Getting Your Article Published: The Mysteries of Peer-Review and the Decisions of Journals

Howard Bauchner, MD, FAAP, FRCPCHEditor-in-Chief, ADCProfessor of Pediatrics & Public HealthVice-Chair, Academic AffairsBoston University School of Medicine/Boston Medical Center

ADC

First published in 1926 Official publication of Royal College of

Paediatrics and Child Health Jointly owned by by RCPCH and BMJ

Publishing Group Ltd 2007 Impact Factor - 2.8; F/N - 2.3 Circulation 11,000 Monthly PDF files downloads – 300,000

Copyright ©2006 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

Valman, B Arch Dis Child 2006;91:962-966

Figure 1 A selection of ADC covers 1926-2006.

Helpful hints !!!

Correct journal Instructions Rejection without review Paper reviewed Peer-review Editors Responding to reviews Keys to success

Is it the correct journal?

This is critical issue for ALL journals Can be far more subjective than you

think Beware case-reports Is the topic hot or sexy Most journals can reject without review Is it worth shooting high, but failing

(impact factor)

Impact Factors* - 2007

NEJM – 53 Cell – 30 Nature – 29 Science - 26 Lancet – 26 JAMA – 25 AIM – 16 BMJ – 10 Pediatrics – 4.5 JOP – 4.0 US Archives – 3.7

* No. of citations to 02/03 articles / no. substantive articles published in 02/03 (NEJM – 28696/744 = 38)

Follow the instructions!

Article type – original, review, etc. Cover page – title, word count Length – critical issue (less is more) Abstract – single most important

page Speak with editor(s) first

A good abstract

90% of us read ONLY abstract Structured Concise In English Some data

Not all data Beware which data

Conclusions Best to have outside reader

Structure of an article

Introduction 2-3 paragraphs

Methods 3-5 paragraphs

Results 5 paragraphs

Discussion (structured) Principal findings Strengths and weaknesses Strengths and weaknesses vis a vis other

studies Meaning of study Unanswered questions/future research

References, tables, figures, support, acknowledgements

Rejection without review

Usually editors/sometimes committee US Archives (2005) -

750 submissions per year 20% rejected with out review Acceptance rate about 22%

ADC (2008) - 1700 submissions per year 1100 original research articles submitted

Rejected without review 35% Acceptance rate of original articles 22%

JAMA (2006) – 5354 major manuscripts

Rejected without review 60% Acceptance rate 8%

Reject without review – why?

Wrong journal – journals have biases Not new or novel Poorly written abstract Poorly designed/wrong analysis Sweeping conclusion Case-report Editor having a bad day (this

happens) !!!

Paper accepted for review

Assigned to editor (not EIC) Most editors have areas of expertise Editors may send article out for review

(rejection without review can occur here)

No magic number of reviewers – 1-3 Statistical consultation can be requested

by editor and/or peer-reviewers

Peer-reviewers

You can recommend reviewers to editor (and individuals not to review – plus/minus) Recommended reviewers score paper the same

as others, but more often recommend acceptance

Chosen from “list” of reviewers that journal generally uses

Some subject areas difficult to find reviewers – editors search reference list or OVID

Process takes 1-3 months

Peer-review

Little science – a fair amount of research

Quality varies, best reviewers are 35 to 45

Time – 2-4 hours depends upon manuscript

Not much difference between blinded and unblinded reviews

What do reviewers assess?

Importance Clarity Design and analysis Should review abstract, text, tables, figures,

references, acknowledgements/support Make recommendation to editor Opinions of reviewers are not binding Usually provide comments to authors and

separate comments to editors

Editors

Review paper Review peer-review May request statistical help Make recommendation to auction/editorial

board (judgment day) Accept; accept with revision; reject with

revision; reject; short report; research letter

Discussed vis a vis importance and validity

Responding to reviews

Do not be argumentative, respectfully disagree

Reviewer A says go left; reviewer B says go right – ask editor

You do not have to respond to every issue, but must articulate why not

Follow directions – i.e. number responses, indicate changes in manuscript and where they can be found

Long explanations to editor in cover letter is not the same as modifying the text

Keys to success

Clarity (abstract) Brevity (2500

words) Novelty (why a

ADC) Modesty (some)

Important issues

Ensure it is the correct journal Rejection without review is usually quick

(BMJ occasionally occurs in minutes) Correspond with journal if permitted Suggest reviewers Be patient – 6-8 weeks for review After rejection – speak with responsible

editor Do not just send out paper again, revise

Getting your article published

Revise revise revise – 10 drafts (date drafts, provide deadlines,

circulate as complete manuscript)

Senior colleagues are critical Clarity Uniqueness Larger context