To my understanding, the traditional route is to submit to a conference first, wait for feedback, then use that feedback to improve your manuscript and submit to a journal. However, this process could take a long time. If submitting to a journal first, you will get feedback from peer review anyways, which could ultimately benefit the manuscript and any later presentation during a conference. I have seen that JAMA provides a disclaimer about this, and states that you may be able to work with the editors so that the manuscript is published at the same time as the conference. In my case, the conference submission deadline is not for a while, so I planned to submit to a journal first. Does anyone have any experience or precautions with either order, or simultaneous submission? Does this differ journal to journal?
Thank you,
Rob
To the best of my knowledge, it's conference first then Journal
Hi Rob, in most cases, a conference really goes first, but I have experienced a few opposite cases, too. As to the issue generally, it is good to think twice about what the planned publication outcome of a conference is — if it is proceedings, which may not be appreciated in your country's research assessment system, I would write an extensive article on the topic and submit it to a prestigious journal, and participated at the conference with something more low-cost.
Envialo primero a la conferencia y luego a la revista para su publicación
Submitting research to a conference is preferred first , then to journal for publication. The acceptance of the paper to conference is easy than journal..
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Graphs