Daniel Feerst | Publishing research strategies for success

Category: Entertainment

Presentation Description

Daniel Feerst, a clinical social worker and internationally recognized employee assistance consultant and author


Presentation Transcript

slide 1:


slide 2:

 Understand the peer review process  Develop a personal publication plan utilising the strategies suggested at the workshop Learning Outcomes

slide 3:

 Explain the BJOT peer review process  Follow your manuscript through the process after you submit it  Understand how and where the key decisions are made  Suggest methods to avoid common problems  Identify key strategies  Enable you to develop your personal action plan 3 Outline

slide 4:

 Technical check - does it meet the current submission guidelines for its category  Word count number of references for category reportng guidelines key messages registraton for RCTs  Ethical approval – informed writen consent  Age of study 4 Peer review process – screening

slide 5:

 Desk review – is it suitable for peer review  Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor reads abstract and looks at submission  Is it within aims and scope of the journal  Does it advance knowledge  Is it current  Does it have international relevance  Consider quality 5 Peer review process – screening

slide 6:

 Technical check – authors may be asked to address problems  Desk review –  send for review  invite to resubmit in another category  reject without review  Out of scope  Not advancing knowledge e.g. we have published a similar study poor research method does not match research question no international relevance ethical problems  Desk reject – prompt decision – can submit to another journal 6 Peer review process – screening

slide 7:

 Is your study worth publishing  Honest refecton on its quality / value  Is a journal artcle the best opton – consider a conference presentaton /non peer review journal  Is the study current now or when it is published  What does your study add 7 Your strategies

slide 8:

 Pick a relevant journal  Check websites of possible publicatons  Look at Aims and Scope  Look at recent issues table of contents OnlineFirst  If you are not sure - email the editor to ask if the journal would be interested  Expect an honest answer 8 Your strategies

slide 9:

 to publish articles with international relevance that advance knowledge on research practice education and management in occupational therapy 9 BJOT Aims and Scope

slide 10:

 Focus on topics less well represented in journal  More clinical/client focus  Emphasise research as evidence for practice  Prioritise research and reviews  All submissions should advance knowledge  Craik C 2016 Strategic directions for the British Journal of Occupational Therapy 79 3 10 BJOT Strategic Direction

slide 11:

 Follow the current submission guidelines for the artcle category  Read the other material on submitng  For example – confrm work is original not submited elsewhere all authors are eligible to be authors have permission to reproduce copyright material e.g. fgures Your strategies

slide 12:

 Editor-in-Chief selects potental reviewers  Double blind peer review by at least 2 reviewers  Authors do not know the reviewers  Reviewers do not know the authors or the other reviewer  Informaton that could identfy you is not sent to reviewers Peer review process – reviewing

slide 13:

 Reviewers –UK and international are invited – email with the abstract  If they agree they receive the full submission with guidelines on reviewing  Asked to return within 4 weeks  Both reviews are sent to Editor-in-Chief for an initial decision Peer review process - inviting reviewers

slide 14:

 Title and abstract must be well writen to assist editors and reviewers  Title should be clear unambiguous and only include relevant words –shorter is beter  Abstract should follow submission guidelines  Include key informaton – research queston / aim /number of partcipants  Make sure it refects the study as currently writen Your strategies

slide 15:

 Reviewers usually comment on each section of the manuscript  The style varies and they may focus on different aspects of the manuscript  With 2 reviews most aspects should be covered  The Editor-in-Chief may also provide additional comments  Additional questions for reviewers - Peer review process - reviews

slide 16:

1. Is the relevance to international occupational therapy clear 2. Does the paper advance knowledge in its area of research 3. Do the conclusions relate logically to the aims results and discussion 4. Are further recommendations made and limitations addressed 5. Do the abstract key messages and what this study has added summarise the article accurately and concisely. Peer review process - questions for reviewers

slide 17:

 Editor-in-Chief considers reviews and submission  Suitable for publication in the current form  Suitable with minor amendments  Suitable but requires major amendments / additions  Unsuitable  Author receives both reviews any comments from the Editor- in-Chief and an overall decision Peer review process – decision

slide 18:

 If unsuitable use the reviews to improve and submit elsewhere  Seldom accepted without revisions  Minor revisions – should take a few hours  Major revisions – only suggested if possible e.g. one or two of-  Update literature  More justification / detail of method  Reconsider the analysis too many tables / quotes  Develop the discussion / implications for practice Possible outcome

slide 19:

 Authors should expect revisions – they are an opportunity to improve your manuscript  Build in time and energy for revisions  Show you have considered all the reviewer comments and in relation to each comment either  Revise as requested or  Justify why not  Provide a table with an account of your responses  Resubmit revised article as soon as possible -2 months Responding to reviewers’ comments

slide 20:

 Avoid common problems throughout the manuscript  Introduction /literature review  Method  Results/findings  Discussion  Key findings / what they study has added 20 Your strategies

slide 21:

 Think of the reader – tell the story  If BJOT - no need to explain occupational therapy  Focus on recent key literature  Use research articles and reviews  Not textbooks or conference presentations  Clearly identify the gap in the literature /rationale for study / research question/s Your strategies - literature review

slide 22:

 Follow a logical order – very important if study has several phases or is part of a larger study cite it  Explain what you did – link to research question  Some justification for choices – referenced  Explain validity and reliability / trustworthiness  Needs to be replicable Your strategies - method

slide 23:

 Start with participants  Link to research question  Present in same order as method  Present key results – not everything  Sensible use of tables figures diagrams  Do not repeat information in tables in the text – highlight key points Your strategies - results / findings

slide 24:

 Again present in same order as method and results  Discuss key points not everything  Identify implications for practice and further research  Discuss limitations  Conclusion  Check abstract key findings and what this study has added do match Your strategies - discussion

slide 25:

 The same reviewer/s will be asked to review again  Not all are willing to do this  If the reviewers / Editor-in-Chief still do not think the manuscript is suitable –it may be rejected or further revisions recommended  Again revise and provide an account of your responses Peer review process – reviewing a resubmission

slide 26:

 Decide if your study is worth publishing  Pick a relevant journal for your study  Follow the submission guidelines carefully  Remember the importance of title and abstract  Avoid common problems throughout the manuscript  Expect revisions do them promptly demonstrating how you responded to the reviewers Strategies for your action plan

slide 27:

Good Luck

authorStream Live Help