Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted for Publication
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted for Publication


Published on

Workshop facilitated by Maria J Grant, Editor-in-Chief of the Health Libraries and Information Journal at the 2012 Health Libraries Group conference, 12-13 July 2012, Glasgow: …

Workshop facilitated by Maria J Grant, Editor-in-Chief of the Health Libraries and Information Journal at the 2012 Health Libraries Group conference, 12-13 July 2012, Glasgow:

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Overcoming ChallengesWhen Writing for Publication @MariaJGrant Editor
  • 2. Enhancing YourChances of Your ManuscriptBeing Accepted @MariaJGrant Editor
  • 3. A Bit About Me…• Editor of the Health Information and Libraries Journal• First publication in 1998• Peer support writers group since 2006
  • 4. How Many of You Write?
  • 5. What Do We Mean by ‘Write’? • Mark (letters, words, or other symbols) on a surface, with a pen, pencil, or similar implement • Compose (a text or work) in writing
  • 6. Writing for publication perceived to be different from other forms of writing (Grant et al 2010)
  • 7. Different Forms of Writing for Publication• Twitter• Facebook• Blogs• Newsletters• Book reviews• Journal articles• Practitioner accounts
  • 8. Writing Academic Papers Is Different• Level of rigour when writing is higher• Expected to support statements with references• Contextualise what is known about the subject and any gaps in the evidence• The manuscript adds to the body of knowledge
  • 9. What Are the Common Challenges When Writing?Finding Time Having an Idea Knowing When to Stop
  • 10. Finding Time…
  • 11. Making Time…
  • 12. Having an Idea
  • 13. Working Titles1. Brainstorming a range of draft working titles2. Think creatively3. Rate your titles4. Shortlist no more than six (Race 1999)
  • 14. Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted
  • 15. Enhancing Your Chances of Your Manuscript Being Accepted1. Message 5. Published Papers2. Audience 6. Setting the3. Guidelines Context 7. Experienced4. Editorial Team Colleagues
  • 16. What is the ‘Take Home’ Message?• Not only what you want to say• What can the readers of your manuscript usefully apply to their own practice?
  • 17. Consider Your Audience• Academic vs. Practitioner publications – HILJ vs. HLG Newsletter• Journals each have defined and unique scope• Imagine an individual you are writing for…
  • 18. Author Guidelines• Read the guidelines… and then follow them• Guidelines will help you determine: – In scope – Structured abstract – Structure of the manuscript – Word count – Referencing style
  • 19. Editorial Team• Not sure if your manuscript fits the scope of a journal…
  • 20. Looks at Past Issues• Learn from people who have already been through the process
  • 21. Setting the Context• Literature review – What is known about the subject area? – What are the gaps identified in the literature? – How does your manuscript address this gap? – International context
  • 22. Experienced Colleagues• Learn from colleagues with publishing experience – Writing together – Editing and advising
  • 23. Writing• Write for 5 minutes about the working title you ranked as the most important• Don’t self edit• Don’t re-read• If you don’t know what to write then write “I don’t know what to write”• Keep your pen or pencil flowing
  • 24. Sandwich Filling• Take turns to share your writing idea with the person sitting next to you• Ask questions to clarify your understanding
  • 25. Writing Sandwich• Re-visit your five minutes of writing• Rework it in light of the questions your partner asked
  • 26. What is Peer Review?‘Peer review is the process by whichreports of, or proposals for, research arescrutinised by other researchers.’(Committee of Publisher Ethics 2011)
  • 27. What is the Purpose of Peer Review?• To ensure that only the best quality manuscripts are published• To provide constructive feedback on how a manuscript can be further developed
  • 28. What Are the Potential Outcomes of a Peer Review?• Four potential outcomes – Accept – Minor revisions – Major revisions – Reject
  • 29. Outcome 1: Accepted• A cause for celebration!• I’ve never known a peer reviewed manuscript be accepted at first submission• Usually a journey…
  • 30. Outcome 2: Minor Revisions“A recommendation ofminor revision shouldbe made if themanuscript is likely tobe of interest to theHILJ readership but errors orincomplete referencesare present.”(S1M 2011)
  • 31. Outcome 3: Major Revisions“A recommendation of amajor revision should bemade if the manuscript islikely to be of interest tothe HILJ readership butrequires a reworking interms of structure or theinclusion of additionalmaterials.”(S1M 2011)
  • 32. What To Do When You Receive Referee/s Comments?• Take a deep breath – Read the comments – Put the manuscript aside – Discuss them with your co- author/s – Respond positively to each point raised• Remember, very few manuscripts are accepted without any revisions
  • 33. Outcome 4: Rejected“A recommendation toreject a manuscript shouldbe made if the manuscriptis unlikely to berelevant/of interest to theHILJ readership or is notsufficiently rigorous to besuitable for publication in academic journal.”(S1M 2011)
  • 34. Reasons a Manuscript Might Be Rejected• Out of scope – Topic area or format• Insufficiently developed – Bullet points – May show promise…• Plagiarism• Not responding to referee/s comments
  • 35. Plagiarism• “Take (the work or idea of someone else) and pretend it is one’s own.” (Fowler, Pocket OED 2002)• “Direct quotes” or in your own words but the source must be acknowledged
  • 36. Research, Evaluation & Audit Key Steps in Demonstrating Your Value• Chapter 11: Writing for Publication• Co-written with Graham Walton, Editor, New Review of Academic Librarianship(Grant et al Forthcoming)
  • 37. One Sentence…
  • 38. Writing Ideas Generated (1)• An Investigation into the Information-Seeking Behaviour of F1 and F2 Doctors. To investigate the information-seeking behaviour of F1 and F2 doctors in an Acute Trust in order to ensure their needs are being met and improve the existing knowledge on this subject.• Changing the Future Now. Using innovations to plan forward for a successful life audit for now and beyond…• Does Social Media Raise the Impact of Current Awareness Days? Measuring the impact of current awareness days in light of social media compared to before relying only on TV, radio and newspaper coverage.• Evaluating Uni Work of OLS in a Large Acute Trust on Patient Care. [No abstract]• From Conference First-Timer to Seasoned Networker. [No abstract]• Going for Gold. Encouraging more NHS staff & students to register for NHS Athens accounts during the 2012 Olympics.• [Untitled] Creating a long-term conditions NHS implementation service using a zero cost approach in collaboration with third sector organisations.
  • 39. Writing Ideas Generated (2)• [Untitled] Library anxiety is an important issue for placement students that hospital librarians should understand and support through better collaboration with academic librarians.• [Untitled] My experience of the HLG 2012, in particular the Innovate or Wait session from Day 1, for the HLG Newsletter.• [Untitled] The research seeks to establish the availability of medical information resources in resource limited settings, the level of access and the utilization of the information.• What Are The Challenges of Providing Health Information to Patients Via Email? An article to address the challenges of responding appropriately to an email enquiry for health information by an NHS information service.• What Do Searches of Trials Registers Add to the Systematic Review Evidence Base? Searches of trails registers may add essential evidence to the SR process and compensate for potential bias, therefore we should search them despite challenges of basic search interfaces, lace of specificity & reference management issues.• “Where Do I Go From Here” A reflective discussion of the next step on the career ladder for an academic librarian.
  • 40. Knowing When to Stop
  • 41. References• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Written evidence submitted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (PR 34). ritev/856/m34.htm• Fowler FG, Fowler HW (eds) Pocket Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, 9th ed• Grant MJ, Sen B, Spring H (Eds) Research, evaluation and audit: key steps in demonstrating your value, London: Facet Publishing, forthcoming.• Grant MJ, Munro W, McIsaac & Hill S. Cross-disciplinary writers group stimulates fresh approaches to scholarly communication: a reflective case study within a higher education institution in the north west of England New Review of Academic Librarianship in press.• Race P, 1999, Tips for Lecturers, London: Routledge Falmer. Chapter 8.• S1M. Health Information and Libraries Journal on ScholarOne Manuscript. 2011
  • 42. Contact Details Maria J. Grant Editor – +44 (0) 161 295 6423@MariaJGrant @HILJnl