How editors like their papers - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

How editors like their papers

Description:

Subheadings: Population. Ethical considerations. Definitions. Technical ... Subheadings, if suitable. Careful data presentation. redundancy. spurious accuracy ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:11
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: marcusm1
Learn more at: https://sites.pitt.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: How editors like their papers


1
How editors like their papers Marcus
Müllner Associate editor BMJ Department of
Emergency Medicine University of Vienna
2
Some simple points
  • Have the right question
  • Have a suitable method to answer it
  • Interpret your findings adequately
  • Find the right journal
  • Consult the journals guidelines

3
Find the right journal
  • Dont select it because of its impact factor
  • Dont select it because of its reputation
  • Select it because of the audience
  • Who will be interested in your paper?
  • Doctors - all or a particular group
  • Researcher
  • Policy makers
  • Public

4
Consult the journals guidelines
  • General points
  • Journal categories
  • Length
  • Format
  • References
  • Specific points
  • Conflict of Interest
  • CONSORT
  • QUOROM

5
The ideal paper - a personal view
  • Short
  • IMRAD
  • Clearly written and presented
  • Complete
  • Try to avoid silly errors

6
The ideal Title - a personal view
  • Informative
  • subject matter
  • study design
  • study population
  • Information clearly presented
  • NO unnecessary detail

7
The ideal Abstract - a personal view
  • Short
  • Structured
  • Matches content of paper
  • Conclusions only for results presented

8
The ideal Introduction - a personal view
  • Short
  • Catch the readers attention immediately
  • Tell the story so far
  • Are there controversies?
  • Aim of the study

9
The Method section
Should be given in such detail to enable the
qualified reader to repeat the experiment
10
The Method section - a personal view
  • Sufficiently long
  • Subheadings
  • Population
  • Ethical considerations
  • Definitions
  • Technical description
  • Statistical methods
  • Clear presentation

11
The Result section - a personal view
  • Clear presentation
  • Short
  • Subheadings, if suitable
  • Careful data presentation
  • redundancy
  • spurious accuracy

12
The structured Discussion - a suggestion
  • Statement of principal findings
  • Strengths and weaknesses of this study
  • Strengths and weaknesses in relation to
  • other studies
  • Meaning of the study
  • Unanswered questions and future research

Doherty M BMJ 19993181225
13
Figures and Tables should
  • Add information
  • Save space
  • Self-explanatory
  • Not overloaded with numbers
  • or ink

14
The text in general - the prose style
  • Clarity
  • Fluency
  • Accuracy
  • Economy
  • Grace

15
Summary
  • There is not one best way but many
  • The choice depends on
  • Journal
  • Topic
  • Audience
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com