medical writing how to get funded and published november 2003
Post on 21-Jan-2016
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Medical Writing
How to get funded and published
November 2003
The key to successful writing is organisation and planning
It is NEVER too early to start
For example use a reference manager system from the beginning and make notes about all papers you read
Know what you are writing
• Original article (IMRaD)
• Case report
• Review/commentary
• Book review
• Letter
• Grant
Know what you are writing
• Message
• Market
• Length
• Co-authors
• Set a deadline
Original articles IMRaD
• Introduction – 3 paragraphs
– Don’t state the obvious
– state hypothesis and aims
• Methods– Succinct
– Web section?
– Answer how?
– Stats
• Results– Logical (simple to
complex)
– Don’t duplicate text/tables
– 3-4 tabs/figs
• Discussion– What are the
implications?
Know your journal
• Read the “instructions for authors”
• Read the journal
• Remember the editor is under a number of pressures
• Think marketing!
How good is your journal?Impact factors
Cell 40Nature 27NEJM 23Lancet 18BMJ 6AJRCCM 5Thorax 4ADC 3
Now the pain…
• First author takes the responsibility
• Write a plan
• Start with methods & results then discussion, introduction, abstract
• Editing
• Co-authors
• Independent
Peer Review
Peer Review
• Like democracy peer review is the worst way to assess research apart from all the others
• Peer review is sensitive to the basics of good presentation, structure, language and style.
• Badly presented papers or grants will not do well
• Obey “instructions for authors” or grant instructions!!!
Grant Review
• Usually grants are awarded by a committee of 10 or more.
• The majority will not have much working knowledge of your specialist area.
• One member will be allocated your application.
• Two or more peer reviewers
• You may have an opportunity to address reviewers comments by mail or at interview.
Grant Review
• Your grant may be discussed for 5 - 20 minutes
• There is usually some form of marking system
• Decisions are usually final but occasionally you will be asked to re-submit.
Peer Review - Abstracts
P os te r S p oken
2 R eview ers
S orted b y C a teg ory
S u b m itted ab s trac t on lin e
Reviewers Responsibilities
• Honest assessment of the MS
• Usually works to a structure (eg Thorax / Blue Journal)
• Ask to recommend acceptance or not and often to grade the paper
• Usually has a confidential note to the Editor
• Should reviewer be identified?
Manuscript Review
AuthorMS Submitted
Editors
Associate Editor
2 or 3 Peer Reviewers
Recommendations- Accept - Minor - Major- Revise + Resubmit- Reject
Statistical review
Reviewers Responsibilities
• Honest assessment of the MS or grant
• Usually works to a structure (eg Thorax / Blue Journal)
• Ask to recommend acceptance or not and often to grade the paper
• Usually has a confidential note to the Editor
• Should reviewer be identified?
Critical appraisal
• Is it of interest?
• Why was it done?
• What was found?
• Are the stats ok?
• What are the implications?
• Will it be cited?
Statistical review
• Sample size
• Are the outcome measures valid?
• Is the basic data well described?
• Are the analyses valid?
• How was significance assessed?
• Have confounders/bias been considered?
Major Criticisms
• Nothing new
• No hypothesis
• Over stating results
• Under powered
• Poor statistical analysis
• Wrong journal
• Methodology of assays etc
Minor Criticisms
• Too long
– Introduction: 1 side
– Methods: 1-2sides
– Results: 1-2sides
– Discussion: 3-4sides
– References <30
– Too many figs/tables
• Poor English
• Spelling mistakes
• Over statement of results
• No acknowledgement of limitations
• Missed refs
• Don’t take it personally• Don’t dissect comments until you have cooled
down• Most rejections are justified• Appeal?• Modify MS before resubmission – the same
reviewer may get it again!• Do resbmit
Responding to Reviewsreject
Responding to Reviewsaccept/resubmit
• Be honest and true to what you believe
• Address all the issues raised
• Don’t be aggressive or wounded
• Concede about 50 - 75% of the issues raised as they are usually correct.
• Return the revised MS promptly
Paper accepted
• Celebrate
• Wait for the proofs (pdf) and respond quickly
• Start the next paper!
top related