The key thing in writing science papers is to first finalize the data. It is generally inappropriate to raise them in later review rounds if they already existed in the first draft submitted.
This was advice my adviser gave me about a month before the due date, when he could tell that my brain and my PDF library were so overflowing with data that I was struggling with actually producing any text.
How to review a journal article: When I undertook the task of writing a scientific literature review article last year, I had hoped that a Google search would reveal a handful of how-to pages thoughtfully created by veterans of this particular writing process.
When selecting your recommendation, consider the prestige of the journal and the usual standard of articles it includes. Look for areas that have not yet been thoroughly reviewed or areas for which you think you have a fresh take on old data.
You might address issues such as the significance of the contribution, quality and thoroughness of the analysis, clarity of presentation, practical importance, originality, depth and appropriateness for the Journal.
Science is an iterative process by which we approach the truth in tiny steps. For these, you would probably switch to the next option. What parts of the manuscript do you really like? The peer review process began some years ago in France and in England,  revolutionizing science by creating a culture of peer criticism and self-criticism.
Just stop when you run out of comments. Different journals specify different lengths for their abstracts. Read each paragraph carefully. Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?
Reviews are often between one and two pages single spaced. For instance, when alluding to previous research to uphold an assertion about some conceptual, methodological, or substantive weakness, it is imperative to provide a complete citation so the Editor and authors can locate it.
Though this viewpoint is controversial, plagiarism of words could be considered error, whereas plagiarism of data must be considered fraud.
Get familiar with software like Papers or any other PDF-management softwareEndNote and Adobe Illustrator or whatever graphics program the journal suggests.
Be quantitative and avoid the use of general terms, especially in presenting the method and reporting the results. Your labmates and collaborators are invaluable resources.
It is permissible and efficient to articulate only the most serious concerns, and to conserve reviewing energy for other manuscripts that stand to gain from more detailed reviewer input. If you cannot respond to all of the comments by either altering your manuscript or rebutting the criticism, then it may be time to pick another journal for submission.
This recommendation should be made when the manuscript is judged to be quite strong and in need of only minor additions, deletions, or corrections. Writing and submitting papers requires a thick skin and a resilient nature. Is it consistent with the length used by this journal?
For example, personalized medicine has caused a paradigm shift in oncology; the idea that each patient should be treated in a way individually tailored to the genes unique to their tumor has caused a great deal of excitement.
Are all references cited listed in the reference list and vice versa? New York Times; This recommendation should be used when the reviewer believes that satisfactory resolution to his or her concerns is possible and that the achievement of successful resolution will result in an acceptable manuscript.
I cannot promise that publication will get easier over time; each new paper presents unique difficulties. It is likely that in the long run the amount of reviewing you are asked to do will be roughly proportional to the number of articles you submit to journals. The essential difference between this recommendation reject in current form and the option above encourage revision is that the current version of the manuscript is not publishable in anything approximating its present form.
Is there unnecessary repetition? Next, note any concerns or problems at the big picture level. Narrowing the scope of the article to conform to these boundaries was perhaps the biggest challenge of this process.
What we know and what we need to know. Yes, I sometimes wrote things that were wrong or at least imperfect when constructing a section from memory.Nov 04, · How to Write a Medical Paper to Get It Published in a Good Journal.
George D. Lundberg, MD, The purposes of a medical journal are to shed light, to take heat, and to give heat. A physicist named Faraday once.
Sample Format For Reviewing A Journal Article Reading and summarizing a research article in the behavioral or medical sciences can be overwhelming.
Below is a simple model to guide students through this process. Write the literature review in the past tense; the research has already been completed. Tips for writing your first scientific literature review article Find places to write where you can concentrate, and take breaks often to stretch, get a snack or even step outside for a few minutes.
On days when I struggled with concentration, I often used a timer to structure my day. JOURNAL NEWS Medical detectives: LIPID NEWS.
George D. Lundberg, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Medscape General Medicine, explains how to write a paper for a medical journal. The article name comes next, followed by the title of the journal (in italics), volume number (in italics) and issue number in parentheses.
End. How to write a medical original article: Advice from an Editor. Author links open overlay panel Ahmed A. Shokeir. Show more with a review focusing on writing an original medical article.
Methods. In this review I focus only on the writing of original articles for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. To write an original article.Download