To Publish or Perish: Strengths, Weaknesses of a Medical Paper (I)

Abstract

This is a review of studies on the explore the strengths, weaknesses of a medical paper and to show the reasons of why manuscripts are rejected. Writing is a process of thoughts converted into words and sentences on paper. It is an indigenous process and continues in some form or other as age advances. Publication are hot topics in the scientific community. So much of the community lives under the constant pressure of “Publish or Perish” that it must be a hot topic. The primary criteria for good scientific writing are accuracy and clarity. If your article is interesting and written with style, fine. But these are subsidiary virtues. First strive for accuracy and clarity. The first step toward clarity is good organization, and the standardized format of a journal article does much of the work for you. The second step toward clarity is to write simply and directly. Academic writing is as much an art as it is a science. The work must have a central thesis and follow a clear and logical plot line from introduction to conclusion. To learn the strengths, weaknesses and the reasons of why manuscripts are rejected would help to the authors to be more successful in writing a medical publications

Keywords

• Publish, Perish, Strengths, Weaknesses, Medical Paper

References

1. Pierson DJ;The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication, Respiratory Care, VOL 49 NO 10, Ajao OG; Some Reasons for Manuscript Rejection by Peer-Reviewed Journals, Annals of Ibadan Postgraduate Medicine, Vol.3 No 2, 2005
2. Thakur SK; Responsible writing, Indian J Surg, 2010, 72:278
3. Guidelines for Writing a Scientific Paper; http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/~smaloy/MicrobialGenetics/topics/scientific- writing.pdf, June 2011
4. Journal of Young Investigators: Writing scientific manuscripts a guide for undergraduates, Journal of Young Investigators, 2005.
5. Bem DJ; Writing the empirical journal article, To appear in Darley, J. M., Zanna, M. P., & Roediger III, H. L. (Eds.). The Compleat Academic: A Career Guide. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2002.
6. Georges B; Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The Strengths and Weaknesses in Medical Education Reports, Educating Physicians: Research Reports, Academic Medicine, Volume 76 - Issue 9 - p 889-896, 2001
7. Winck JC, Fonseca JA, Azevedo LF, Wedzicha JA; To publish or perish: How to review a manuscript, Rev Port Pneumol. 2011;17(2):96-103
8. Kassirer, JP and Campion; Crude and understudied, but indispensable, Journal of the American Medical Association, (2), 96-97,1994.

9. Horrobin, DF; Something rotten at the core of science? Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 22(2), 51-52, 2001
10. Yuksel, A.; Writing publishable papers. Tourism Management, 24(4), 437-446, 2003
11. McKercher B, Law R, Weber K, Song H et al. Why referees reject manuscript, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 31, No. 4, 455-470, 2007
12. Seaton, A. V. (1996). Blowing the whistle on tourism referees. Tourism Management, 17(6), 397-399.
13. Woolley KL, Barron JP; Handling Manuscript Rejection, Insights From Evidence and Experience, CHEST , vol. 135 no. 2 573-577, 2009
14. Chew FS; Fate of manuscripts rejected for publication in the AJR. AJR Am J Roentgenol 156:627–632 1991.
15. Pierson DJ: The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication. Respir Care 49:1246–1252, 2004
16. Hall SA, Wilcox AJ; The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to Epidemiology. Epidemiology 18:262–265,2007
17. Wager E: Getting research published (Radcliffe Publishing Ltd, Oxon, UK), 2005
18. Sharma, P; Editor’s note: 2009—A year in review. Family Business Review, 23, 5-8, 2010
19. Craig JB; Desk Rejection: How to Avoid Being Hit by a Returning Boomerang, Family Business Review, 23(4) – 309, 2010.
20. Reuber, AR; Strengthening your literature review. Family Business Review, 23, 105-108, 2010
21. Osborne JW and Holland A; What is authorship, and what should it be? A survey of prominent guidelines for determining authorship in scientific publications, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Vol 14, No 15, 2009.
22. Ortinau DJ; Writing and publishing important scientific articles: A reviewer's perspective, Journal of Business Research 64,150–156, 2011.