Outline of this presentation 1 Outline of paper

  • Slides: 71
Download presentation

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q).

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper. 6 Conclusion 3

EECON https: //www. facebook. com/Thai. EECONHistory/ 4

EECON https: //www. facebook. com/Thai. EECONHistory/ 4

EECON 40 5

EECON 40 5

EECON 40 6

EECON 40 6

EECON 40 7

EECON 40 7

1. Title & Authors 2. Abstract 3. Introduction 4. Experimental 5. Results and Discussions

1. Title & Authors 2. Abstract 3. Introduction 4. Experimental 5. Results and Discussions 6. Conclusions 7. Acknowledgements 8. References 8

9

9

10

10

11

11

Rapid communication 12

Rapid communication 12

Letters 13

Letters 13

Good example for discussion Review (small book) 14

Good example for discussion Review (small book) 14

Review of Recent 150 ref. 15

Review of Recent 150 ref. 15

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper. 6 Conclusion 16

17

17

18

18

IF = 2. 086 19

IF = 2. 086 19

Q 1 from 109 Journals 20

Q 1 from 109 Journals 20

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper. 6 Conclusion 21

1. Title & Authors 2. Abstract 3. Introduction 4. Experimental 5. Results and Discussions

1. Title & Authors 2. Abstract 3. Introduction 4. Experimental 5. Results and Discussions 6. Conclusions 7. Acknowledgements 8. References 22

23

23

Paper My style 1. Title & Authors Write paper 4. Experimental 2. Abstract, keywords

Paper My style 1. Title & Authors Write paper 4. Experimental 2. Abstract, keywords 5. Results and Discussions 3. Introduction 8. References 4. Experimental 1. Title & Authors 5. Results and Discussions 7. Acknowledgements 6. Conclusions **Experiment Data Discussion** 7. Acknowledgements 8. References 3. Introduction Write manuscript 6. Conclusions 2. Abstract, keywords 24

25

25

26

26

27

27

28

28

29

29

30

30

31

31

32

32

33

33

34

34

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper. 6 Conclusion 35

Results and Discussion Results -- numbers -- graphs -- figures -- tables **What have

Results and Discussion Results -- numbers -- graphs -- figures -- tables **What have you found? **Report your data Discussion -- reasons (why ? ? ) **Sell your data -- comparison **Advantage of this study -- reviews 36

Good tables and figures for good discussion in review paper 37

Good tables and figures for good discussion in review paper 37

Good table for good discussion in original paper Morphological, antimicrobial, durability, and physical properties

Good table for good discussion in original paper Morphological, antimicrobial, durability, and physical properties of untreated and treated textiles using silvernanoparticles. Original Research Article Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, Volume 436, 5 September 2013, Pages 975 -989 Srimala Perera, Bharat Bhushan, Rathnayake Bandara, Gamini Rajapakse, Sanath Rajapakse, Chaturanga Bandara 38

Results and discussion Results Discussion 39

Results and discussion Results Discussion 39

Results and discussion Results Discussion 40

Results and discussion Results Discussion 40

Results and discussion Results Discussion 41

Results and discussion Results Discussion 41

Results and discussion Results Discussion 42

Results and discussion Results Discussion 42

Results and discussion Results Discussion 43

Results and discussion Results Discussion 43

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and

Outline of this presentation. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper. 6 Conclusion 44

1) Experiment Data Discussion 2) Write manuscript 3) Submit and waiting 4) Reject or

1) Experiment Data Discussion 2) Write manuscript 3) Submit and waiting 4) Reject or Revise 5) 6) Accepted Copyright Proof Print List of papers on CV 45

Submitted manuscript for journal 46

Submitted manuscript for journal 46

Accepted manuscript 47

Accepted manuscript 47

In Press Date 48

In Press Date 48

Normal First author Corresponding author * Date Abstract Keywords 49

Normal First author Corresponding author * Date Abstract Keywords 49

Conclusion 1. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q).

Conclusion 1. 1 Outline of paper and Thesis. 2 Impact factor and quartile (Q). 3 How to write paper. 4 Results and discussion part (examples) . 5 Experiment to paper 50

Paper Conclusion 2 1. Title & Authors Write paper 4. Experimental 2. Abstract, keywords

Paper Conclusion 2 1. Title & Authors Write paper 4. Experimental 2. Abstract, keywords 5. Results and Discussions 3. Introduction 8. References 4. Experimental 1. Title & Authors 5. Results and Discussions 7. Acknowledgements 6. Conclusions **Experiment Data Discussion** 7. Acknowledgements 8. References 3. Introduction Write and rewrite manuscript 1 st paper, VDC 6. Conclusions 2. Abstract, keywords 51

Questions from elsevier after accepted 52

Questions from elsevier after accepted 52

Language Editing

Language Editing

Important

Important

The Peer Review Process Adapted from a presentation by Richard Henderson, Elsevier Hong Kong

The Peer Review Process Adapted from a presentation by Richard Henderson, Elsevier Hong Kong

Peer-review Process When a paper arrives at a journal’s editorial office a few things

Peer-review Process When a paper arrives at a journal’s editorial office a few things can happen: A. Editor reviews paper herself/himself B. Editor assigns to Associate Editor C. Editor or AE assigns to Peer Reviewers

Peer-review Process What to look for 1. Appropriateness for the journal • Is the

Peer-review Process What to look for 1. Appropriateness for the journal • Is the topic relevant to the journal? • Is the topic timely? • Is the topic significant? • Is the study unique? If so, How?

Peer-review Process What to look for 2. What type of paper/research is it? •

Peer-review Process What to look for 2. What type of paper/research is it? • If research, how is it structured? – Randomized, controlled, blinded Meta-analysis? – Retrospective? – Case series or single case

Editors and Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Did the author follow the instructions

Editors and Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Did the author follow the instructions of the journal? • Correct Number of Authors? • Conflict of Interest/Disclosure Statement? • Copyright release signed? • Informed consent (if applicable)/Ethics considerations

Peer-review Process Did the author follow the Instructions of the journal? • Is the

Peer-review Process Did the author follow the Instructions of the journal? • Is the article format correct? – Structured abstract? – Correct article format (Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Refs? ) – Are References in correct format?

Peer-review Process Peer Reviewers look for: Are the technical aspects correct? • Research Structure:

Peer-review Process Peer Reviewers look for: Are the technical aspects correct? • Research Structure: – Correctly described and performed? • Statistics: – Correct analysis? – Accurate interpretation? – Clear presentation?

Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Technical aspects, continued Tables and Figures: – Accurate

Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Technical aspects, continued Tables and Figures: – Accurate and clear structure, presentation, and presentation? – Do the numbers add up? – Are the data consistent with the body of the paper?

Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Technical aspects, continued Tables and Figures: • Abstract

Peer-review Process Editors/Peer Reviewers look for: Technical aspects, continued Tables and Figures: • Abstract & Body of paper – Do number of patients, other data match? – Conclusions consistent?

Peer-review Process REJECTION: Most journals accept 30% or less (NEJM, BMJ accept ~ 10%)

Peer-review Process REJECTION: Most journals accept 30% or less (NEJM, BMJ accept ~ 10%)

Thank you for your kind Attention

Thank you for your kind Attention