Often times, many manuscripts are rejected by some highly notable publishers as a result of lacked knowledge of basic steps involving;
1. Actions needed to be taken right before such research takes place,
2. Actions needed when preparing the reports and
3. Actions required before submissions.
It has been repeatedly emphasized that until one becomes a reviewer with these great and first class publishers, one may not be acquainted with the reasons for rejecting his/her submitted paper. Is this the only factor, and what are the other required actions?
Kamoru - there are well recognised 'general' tips that will assist most authors chances of acceptance in mid-high-ranking journals. One could argue that the same skills are still required for low-ranking journals - but it depends on the context. The attached chapter may assist. It is aimed at a nursing and midwifery audience - but the principles are relatively universal. It offers useful 'tricks of the trade' and presents both from the author and reviewer/editor perspective.
Kamoru - there are well recognised 'general' tips that will assist most authors chances of acceptance in mid-high-ranking journals. One could argue that the same skills are still required for low-ranking journals - but it depends on the context. The attached chapter may assist. It is aimed at a nursing and midwifery audience - but the principles are relatively universal. It offers useful 'tricks of the trade' and presents both from the author and reviewer/editor perspective.
Dear Kamoru, this is an interesting question and researchers should consider many areas before start planning for research or even decide on the topic or the research question to be the basis of their work. I enclose a paper I have published with my colleagues in this area. I also invite you to attend my training workshops in this area, to be conducted at King Saud University College of Medicine, in Riyadh, they are as follows:
- 11 April 2018: Research Methods
- 25 April 2018: Becoming A Scholarly Leader
- 09 May 2018: Becoming A Research Supervisor
I also attach the posters of these workshops to share with your colleagues.
Looking at your question again as an Editor, I would say it is important to think about these questions:
- Does the submitted article address important topics/or priorities of the journal?
-Does the submitted article address the guidelines to the authors?
- Originality, advancement of the science in the field
- the Title.
- What was the problem? the research questions, the rationale of the research, the authors' hypothesis
- the study design, validity of the method used, justification given.
- Academic language used, presentation, engagement, and the balance in the paper
- Alignment of the title, the abstract, the research question, method used, results, discussion and the conclusions,
- Any contradictions, or inconsistencies
- Has the paper answered the research questions?
- Biases and limitations in the study
- Areas of strength in the study
- Priorities and comments made by the peer reviewers
- If the paper was peer-reviewed; Can the authors address the issues raised by the reviewers or the Associate Editor?
- Problems that can be easily identified by the Associate Editor that force us to reject the manuscript without sending it for peer-review.
I just briefly focused on key points we generally look at. I hope this helps. Regards, Prof S Azer
Prof S Azer, all these are awesome! I hope you will address them further in your upcoming workshops in April? I cannot afford to miss at least one of them, esp the one tagged "be a research supervisor''. Your points here have shown who you are...excellent.
I think one should take care while submitting it to that high ranking journal
the format of the journal
what is contribution of that study in to the existing study
co relation of main results with findings
there is not any bias factor in that study
justification of the results
and suggestions based on rationale.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals