2. Preparing & Submitting the
Manuscript
4th Research Summer School
9th July, 2012
Taghreed Justinia MSc PhD
Asst. Professor, Department of Health Informatics
Asst. Director, Information & Communication Technology
KSAU-HS, NGHA
Tel. +966 2 6240000 ext. 26217 / 26210
Email: JustiniaT@ngha.med.sa
3. In this session…
Major parts of a Manuscript
Writing skills; suggestions for improvement
Submitting the manuscript; process and advice
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 3 09/07/12
4. Manuscript writing
The goal of scientific writing in a manuscript is effective
communication
The report is precise and to the point: it states the question
to which the problem is addressed, the method employed,
the results obtained and the relation of these results to other
scientific knowledge
The usual requirements of English such as complete
sentences, accurate spelling and current grammar is required
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 4 09/07/12
5. Major Parts of a Manuscript
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 5 09/07/12
6. Major parts of a Manuscript
1. Title page
Title
Author’s name and institutional affiliation (disclaimers)
Abstract
Key words
2. Introduction
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. References
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 6 09/07/12
7. Title
99% of readers will read only the title and abstract of your paper
(most will only read the title)
The title should
summarize the main idea of the paper
be a concise statement of the main topic
should refer to the major variables investigated
make electronic retrieval both sensitive and specific.
Do not use abbreviations in the title
Recommended length is 10-12 words
Shorter or longer titles are permissible
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 7 09/07/12
8. Author’s name & institutional
affiliation
The author’s name should appear as normally written
Be consistent!
an author should not use initials on one manuscript and full
name on a later one
Institutional affiliation as of the time the research was conducted
Corresponding author's name, mailing address, telephone and fax
numbers, and email address
Email addresses of all authors
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 8 09/07/12
9. Abstract
A brief summary of the contents and purpose of the article
Approximately 120-150 words (short but informative)
Should contain statements of (a) the problem, (b) the
method, (c) the results, and (d) the findings and conclusions
Results are most important, and every abstract should at
least contain the trend of the results
State the kind and number of subjects, and the research
design
A list of three to nine key words follows the abstract
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 9 09/07/12
10. Introduction
To inform the reader of the specific problem under study
and the research strategy
What is the point of the study?
What is the rationale or logical link between the problem
and the research design?
What are the theoretical implications of the study and its
relationship to previous work in the area?
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 10 09/07/12
11. Introduction
Discuss the pertinent literature (not include an exhaustive
historical review)
Cite only selected studies that are pertinent to the specific
issue
In summarizing earlier works, avoid nonessential details:
emphasize major conclusions, findings and relevant
methodological issues
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 11 09/07/12
12. Methodology
How the study was conducted
Should be described in enough detail to permit an
experienced investigator to replicate the study if desired (this
applies to quantitative research)
Three labeled subsections:
Participants
Apparatus (or Materials)
Design and Procedures
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 12 09/07/12
13. Results
Briefly state the main idea of your results or findings
Present detailed summaries in tables or figures
(supplementary; not instead of text)
Report the data in sufficient detail to justify your subsequent
conclusions
DO NOT discuss the implications of the results in this
subsection (save implications for the DISCUSSION section)
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 13 09/07/12
14. Discussion
In general, be guided by the following questions:
What have I contributed here?
How has my study helped to resolve the original
problem?
What conclusions and theoretical implications can I
draw from my study?
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 14 09/07/12
15. Discussion
Relate findings of the study to findings reported by others
Provide a deeper understanding of your findings
Do not restate what you have done
Do not focus on yourself - put current results in context with similar
data that might interest the readers
The author may
draw inferences from the results
give alternative interpretations
base these firmly on the research findings
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 15 09/07/12
16. References
Note and adhere to format of journal to be submitted to
Avoid excessive self-citation; make sure to balance between your
own work and that of others
Choose references carefully and cite them accurately
Can use reference manager like EndNote/Procite/RefWorks
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 16 09/07/12
17. Appendices
Inclusion of an appendix will help your instructor/reviewers
evaluate your paper
Some examples that may be included in the appendix are:
Raw scores and computations used in statistical analyses
In non-experimental research: a questionnaire, consent
form, information sheet
Anything you include as an appendix does not count toward
the word count of the final paper
Approvals, forms, letters
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 17 09/07/12
19. Problems with Scientific Writing
What are the most common problems with manuscripts?
The paper is too long
Its subject matter is not suitable for the journal
The author has not explained the general interest of the
specific issues
The author assumes too much specific knowledge from the
reader
The writing and figures are not clear
It is not well structured
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 19 09/07/12
20. Writing Skills
Be Accurate
Science is a precise discipline. Your descriptions or results
may be used by others who need to know they are reliable
Be Brief
Use only as many words as you need – remove or replace
words that are repeated or do not add anything useful
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 20 09/07/12
21. Writing Skills
Be Clear
You will not be there to explain to the reader what you
mean. If you have to read a sentence again in order to
understand it, rewrite it. Better still, give your work to others to
read to see if it makes sense to them
Avoid long sentences
Long sentences are hard to follow. Shorter sentences help
you write concisely
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 21 09/07/12
22. Writing Skills
Be concise
This keeps your writing from being swamped with
unnecessary words
Make your writing clear and therefore easy to follow
Most journals have strict word limits!
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 22 09/07/12
23. Writing that is not concise
The data that were collected in this study were obtained by walking 6 x
500 m transects that traversed, from one side to the other, study plots in
each of the four forest compartments (K14, K12, K10) listed in the
previous section.
All the words that are underlined are unnecessary and can be
removed without any loss of important information, leaving:
The data were obtained by walking 6 x 500 m transects in each of the
four forest compartments.
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 23 09/07/12
24. Language and Grammar
Use plain words
Impress the reader with your project, not your knowledge of
the dictionary
Avoid jargon and abbreviations as they may not be widely
known
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 24 09/07/12
25. Less is more
at this point in time = now
at that point in time = then
has the ability to = can
has the potential to = can
in light of the fact that = because
in the event that = if
in the vicinity of = near
owing to the fact that = because
the question as to whether = whether
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 25 09/07/12
26. Planning your paragraphs
This is the key to writing logical, structured reports:
Start with generalities and then move towards more specific
ideas
There should be an obvious logical connection between
paragraphs
There should be one main or theme point per paragraph; if
the paragraph contains too many themes, create a new
paragraph or paragraphs
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 26 09/07/12
27. Grammar
You can be a very good writer without knowing much about
grammatical terms
Simple writing is often easier to follow than writing that
uses complex structures
Remember to use the same tense throughout your paper
Most problems occur in long, complex sentences – a good
reason to keep them short
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 27 09/07/12
28. Grammar
Make it look good
Get rid of ALl typingg an$d sPeling erors;
If your writing looks careless, people may not trust the
accuracy of your work
Be consistent
Use the same definitions throughout – if you introduce a
definition in the methods, use the same term in the results and
discussion
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 28 09/07/12
30. Impact Factors
Impact Factor is:
A measure of the frequency with which the "average
article" in a journal has been cited in a particular year or
period
Depends heavily on size of the field
Does not reflect individual articles
Includes self-citations (journal and author)
Review articles skew impact factors
Linked to publication time of journal (2-year timeframe)
Publishing in high-impact journal does not guarantee high
citations
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 30 09/07/12
31. Determining authorship
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Criteria:
3.Substantial contributions to conception and design, or
acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
4.Drafting the article or revising it critically for important
content
5.Final approval of the version to be published
Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, 3 to be credited.
“Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of
the research group, alone, does not constitute authorship.” - ICMJE
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 31 09/07/12
32. Word count
Depends on specific journal requirements (refer to the journal
guide for authors and submission guidelines)
Could be 22 pages, 5,000 words, 7,000 words, unspecified
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 32 09/07/12
33. Submission Procedures
Depends on specific journal guidelines and requirements
Submit by post:
No staples, single sheets
If more than 5 pages manila file
Most journals have online submission procedures
Make sure you have carefully read and adhered to the journal’s list of
instructions for authors
No manuscript should be submitted simultaneously to more
than one journal
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 33 09/07/12
34. Cover Letter
Title of the research paper
Intended submission type (article, report, letter, review etc.)
Details about the authors and their affiliations
Contact information of the corresponding author
Very brief background on the research field (what are the open
questions and why are they important?)
Briefly about the paper’s objectives and findings
Why is the study relevant?
Why the paper should be published
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 34 09/07/12
35. The submission process
1. Authors submit to journal
2. Review by editorial board >>Deliberation
3. Peer review by referee>>Return to editorial board>>Deliberation
4. Return to authors with decision letter:
Accept-no revisions (go to step 7)
Accept-minor revisions (most common) > (go to step 5)
Accept-major revisions
Reject
P Revision done by authors>>Return to editorial board
Deliberation by editorial board>>final decision (accept or reject)
e If Accepted
Proofs
Publication
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 35 09/07/12
36. Turnaround times
No precise answer (but takes a long time)
Depends on many factors
The more revisions the more time
First decision letter could be received within 10-14 weeks
From submission date to final print could take 6 months
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 36 09/07/12
37. Editors
Act as quality-control managers
Everything goes through them
Link between author paper, referees and publishers
Make final decisions about acceptance and rejection of
papers
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 37 09/07/12
38. Peer Review
Referee/Reviewer:
any researcher in a university or other organization that has
demonstrated the required expertise in a specialty area of the
paper
Selected by the journal editorial board
Determines if methods and conclusions are sound
Quality control element of science
Blind / double-blind process
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 38 09/07/12
39. What referees & editors look for
ignificance of research topic
riginality of the work
dequacy of approach/experimental design/techniques
oundness of conclusions and interpretation
elevance of discussion
uitability for journal
fficiency of organisation
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 39 09/07/12
41. Minor revision
The most common response to submissions
Welcome it as a healthy option
Take the advice of the editors and reviewers as constructive
They are professional experts in the field
Their advice will make your paper better
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 41 09/07/12
42. Major revision
id referees misunderstand the paper?
o you agree with referees’ comments?
f so, accept that the necessary revisions
Will most probably improve the paper; make the changes!
oes it require additional lab work?
any papers do not get re-submitted at this stage
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 42 09/07/12
binned
43. Dealing with rejection
Everyone gets rejected; don’t take it personally & don’t lose hope!
Many journals have high rejection rates (sometimes up to 95%!)
Remember that most criticism leads to revisions that ultimately
improve the paper
Consider editor’s and referees’ comments carefully before
deciding what to do next
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 43 09/07/12
44. What to do with rejection?
Editors and referees do make mistakes:
willing to overrule specific points, especially if there
were factual errors in the reviews
large majority of decisions are not overturned
Consider appealing (be aware that it is an uphill battle)
Time is an issue if you want to appeal
Do more work and resubmit as a new paper to the same
journal?
Bite the bullet; send to a different journal?
DO NOT use inflammatory language, bribes, threats
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 44 09/07/12
45. Most importantly
Read author guidelines carefully; you will learn a lot!
Enjoy the process
Learn from the process
The more you write and submit, the better you will get!
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 45 09/07/12
46. References & further reading
How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education by Jack R.
Fraenkel and Norman E. Wallen (2006, Book, Illustrated)
Bryman, A. and M. Hardy, Eds. (2004). Handbook of data
analysis. London, Sage.
Silverman, D., Ed. (2006). Qualitative research: theory, method
and practice. London, Sage.
Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
Corbin, J. and A. Strauss (1990). “Grounded Theory Research:
Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria”. Qualitative Sociology
13(1): 3.
Latest on Journal Manuscript Submissions 46 09/07/12
Appealing the decision. If you receive a rejection letter, put it away for a minimum of 24 hours. Knee-jerk responses are rarely rational or well constructed. Also, if you are making fun of us, take special care to ensure you click “forward” and not “reply” to the decision letter, as no matter how amusing I find these letters, they are not usually meant for our eyes (the most entertaining of these e-mails said I deserved a spanking). Determine whether a rebuttal letter is truly your best option, as you may not submit the work elsewhere while the rebuttal is still being considered. But editors and referees do make mistakes, and we are willing to overrule specific points, especially if there were factual errors in the reviews. While I have no statistics on how many rebuttals are successful, I note that the large majority of decisions are not overturned. What helps in a rebuttal letter? As in the point-by-point letter, be polite, even if you disagree. Do not guess at the referee’s identity, as most of the time you are incorrect, and we will not reveal any information related to who did or did not provide input into the decision; it is helpful, however, to have specific evidence if you feel a referee is biased. But do not spend too much time trying to prove the editor or referee wrong; simply explain why your manuscript deserves a second look. You should always offer to add new data and not just make superficial changes. Stress that you are willing to do everything and more to alleviate the editors’ and referees’ concerns and to improve the paper. Point out (politely) what factual errors were made in the interpretations of the data. What doesn’t help (and is more often supplied in rebuttal letters)? Inflammatory language. Calling the editors or referees idiots. Bribes (rare) or threats of varying seriousness (not as rare). Blanket statements that the referees are unfair. Celebrity endorsements like “Nobel laureate X said my paper was great.” Cosmetic rewriting of the paper. Guesses at referee identity followed by personal attacks. Statements about your reputation and where you have previously published. And worst of all, don’t tell us that we “published a worse paper on a similar subject.”
Appealing the decision. If you receive a rejection letter, put it away for a minimum of 24 hours. Knee-jerk responses are rarely rational or well constructed. Also, if you are making fun of us, take special care to ensure you click “forward” and not “reply” to the decision letter, as no matter how amusing I find these letters, they are not usually meant for our eyes (the most entertaining of these e-mails said I deserved a spanking). Determine whether a rebuttal letter is truly your best option, as you may not submit the work elsewhere while the rebuttal is still being considered. But editors and referees do make mistakes, and we are willing to overrule specific points, especially if there were factual errors in the reviews. While I have no statistics on how many rebuttals are successful, I note that the large majority of decisions are not overturned. What helps in a rebuttal letter? As in the point-by-point letter, be polite, even if you disagree. Do not guess at the referee’s identity, as most of the time you are incorrect, and we will not reveal any information related to who did or did not provide input into the decision; it is helpful, however, to have specific evidence if you feel a referee is biased. But do not spend too much time trying to prove the editor or referee wrong; simply explain why your manuscript deserves a second look. You should always offer to add new data and not just make superficial changes. Stress that you are willing to do everything and more to alleviate the editors’ and referees’ concerns and to improve the paper. Point out (politely) what factual errors were made in the interpretations of the data. What doesn’t help (and is more often supplied in rebuttal letters)? Inflammatory language. Calling the editors or referees idiots. Bribes (rare) or threats of varying seriousness (not as rare). Blanket statements that the referees are unfair. Celebrity endorsements like “Nobel laureate X said my paper was great.” Cosmetic rewriting of the paper. Guesses at referee identity followed by personal attacks. Statements about your reputation and where you have previously published. And worst of all, don’t tell us that we “published a worse paper on a similar subject.”