Getting Your Manuscript Published Practical Tips for Preparing
Getting Your Manuscript Published: Practical Tips for Preparing Your Manuscript, Avoiding Common Mistakes, and Choosing the Right Journal Professor Teresa Davis, Editor-in-Chief The Journal of Nutrition Professor Jack Odle, Editor-in-Chief Current Developments in Nutrition IUNS-ICN 21 st International Congress of Nutrition Buenos Aires, Argentina, October 2017
Part 2 Understanding the Peer Review Process and Responding to Reviewers Jack Odle, Ph. D. Editor-in-Chief Current Developments in Nutrition Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry Open Access x Pioneering Research x Stringent Peer-Review Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
The Journal of Nutrition Peer Review Process (13 steps) Author submits manuscript EIC rapidly rejects or sends to JN staff Asst E sends review to EIC Asst E reviews for problems with formatting, design, and analysis JN staff checks format JN staff sends to EIC AE receives reviews and either rejects or requests review by Asst E EIC looks at reviews and sends to AE AE provisionally accepts and returns manuscript to Author for revision or rejects Author revises and resubmits AE accepts or returns manuscript to reviewers and Asst E or rejects EIC assigns to AE AE solicits reviewers (EBM and ad hoc) Letter to Author: Acceptance or Rejection or Reject with Invitation to Resubmit or Revision EIC = Editor-in-Chief AE = Associate Editor Asst E = Assistant Editor
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Overview of Review Process Submit using web-hosting program Pre-flight check by journal staff Assessment of ms “fit” for journal Assignment to Guiding Editor (Assoc. Ed. ) Review by peers Technical review (plagiarism screen) Initial decision by Guiding Editor (AE) Responding to reviewers American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 4
1. Submit using web-hosting program Stanford High-Wire Press Bench. Press Oxford University Press Scholar. One American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 5
ASN Journals Partnering with Oxford University Press • An innovative, state of the art online publishing platform, designed specifically for today's mobile-and social media-centric readers • Strategic guidance, analytical tools and market research to support the growth and development of ASN journals • Services for authors- manuscript submission assistance, authoring tools which allow authors to create manuscript in End. Note and submit it to an ASN journal seamlessly, an Author Resource Center, guidance of article promotion via social media channels, and management of image permissions on behalf of authors • Dedicated sales and marketing teams which will raise awareness and usage of ASN journal content and grow ASN's institutional sales and revenue globally increased distribution and visibility of your papers. • Moving to a new manuscript submission & mgmt webprogram. American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 6 Scholar. One.
Submission: Patience is a virtue! • Meta-data is tedious, but important – Authors, contact info – ORCID highly recommended – Corresponding author – Abstract for reviewing purposes (sp characters) – Key words (for review) – Conflict of Interest information (form under development to streamline) American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 7
ORCID – Open Researcher & Contributor ID; 4 M members Free American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 8
ORCID CDN/2017/001651 Current Developments in Nutrition: A New Journal Designed for the Open-Access Era id , and Sarah Mc. Cormack id John Smithid , Karen King Provides a UNIQUE numeric identifier for all of your work. - Scientists with same name can be distinguished - Accurately track your work if you change employer American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 9
Suggest/Exclude Editors & Reviewers • Suggesting qualified reviewers helps the editors. – Shows your desire to compete at the highest level – Don’t suggest your friends or those with few credentials. • A Pub. Med search of their expertise is only a mouse click away. • Your friends may not be as friendly as you think. • Excluding reviewers may influence the editors. – But editors may consider these to be precisely the opinions they want to hear for a fully-informed judgment. From D. Bier
2. Pre-flight check by journal staff Non-scientific checklist to ensure the submission is complete. General compliance with “guide to authors” To ensure manuscript is reviewable. American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 11
3. Assessment of ms “fit” for journal Role of EIC, with possible consult from Associate Editors. American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 12
Rapid Rejects (without external review) The Journal of Nutrition Ø Outside of JN scope § Nutrition not part of study design § Food composition reports § Critically ill patients § Pharmacological doses Ø Descriptive, premature, confirmatory, poor design, inadequate methods, etc. Ø Prevents delay of an external review that will likely reach the same conclusion.
Porting of your MS Among ASN Journal AJCN JN AN CDN Reviews can travel with your ms to expedite further consideration by receiving journal. You can respond to reviews and revise ms if you choose. American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 14
Rapid Rejection, without external review Dear Dr. XXXX: Thank you for submitting the manuscript ……Unfortunately, ……. If you would like to have your manuscript reviewed by another journal in the American Society for Nutrition’s portfolio, locate this article at http: //submit. nutrition. org in your Author Area, under the Rejected Manuscripts queue. Click on the appropriate link to send your manuscript to Current Developments in Nutrition (CDN). It may take up to 90 minutes for CDN to receive your submission. You will be emailed once your submission has been transferred with instructions for logging into CDN (http: //submit. cdn. nutrition. org) and completing the submission. Whether to revise your files is left to your discretion. American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 15
4. Assignment to Guiding Editor (Associate Editor) • • Subject matter considered They chaperone the review process Wise, fair judgement Select a peer reviewer from editorial board Solicit external ad hoc peer reviewer(s); considers your suggestions Solicit technical (assistant) editor review Assess reviews; recommend Accept/Revise/Reject Evaluate revised manuscripts; recommend Accept/Reject American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 16
5. Review by peers • • An honest critic is a scientist’s best friend. Anonymous for most but not all journals Separate major from minor points of critique (Common problems discussed later) American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 17
6. Technical/Assistant Editor review (plagiarism screen) Extensive, detailed checklist, Spanning all dimensions of the manuscript (grammar, stats, conclusions, tables/figures, etc. ) Detail is often frustrating to authors, but journal must uphold quality standard. This serves the author, the journal and the reader! American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 18
Manuscripts are scanned for plagiarism Ø Self-plagiarism: reusing the author’s own previously published words without citation • Common in Methods section • Breach of copyright Ø Plagiarism: using text, tables, or illustrations developed by someone else • Permission is needed from publisher for use of previously published material and source must be cited
6. Initial decision by guiding editor • Letter 1: Accepted, < 0. 1% of ms • Letter 2: Rejected with minor revisions, 1. 4% • Letter 3: Rejected with major revisions, 25% • After revision: 88% accepted, 9% rejected, (3% not revised) • Revised version may be treated as a “new manuscript” • Letter 4: Rejected, 75% • “Low priority” – i. e. really rejected, often for “non scientific” reasons, inappropriate for journal, etc. (includes rapid rejects) Modified from D. Bier
Reviewers’ Common Manuscript Criticisms Ø Premature Ø Confirmatory Ø Descriptive Ø No hypothesis Ø Poor experimental design, methods, statistics Ø Erroneous or unsupported conclusions Ø Poor quality illustrations Ø Disorganized paper, poor English…. .
Concerns for Authors Whose Native Language Is Not English Ø The paper cannot be evaluated due to improper English Ø A scientifically good paper can be rejected on the basis of language Ø Get English writing assistance from a colleague for whom English is their first language or from an international science editing company
Some Commercial Language Editing Services * * * Workshop sponsors
8. Responding to Reviewers American Society for Nutrition, Inc. 24
Responding Ø Read review carefully and closely follow the reviewers’ advice Ø Distinguish major from minor critiques Ø What are the reviewers requesting? • Change the interpretation of the results • Modify the conclusion • Provide more explanation • Correct mistake • New analysis of data • More data
Responding to Reviewers Ø Do not respond antagonistically Ø Respond completely to all comments Ø In the “Response to Reviewers, ” restate each of the reviewers comments, then respond to each comment and identify by line numbers where the changes were made in the revised manuscript. Make it easy for editor to track. Ø In the revised manuscript, mark the changes (JN requires yellow highlight) Ø Respond before the deadline
Rejection Decisions Ø Do not despair, another journal may publish the paper Ø Use the peer reviewers’ comments and editor’s comments to improve your paper and try again! Ø The same reviewers may see the paper again so use their words of wisdom to improve your paper Ø Change the cover letter Ø Check the Instructions for Authors
A 2 m 8 e r i c a n S o c i e t y f o r N u t r i t i o n , I n c Summary of Review Process 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Submit using web-hosting program Pre-flight check by journal staff Assessment of ms “fit” for journal Assignment to Guiding Editor (Assoc. Ed. ) Review by peers Technical review (plagiarism screen) Initial decision by Guiding Editor (AE) Responding to reviewers
Thank You and Good Luck From the ASN Journal Family http: //www. nutrition. org
- Slides: 29