Writing for publication University of Ottawa, May 2003

1
Writing for publicationUniversity of Ottawa, May
2003

• John Hoey, James Maskalyk
• cmaj.ca/misc/slides

2
Writing for publicationUniversity of Ottawa, May
2003

• cmaj.ca/misc/slides

3
Editor, expert in anything?
4
www.cmaj.ca
5
What is this about?

• What do editors look for?
• How an editor reads a paper.
• Why do papers get rejected?
• How to pick a journal
• Writers block
• Responding to an editor

6
The pleasures of editingLetters from readers
Dear Editor What are you smoking? Is our Journal
the garbage can of last resort? You conspire to
cover up government damage to health care from
abnegation of its responsibility Why do you do
that? Money? I enclose items from August CMAJ
which disturb me. After all the CMA blather
about excellence, how come you are so
sub-standard?
7
The pleasures of editingLetters from readers
Hi, im doing this project in school about The E
Coli as an example of how water damages
thingsus. Can u send me info about E coli and
what it is and how it came into the waters and
stuff??? But not pages of stuff Just the
important points. Thanks, Vanessa Send to
fishy_000_at_.
8
START
SUCCESS
9
Choosing the appropriate journal

• Content of manuscript
• Journal prestige and quality
• Speed of editorial process
• Probability of acceptance
• Visibility of Journal
• Is it free full text?
• Publicity?

10
Content

• Appropriateness of content
• NEJM publishes narrative reviews but few
  meta-analyses
• The Lancet and BMJ publish more international
  material
• The JAMA editor is a pediatrician
• CMAJ editor is an internist and public health
  physician
• CMAJ would love to publish more clinical research

11
Journal prestige and quality

• CMAJ articles regularly picked up by the Canadian
  press
• Informal hierarchy (for a typical clinical
  research study)
• a1. General medical journals
• a2. Specialty journals
• a3. Epidemiologic journals

12
Journal prestige and quality

• Impact factor ranking
• The impact factor is an index of journal quality
  and (loosely defined) represents the number of
  citations each journal article receives in the
  first 1-2 years.

13
Impact factors 2001Top 5 general med. journals

• NEJM 29.0
• JAMA 17.6
• Lancet 13.3
• BMJ 6.6
• CMAJ 2.8

14
Impact factors for family medicine journals, 2000

• Arch F. Med 2.3
• J. Fam Practice 2.1
• Fam Practice 1.0
• Can Famil. Physician 0.9
• Am. Famil. Physcian 0.9
• Brit. J. Gen Practice 0.8
• 2001

15
Impact factors for obstetrics gynecology
journals 2000

• Human Reprod 3.0
• Am J Obstet Gynecol 2.5
• Br J Obstet Gynecol 2.3
• Obstet Gynecol 2.1

16
Speed of the editorial process

• Time to intercept 2-3 weeks
• Time to peer reviewed editorial response 8 weeks
  
• Time between acceptance and publication 6 issues
  (i.e., 3 months)
• Early online publication at the Lancet

17
Probability of acceptance

• gt90 percent rejection rate at NEJM
• Approximately 85 percent at CMAJ

18
Visibility

• Reporting in news media/government?
• Free, full text

19
PubMed Central
pubmedcentral.nih.gov
20
Biomedcentral.com
21
Bottom line

• Determine likely journal
• Create a short list of 3-4 journals (better and
  worse)
• If you receive a rejection, resubmit within 2
  weeks

22
RejectionThe 5 steps of recovery

• 1. Read the reviews
• 2. If fair, redo manuscript and resubmit.
• 3. If unfair - redo manuscript to make it
  clearer.
• 4. Consider appeal.
• 5. Resubmit or appeal.

23
Getting started 110 steps to writing a
paperpreparartion

• Instructions for authors
• Read the journal
• Read similar papers

24
Readings
25
Orwells 6 rules

• Never use a metaphor, simile or figure of speech
  which you are used to seeing in print.
• Never use a long word when a short one will do.
• If possible to cut out a word, always cut it out.

26
Orwells 6 rules
Passive A retrospective cohort study was done.
Active We did a retrospective cohort study.

• Never use the passive where you can use the
  active.
• Never use a FOREIGN PHRASE, a scientific word or
  a JARGON word if you can think of an everyday
  English equivalent.
• Break any of these rules sooner than say anything
  outright barbarous.

We examined the records of all patients seen in
our clinic in 1998 and telephoned then in January
2002 to determine their compliance with our
previously offered advice on weight loss.
27
Getting started 2

• Key results
• Construct the key table
• Discernible point
• Why did you do this study?
• What were your specific objectives?

28
Getting started 3
Objectives
Discernible point
Key Result Table
Methods
Interpretation
What does your study add to literature ?
29
Getting started 4Introduction

• Outline the discernible point
• Cite key literature - not all the literature
• End with your specific objective(s)
• Keep it short - 2 pages

30
Getting started 5Methods

• Describe sample/subjects
• Exclusions
• Definitions
• Study instruments
• Questionnaires - validity, reliability, content
• Analysis
• Ethical approval of study

31
Getting started 6Jargon

• We did a nested retrospective cohort study.
• Using the medical records of all patients with
  bacterial conjunctivitis who visited the clinic
  in 1999, we tracked their use of topical
  antibacterial ointments over the over the next 2
  years.

32
Getting started 7Results

• Characteristics of Sample
• Main crude results
• Multivariate analyses
• Secondary analyses
• Tables/Figures self-explanatory
• Title
• Footnotes
• Column/row headings

33
Getting started 8Interpretation

• Summarize the main result
• Describe limitations
• Describe what the results add to literature
• Implications (be modest and brief)
• for practice?
• For research?
• Conclusion

34
Getting started 9And ...

• References
• Cover page
• Title, Authors, Contacts, Word count, sources of
  funding, conflicts of interest
• Other information
• Author contributions
• Financial disclosure

35
Getting started 10Cover letter

• Pleasure to send this paper.
• Why is it important? Discernible point.
• Anything special?
• Length
• Tables
• Questionnaire

36
Cover LetterExamples

• Please find enclosed 3 copies of a manuscript
  entitled The manuscript conforms to the style
  detailed in the uniform requirements. All authors
  have read and agree with the papers content. The
  paper has not been previously published in whole
  or in part nor is it under consideration by
  another journal.

37
Cover LetterBe positive

• I have enclosed my manuscript, Alzheimers
  Disease Update for consideration for
  publication.
• In the light of the announcement made late last
  year by the University of Toronto, my manuscript
  may be obsolete.

38
Responding to an editor

• Be polite.
• Write well and carefully.
• Address all reviewer and editor questions.
• Explain responses to every item.
• Make changes and explain what they are.
• Be prompt.

39
Responding to an editor

• Comment
• On page x you should mention the important study
  by Groucho Marx.
• Response
• We are aware of the Marx paper. However, this
  paper addresses the rare situation of confused
  identity with mirrors. Our paper does not discuss
  this condition. Thus we have not included a
  reference to the paper.

40
So in summary...

• Remember the reader and the editor.
• Write clearly using plain language.
• Pick 4 journals and respond quickly.
• Be polite and thorough.
• Remember that the Journal needs your paper just
  as much as you need the Journal.

41
Thank you