Scientific Writing: A step Scientific Writing: A step forwardforward

Arash Etemadi, MDArash Etemadi, MD

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical SciencesMedical Sciences

aetemadi@tums.ac.iraetemadi@tums.ac.ir

Why Writing Is Important?Why Writing Is Important?

No publication, no projectNo publication, no project Make information available for othersMake information available for others

No publication, no promotionNo publication, no promotion Yardstick of productivityYardstick of productivity

No publication, no fundingNo publication, no funding What have you done for me lately?What have you done for me lately?

Intrinsic Causes of Writing Intrinsic Causes of Writing ProblemsProblems

Internal CensorsInternal Censors– Fears of FailureFears of Failure

PerfectionismPerfectionism ProcrastinationProcrastination

Intrinsic Blocks to WritingIntrinsic Blocks to Writing (I) Inability to Start (I) Inability to Start WritingWriting ““First, there is the difficulty of First, there is the difficulty of

writing at all” writing at all” D. BrandeD. Brande Becoming a WriterBecoming a Writer

Perfectionism, self-consciousness, Perfectionism, self-consciousness, procrastinationprocrastination

How to StartHow to Start

DailyDaily 30 minutes to one hour30 minutes to one hour Do not pay attention to structure, Do not pay attention to structure,

grammar, spellinggrammar, spelling

Stimulus ControlStimulus Control

Few regular places to workFew regular places to work Close the doorClose the door Unplug the phoneUnplug the phone No e-mailNo e-mail Arrange the siteArrange the site

– But do not clean up the officeBut do not clean up the office

(II) Inability to Finish (II) Inability to Finish WritingWriting Multiple revisionsMultiple revisions Multiple analysesMultiple analyses ““Each time I think I am finished, I Each time I think I am finished, I

see there is a lot more to do”see there is a lot more to do” Similar roots as inability to start Similar roots as inability to start

(perfectionism)(perfectionism) Different peopleDifferent people Lack of insightLack of insight

TUMS workshops on TUMS workshops on scientific writingscientific writing Level 1: BasicsLevel 1: Basics Level 2: Focus on international Level 2: Focus on international

publicationspublications Level 3: Specialized writingLevel 3: Specialized writing

An overviewAn overview

The traditional IMRaDThe traditional IMRaD

– IntroductionIntroduction– MetodsMetods– ResultsResults– DiscussionDiscussion

A full paper consists of:A full paper consists of:A full paper consists of:A full paper consists of:

TitleTitle Authors and AffiliationAuthors and Affiliation AbstractAbstract IntroductionIntroduction MethodsMethods ResultsResults DiscussionDiscussion Acknowledgments Acknowledgments (optional)(optional)

ReferencesReferences

TitleTitle Authors and AffiliationAuthors and Affiliation AbstractAbstract IntroductionIntroduction MethodsMethods ResultsResults DiscussionDiscussion Acknowledgments Acknowledgments (optional)(optional)

ReferencesReferences

Target your paper at a Target your paper at a particular journalparticular journal Familiarise yourself thoroughly with Familiarise yourself thoroughly with

potential journalspotential journals what sort of papers do they publish? what sort of papers do they publish?

(original articles, briefs, reviews, (original articles, briefs, reviews, commentaries, iconoclastic pieces?)commentaries, iconoclastic pieces?)

What is the “culture” of the journal?What is the “culture” of the journal? National or international focus?National or international focus? Write for that journalWrite for that journal

If for a general If for a general medical journal..medical journal.. Mostly read by clinicians, so Mostly read by clinicians, so

“practical”, useful, papers highly “practical”, useful, papers highly regarded.regarded.

If a specialist journal...If a specialist journal...

Cut to the chase!Cut to the chase! Do not waste time with Do not waste time with

elementary ABC introductory elementary ABC introductory sections -- it is being read by sections -- it is being read by people who know the fieldpeople who know the field

locate your paper precisely in locate your paper precisely in what has gone beforewhat has gone before

1.1. Design wellDesign well2.2. Decide politicsDecide politics3.3. Choose journalChoose journal4.4. Read instructions to authors/papersRead instructions to authors/papers5.5. Set frameworkSet framework6.6. Prepare draftsPrepare drafts7.7. DistributeDistribute8.8. PolishPolish9.9. SubmitSubmit

What is the gestational period for a clinical science publication?

START

STUDIES/EXPERIMENTS

WRITE ANDSUBMIT

REWRITE ANDRESUBMIT

WAIT

PUBLISHED!

4-24 months

2-4 months

2-4 months

2-4 months

2-4 months

14-44 Months!

PROTOCOL/IRB 2-4 months

BEST GUESS

Order of writing?Order of writing?

1.1. ResultsResults

2.2. MethodsMethods

3.3. IntroductionIntroduction

4.4. DiscussionDiscussion

5.5. AbstractAbstract

6.6. ReferencesReferences

Order of writing?Order of writing?

1.1. MethodsMethods

2.2. ResultsResults

3.3. IntroductionIntroduction

4.4. DiscussionDiscussion

5.5. AbstractAbstract

6.6. ReferencesReferences

Getting StartedGetting Started Do you have enough data for a Do you have enough data for a

manuscript?manuscript? Do you have a complete story to tell?Do you have a complete story to tell? Write a list of the figures and tables that Write a list of the figures and tables that

you would include in your paperyou would include in your paper Write a brief, skeleton outline of the Write a brief, skeleton outline of the

paper (1-2 pages) and show it, along with paper (1-2 pages) and show it, along with the list of figures, to your coworkers and the list of figures, to your coworkers and discussdiscuss

TIPS….TIPS….

Be enthusiastic about your data Be enthusiastic about your data and your storyand your story

Be sure you convey what Be sure you convey what “problem” you have addressed in “problem” you have addressed in your studyyour study

Be sure to describe the area of Be sure to describe the area of research you are studying as research you are studying as fascinating and importantfascinating and important

First StepsFirst Steps

Analyze your data criticallyAnalyze your data critically Do statistical analysesDo statistical analyses Prepare figuresPrepare figures

– make graphsmake graphs– take photographs, get prints, labeltake photographs, get prints, label

Prepare tablesPrepare tables Be sure your data is internally consistentBe sure your data is internally consistent Show the final data figures (and tables) to Show the final data figures (and tables) to

your co-authors for commentyour co-authors for comment

Effective Data Effective Data PresentationPresentation

Figures are almost always better than tablesFigures are almost always better than tables Look at published figures (in papers that Look at published figures (in papers that

have data similar to yours) to get ideas about have data similar to yours) to get ideas about how to compose graphs, and how to frame how to compose graphs, and how to frame and label blots, gels and photomicrographsand label blots, gels and photomicrographs

Learn how to use graphics programs (Sigma Learn how to use graphics programs (Sigma Plot or Excel)Plot or Excel)

Learn to use Adobe PhotoshopLearn to use Adobe Photoshop Photomicrographs - color is expensive!Photomicrographs - color is expensive!

Instructions to the Instructions to the AuthorsAuthors

Guidelines for writing the paperGuidelines for writing the paper Usually found in January issue of Usually found in January issue of

journaljournal Almost always found on the web Almost always found on the web

site for the journalsite for the journal

Mechanics of Writing- Title, Mechanics of Writing- Title, Abstract and IntroductionAbstract and Introduction

Title- be as specific as possible; include Title- be as specific as possible; include designdesign

Abstract is a summary of the paper Abstract is a summary of the paper (therefore write last); check for a word (therefore write last); check for a word limit; structure it.limit; structure it.

Introduction – Importance, a brief review Introduction – Importance, a brief review of the literature, information gaps, of the literature, information gaps, statement of hypothesisstatement of hypothesis

Introduction- about 3 to 4 paragraphsIntroduction- about 3 to 4 paragraphs

Mechanics of Writing - Mechanics of Writing - MethodsMethods

Use subheadings to organizeUse subheadings to organize Details - use sufficient detail for Details - use sufficient detail for

another investigator to be able to another investigator to be able to reproduce your resultsreproduce your results

Reference methods used previouslyReference methods used previously Be precise with respect to Be precise with respect to

measurements and definitionsmeasurements and definitions StatisticsStatistics

Mechanics of Writing-Mechanics of Writing-ResultsResults

Tell a storyTell a story Use the most logical sequence to present Use the most logical sequence to present

the data (not necessarily the order in the data (not necessarily the order in which you did the experiments)which you did the experiments)

Just report the data - do not include Just report the data - do not include interpretation or comparison to literatureinterpretation or comparison to literature

No duplication of dataNo duplication of data

Guidelines for Writing Guidelines for Writing Results - Results - The Study as it was The Study as it was ConductedConducted Specify the dates of the studySpecify the dates of the study

Provide a schematic summaryProvide a schematic summary Describe the characteristics of each Describe the characteristics of each

groupgroup Indicate if the sample is representativeIndicate if the sample is representative Indicate if randomization was successfulIndicate if randomization was successful Describe duration and nature of follow upDescribe duration and nature of follow up For observations based on judgment, For observations based on judgment,

provide assessment of consistencyprovide assessment of consistency

Guidelines for Writing Guidelines for Writing Results: Results: The Study OutcomesThe Study Outcomes

Present the results for all primary endpointsPresent the results for all primary endpoints Report statistical findings in detailReport statistical findings in detail Report actual p values , 95% CI , etc.Report actual p values , 95% CI , etc. Report the main findings in figures or tablesReport the main findings in figures or tables

- - you don’t need to also report them in you don’t need to also report them in the textthe text

Report confoundersReport confounders

Mechanics of Writing- Mechanics of Writing- DiscussionDiscussion

Construct parallel to resultsConstruct parallel to results Interpretation of dataInterpretation of data Relate your results to the findings Relate your results to the findings

of other investigatorsof other investigators Summary paragraph at end - Summary paragraph at end -

include significance of resultsinclude significance of results Avoid redundancy with results and Avoid redundancy with results and

introduction sectionsintroduction sections

Good discussions---Good discussions---

Address every key finding of the studyAddress every key finding of the study Present the finding in terms of what is Present the finding in terms of what is

knownknown State why this study is differentState why this study is different State why the results concur/ State why the results concur/

disagree with current knowledgedisagree with current knowledge Justify differencesJustify differences Point out future directions/ continued Point out future directions/ continued

knowledge gapsknowledge gaps

ReferencesReferences

Aim for about 30 referencesAim for about 30 references Use recent review papers where Use recent review papers where

appropriate to decrease the numberappropriate to decrease the number Get a hard copy of every reference in the Get a hard copy of every reference in the

manuscript and make sure the manuscript and make sure the referenced paper says what you say it referenced paper says what you say it does! Don’t use abstracts!does! Don’t use abstracts!

Proof-read the reference list especially Proof-read the reference list especially carefully as one of your reviewers may be carefully as one of your reviewers may be cited!cited!

Use End Note or other bibliographic Use End Note or other bibliographic softwaresoftware

Use the InternetUse the Internet

A Few RulesA Few Rules

The first time you use an abbreviation, The first time you use an abbreviation, define itdefine it

When you give the commercial source When you give the commercial source for a reagent, the first time you cite the for a reagent, the first time you cite the source include the location of the source include the location of the company (city and state) company (city and state)

Make sure the subject and verb agree in Make sure the subject and verb agree in every sentenceevery sentence

No contrac. or exclamation points!No contrac. or exclamation points!

A Few Rules - continuedA Few Rules - continued

Look for redundancy within the manuscriptLook for redundancy within the manuscript Try not to use “it” or “they” - be specific!Try not to use “it” or “they” - be specific! No jargonNo jargon Two shorter sentences are frequently much Two shorter sentences are frequently much

more effective than a long, complex more effective than a long, complex sentencesentence

““Data” is plural not singular, i.e., “the data Data” is plural not singular, i.e., “the data are…” NOT “ the data is…”are…” NOT “ the data is…”

A Few Rules - A Few Rules - continued continued Capitalize people’s names, i.e., Capitalize people’s names, i.e.,

Golgi apparatusGolgi apparatus Never, ever plagiarize! (even Never, ever plagiarize! (even

from yourself!)from yourself!) Use numbers when expressing Use numbers when expressing

measurements, except when the measurements, except when the number would begin a sentencenumber would begin a sentence

Common Errors in Common Errors in ManuscriptsManuscripts

The TitleThe Title is misleading/ does not set limitsis misleading/ does not set limits Gives away the punch lineGives away the punch line

The AbstractThe Abstract reports different measures/ methods reports different measures/ methods results are not the same as the paperresults are not the same as the paper conclusions are not the sameconclusions are not the same

The IntroductionThe Introduction question, hypothesis, study question, hypothesis, study

objectives are not specified, or objectives are not specified, or are confusedare confused

importance, novelty, originality importance, novelty, originality of the study not shownof the study not shown

presentation is not intriguingpresentation is not intriguing

(ie, the introduction is boring)(ie, the introduction is boring)

The MethodsThe Methods

Probably the most important Probably the most important sectionsection

reported methods not usedreported methods not used details are missing so you details are missing so you

cannot understandcannot understand entire methods are omittedentire methods are omitted

Common Errors When Common Errors When Reporting RESULTSReporting RESULTS

Errors of OmissionErrors of Omission:: Not accounting for all study Not accounting for all study

subjectssubjects Not naming which statistical tests Not naming which statistical tests

were used for specific analyseswere used for specific analyses Not presenting the results in Not presenting the results in

clinically relevant termsclinically relevant terms

Errors in the AnalysisErrors in the Analysis Lack of powerLack of power Failure to adjust for multiple comparisonsFailure to adjust for multiple comparisons Analysis by treatment received and not Analysis by treatment received and not

by intention to treatby intention to treatErrors in InterpretationErrors in Interpretation Not recognizing the limits/meaning of pNot recognizing the limits/meaning of p Clinical significance ignored in the face Clinical significance ignored in the face

of statisticsof statistics

The DiscussionThe Discussion logic is looselogic is loose is too expansive, wandersis too expansive, wanders is biased, omits key findingsis biased, omits key findings key results are poorly explainedkey results are poorly explained references are outdatedreferences are outdated speculation is not identifiedspeculation is not identified implications/ importance are overstatedimplications/ importance are overstated limitations are not describedlimitations are not described

The ConclusionsThe Conclusions simply restate the resultssimply restate the results do not answer the study do not answer the study

questionquestion do not set limits for applicationdo not set limits for application

General TipsGeneral Tips

Just START !!Just START !! Follow the instructions for authorsFollow the instructions for authors Apply research analytical principles Apply research analytical principles Adhere to scientific and writing ethicsAdhere to scientific and writing ethics Be patient - centered and not Be patient - centered and not

numbers centerednumbers centered Write with vigor and write vividlyWrite with vigor and write vividly

General TipsGeneral Tips

Write for readers and not to please peer Write for readers and not to please peer reviewsreviews

- readers read to learn; reviewers, - readers read to learn; reviewers, to improveto improve

Avoid self plagiarismAvoid self plagiarism Update the literature review Update the literature review Have a clinical colleague read your draftHave a clinical colleague read your draft Seek out criticismSeek out criticism

More readingMore reading

Hall GM, ed. Hall GM, ed. How to write a paper.How to write a paper. London: London:

BMJ Publishing Group. BMJ Publishing Group.

Peat J. Scientific Writing Easy when you know Peat J. Scientific Writing Easy when you know

how. BMJ Publishing Group. 2002.how. BMJ Publishing Group. 2002.

The Vancouver Group. The Vancouver Group. Uniform Uniform

requirements for manuscripts submitted requirements for manuscripts submitted

to biomedial journals.to biomedial journals.

www.icmje.orgwww.icmje.org

Finding and choosing an Finding and choosing an appropriate journalappropriate journal

Where to look for the journal:Where to look for the journal:– Personal experiencePersonal experience– Colleagues’ experienceColleagues’ experience– LibraryLibrary– CitationsCitations– OnlineOnline

Appropriate JournalAppropriate Journal

General versus SpecialtyGeneral versus Specialty

International versus LocalInternational versus Local

High versus Low impactHigh versus Low impact

LOOK AT THE JOURNALLOOK AT THE JOURNAL

LOOK AT THE AUDIENCELOOK AT THE AUDIENCE

1. What type of paper 1. What type of paper you wrote ?you wrote ?research report (“original article”)research report (“original article”)

review paperreview paper

special article special article

editorialeditorial

case reportcase report

letter to the editorletter to the editor

2. Is the paper really 2. Is the paper really worth being published?worth being published?

– Is the message new, or new to a Is the message new, or new to a particular audience?particular audience?

– Search the literature to make sure Search the literature to make sure you are not repeating history ++you are not repeating history ++

– Determine the odds that a particular Determine the odds that a particular journal will appreciate the newness journal will appreciate the newness and importance of your manuscript and importance of your manuscript in the context of the existing in the context of the existing medical literaturemedical literature

3. Be realistic3. Be realistic– This is your first manuscript or you have This is your first manuscript or you have

already a real track of publications on the already a real track of publications on the topic ?topic ?

– Are the co-authors or the Institution were you Are the co-authors or the Institution were you are based recognized in the field ?are based recognized in the field ?

– Are you an Iranian author submitting to a Are you an Iranian author submitting to a national, a European or an American journal ?national, a European or an American journal ?

– Reviews are mostly only by invitation but Reviews are mostly only by invitation but national journals can be quite opennational journals can be quite open

4. Know your journal 4. Know your journal targets?targets?1.1. Impact factor and prestige Impact factor and prestige 2.2. Normal content of one of the journal issuesNormal content of one of the journal issues

Which kind of manuscripts are published ?Which kind of manuscripts are published ? What are the preferred formats ?What are the preferred formats ?

3.3. Style and recent trends in the journalStyle and recent trends in the journal4.4. Who is the editor-in-chief ? Can you contact him Who is the editor-in-chief ? Can you contact him

??5.5. Who are the members of the editorial-board ? Who are the members of the editorial-board ?

They are very aware of the journal’s publication They are very aware of the journal’s publication policy…you can try to contact some of them policy…you can try to contact some of them with questionswith questions

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

J Natl Cancer Institute 10.730 12.945 14.159 14.240 14.500

J of Clinical Oncology 8.228 7.963 8.773 8.530 9.868

Cancer Research 8.370 8.614 8.460 8.302 8.318

Clinical Cancer Research 2.941 3.442 4.643 5.076 5.991

Oncogene 6.192 6.517 6.490 6.737 5.979

Gene Chromosome Cancer 3.804 4.902 4.534 4.416 4.199

Int Jrnl Cancer 3.283 3.545 3.918 4.233 4.056

Cancer 3.660 3.362 3.611 3.909 3.941

Annals of Oncology 2.867 3.195 3.249 3.153 3.114

1. Impact Factor: Oncology1. Impact Factor: Oncology

2. Normal content of the 2. Normal content of the journal ?journal ?

• Is the topic within the scope of the Is the topic within the scope of the journal?journal?

• Is the topic represented in the journal Is the topic represented in the journal frequently, or only rarely?frequently, or only rarely?

• Would the journal offer the best Would the journal offer the best match of audience and topic?match of audience and topic?

• What formats are acceptable to the What formats are acceptable to the journal?journal?

3. Style and recent 3. Style and recent trendstrends

Do look at a recent issue of the journal you Do look at a recent issue of the journal you plan to submit toplan to submit to

Do read the Instruction to authors of the Do read the Instruction to authors of the journal journal

((links to 3500 journals’ Instructions at links to 3500 journals’ Instructions at

www.mco.edu/lib/instr/libinsta.htmlwww.mco.edu/lib/instr/libinsta.html)) Be aware of word/figure/table limitsBe aware of word/figure/table limits Use the appropriate reference and citation Use the appropriate reference and citation

stylesstyles Help Editors and Referees (and yourself) – Help Editors and Referees (and yourself) –

Number all pagesNumber all pages

– Who is the editor-in-chief ?Who is the editor-in-chief ?– If you can contact him, query the If you can contact him, query the

editoreditor be specificbe specific sell your productsell your product

– Editorial board members?Editorial board members?

4. Editor in chief and editorial board

– He may belong to a specific editorial He may belong to a specific editorial boardboard

– He senses new opportunitiesHe senses new opportunities Launching of a new journalLaunching of a new journal Accurate format to sell your productAccurate format to sell your product

– Provides a more realistic point of Provides a more realistic point of viewview

5. Ask your mentor

6. What is your own 6. What is your own agenda when publishing ?agenda when publishing ?

• ColleaguesColleagues• Prestige journal vs. rapid publicationPrestige journal vs. rapid publication• National visibility vs international fameNational visibility vs international fame• Issues of timeliness and in-depth track Issues of timeliness and in-depth track

do matterdo matter

7. Timeliness and 7. Timeliness and friendliness of the friendliness of the submission processsubmission process

• Hot topic?Hot topic?• You can query about the average You can query about the average

reviewing time (assistant of the editors)reviewing time (assistant of the editors)• Is there an online submission process?Is there an online submission process?• Can you track your manuscript status Can you track your manuscript status

onlineonline

Target your paper at a Target your paper at a particular journalparticular journal Familiarise yourself thoroughly with Familiarise yourself thoroughly with

potential journalspotential journals what sort of papers do they publish? what sort of papers do they publish?

(original articles, briefs, reviews, (original articles, briefs, reviews, commentaries, iconoclastic pieces?)commentaries, iconoclastic pieces?)

What is the “culture” of the journal?What is the “culture” of the journal? National or international focus?National or international focus? Write for that journalWrite for that journal

Anatomy of a Anatomy of a submissionsubmission Compose a title pageCompose a title page

– determine who is the first author determine who is the first author (you) vs. the senior author (last (you) vs. the senior author (last in the list of authors)in the list of authors)

Be sure to cite the source of Be sure to cite the source of funding for the projectfunding for the project

Study design and ethical approval Data analysis Authorship Conflicts of interest Peer review Redundant publication (and

duplicate submission) Plagiarism and fraud Dealing with misconduct

An “author” is generally considered to be An “author” is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study, and biomedical contributions to a published study, and biomedical authorship continues to have important academic, authorship continues to have important academic, social, and financial implications. social, and financial implications.

Some journals now request and publish Some journals now request and publish information about the information about the contributionscontributions of each of each person named as having participated in a person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. submitted study, at least for original research.

Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a implement a contributorshipcontributorship policy, as well as a policy, as well as a policy on identifying who is responsible for the policy on identifying who is responsible for the integrity of the work as a whole (integrity of the work as a whole (guarantorshipguarantorship). ).

Authorship credit should be based onAuthorship credit should be based on– 1) substantial contributions to conception 1) substantial contributions to conception

and design, or acquisition of data, or and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; analysis and interpretation of data;

– 2) drafting the article or revising it 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; critically for important intellectual content;

– and 3) final approval of the version to be and 3) final approval of the version to be published. published.

Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.and 3.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, general supervision of the research group, alone, does not justify authorship.does not justify authorship.

All persons designated as authors should qualify All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.be listed.

Each author should have participated sufficiently Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. appropriate portions of the content.

The order of authorship on the byline should be a The order of authorship on the byline should be a joint decision of the co-authors. Authors should be joint decision of the co-authors. Authors should be prepared to explain the order in which authors are prepared to explain the order in which authors are listed.listed.

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. Financial and material only general support. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged. support should also be acknowledged.

Groups of persons who have contributed Groups of persons who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under a do not justify authorship may be listed under a heading such as “clinical investigators” or heading such as “clinical investigators” or “participating investigators” “participating investigators”

When a large, multi-center group has When a large, multi-center group has conducted the work, the group should conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. responsibility for the manuscript.

These individuals should fully meet the These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship defined above. criteria for authorship defined above.

When submitting a group author When submitting a group author manuscript, the corresponding author manuscript, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation should clearly indicate the preferred citation and should clearly identify all individual and should clearly identify all individual authors as well as the group name. authors as well as the group name.

An example: GEMINIAn example: GEMINI

Conflicts of interestConflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest comprise those which may not be fully apparent and which may influence the judgment of author, reviewers, and editors.

They have been described as those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived.

They may be personal, commercial, political, academic or financial.

“Financial” interests may include employment, research funding, stock or share ownership, payment for lectures or travel, consultancies and company support for staff.

(1) Such interests, where relevant, must be declared to editors by researchers, authors, and reviewers.

(2) Editors should also disclose relevant conflicts of interest to their readers. If in doubt, disclose. Sometimes editors may need to withdraw from the review and selection process for the relevant submission.

Redundant publication/ Redundant publication/ duplicate submissionduplicate submission

Redundant publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross reference, share the same hypothesis, data, discussion points, or conclusions.

Duplicate submission is when the same manuscript has been sent to journal while still under evaluation by another.

(1) Published studies do not need to be repeated unless further confirmation is required.

(2) Previous publication of an abstract during the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made at the time of submission.

(3) Re-publication of a paper in another language is acceptable, provided that there is full and prominent disclosure of its original source at the time of submission.

(4) At the time of submission, authors should disclose details of related papers, even if in a different language, and similar papers in press.

What is fraud?What is fraud?

Fabrification: Invention of data or casesFabrification: Invention of data or cases Falsification: Wilful distortion of dataFalsification: Wilful distortion of data

– Ignoring outliers?Ignoring outliers?– Not admitting that some data are Not admitting that some data are

missing.missing.– Post hoc analyses that are not Post hoc analyses that are not

admitted?admitted?– Not including data on side effects in a Not including data on side effects in a

clinical trialclinical trial

What is fraud?What is fraud?

Plagiarism: Copying of data or papersPlagiarism: Copying of data or papers– But by how much?But by how much?– Stealing ideas?Stealing ideas?

Redundant publicationRedundant publication Gift authorship.Gift authorship. Not attributing other authors.Not attributing other authors. Not publishing researchNot publishing research Not disclosing a conflict of interestNot disclosing a conflict of interest

PlagiarismPlagiarism

Plagiarism ranges from the unreferenced use of others’ published and unpublished ideas, including research grant applications to submission under “new” authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in a different language.

It may occur at any stage of planning, research, writing, or publication: it applies to print and electronic versions.

All sources should be disclosed, and if large amounts of other people’s written or illustrative material is to be used, permission must be sought.

Dealing with misconduct

(1) The general principle confirming misconduct is intention to cause others to regard as true that which is not true.

(2) The examination of misconduct must therefore focus, not only on the particular act or omission, but also on the intention of the researcher, author, editor, reviewer or publisher involved.

(3) Deception may be by intention, by reckless disregard of possible consequences, or by negligence. It is implicit, therefore, that “best practice” requires complete honesty, with full disclosure.

(4) Codes of practice may raise awareness, but can never be exhaustive.

Investigating misconduct

(1) Editors should not simply reject papers that raise questions of misconduct. They are ethically obliged to pursue the case. However, knowing how to investigate and respond to possible cases of misconduct is difficult.

(2) COPE is always willing to advise, but for legal reasons, can only advise on anonymised cases.

(3) It is for the editor to decide what action to take.

Serious misconduct Less serious misconduct Sanctions, blacklists

FeedbackFeedback Ask your co-authors to read the Ask your co-authors to read the

manuscript criticallymanuscript critically Give the paper to informed colleagues Give the paper to informed colleagues

(1or 2 max) to read(1or 2 max) to read A real friend will give you lots of ideas A real friend will give you lots of ideas

for improvementfor improvement Read your own paper as if you were a Read your own paper as if you were a

reviewer, with the figures in front of reviewer, with the figures in front of you as you read ityou as you read it

Final Preparations for Final Preparations for SubmissionSubmission Proof-read, proof-read, proof-read!Proof-read, proof-read, proof-read! Make sets of figures for submission but also Make sets of figures for submission but also

keep a set of original figures for your fileskeep a set of original figures for your files Make copies of the submitted manuscript, Make copies of the submitted manuscript,

including the figures, for every authorincluding the figures, for every author Write a cover letter, short and direct, Write a cover letter, short and direct,

addressed to the editoraddressed to the editor Make a list of suggested reviewers, if this is Make a list of suggested reviewers, if this is

requested by the journalrequested by the journal

Dr. Michael Holtzman,Dr. Michael Holtzman,American Journal of Respiratory Cell American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology,and Molecular Biology,Editorial OfficeEditorial OfficeAmerican Thoracic SocietyAmerican Thoracic Society1740 Broadway, New York, NY 10019-43741740 Broadway, New York, NY 10019-4374Tel 212-315-6440Tel 212-315-6440Fax 212-315-6456Fax 212-315-6456

Dear Dr. Holtzman,Dear Dr. Holtzman,Please find enclosed an original manuscript entitled, “……………………...” by [authors]. The Please find enclosed an original manuscript entitled, “……………………...” by [authors]. The material presented in this paper is original and has not been submitted for publication material presented in this paper is original and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere. No part of the research presented in this manuscript has been funded by tobacco elsewhere. No part of the research presented in this manuscript has been funded by tobacco industry sources. We verify that all the authors have read the manuscript and approve its industry sources. We verify that all the authors have read the manuscript and approve its submission. To aid the review process, may we suggest the reviewers listed on the following submission. To aid the review process, may we suggest the reviewers listed on the following page.page.

We hope that you will find our manuscript acceptable for publication in the We hope that you will find our manuscript acceptable for publication in the American Journal of American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology.Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology.

Thank you for your attention.Thank you for your attention.SincerelySincerely…………..…………..Corresponding authorCorresponding author

List of Potential List of Potential ReviewersReviewers

4) Dr. David Mitchell4) Dr. David MitchellDepartment of PediatricsDepartment of PediatricsMilton S. Hershey Medical CenterMilton S. Hershey Medical CenterH085 HospitalH085 HospitalHershey, PA 17033Hershey, PA 17033Phone: 717-531-5925Phone: 717-531-5925Fax: 717-531-8985Fax: 717-531-8985e-mail: e-mail: dsp4@psu.edudsp4@psu.edu

5)Dr. Arnold Smith5)Dr. Arnold SmithUniversity of Missouri-ColumbiaUniversity of Missouri-ColumbiaDepartment of Molecular Microbiology and Department of Molecular Microbiology and

ImmunologyImmunologyM616 Medical Sciences Building DC 04400M616 Medical Sciences Building DC 04400Columbia, MO 65212Columbia, MO 65212Phone: 573-882-8989Phone: 573-882-8989Fax: 573-882-4287Fax: 573-882-4287e-mail: e-mail: SmithAL@missouri.eduSmithAL@missouri.edu

1) Dr. Joe SmithDuke University Medical CenterCell Biology438 Nanaline Duke/Box 3709Durham, NC 27710Phone: 919-684-8040Fax: 919-684-8106e-mail: j.smitht@cellbio.duke.edu

2)Dr. Virginia JonesVanderbilt UniversityPathology1310 24th Ave S.Nashville, TN 37212-2637Phone: 615-327-4751 X 5499Fax: 615-321-6305e-mail: jonesv@aol.com

3)Dr. Tony D. SopranoSouthampton General HospitalChild HealthLevel G (803) Center BlockTremona Rd.Southampton, SO16 6YD United KingdomPhone: 44-23 8079 6161Fax: 44-23 8079 6378e-mail: adp@soton.ac.uk

COVERING LETTERCOVERING LETTER

PolitePolite

Why Why JournalJournal chosen chosen

Importance of paperImportance of paper

ConcessionsConcessions

BriefBrief

Submitting the PaperSubmitting the Paper Frequently done on-line via PDF filesFrequently done on-line via PDF files If required, send the number of hard copies of the If required, send the number of hard copies of the

manuscript and figures required by the journalmanuscript and figures required by the journal Send a disk with files for the manuscript and Send a disk with files for the manuscript and

figures, if requiredfigures, if required Get the copyright form used by the journal Get the copyright form used by the journal

signed by all authors, if requiredsigned by all authors, if required Send all of this material by a reliable method, so Send all of this material by a reliable method, so

that your precious manuscript is not lost in the that your precious manuscript is not lost in the mail!!mail!!

Peer reviewPeer review

Articles submitted to peer-Articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals (manuscripts) reviewed journals (manuscripts) are reviewed by experts who are reviewed by experts who advise the editor on whether they advise the editor on whether they should be published and what should be published and what changes are necessary.changes are necessary.

Editorial decisionEditorial decision

1.1. Accepted as it is (rare)Accepted as it is (rare)

2.2. Accepted on the condition of Accepted on the condition of certain amendments (back to certain amendments (back to cycle)cycle)

3.3. Reconsidered if reviewers’ Reconsidered if reviewers’ comments met (back to cycle)comments met (back to cycle)

4.4. RejectedRejected

Peer Review - FunctionsPeer Review - Functions

To Protect To Protect i) The author from i) The author from publishing & publishing & ii) The subscriber from ii) The subscriber from readingreading

Material of insufficient Material of insufficient qualityquality

Problems with peer reviewProblems with peer review

SlowSlow ExpensiveExpensive A lotteryA lottery IneffectiveIneffective BiasedBiased Easily abusedEasily abused Can’t detect fraudCan’t detect fraud Works for improving studies not selecting which to Works for improving studies not selecting which to

publishpublish Can’t detect fraudCan’t detect fraud

Dealing with the Journal’s ResponseDealing with the Journal’s Response

Absolute Rejection Absolute Rejection – Don’t take it personalDon’t take it personal– Don’t write or call the editors (unless you Don’t write or call the editors (unless you

know them well !)know them well !)– Editorial rejection: send it out the next day Editorial rejection: send it out the next day

to another journal to another journal – Reviewers comments:Reviewers comments:

Fix the easy ones Fix the easy ones Fix the glaring onesFix the glaring ones Unlikely to get much better sitting on your deskUnlikely to get much better sitting on your desk Send it out the next daySend it out the next day

Dealing with the Journal’s Dealing with the Journal’s ResponseResponse

Conditional acceptance (rejection)Conditional acceptance (rejection)– It is yours to loseIt is yours to lose– First cool down (24-48 hours)First cool down (24-48 hours)– Within 1-2 weeks decide on responsesWithin 1-2 weeks decide on responses– Make real changes, say you have done Make real changes, say you have done

great changes (describe, highlight,etc) great changes (describe, highlight,etc) – Look for clues from the editor as to the Look for clues from the editor as to the

extent of the revision needed.extent of the revision needed.– Avoid argumentsAvoid arguments– Thank sincerely, but avoid being Thank sincerely, but avoid being

obsequiousobsequious

Responding to reviewsResponding to reviews Swallow your pride!Swallow your pride! You don’t have to accept all, but don’t You don’t have to accept all, but don’t

over-rejectover-reject Ask editor about conflicting commentsAsk editor about conflicting comments However unreasonable the reviewers may However unreasonable the reviewers may

seem: be polite!seem: be polite! Distinguish conditional acceptance from Distinguish conditional acceptance from

offer to reconsider (and from rejection of offer to reconsider (and from rejection of course!)course!)

Appeals (for rejection)Appeals (for rejection)

Resubmission LetterResubmission LetterDr. Brian F. McCabeDr. Brian F. McCabe

Editor, Annals of Otology, Rhinology and LaryngologyEditor, Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology

Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck SurgeryDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

The University of Iowa Hospitals and ClinicsThe University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics

Iowa City, IA 52242Iowa City, IA 52242

Dear Dr. McCabe,Dear Dr. McCabe,

Please find enclosed a revised manuscript entitled, "Surfactant protein A in rabbit sinus Please find enclosed a revised manuscript entitled, "Surfactant protein A in rabbit sinus and middle ear mucosa" by………. and middle ear mucosa" by……….

We have addressed the comments of the reviewers as detailed below:We have addressed the comments of the reviewers as detailed below:

1)We have changed the title of the paper as suggested by the reviewer.1)We have changed the title of the paper as suggested by the reviewer.

2)We have expanded the description of the animals used in the study (page 4, 2)We have expanded the description of the animals used in the study (page 4, paragraph 1). All the animals except the pathogen-free, were naturally infected paragraph 1). All the animals except the pathogen-free, were naturally infected with with PasteurellaPasteurella multocidamultocida. The antibiotic treated animals were chosen . The antibiotic treated animals were chosen randomly. The infections were observed postmortem and pathogen was randomly. The infections were observed postmortem and pathogen was identified by culture by the Animal Care Unit.identified by culture by the Animal Care Unit.

3)The lengths of the micron bars in Figures 5-8 have been added to the legends. A 3)The lengths of the micron bars in Figures 5-8 have been added to the legends. A magnification bar has been added to Figure 10.magnification bar has been added to Figure 10.

We hope that you will now find our manuscript suitable for publication in the Annals of We hope that you will now find our manuscript suitable for publication in the Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology. Thank you very much for your prompt review.Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology. Thank you very much for your prompt review.

Sincerely,Sincerely,