Writing and publishing important scientific articles a reviewers perspective

Does your study pass the so-what test? Who if anyone was blinded, and where and when was the actual data collected? Results, Discussion, and Conclusions In most journals the results section is separate from the discussion section. Make sure you haven?


Is the significance of your study clear? Some journals such as Science have an initial screening step in which papers unlikely to make it through the review process are rejected. For example, consider this simple passive sentence: The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication.

If the journal editors feel the paper sufficiently meets these requirements and is written by a credible source, they will send the paper to accomplished researchers in the field for a formal peer review.

In Results, stick to the facts. As always, let the instructions to authors be your guide. There are a two things you can look for in your editing process that, when addressed, will markedly improve the quality of your paper: Manuscript problems that are very difficult, if not impossible, to successfully fix possibly fatal flaws consists of such issue as: If so, what data will you need to collect to eliminate that other possibility?

There was a problem providing the content you requested

The role of the editor is to select the most appropriate manuscripts for the journal, and to implement and monitor the peer review process. The reader must come to the same conclusions you have solely on the basis of your results.

A review from a second set of trained eyes will often catch these errors missed by the original authors. The reliability of the items of the above questionnaire was approved with Cronbach's alpha test, 0.

5 Tips for Publishing Your First Academic Article

Past studies are used to set the stage or provide the reader with information regarding the necessity of the represented project. Resist the temptation to provide molecular and genetic explanations for everything; consider carefully whether the nature of your study warrants such an explanation.

Writing a Publishable Journal Article: A Perspective From the Other Side of the Desk

Some scientists are better reviewers than others--they are more critical and thorough, a fact that quickly becomes known to editors. If your writing is littered with commas, semi-colons, and dashes, go back and simplify.

Moreira A, Haahtela T. When you edit your own work, you need to give yourself plenty of time between when you actually do your writing and when you do your editing.

All of the related data not included in the main body of the paper should be clearly accessible to the reviewers, either as an appendix or through a publicly available database. But how can you be certain that the journal? Carefully consider placement of, naming of, and location of figures.

In any case, there is a good chance that they will be familiar with any article you reference from the journal. Be sure to carefully address all relevant results, not just the statistically significant ones or the ones that support your hypotheses.

Meanwhile, most journals do not accept an article for review that is simultaneously being reviewed by another journal. Following treatment, the notes were scrutinized by a local medical council to determine whether the physician had met the required standards of medical care.

See general information about how to correct material in RePEc. Do not include speculative statements or additional material; however, based upon your findings a statement about potential changes in clinical practice or future research opportunities can be provided here. As you edit your paper, be your own worst nightmare: Materials and Methods Have you described all selection criteria in your Methods?

The purpose of your paper should naturally drop out of your well-orchestrated literature review.How to Write a Scientific Review Article.

into the existing body of knowledge.” Importantly, a review should present results clearly and accurately—good writing is essential and must follow a strict set of rules.

publishers, editors, and students to learn and share their experience about research and publishing. Enago Academy also. The article discusses various complex and interrelated quality issues mediating reviewers' expectations and standards.

Authors must meet or exceed reviewers' and editors' expectations of providing. Writing a Publishable Journal Article: A Perspective From the Other Side of the Desk But how can you be certain that the journal?s editor and peer reviewers will agree that your paper merits.

Writing for academic journals is a highly competitive activity, and it’s important to understand that there could be several reasons behind a rejection. Furthermore, the journal peer-review process is an essential element of publication because no writer could identify and address all potential issues with a manuscript.

The Pathway to Publishing: A Guide to Quantitative Writing in the Health Sciences.

Writing and publishing important scientific articles: A reviewer's perspective

Steve. Luby. Dorothy Southern. Revised.

Tips for Publishing in Scientific Journals

October 1. so as to increase the sharing of important scientific results. Since this guide grew out Health at Stanford University is to develop scientific writing capacity among scientists working in low.

Writing and publishing important scientific articles: A reviewer's perspective and elements relating to undertaking important and relevant research endeavors and writing important scientific articles that offer meaningful and useful contributions to the ever-growing marketing literature.

Journal editors and editorial reviewers are key.

Writing and publishing important scientific articles a reviewers perspective
Rated 4/5 based on 48 review