130320 Edanz Brazil Seniors Clinical

836 views
766 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
836
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
434
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

130320 Edanz Brazil Seniors Clinical

  1. 1. Maximizing your scientific output: A clinical perspective Daniel McGowan, PhD Science Director Edanz Group Ltd
  2. 2. Customer Service Introduction A little about me…
  3. 3. Customer Service Introduction Today’s presentation • Introduction • Reasons for rejection • Evaluations • Analysis • Enhancing significance • Packaging results
  4. 4. Customer Service Introduction What do journal editors want? High quality research Increase impact Original andnovel research Clear and concise English Interesting to journal’s readership
  5. 5. Customer Service Introduction What do journal editors want? “…dedicated to bringing physicians the best research and key information at the intersection of biomedical science and clinical practice... A career companion for physicians” “…the "gold standard" for quality biomedical research and for the best practices in clinical medicine.”
  6. 6. Customer Service Introduction What do high-impact journals want?  “…primary forum of scientific discourse for the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). JCO strives to publish the highest quality manuscripts dedicated to clinical oncology.”  “the single most credible, authoritative resource for disseminating significant clinical oncology research”
  7. 7. Avoiding rejectionCustomer Service Reasons for rejection: the science Incomplete Inappropriate data methodology Weak research motive InaccuratePoor analysis conclusions
  8. 8. Avoiding rejectionCustomer Service Reasons for rejection: the manuscriptJournal requirements Inappropriate not met citations Rationale and aims not stated Poor grammar and Inappropriate data style presentation
  9. 9. Avoiding rejectionCustomer Service Reasons for rejection: other Inappropriate journal selected Unlucky timing
  10. 10. Evaluations Honest evaluation Significance Novelty State of field Relevance Journal factors Appeal Timing Real world
  11. 11. Evaluations Evaluating significance Novelty How new are your findings?Relevance How broadly relevant are your findings? Appeal What are the important real world applications?
  12. 12. Evaluations Evaluating significance: novelty• How new are my results compared with those already published? New findings Incremental Conceptual advances advances Low to medium Medium to high impact impact
  13. 13. Evaluations Evaluating significance: Relevance How broadly relevant is my work? Population specific? Restricted to geographical Medical location? How common is the disease? Relevant to business or marketing?Psychology Have impact on government policy? Is my design applicable to other fields?Engineering Is it cost-effective?
  14. 14. Evaluations Evaluating significance: Appeal Area of popular Stem cells, tissue engineering, appeal global warming, artificial intelligence Important real Rice resistant to high salt conditions,world applications shrimp resistant to infection
  15. 15. Analysis Trends: Most viewed
  16. 16. Analysis Evaluation Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1): antibody–drug conjugate incorporating the HER2–targeted antitumor properties of trastuzumab and the cytotoxic activity of DM1 T-DM1 significantly prolonged PFS and OS, and had lower toxicity than an alternative in a phase 3 study of patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
  17. 17. Analysis Evaluation Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1): antibody–drug conjugate incorporating the HER2–targeted antitumor Novelty Appeal activity of properties of trastuzumab and the cytotoxic DM1 Positive results in a large heterogeneous population refractory to prior treatments T-DM1 significantly prolonged PFS and OS, and had lower toxicity than an alternative Relevance3 study of Importance in a phase patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
  18. 18. Analysis Evaluation Accurate, objective reporting of methodology and results Concise illustrations and descriptions (PFS, OS, response rates, AEs) Short but to-the-point objective discussion Full disclosure and registered trial (ClinicalTrials.gov): “Study oversight”
  19. 19. Enhancing significance The significance of findings should be accentuated in the manuscript reporting them and the cover letter Clearly communicating the significance (importance, novelty, relevance and appeal) of findings can increase the chances of acceptance by a high-impact journal
  20. 20. Enhancing significance Clearly explain the rationale and aims in the Introduction and link back to these in the Discussion section Cite all of the appropriate references—this shows reviewers and editors that you know what you are talking about
  21. 21. Enhancing significance Clear concise figures and tables presenting the most relevant information Emphasize ethical compliance, full disclosure, and trial registration Describe the most important finding first, followed by validating findings
  22. 22. Packaging results Coverage and Staffing Plan TimingAsk yourself:  Will additional supporting results allow me to ‘aim higher’?  Do I have the resources available to perform these additional experiments?
  23. 23. Packaging results Coverage and Staffing Plan To divide or not to divide Main trial results + Sub-analyses •Primary efficacy •Secondary efficacy •Safety Positive vs negative results? Low to medium Medium to high impact journal impact journal?
  24. 24. Packaging results Coverage and Staffing Plan Increasing output Reviews Meta-reviews Clinical trial results New trialsSub-analyses of trial dataset Primary publication reporting safety and Preclinical efficacy research
  25. 25. Any questions? Thank you!edanzediting.com/brazil_march_2013 Download and further reading @JournalAdvisor Follow us on Twitter facebook.com/JournalAdvisor Like us on Facebookwww.edanzediting.co.jp

×