Journal editors evaluate all manuscripts that are submitted to their journal, select those which they consider to be suitable for the journal to send for peer review, and consider peer reviewers’ advice to make a final decision about what gets published. Therefore, it is important to know how they make their decisions.

1. The other side: What Editors and Reviewers want?
Professor Vikesh Agrawal
MS, MCh
Professor, Pediatric Surgery
Department of Surgery
Editorial Secretary, Progress in Pediatric Urology
Editorial Consultant, JIAPS
President, Society of Pediatric Urology

2. What will we cover?
 The review and editorial process
 Choosing a journal!
 Choosing a topic!
 Practical tips before you submit!
 What makes a good manuscript?
 Revising a paper!
 Resubmission!
What we don’t cover?
 Research methodology
 Structure of manuscript
 Publication ethics

3. Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decision
Revise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]
Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
Submission is not a “black hole”, you do get chances!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

4. Submit a paper

5. Current scenario of journals- Vs
1
100
10000
60s 70s 80s New Millennium
Year
Nooftitleslaunchedandtill2020

6.  Who is the audience?
 Is it peer-reviewed?
 Indexed, essentially a pubmed-indexed
 Impact Factor
[the average annual number of citations per article published]
 What is the rejection rate?
 Average time to print?
 Recently had similar publication?
Which is the right journal?

7. What to publish?
What to publish:
• Is it new?
• Is it true?
• Is it interesting?
• Is it important?
What NOT to publish:
•Out of date
•Incorrect/unacceptable
•Not of scientific interest
•Duplications

8. How to find new areas of research?

9. Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decision
Revise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]
Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
Try and pass the first test- Editorial review!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

10. Why?
 The peer-review system is grossly overloaded
and editors wish to use reviewers only for
those papers with a good probability of
acceptance.
 It is a disservice to ask reviewers to spend
time on work that has clear and evident
deficiencies.
Initial Editorial Review
Many journals use a system of initial editorial review. Editors
may reject a manuscript without sending it for review

11. What do editors want?
 Trueness- Data validation over experience
 Important- Debate over settlement
 Newness- Hypothesis over dogma and paradigm
Primary loyalty of editors is towards science
Courtesy: Prof Dhananjaya Sharma

12. What is Editor’s choice?
 Relevant Title (Not misleading)
 Clinical relevance
 Cause-effect relationship
 A well structured manuscript
 Language is usually NOT a hindrance

13. Abstract: The key criteria for screening by editor
 Should stand alone!
 Consider it “A Teaser” of your article
 Should tell the prospective reader what you did and highlight the
key findings.
 You must be accurate and specific!
 A clear abstract will strongly influence whether or not your work
is further considered.

14. Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decision
Revise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]
Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
Try and pass the second test- Reviewers’ acceptance!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

15. What is an ideal manuscript?

16. References
 More mistakes are found in the references than any other part of
the manuscript.
 It is one of the most annoying problems, and causes great
headaches among editors…
 Cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based
 Do not inflate the manuscript with too many references – it doesn’t make
it a better manuscript!
 Avoid excessive self-citations
 Avoid excessive citations of publications from the same region

17. A Word about Your Words
NOT creative writing class.
Journal space is precious.
Be concise.
“If clarity can be achieved in n words, never use n+1”

18. Internal review: A Mock review!
Internal
Review

19. Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decision
Revise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]
Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
Try and pass the third test- Reviewers’ recommendation of revision!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

20. Poor science!
Can NOT be helped
Poor language…..
Why are the articles rejected?
Courtesy: Prof Dhananjaya Sharma

21. Why are the articles rejected by reviewers?
“The following problems appear too frequently”

22. 1. Data Analysis- Keep an Excel sheet
2. Introduction- Explain hypothesis
3. Explain methodology
4. Write results- Positive and negative
5. Discuss the hypothesis and prove

23. 6. Title your paper
7. Write abstract
8. Work on references
9. Work on Figures and Tables
10. Intended language check

24. 11. Read paper again > 2 days
12. Internal review
13. Revision
14. Intended proof reading
15. Submission

25. Submit a
paper
Basic requirements met?
REJECT
Assign
reviewers
Collect reviewers’
recommendations
Make a
decision
Revise the
paper
[Reject]
[Revision required]
[Accept]
[Yes]
[No]
Review and give
recommendation
START
ACCEPT
Author Editor Reviewer
Submission is not a “black hole”, Avail the second chance!
Michael Derntl. Basics of Research Paper Writing and Publishing.
http://www.pri.univie.ac.at/~derntl/papers/meth-se.pdf

26. Revising a paper

27. Re-Vision of manuscript!

29.  Learn from their comments.
 Respond promptly- As it’s fresh in the mind of reviewers
 Nearly every manuscript requires revision.
 Editors and reviewers mean to help you improve your article- Do not
take offense.
 Minor revision does NOT guarantee acceptance
 Revise the whole manuscript- not just the parts the reviewers point out
 Carefully study the comments and prepare a detailed letter of
response.
 Provide a scientific response to the comment you accept; or a
convincing, solid and polite rebuttal to the point you think the
reviewer is wrong.
Reviewing is a Painstaking task- Respect it!

30. Publishing speed- Be patient!
Many journals have now introduced a “Fast Rejection“ process by the journal Editor

31. Take home message
Choose indexed/ reputed journals
Choose a topic carefully: Lot of hardwork will follow
Prepare a manuscript well- Stick to science
Use internal review- Get involved in a team
Improve upon your language- Intended proof reading
Revision improvize your paper- Be receptive
Rejection is not a failure- May find a better journal

32. Your paper is worthless if no one reads, uses, or cites it
A research study is meaningful only if…
 it is clearly described, so
 someone else can use it in his/her studies
 it arouses other scientists’ interest and
 allows others to reproduce the results.
By submitting a manuscript you are basically trying to sell your
work to your community…