hope the information provided will be helpful to revise your manuscript in the future.

I regret that the outcome has not been favorable at this time.

Editor may be interested in your work


We cannot publish your manuscript

Your study does not contain novel results that merit publication in our journal.

We appreciate your interest in our journal. However, we will not further consider your manuscript for publication.

We wish you luck in publishing your results elsewhere.

Editor is not interested in your work

Customer Service 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

Customer Service 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


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 now!!!

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 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).

Disagree with evidence

Revisions

Location

Reviewer response letter

S

Be an effective communicator

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


Write your ideas clearly

Logically present your research

Publish ethically

Promote your research to your journal

Thank you!

Any questions?

Follow us on Twitter

@EdanzEditing

Like us on Facebook

facebook.com/EdanzEditing

Download and further reading edanzediting.co.jp/kumamoto1512

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