Upload
edanz-group
View
267
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Trevor Lane, PhD Julian Tang, PhD
Author Success Workshop:
Effectively Communicate Your Research
Yokohama City University
29 March 2016
S
Be an effective communicator
Your goal is not only to be published, but also to be widely read and highly cited
Preparing well
Developing your writing skills
Logically communicating your ideas in your
manuscript
Making the best first impression for readers
Making the best first impression for editors
Confidently navigating the peer review process
Section 1
Planning 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
Patenting Engagement
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well Select your journal early
Journal guidelines • Manuscript structure • Word limits • References • Procedures, Copyright
Journal features • Aims & scope
(International/local; general/specialist; clinical/nonclinical)
• Learn writing style • Check relevant references • Check originality, importance & usefulness! • Check journal ethics requirements
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
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; Accountable
Publication ethics
Funding & COIs Disclose any funding sources and
financial/personal conflicts of interest
Safety Humans: Approval, signed consent, privacy;
animal and environmental safety
Committee on Publication Ethics, COPE
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
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, 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
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
Evaluate 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! Use international reporting guidelines!
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
Register trials at: clinicaltrials.gov; who.int/ictrp/network/en;
controlled-trials.com; umin.ac.jp/ctr
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
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
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
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
Coverage and Staffing Plan Prepare well
THINK Trusted and appropriate?
SUBMIT Only if OK
thinkchecksubmit.org
CHECK Do you know the journal?
Trustworthy journals
Section 2
Improving the effectiveness of your writing
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.”
Improving readability
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Improving readability
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills Improving readability
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)
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
“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...”
Improving readability
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.”
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Improving readability
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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!
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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 2
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
Readers expect…
verbs to closely follow their subjects long ends (not long 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
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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.
Scientific English writing style 1
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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).
Scientific English writing style 1
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Scientific English writing style 1
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Scientific English writing style 1
Adapted from: Kafyulilo et al. Educ Inf Technol. 5 May 2015; DOI 10.1007/s10639-015-9398-0
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Adapted from: Kafyulilo et al. Educ Inf Technol. 5 May 2015; DOI 10.1007/s10639-015-9398-0
Information in the topic position can introduce the topic of the next sentence
(useful for definitions, descriptions, and narratives).
Scientific English writing style 2
Coverage and Staffing Plan Writing skills
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
Adapted from: Kafyulilo et al. Educ Inf Technol. 5 May 2015; DOI 10.1007/s10639-015-9398-0
Information in the stress position can introduce the topic of the next few sentences
(useful for lists and describing whole/parts).
Scientific English writing style 3
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, As/So long as, Otherwise,…
Activity 1
Please see Activity 1 in your workbook
Section 3
Overview of manuscript structure
Manuscripts with impact
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
Manuscripts with impact 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!
Manuscripts with impact
Logically organize your ideas; adhere to journal
& international guidelines
Communicate well in English
Factors to consider when writing a manuscript
Importance of logic
Draft outline & draft abstract/title;
Draft & revise manuscript
Edit manuscript & finalize
abstract/title
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
Why is your study needed?
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
Manuscripts with impact
How the study was done
• Processes, treatments, measurements, follow-up
• Variables (direct/proxy) • Outcome/endpoints (1o, 2o)
• Quantification/models • Statistical tests (& P level) • Consult a statistician
Who/what was studied
• Participants, controls • Enrollment, N & “power” • Materials, databases
Data analysis
Describe all aspects of the design
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?
Manuscripts with impact
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
Manuscripts with impact
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?
Manuscripts with impact
GPER is an E2 binding, G-protein coupled membrane receptor that was reported to be overexpressed in breast, endometrial, ovarian and thyroid cancers. However, it is currently unclear if different types of lung cancers including adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinoma and large cell carcinomas express higher GPER than normal lung tissue. Here, we demonstrate for the first time that GPER is overexpressed in lung tumors and lung adenocarcinoma cell lines relative to normal lung and immortalized normal lung cell lines, although the expression of GPER transcript in HPL1D cells is higher than HBECs.
Re-introduction
Conclusion
Modified from: Rao Jala et al. BMC Cancer 2012; 12: 624.
State the major conclusion of the study
Restate problem
Long Discussion – Beginning
Manuscripts with impact
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: subordinate the bad news first
Manuscripts with impact
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 finding
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 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
Activity 2
Please see Activity 2 in your workbook
Section 4
Making the best first impression: Titles and
abstracts
Customer Service Marketing your work Titles and abstracts
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 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?
Why did you do the study?
Unstructured abstract
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
Section 5
Making the best first impression: Cover letters
Customer Service Marketing your work
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
Conclusion/ relevance and 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
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
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 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
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
Customer Service Marketing your work Cover letter to the editor
Highlight recent issues in the media
“Given the considerable attention Ebola has received worldwide, it will be important to…”
Highlight recent policy changes
“Recently, the local government has implemented new incentives to promote health tourism…”
Highlight recently published articles in
their journal
“The uses of CRISPR-Cas 9 editing have recently been showcased in your journal. However, it still remains unclear…”
Highlight current controversies
“Currently, there is disagreement on the role of music therapy for young children. Our study aims to address this controversy…”
Customer Service Marketing your work
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
Customer Service Marketing your work
Be careful who you recommend!
Section 6
Navigating the peer review process
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 What reviewers are looking for
The science
The manuscript
Relevant hypothesis Good experimental design Appropriate methodology Good data analysis Valid, useful conclusions
Logical flow of information Manuscript structure and formatting Appropriate references High readability
Innovation & Importance, Information, Interest, Influence = IMPACT
Peer review
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 teachings [sic] of a technology-enhanced lesson,” said one of the pre-service teachers.
• Match quantitative/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 complaints –Summarizing results
Peer review
Drug A significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels by 28% (p<0.05). Drug A significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels from 4.7±0.3 mmol/L to 3.4±0.6 mmol/L (p=0.02, 95% CI: 0.8–1.8). Because a minimal reduction of 1.4 mmol/L is required to be clinically effective, the efficacy of Drug A is still unclear.
• Use absolute values • State exact P-value and 95% confidence interval (CI) • State minimal clinically relevant difference
Common complaints – Statistics
Statistical significance does not equal clinical significance!
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)
Peer review Decision letter
“Slush pile” desk review: Rejection (not novel, no focus or rationale, wrong scope or format) / Resubmit
Peer review: Accept / Accept with minor or language revisions / Revise & resubmit / “Reject”
Hard rejection (“decline the manuscript for publication”) Flaw in design or methods; poor ethics Major misinterpretation; lack of evidence
Soft rejection (“cannot consider it further at this point”) Incomplete reporting or overgeneralization Additional analyses needed; presentation problem Discussion is weak; references too old
Interpret the decision letter carefully (& after a break)
Peer review Reviewer response letter
Respond to every reviewer comment
Easy for editor & reviewers to
see changes
• Revise if you can; 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
Please see Activity 3 in your workbook
S
Be an effective communicator
Your goal is not only to be published, but also to be widely read and highly cited
Preparing well
Developing your writing skills
Logically communicating your ideas in your
manuscript
Making the best first impression for readers
Making the best first impression for editors
Confidently navigating the peer review process
http://www.picserver.org/s/success.html CC BY-SA 3.0 NY
Thank you!
Any questions?
Follow us on Twitter
@EdanzEditing
Like us on Facebook
facebook.com/EdanzEditing
Download and further reading edanzediting.co.jp/yokohama1603
Trevor Lane: [email protected] Julian Tang: [email protected]