A guide to assist in writing for publication

1. 1
How to write for publication:
basic steps
Presentation prepared by:
Prof JM Frantz

2. Different types of
publications
q Short report (1500 words)
q Really good stuff (500 words)
q Full Paper (3000 words)
q Innovative report (1500 words)
2

3. Steps in planning to write
• Identify the correct journal
• Get the authors guidelines
• Choose an accurate title
• Be clear about the aim of the article
• Decide on the section headings
• Take Action
• Expand the section headings
3

4. Typical Structure and guide of an article
Title 8- 15 words
Abstract 200 – 250 words
Keywords 5-10 words
Introduction and Literature Review
- May included the background, conceptual framework
and identifying the gap that the article is addressing
500 – 1500 words
Methods/Methodology
- Research Design
- Sampling (Target population , research context and
sampling method)
- Data collection
- Measures
- ethics
500 – 1000 words
Results 1000 words
4

5. The title page
• A title should be well written as it
alerts the reader as to the topic
• It should describe the research in an
accurate, precise manner
• Should not be too long
5

6. Authorship
• Should be based on
contributions to:
– conception, design,
collecting of data
or analysing data
– Drafting the article
or revising the
article critically
– Contribution to the
final version before
submission
• Participation only in
data collection does
not justify authorship
• Authors must have
sufficient input to the
writing of the report
to be able to defend it
• Acknowledge those
who contributed
intellectually to the
article e.g. stats
6

7. Abstract
• A structured abstract has the
following components:
– Introduction
– Aim, objective, purpose
– Methods
– Results
– Discussion
– Conclusion
7

8. Abstract: 250 words
• Introduction
• Aim
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• 1-2sentences introducing
the study
• 1 sentence for the aim
• Describe the methods
and main results in 2-3
sentences. Just state the
main results
• Sum up the findings in 1
sentence
• then make a conclusion in
1 -2 more sentences
8

9. Feedback on abstracts
• Too long
• Repetition
• Do not include references
• Try an avoid lots of abbreviations
• Keep it brief and to the point
• Ensure conclusion and implications are
linked to the aim
• Make sure the abstract reflects the
content of the article 9

10. Introduction
• Lays the foundation of the article
• The introduction consists of 2-3
paragraphs and ends with the rational
for the study
• Four important things to include:
– What is the problem
– Why is it important
– Highlight the gap
– Your research aim 10

11. Steps in the introduction
• Establish common ground by
contextualising the field or problem
and making a general statement
• Summarize previous studies
• Prepare the reader for the current
study by highlighting the gaps
• Now present the purpose of the
present research
11

12. Common reviewer
feedback on introduction
• Literature outdated
• Aim not clear or not stated
• Unsubstantiated statements
• Gap that the study is addressing not
clearly highlighted
• Link between literature and aim of
study not clear
12

13. TASK 1
• Write the introduction under the headings
indicated
• Give to your supervisor and writing coach
to provide critical feedback
13

14. Methodology
• The methods section should describe in detail how the
study was performed.
• Ideally when reading your methods study the reader
should be able to reproduce the study.
• It should also contain enough detail to enable the reader
to evaluate appropriateness of your methods and
reliability of your findings
• Headings (Give enough detail for each section)
– Research design
– Population and sampling
– Data collection methods
– Reliability and Validity
– Ethical considerations
– Data analysis 14

15. Methods: 1
• Research design
• Population
• A cross-sectional,
descriptive survey
was used to
determine....
• The population for
this study included all
physiotherapy
academics employed
at the UWC between
2002 and 2009
15

16. Methods: 2
• Data collection
methods
• Validity and
reliability
• As no validated, reliable
questionnaire could be
found, a self-developed
questionnaire was used
which was based on
questionnaires used in
similar studies and the
authors personal
experience.
• The study used a self
administered questionnaire
consisting of 2 scales that
had been validated by
Frantz (2009)
16

17. Methods: 3
• Process for
ensuring rigour in
qualitative research
• Ethical
considerations
• Permission/ethical
approval
• Consent
• Confidentiality
• Anonymity
17

18. Methods 4:
• Data Analysis
– Describe the
statistical package
used
– What statistical
tests were done
– What p-value was
deemed significant
• Data was analysed
using SPSS version
16. descriptive
statistics was used
to summarise the
data using frequency
tables. Statistical
significance was set
at p<0.05
18

19. Common reviewer feedback
on methods (quantitative)
• Research design not clear
• Validity and reliability of instruments
not clear
• Methods used not clearly explained
• Translation of instruments
• Justification of sampling or type of
sampling
19

20. Common reviewer feedback
on methods (qualitative)
• Type of sampling
• Explain interview guide
• Composition of focus groups
• Who did interviews
• Rigour
20

21. TASK 3
• Research design
• Population
• Data collection methods
• Validity and reliability
• Process for ensuring rigour in qualitative
research
• Ethical considerations
• Data Analysis
21

22. TASK 4
• Once you have written your
methodology and worked on the
introduction revisions, give it to your
critical reader
• You will receive a revised
introduction and methodology from
another author and it is your
responsibility to read it and provide
the author with feedback
22

23. Results
• When presenting the findings
present the “forest” first and then
the “trees” i.e present the central
findings first and then the more
peripheral ones
• Ensure that the reader is able to
grasp your major findings easily thus
label tables and figures appropriately
• Relate findings to aims of the study
23

24. Comments from reviewers
• Not clear what the findings are
• Findings are not linked to aim and
objectives
• Tables and figures not very clear
• Findings are not new
• Do not repeat information in a table
in the narrative
24

25. TASK 5
• Write your results section and
submit to a critical reader
• You will receive a results section with
an intro and methods section to read
and give feedback
25

26. DISCUSSION
• Discuss the findings to the research
questions
• Discuss the limitations and strengths
of the study
• Do no overstate findings but
contextualise your results within the
broader literature
• Mention the implications of the
findings 26

27. Comments
• Author tends to generalise
• Key findings not discussed
• Biased arguments
• Limitations of study not mentioned
27

28. TASK 6
• Write your discussion section and
submit to a critical reader
• You will receive a full draft article to
read and give feedback
28

29. CONCLUSION
• Brief summary of what the study has
shown
• Highlight main implications of
findings
• Future research
29

30. General comments
• Do not use long sentences
• Do not use flowery language. Be
concise and to the point
• Short words and sentences are best
• Check grammar and spelling
• Avoid repetitive words
• Stick to the recommended word limit
30

31. THANK YOU
31