Download
1 / 36
360 likes | 558 Views
. . . Peer Review Process in the American Journal of Epidemiology. Paper reviewed by EIC. Primary Prevention. In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficientsIn a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence ratio regressionPresentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundantBe careful when comparing association strengthsStratified data in34656
E N D
1. Addressing Reviewers’ Comments and Revising Manuscripts After Peer Review Moyses Szklo
Editor-in-Chief
American Journal of Epidemiology
3. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
4. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
5. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence/incidence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
7. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence/incidence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
8. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence/incidence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
9. Primary Prevention
In a case-based case-control study, odds ratios instead of beta coefficients
In a cross-sectional study or when calculating cumulative incidence ratio without adjustment for time-to-event, prevalence/incidence ratio regression
Presentation of p values, 95% confidence limits and standard errors simultaneously is often redundant
Be careful when comparing association strengths
Stratified data instead of interaction terms (the latter are useful for statistical testing and for predictive equations)
10. Association of Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) scores (ln(CES-D + 1) with bereavement and baseline CES-D scores at 1 and 12-month interviews, adjusted for health and social network variables§, widowed and married women aged 65-74 yrs, Washington Co., MD, 1979-83
11. Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) Mean Baseline and Follow-up Scores According to Whether Bereavement Occurred, Women Ages 65-75 Years, Washington County, MD, 1979-1983
12. Read carefully the Instructions to Authors (focus on maximum number of pages, other rules of presentation ? e.g., AjE requires aa to plot ratio-based measures on a log scale)
Do not submit the same or similar publications to different journals
Avoid abbreviations
Description of results in text should follow the same order as in table
Avoid the word, “effect”, when reporting observational results
Make sure text, tables and figures match. When a result is presented only in the text, add parenthetically something like “not shown in table/figure”
13. Read carefully the Instructions to Authors (focus on limit on number of pages, other rules of presentation ? e.g., AjE requires aa to plot ratio-based measures on a log scale)
Avoid abbreviations
Description of results in text should follow the same order as in table
Avoid the word, “effect”, when reporting observational results
Make sure text, tables and figures match. When a result is presented only in the text, add parenthetically something like “not shown in table/figure”
14. Read carefully the Instructions to Authors (focus on limit on number of pages, other rules of presentation ? e.g., AjE requires aa to plot ratio-based measures on a log scale)
Avoid abbreviations
Description of results in text should follow the same order as in table
Avoid the word, “effect”, when reporting observational results
Make sure text, tables and figures match. When a result is presented only in the text, add parenthetically something like “not shown in table/figure”
Primary Prevention
16. Read carefully the Instructions to Authors (focus on limit on number of pages, other rules of presentation ? e.g., AjE requires aa to plot ratio-based measures on a log scale)
Avoid abbreviations
Description of results in text should follow the same order as in table
Avoid the word, “effect”, when reporting observational results
Make sure text, tables and figures match. When a result is presented only in the text, add parenthetically something like “not shown in table/figure”
Primary Prevention
18. Read carefully the Instructions to Authors (focus on limit on number of pages, other rules of presentation ? e.g., AjE requires aa to plot ratio-based measures on a log scale)
Avoid abbreviations
Description of results in text should follow the same order as in table
Avoid the word, “effect”, when reporting observational results
Make sure text, tables and figures match. When a result is presented only in the text, add parenthetically something like “not shown in table/figure”
Primary Prevention
19.
Focus on trends, not just on testing or precision
Do not repeat results in the text that are clearly shown in tables
Discuss the study’s limitations
Paper should be as short as possible
Primary Prevention
20.
Focus on trends, not just on testing or precision
Discuss the study’s limitations
Paper should be as short as possible
Primary Prevention
21.
Focus on trends, not just on testing or precision
Discuss the study’s limitations
Paper should be as short as possible
Primary Prevention
22. Avoiding wordiness (Friedman, AJE 1990;132:591)
24. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree somewhat with the request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
25. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree somewhat with the request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
26. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree somewhat with the request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
27. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree somewhat with the request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
28. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree with a request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
29. Responding to Reviewers’ Comments In your cover letter, answer each critique/comment made by reviewers.
Highlight in the revised paper the changes made as a result of the reviewers’ comments.
Be courteous. A good idea is to start your response with, “I thank the reviewer for this thoughtful suggestion…” (that is, if you think it is thoughtful…)
Try to consider carefully each suggestion or comment.
If you disagree with a request for a change, but it is easy to implement it and it does not affect the science…do it!
If you disagree entirely with a criticism and believe it is scientifically sound, explain why.
31. Decisions made for submissions to the AjE between 1/1/08 and 6/30/08
33. Reputed rejection slip from a Chinese economics journal
35. Adjusted* Risk (Hazard) Ratios of Coronary Heart Disease by Selected Factors, with 95% Confidence Intervals, Men 40-64 Yrs. Old at Baseline, 5-year Follow-up, 1975-79
