1 / 25

Writing Your First Paper

Writing Your First Paper. Rebecca A. Silliman, MD, PhD Director of Research, Section of Geriatrics Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology October 28, 2014. Why Consider It?. I need publications so that I have a track record for a faculty appointment, grant applications, etc.

barrie
Download Presentation

Writing Your First Paper

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Writing Your First Paper Rebecca A. Silliman, MD, PhD Director of Research, Section of Geriatrics Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology October 28, 2014

  2. Why Consider It? • I need publications so that I have a track record for a faculty appointment, grant applications, etc. • It is required by my training program • OR • Find a reason that will sustain you . . .

  3. Because… • You will write many drafts • It will take much longer than you think “I remember a past CREST fellow working on papers from her thesis two years after finishing the program. I now understand why.”

  4. Getting Started #1 • Do I have a story worth telling? • Important – either in your eyes or your mentor’s • Scientifically sound • Fills a gap (supported by your literature review): • Subject characteristics • Methods • Findings • What is/are my key message(s)? • What is the research question that you are trying to answer? Your main finding? • Prepare your tables and understand your findings before you begin writing

  5. Getting Started #2 • Who will be my co-authors (follow the rules)? • ICMJE Criteria for Authorship: • Substantial contributions to conception, design, and acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of data. • Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content. • Final approval of the version to be published. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. Updated May 2000 (http://www.icmje.org)

  6. Getting Started #3 • How will authors be ordered? • Understand conventions of your discipline • Have a plan up front, but be flexible • Who will be senior author? • Principal Investigator • Mentor • Other • Understand writing strategies/conventions of your senior author.

  7. Getting Started #4 • How do I decide on a journal home (“fit”)? • Topic • Novelty and importance of findings • Broad vs. narrow appeal (audience) • [Ask your mentor/co-authors; Ask the editor] • Create a list of top three choices • Decide if you will shoot high vs. on target

  8. Getting Started #5 • Journal home: read the directions and follow them: abstract, word count, references • Find a model article (similar methods/data type) to follow and follow it

  9. Writing #1 • What, as first author, will be my responsibilities?: • Will I draft the entire manuscript? • If not, make writing assignments and give your colleagues deadlines • When and where will I write? • Will I write alone or collaboratively? • How and what will I write (how to avoid writer’s block)? • Give yourself assignments and due dates • Make assignments that are realistic • Do what your fourth grade teacher taught you – make on outline first • Manage technological intrusions • Keep the process moving – write small amounts regularly

  10. Writing #2 • Introduction • Set the stage: state of knowledge, gaps, and study objective(s) • Generally three to four paragraphs (1 ½ pages double spaced)

  11. Writing #3 • Methods • Study design (figures are helpful) • Study sample (inclusion/exclusion) • Data collection • Analytic variable definitions • Analysis plan

  12. Writing #4 • Results • Tables 1 – 3 • Don’t repeat data in tables in the text: summarize and explain your findings • Figures

  13. Writing #5 • Discussion • Summary of main findings • Comparison with existing literature • Meaning/Implications, including surprises • Strengths/Limitations • Conclusion: How do your findings fill the gaps identified in the introduction? What is next? • Abstract – easiest to write last

  14. Writing #6 • You will need to write multiple drafts • Once you have a complete draft, read and review critically; rewrite and proofread • Ask a trusted friend/colleague to proofread and edit to make the language concise • Circulate to your co-authors for review; rewrite

  15. Writing #7 • Circulate to a few trusted and experienced reviewers (proofread before you circulate) • Provide sufficient time for review (2-3 weeks) • Provide guidance regarding what kind of feedback that you want: • conceptual; content; style • Reminders may be needed; not everyone reads emails carefully

  16. Tips for Success #1 • Find a model article and follow it • Create an outline of key points before beginning to write • Write regularly, even if only a few sentences • Remember that scientific writing is formal, so avoid informal terms • Example: cheap vs. inexpensive

  17. Tips for Success #2 • Be parsimonious with language • Avoid too many words • less is usually more • rambling suggests lack of clarity in thinking • If a sub study, include only relevant methods detail • Summarize data from tables in the text • Keep the text organized • Use subheadings • Make sure the text is where it belongs • Example: do not describe new results in the discussion • Describe and discuss variables in the same order: methods, results text, and tables

  18. Tips for Success #3 • Provide enough methodologic detail so that reviewers/readers can understand the rationale for study decisions • Example: excluding daily step counts >20,000 • Proofread, proofread, proofread • Perfection is the enemy of the good • Leave the rest to the reviewers • Keep a log of all decisions that you and your co-authors have made, so as to be efficient with reviewers’ comments

  19. Tips for Success #4 • Spend your highest quality brain power on the Discussion section • What does it mean? • Truth, chance, bias? Don’t overstate, but don’t be anemic • End on an upbeat – Where is the field going? What is needed? • Avoid “Future research is needed to…”

  20. Dealing with Reviews #1 • Code phrases “We regret to inform you that we cannot accept your manuscript in its current form.” “If you believe that you can address the issues raised, we would be willing to reconsider your manuscript, but cannot guarantee acceptance.”

  21. Dealing with Reviews #2 • Responding to reviews • Read reviews and put them away for awhile, but not too long… • Ask your mentor or a senior colleague to read and interpret them • Create a table or document for yourself: list each review point and necessary changes and/or response

  22. Dealing with Reviews #3 • Responding to reviews, cont’d. • Wait to begin drafting responses until you can do so without emotion (at least in your written response) • Ask someone less emotionally invested to read your responses for tone

  23. Dealing with Reviews #4 • When to challenge a “reject” decision • Reviewers are incorrect • All concerns are addressable • When to back off and why

  24. Thank you! Questions?

  25. Special Thanks • To those who taught me how to write: • JoAnne Earp • Bob Fletcher • To those who contributed to this presentation: • Jaclyn Bosco • Jess Eng • Vicky Parker

More Related