Overcoming Challenges

When Writing for

Publication@MariaJGrant

Editor http://bit.ly/9RMH6S

Enhancing Your Chances of Your

Manuscript Being Accepted

@MariaJGrant

Editor http://bit.ly/9RMH6S

A Bit About Me…

• Editor of the Health

Information and

Libraries Journal

• First publication in

1998

• Peer support writers

group since 2006

How Many of You Write?

http://bit.ly/Na7VRj

What Do We Mean by ‘Write’?

• Mark (letters, words, or other symbols) on a surface, with a pen, pencil, or similar implement

• Compose (a text or work) in writing

http://amzn.to/LDA7Ng

Writing for publication perceived to be

different from other forms of writing(Grant et al 2010)

Different Forms of Writing for Publication

• Twitter

• Facebook

• Blogs

• Newsletters

• Book reviews

• Journal articles

• Practitioner accounts

http://bit.ly/pgUxaH

Writing Academic Papers Is Different

• Level of rigour when writing is higher

• Expected to support statements with references

• Contextualise what is known about the subject and any gaps in the evidence

• The manuscript adds to the body of knowledge

What Are the Common Challenges When Writing?

http://bit.ly/M8BJ1E http://bit.ly/NcaVQM http://bit.ly/OcL8pk

Finding Time Having an Idea Knowing When to Stop

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

Finding Time…

http://bit.ly/M8BJ1E

Making Time…

http://bit.ly/M8BJ1E

Having an Idea

http://bit.ly/NcaVQM

Working Titles

1. Brainstorming a range of draft working titles

2. Think creatively

3. Rate your titles

4. Shortlist no more than six

(Race 1999)

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted

1. Message

2. Audience

3. Guidelines

4. Editorial Team

5. Published Papers

6. Setting the Context

7. Experienced Colleagues

http://bit.ly/Odoj4G

What is the ‘Take Home’ Message?

• Not only what you want to say

• What can the readers of your manuscript usefully apply to their own practice?

http://bit.ly/nS9QxS

Consider Your Audience

• Academic vs. Practitioner publications – HILJ vs. HLG Newsletter

• Journals each have defined and unique scope

• Imagine an individual you are writing for…

http://bit.ly/qhUSlq

Author Guidelines

• Read the guidelines… and then follow them

• Guidelines will help you determine:– In scope

– Structured abstract

– Structure of the manuscript

– Word count

– Referencing stylehttp://bit.ly/cv7S6j

Editorial Team

• Not sure if your manuscript fits the scope of a journal…

Looks at Past Issues

• Learn from people who have already been through the process

http://bit.ly/qOaJWR

Setting the Context

• Literature review

– What is known about the subject area?

– What are the gaps identified in the literature?

– How does your manuscript address this gap?

– International context

http://bit.ly/n8ed3j

Experienced Colleagues

• Learn from colleagues with publishing experience

– Writing together

– Editing and advising

Writing

• Write for 5 minutes about the working title you ranked as the most important

• Don’t self edit

• Don’t re-read

• If you don’t know what to write then write “I don’t know what to write”

• Keep your pen or pencil flowing

http://bit.ly/N4gUGY

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

Sandwich Filling

• Take turns to share your writing idea with the person sitting next to you

• Ask questions to clarify your understanding http://bit.ly/N4gUGY

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

Writing Sandwich

• Re-visit your five minutes of writing

• Rework it in light of the questions your partner asked http://bit.ly/N4gUGY

http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

What is Peer Review?

‘Peer review is the process by which reports of, or proposals for, research are scrutinised by other researchers.’

(Committee of Publisher Ethics 2011)

What is the Purpose of Peer Review?

• To ensure that only the best quality manuscripts are published

• To provide constructive feedback on how a manuscript can be further developed

What Are the Potential Outcomes of a Peer Review?

• Four potential outcomes

– Accept

– Minor revisions

– Major revisions

– Rejecthttp://bit.ly/qKLDRq

Outcome 1: Accepted

• A cause for celebration!

• I’ve never known a peer reviewed manuscript be accepted at first submission

• Usually a journey…http://bit.ly/o80w2e

Outcome 2: Minor Revisions

“A recommendation of minor revision should be made if the manuscript is likely to be of interest to the HILJ readership but typographical errors or incomplete references are present.” (S1M 2011)

http://bit.ly/n3Uowg

Outcome 3: Major Revisions

“A recommendation of a major revision should be made if the manuscript is likely to be of interest to the HILJ readership but requires a reworking in terms of structure or the inclusion of additional materials.”

(S1M 2011)

What To Do When You Receive Referee/s Comments?

• Take a deep breath– Read the comments

– Put the manuscript aside

– Discuss them with your co-author/s

– Respond positively to each point raised

• Remember, very few manuscripts are accepted without any revisions

http://bit.ly/LBT2Ja

Outcome 4: Rejected

“A recommendation to reject a manuscript should be made if the manuscript is unlikely to be relevant/of interest to the HILJ readership or is not sufficiently rigorous to be suitable for publication in an academic journal.”(S1M 2011)

http://bit.ly/pT2Ess

Reasons a Manuscript Might Be Rejected

• Out of scope– Topic area or format

• Insufficiently developed– Bullet points

– May show promise…

• Plagiarism

• Not responding to referee/s comments

http://bit.ly/pT2Ess

Plagiarism

• “Take (the work or idea of someone else) and pretend it is one’s own.” (Fowler, Pocket OED 2002)

• “Direct quotes” or in your own words but the source must be acknowledged

http://bit.ly/ne6p4U

Research, Evaluation & AuditKey Steps in Demonstrating Your Value

• Chapter 11: Writing for Publication

• Co-written with Graham Walton, Editor, New Review of Academic Librarianship

(Grant et al Forthcoming) http://bit.ly/MXt6LT

One Sentence… http://bit.ly/NhZRBm

http://bit.ly/RVf3Gc

Writing Ideas Generated (1)

• An Investigation into the Information-Seeking Behaviour of F1 and F2 Doctors. To investigate the information-seeking behaviour of F1 and F2 doctors in an Acute Trust in order to ensure their needs are being met and improve the existing knowledge on this subject.

• Changing the Future Now. Using innovations to plan forward for a successful life audit for now and beyond…

• Does Social Media Raise the Impact of Current Awareness Days? Measuring the impact of current awareness days in light of social media compared to before relying only on TV, radio and newspaper coverage.

• Evaluating Uni Work of OLS in a Large Acute Trust on Patient Care. [No abstract]

• From Conference First-Timer to Seasoned Networker. [No abstract]

• Going for Gold. Encouraging more NHS staff & students to register for NHS Athens accounts during the 2012 Olympics.

• [Untitled] Creating a long-term conditions NHS implementation service using a zero cost approach in collaboration with third sector organisations.

Writing Ideas Generated (2)

• [Untitled] Library anxiety is an important issue for placement students that hospital librarians should understand and support through better collaboration with academic librarians.

• [Untitled] My experience of the HLG 2012, in particular the Innovate or Wait session from Day 1, for the HLG Newsletter.

• [Untitled] The research seeks to establish the availability of medical information resources in resource limited settings, the level of access and the utilization of the information.

• What Are The Challenges of Providing Health Information to Patients Via Email? An article to address the challenges of responding appropriately to an email enquiry for health information by an NHS information service.

• What Do Searches of Trials Registers Add to the Systematic Review Evidence Base? Searches of trails registers may add essential evidence to the SR process and compensate for potential bias, therefore we should search them despite challenges of basic search interfaces, lace of specificity & reference management issues.

• “Where Do I Go From Here” A reflective discussion of the next step on the career ladder for an academic librarian.

Knowing When to Stop

http://bit.ly/MNVdx0

References• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Written evidence submitted by the

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (PR 34). http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmsctech/writev/856/m34.htm

• Fowler FG, Fowler HW (eds) Pocket Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, 9th ed

• Grant MJ, Sen B, Spring H (Eds) Research, evaluation and audit: key steps in demonstrating your value, London: Facet Publishing, forthcoming.

• Grant MJ, Munro W, McIsaac & Hill S. Cross-disciplinary writers group stimulates fresh approaches to scholarly communication: a reflective case study within a higher education institution in the north west of England New Review of Academic Librarianship in press.

• Race P, 1999, Tips for Lecturers, London: Routledge Falmer. Chapter 8.

• S1M. Health Information and Libraries Journal on ScholarOne Manuscript. 2011 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/hilj

Contact Details

Maria J. Grant

Editor – HILJ

m.j.grant@salford.ac.uk

+44 (0) 161 295 6423

@MariaJGrant @HILJnl