Publish or Perish - A guide to submitting papers for peer-reviewed publication
Download as PPTX, PDF3 likes1,142 views
This document provides a guide to publishing papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It discusses the history of scientific publishing, including the first scientific journal in 1665 and the rise of open access journals since 2000. The document outlines various reasons for publishing papers, such as sharing knowledge, building reputation, and attracting research funding. It also discusses factors to consider when choosing a journal, such as audience, impact factor, and specialty. The document provides tips for preparing manuscripts, navigating the peer review process, and possible outcomes of submission.
Publish or Perish - A guide to submitting papers for peer-reviewed publication
- 1. Publish or perish? A guide to submitting papers for peer-reviewed publication Ian Brown Louise Savory Erlend Aasheim
- 2. A brief history of scientific publication • First scientific journal was Philosophical Transactions • published by the Royal Society in 1665 Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/publishorbedamned.shtml
- 3. • Now more than 2,000 publishers producing more than 1.6 million articles in more than 20,000 journals • Traditionally subscription-based • Rise of open access journals since 2000 Source: http://southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/v09n03/mcguigan_g01.html A brief history of scientific publication
- 4. Source: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/124 The rise of open access publishing
- 5. With thanks: http://tinyurl.com/carolinetomes Why should I try to publish? To share learning and disseminate knowledge To build your reputation as an academic To challenge the accepted scientific view In response to another publication To attract research funding To contribute to the research impact of your department Because your supervisor has told you to To achieve KA9 academic PH competences It looks good on your CV To improve population health and wellbeing To reduce health inequalities To demonstrate something is or isn’t (cost) effective To share a useful new method Failure to publish negative findings distorts the evidence base
- 6. What could I submit? • MPhil dissertation • Service work evaluation • Case reports – e.g. from health protection placement • Systematic review • Comment piece / letter to editor
- 8. Choosing where to submit • ‘High impact’ general medicine journals e.g. Lancet, British Medical Journal + Wide readership + High impact + Great for CV –Only accept a minority of papers –Laborious process of review, revision and publication –A more specialist paper may be more suited to a specialist journal
- 9. Choosing where to submit • Specialist public health journals e.g. Journal of Public Health, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health + More likely to reach an interested audience + Tend to accept a greater proportion of papers –Lower impact than general medical journals –Less likely to attract media coverage –Laborious process of review, revision and publication
- 10. Choosing where to submit • Open Access journals, e.g. PLOS Medicine, BMC Public Health, BMJ Open + Papers can be published within weeks not months + Some OA journals accept all papers so long as they are methodologically sound + Full paper available to everyone –Many have high fees to cover costs –Variable quality and impact
- 11. Deciding on a journal • Where were the articles you cited published? • What journals do you read? • Who are your target audience? • Use an online tool like JANE http://www.biosemantics.org/jane/ • Check the Journal’s website for information • Send an exploratory e-mail to the editors • Look out for calls for articles on your topic • Check impact factors
- 12. Journal Impact Factor • A measure of the frequency with which the ‘average article’ in a journal has been cited in a particular year • Helps evaluate a journal’s relative importance, especially compared to others in the same field • Impact factor >5 considered very good • e.g. BMJ - 17, Journal of Public Health - 2, BMC Public Health - 2
- 13. Exercise • On your tables • As a table discuss the barriers to paper submission (5 minutes) • Then, in pairs discuss a piece of work that you could turn into a paper • What would be the key PH message? (5 minutes) • Share with the table, and choose one barrier and one idea for a paper to feed back to the room (5 minutes)
- 14. Co-author etiquette • If it’s your paper, you should be the first author • Often the main supervisor or principal investigator is last • Link those positions in between to relative contributions made • Shared 1st authorship is becoming more common
- 15. Co-author etiquette • ICMJE criteria for authorship: 1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND 2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND 3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND 4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work Source: http://tinyurl.com/ICMJEcriteria
- 16. Preparing your manuscript • Contact your academic supervisor for advice, contacts, facilities • Befriend a tame statistician • Use reference manager software (e.g. Mendeley) • Read the journal author instructions • Refer to STROBE or other relevant guidelines • Base layout on similar articles from the journal • Be patient. It can take months or years, even working full-time! http://www.strobe-statement.org/
- 17. Peer review • Usually two subject experts and a statistician • Many journals will give authors the opportunity to recommend or veto potential referees • Once you have registered to submit your paper, you may get requests to review future papers • Contributing to peer review is part of academic life • Critical appraisal skills are needed • Subject expertise helps to put articles in context
- 18. What do editors and peer reviewers look for? Is the information in your manuscript… • New? (not published elsewhere) • True? (conclusions valid) • Relevant? (to the readership) Does it have impact, presentation or citation potential? Is it well-written, conforming to manuscript instructions?
- 19. Possible outcomes of submission • Rejection without peer review • Rejection with referees’ comments • Opportunity to submit a revised manuscript addressing referees’ comments • Unqualified acceptance
- 20. A selection of recent StR publications • Aasheim ET. Fan charts. Tidsskr Nor Legeforen 2013;133:196. • Aasheim ET, Seymour M et al. Acute hepatitis A in an elderly patient after care worker travel to high endemicity country . Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9:2480-2482. • Savory LA et al. Changes in diet, cardiovascular risk factors and modelled cardiovascular risk following diagnosis of diabetes: one-year results from the ADDITION-Cambridge trial cohort. Diabet Med. 2014;31:148-155. • Shankar AG, Lee A, Reddy H, Seymour M. Bordetella pertussis infection in a child with completed primary immunization: A case report. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2013;9:322-324. • Yip JL et al. Area deprivation, individual socioeconomic status and low vision in the EPIC-Norfolk Eye Study. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2014;68:204-10.
- 21. Questions?
Editor's Notes
- #5: Note open access is a complex issue, and definition of “open” varies.
- #6: Ask for audience suggestions first
- #7: Note MPhil and service work require conversion to a suitable format. Service work evaluation must be done with sufficient rigour Shall we sprinkle this slide (or create another) with examples of registrar publications (here or as references in an appendix to the presentation)?
- #8: Note MPhil and service work require conversion to a suitable format. Service work evaluation must be done with sufficient rigour Shall we sprinkle this slide (or create another) with examples of registrar publications (here or as references in an appendix to the presentation)?
- #9: BMJ publishes 7% of the 7,000 to 8,000 articles they receive annually. Example of what we mean by specialist paper: e.g. communicable disease case report, a methodology paper, a paper with relevance to a specific population group, e.g. geriatric public health
- #12: Demonstrate Jane tool using a real abstract (TBC). Journals usually publish a mission statement: who there audience is, what they publish and what they don’t publish.
- #13: Note limitations of Impact Factor: Comparisons across disciplines may not be fair Favours journals with that publish reviews May reflect the large impact of a relatively small proportion of a journal’s output Penalises Open Access journals that are less selective in what they publish (high impact articles “diluted”) Other “impact” metrics are available
- #15: Note choice of second and second to last is also important.
- #16: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
- #18: Though they may ignore your preference!
- #19: New: Could also mean a new interpretation or spin on existing knowledge. The more novel, the higher the likely impact but replication or refutation can also be important findings. As can negative (null) results.
- #20: If your paper is relevant to the journal, and you’ve followed the authorship instructions, then you can expect to fall in the middle. Rejection without peer review suggests you’ve aimed to high, while unqualified acceptance is extremely rare in respected peer-reviewed journals.