Publishing presentation by Sadis Matalon

1. How to publish your paper in AJP-Lung:
“The best place to publish basic,
translational and hypothesis driven
clinical research”
Sadis Matalon, PhD, DrSc (Hon)
Distinguished Professor
Alice McNeal Endowed Chair
Vice Chair & Director, Division of Molecular and Translational Biomedicine
Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
Director, Pulmonary Injury and Repair Center
The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham Alabama

2. Why is publication so important?
• No publication, no project
– Your results must be available for others, or it is as if they
don’t exist
• No publication, no promotion
– Yardstick of productivity
• No publication, no funding
– What have you done for me lately?
• No publication, no job!
Publishing your work is vital for success
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

3. Authorship
• Decide on authors, and their order, as early as
possible
– Preferably before even starting the project
– Reassess often: authors and order may need to change as
projects develop. DONOT CHANGE THE ORDER AFTER IT IS
SUBMITTED.
• Authors should include only those who have made a
substantive intellectual contribution to the project
reported, and can defend the data and conclusions
publicly
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

4. Criteria for Authorship
• Generate at least part of the intellectual content
– Conception or design of the work
– Data analysis and interpretation
• Draft, critically review, or revise the intellectual
content
• Approve the final version to be submitted
All three criteria should be satisfied
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

5. Essential Elements of a Manuscript
• Concise summary of rationale, results and how the results
advance the field (usually 200-250 words)
- Abstract
• Based on what was known and unknown, why did you do the
study?
– Introduction
• How did you do the study?
– Methods (some journals ask you to list methods in a
supplement)
• What did you find?
– Results
• What does it mean in the context of the existing body of
knowledge?
– Discussion
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

6. Choosing the Right Journal
• The IMPACT FACTOR: Most authors submit
their manuscripts to journals with a high
impact factor, even though they know that
there is little chance that it will be accepted.
• Import and significance of the findings
– Seek input from colleagues. Is it possible for this article to
be considered by a high impact journal (Science, Cell,
Nature, JCI etc.?)
• If not, choose your target audience
– “Is it lung related?”
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

7. • AJP-Lung is the official pulmonary journal of the American
Physiological Society
• Review all submitted articles and provide authoritative,
helpful and timely review which improve the quality of each
paper
• Recognize high quality articles by junior authors by offering
a number of awards
• Outstanding Associate Editors who summarize what needs
to be done to address reviewers concerns
• No supplements are necessary form methods and no limits
to the number of figures; no charge for color figures to APS
members
Why should I submit my paper
to AJP-Lung?

8. 2010 2011 2012 2013
ARRCCM* 9.09 11.08 11.04 11.986
THORAX* 6.525 6.84 8.376 8.562
ERJ* 5.922 5.895 6.355 7.125
AJRCMB 4.426 5.125 4.148 4.109
AJP-Lung 4.137 3.662 3.523 4.041
Resp. Res 3.127 3.336 3.642 3.38
Our Impact Factor is 4.041
Impact Factors of Journals Publishing
Lung Research
* Publish mainly clinical articles (basic science
article should contain data on human subjects)

9. • AJP Lung is dedicated to publishing high-quality original and
review articles on all aspects of lung physiology, biochemistry
and cell biology, as well as, results of hypothesis driven
clinical trials
Editorial Philosophy and Policy
Types of Articles Considered for Publication
Rapid Reports Research Articles
Perspectives Innovative Methodology
Editorial Focus Letters to the Editor
Review Articles (including history of pulmonary physiology)
We encourage the submission of unsolicited Review articles and Perspectives

10. The Editorial Team
Editor-in-Chief
Sadis Matalon, PhD, ScDr (Hon)
Deputy Editor
Y. S. Prakash, MD, PhD
Associate Editors
James F. Collawn, PhD
Lester Kobzik, MD
Wolfgang M. Kuebler, MD
Bethany Moore, PhD
Dolly Mehta, PhD
Rory E. Morty, PhD
Rakesh P. Patel, MD
Irina Petrache, MD
Larissa Akimi Shimoda, PhD
Kurt R. Stenmark, PhD
Editorial Assistant
Amy McEver

11. • Major accomplishments and future
challenges
o Matalon S. A critical review of the American
Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and
Molecular Physiology: 2012-1015. Am J
Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol
2014;307(12):L911-6. Epub 2014 Nov 7
doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00330.2014. PMID: 25381028
Major Accomplishments
2012-2015

12. • Manuscript submitted to APS
o Ms. Trang checks for adherence to APS guidelines
o Returned to the authors for corrections or sent to Dr.
Matalon (< 2 days)
• Assigned to Associate Editor (AE) with the most
expertise in the area (< 1 day)
• The AE choses two reviewers (< 4 days)
• Average time to decision = 19 days
Note: we encourage authors to recommend impartial
reviewers with significant expertise in the field
The Editorial Process

13. • 50% acceptance rate
o Associate Editors write a concise summary with
reasons for decision and clear instructions for revisions
o 95% of accepted manuscripts require revisions
• Rejected manuscripts with sound methodology
and results, may be recommended for
consideration by Physiological Reports (no
additional submission fee or reformatting
required).
Acceptance/Rejection

14. Responding to Reviewers
• Complete additional experiments if needed
• Address all comments in a point-by-point fashion
– Resist the temptation to prepare an impassioned
response to points with which you disagree
– Stand firm (diplomatically) if that is truly the right thing
to do
• Sincerely thank the editor and reviewers for helping
you to improve your work
– They have invested a lot of time, mostly on a voluntary
basis
• Ask a neutral colleague to review your response
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

15. • R1 manuscripts are assigned to the same AE and the same
reviewers. Average time to reach a decision=15 days.
• Accepted research articles are scrutinized by the APS for
image manipulation; review articles are screened for textual
similarities with published ones.
• If no problems are identified, articles are published online
within five business days; otherwise the Ethics Manager (Dr.
Christina Bennett) sends an email to the corresponding
author asking them to fix provide additional information).
Submission of a Revised Manuscripts

16. Ethical Concerns
• The review of any article may be stopped at any time
because of ethical concerns raised by the reviewers or the
Associate Editor.
In this case, the article referred to Dr. Bennett and the
Ethics Committee (headed by the Vice Chair of the APS
Publications Committee). The Committee seeks additional
information from the authors to clarify the issue.
• The Committee may decide that there is no infraction (in
which case the paper will be returned to the review process
with no prejudice) or there is an ethics violation. The paper
may be rejected on ethical grounds.

17. Ethical issues in Biomedical Publishing
• Ethical misconduct is increasing among submissions to
biomedical journals, including (until recently) those of APS
• While most scientists are entirely ethical, a significant
proportion will admit to occasional questionable practices if
surveyed anonymously (Martinson et al. Nature 435: 737-738,
2005)
• Several risk factors for violation of ethical policies
– Inexperience/lack of mentoring on appropriate standards
– Multiple authors
– Availability of software tools for figure manipulation
– Increased competition for positions and funding
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

18. Common Ethical Issues
(in order of prevalence at APS)
• Inappropriate but non-fraudulent figure manipulation
• Duplication of data
• Duplicate publication
• Animal welfare concerns
• Data fabrication/falsification
– Increasingly, includes inappropriate manipulation of figures
• Plagiarism
• Human welfare concerns
• Authorship disputes
• Conflicts of interest
• Others (e.g., reviewer bias, submission irregularities)
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

19. Plagiarism
• Definition
– Taking the work of
another
– Copying a figure, table,
or even wording from a
published or
unpublished paper
without attribution
– Self-Plagiarism: copying
an extensive amount of
text from one of your
previous manuscripts
• How to avoid
– Provide citation to the
work of others
– Obtain copyright
permission if needed
– Do not copy exact
wording from another
source, even if
referenced, unless in
quotes
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

20. 1. How does an Associate Editor chose reviewers?
• Reviewers chosen based on published expertise in the area of research
• Usually from members of the editorial board or experts in the area.
Authors recommendations are always taken into consideration.
2. What are the major criteria for determining the fate
of my paper?
Questions about the
Editorial Process
Reviewers are asked to rate each
paper using the criteria shown
Novelty of findings and potential
impact on the field are the two most
important determinants for potential
acceptance
Papers with an overall rating Lower
than 50% are either rejected or
referred to Physiological Reports

21. 3. My paper was rejected; however, I feel that I can address
the comments of reviewers.
The reviewers felt that the paper was technically sound but the approach lacks
originality and the conclusions do not advance the field. Please pay attention to
the summary provided by the Associate Editor.
4. I am interested in reviewing papers for AJP-Lung and
eventually joining the Editorial Board. How do I do this?
Ask a member of the editorial board to recommend you when they are unable to
review a paper. If you are invited to review, accept the invitation and provide an
informative and helpful review on time. Do not make inflammatory comments in
your review and do not ask the authors to quote your papers.
Publish papers in AJP-Lung as a first or senior author. Members of the Editorial
Board are expected to publish at least one paper per year in AJP-Lung
Send suggestions to the Editor on how to improve the quality and impact of AJP-
Lung to the lung community.
Questions Cont’d

22. 5. I am interested in reviewing papers for AJP-Lung and
eventually joining the Editorial Board. How do I do this?
Promote the journal by encouraging your students and colleagues to publish in
AJP-Lung. This will come to the attention of the Editor
Ask a senior colleague to read your review prior to submitting it.
Remember, your goal is to help the authors improve the quality of their
manuscript
Hold yourself to the highest ethical standards in the conduct of research.
6. I am interested in meeting the Editor and Associate Editors
and discussing my research with them.
The Editor and AEs are active scientists who participate in various national and
international meetings. Please approach them and introduce yourself. You can also
ask any of them to visit your poster or hear your talk. Send them your ideas of how
you can contribute to improving the quality of AJP-Lung.
Questions Cont’d

23. 7. Assuming that I do a good job reviewing and
publishing papers, what are my chances of being
appointed to the Editorial Board of AJP-Lung?
The Associate Editors choose the members of the Editorial
Board based on their dependability and visibility. In other
words, there is an excellent chance that you will be
appointed to the Editorial Board. This is the first step of
becoming an Editor!
Questions Cont’d

24. Physiological Reports
www.physiologicalreports.org
• Open access journal launched March 2013
• Partnership with The Physiological Society (UK)
– Published on behalf of the Societies by Wiley Blackwell
• Author pays model – “Gold OA”
• Two ways to submit
– De novo submission
– Cascade from current research journals (Am J Physiol, J Appl Physiol, Physiol
Genomics, J. Neurophysiol; J Physiol; J Exp Physiol)
• Papers are accepted solely on the basis of scientific rigor,
adherence to technical and ethical standards, and evidence that
the study is sufficiently well-conceived and the data support the
conclusions.
• Editors-in Chief
– Susan Wray (Phys Soc)
– Tom Kleyman (APS)
• Submit at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/physiologicalreports
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

25. Scenario 1
• A PI asks a graduate student working in her group to
assist in the peer-review of a manuscript from a
competing group of investigators. The manuscript
contains details of a method that would greatly
accelerate the student’s progress towards
completion of his thesis.
– Is the PI’s action acceptable? What are the obligations of
the PI in this scenario?
– What are the obligations of the student?
– Can the student adopt the new method for his own work?
If so, when?
Adapted from a scenario authored by Dale Benos, UAB
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

26. Scenario 2
• You are completing a post-doctoral fellowship and
submit your last paper with your PI as senior author
and two graduate students as co-authors. After you
have left the lab, the paper is returned with a
request for additional experiments. Your former PI
asks another post-doc to complete these, and adds
her name to the paper as middle author. You object
to this addition and refuse to sign the change of
authorship form.
– Is your decision the right one?
– Who else has rights that must be respected in this
scenario?
– How might the PI have handled the situation differently?
Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism

27. Integrating the Life Sciences from Molecule to Organism
The American Physiological Society
Some slides were taken from
“Publishing 101:
How to Get Your Work Published
and Avoid Ethical Minefields”
Presented at the EB 2015 meeting
1. Curt Sigmund, Chair, APS Publications Committee
2. Scheman, APS Director of Publications, Executive Editor
3. Christina Bennett, APS Publications Ethics Manager
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
Acknowledgments
4. Lee Ann Riesenberg, RN, MS, PhD, for valuable
discussions and editorial assistance