Congratulations. Time for pizzas!

"Like to change" does not imply "Have to change"! Leave it and move on.

No paper is perfect.

“Yesterday I put a comma in and today I took it out.”

However, make a note of the little untidy things, and forward them to the editor, in case they are not picked up.

Do not worry about ruffling the feathers of the referees. They are not privy to your conversation with your editor.

Hi Dean,

Interesting scenario.. I doubt anyone would advise 'snatching defeat from the jaws of victory' by making any changes to the accepted manuscript.. :)

On a more serious note, i think you must have applied a lot of thought and many revisions to make it a perfect submission that got accepted in first go. It is only human nature to further improve on the work done. What i mean is that suppose you make these changes and the editor is generous enough to accomodate this in the manuscript, it is very likely that another few months later when you look at the manuscript with 'fresher and even more objective eyes', you will find more things to correct and improve.

I think you should celebrate your achievement, congratulations...

regards, raza

Congratulations. Time for pizzas!

"Like to change" does not imply "Have to change"! Leave it and move on.

No paper is perfect.

“Yesterday I put a comma in and today I took it out.”

However, make a note of the little untidy things, and forward them to the editor, in case they are not picked up.

Do not worry about ruffling the feathers of the referees. They are not privy to your conversation with your editor.

Hi Raza and Ian,

I know that you have both contributed to this question from emails sent to me - and many thanks for that - but it is coming up in my ReseachGate thread that no-one has answered. Your comments are not visible to me. Also - I note that the question does not appear in the Q&A tab. I will keep on eye on it - and see what happens.

Hi Raza and Ian - 'normal service is resumed by the looks of it now'. Many thanks both for your insightful and supportive comments. The pizza's are on me when we meet up one day!! I appreciate that, as time passes, we tend to view our past efforts in a 'less romantic' and more critical light (although that said - I 've a few publications that I've thought 'how the hell did I get that published?' but, later viewing, has had me thinking 'actually - it wasn't that bad'). I think that I will move on. The changes that I would have 'liked to have made' - can be in my next one!!

Still would like to hear from people though who have experienced similar - but gone about things differently.

Congrats

Hi, Dean: Depending on the journal, you can make these corrections when they send you the page proofs - even if not requested by the reviewers. If open access, it has been my experience with the BMC editors that they will work with you to repost a modified copy. I would go ahead and make the corrections that you see and then contact the editor to get your modified file swapped out for the previous one. And - congratulations on getting a paper accepted right away! ;-) Donna

Many thanks Raja and Donna too - I'm starting to understand what it must be like to get a Nobel Prize!! Donna - the vast majority of my publications are submitted to 'traditional' journals - particularly through the Wiley and Elsevier publishing houses. As a general rule - they tend to identify that no real content changes can be made to proofs when they arrive. I will contact the editor (who I know quite well anyway) - and enquire before the proofing starts. If they say 'no' - nothing lost and I can live with it.

Congrats

This can happen. If we continue to look for perfection we will spend long time. Remember 80/20 rule.

Henk - many thanks for the input. I don't disagree with what you are saying. It's a fair point that authors should not routinely be able to radically revise their accepted manuscripts in case the revision ends up actually detracting from the original. The changes that I would like to introduce, however, are not of that nature - and would enhance the overall product - in my view. I suppose that part of my issue is that I can't understand why at least one of my reviewers didn't pick such issues up - or all of them pick up one or two apiece. That's why I said that I didn't want to undermine the reviewers - but, in my mind, (as a more 'distant' observer than me as the more subjective author) if I was reviewing it - I think that I would have spotted a few issues with it.

Reviewers are not perfect. It is quite possible for all three reviewers to suffer from the same tunnel vision. All each effectively said was: This is good enough to publish. None of them claimed that your paper was perfect.

Thanks Ian and Henk. Ohhhh - I'm only too aware that there is not such thing as the 'perfect' article. I've always put my best foot forward when it comes to writing - but then I suppose that most people do the same. There will always be a degree of interpretation and subjectivity with both writing and reviewing which means that the 'perfect' manuscript is both arbitrary and an anathema. It's much the same as the 'perfect' assignment. I've never given an academic assignment 100%. I don't believe it is possible - unless it is a machine marking a test where the answer is right or wrong. As soon as you bring in the human element - both on the side of author and the marker/reviewer - then 'stuff happens'. I've given 90% or so before - but the remaining 10%, to me, is an 'ethereal' and subjective entity that is a buffer against absolute perfection. Mans (and women's I hastened to add) drive to extend their personal knowledge and development (which is what defines us) is represented in that buffer zone. Anyway - I think that this is probably another question - or, at best, getting off track a little

I think your last post shows that you have considered others responses to allow you to answer your own question in a way that you can reconcile the experience and move on to the next manuscript. I agree with you that it is disconcerting as remember the same feeling when that happened to me last year. My advice is to think big picture in that the audience will by the majority be focusing on the points of discussion and relating the content to their own reality. I think it is natural to review previous work with a critical lens and as I advance in my writing skills it is easier to see issues, however, I think it is healthy to regard the work as the best that I was capable of at that point in time and look forward. A wise colleague pointed out to me that I should enjoy having a manuscript accepted without revision as it may never happen again!

True Melanie - it may never happen again to me again. Of course, the danger now is that really I might be 'anticipating' that it is always going to happen from here-on-in - but destined to be thwarted at every twist and turn and inevitably become a shadow of my former self. The only way is down now - hey!! On a more serious note though, I agree that it is wise to view your current work as the best that it can be at this current moment in time - and to bear that in mind when looking back on that work from a distance later on. In essence, as those Oasis boys so eloquently put it; don't look back in anger'.

Yes, @Dean, keep on publishing papers that are as good as possible at a given time. Don't end up like Bob Beamon in his profession.

Hi Michael - many thanks. Had to Google that one. So - you are referring to the Olympic long-jumper - hey? If so - the analogy is don't strive for the 'one perfect jump - then never jump again'?

Dear Dean: congratulations and enjoy the rare 'no revisions needed' experience in publishing. I agree with Melanie that sometimes writers try so hard to enhance the paper so that it matches their vision of perfection that they might lose track of their audience's needs.

Hi Katarzyna - many thanks. Rest assured - whatever ends up being published it will not be 'perfection'. The best that I can hope for is 'reasonable'!!

Hey, @Dean, yes I was referring (two days ago) to the long-jumper , who gave up jumping after he could not provide a similar result in a while. So, I'm saying don't give up, even if you have to go through revisions for your already good papers from now on.

Thanks Michael - I don't plan to give up any time soon!!

In fact, just had an article accepted in a target journal two days ago!!

Dean

Dear Dean, I was very happy to know about this great news.My congratulation to you.You might have spent a lot of time for the paper.

Sukla

Many thank Lala - much appreciated!!

Dean, it happens all the time.

All academics suffer from a medical condition called DEADLINITIS :)

How is this different than the industry ? They have to launch a product. They test everything. Its all good. Launch it. OOPS. There is a recall. I remember the major microprocessor recall from INTEL, which cost them $100M's ...

Thank god, there is a month period from the acceptance to the CAMERA READY submission ... One time, we changed a paper so much that, the title was barely the same ! Sometimes, you find a problem a year later ...

It is always a working progress. You do the absolute best you can, and the rest is a little bit of luck ...

Tolga - another informed response. Yes - it's never an exact science. I've had articles 'severely' critiqued that i thought were fine. I've declined a submission to a few journals previously - on the basis that the reviewers were being overly critical and asking for changes that would have made a bit of a 'nonsense' of what i had written. On the other hand, I've submitted manuscripts where i thought 'fingers-crossed' - and they've been fine. It can be a lottery - hey!!

Mats - not too sure on the sporting analogy - but I suppose it fits the writing process in a way. Refining the 'perfect' article is more a marathon - than a sprint. If you are in the business of quantity over quality - then that's the sprint in writing - and perhaps not such a good strategy.

Ahhh - glad that I interpreted it correctly Mats!!

Sorry Mats - should have read closer - but still correct!! The Nobel Prize was never won in a day!!

I have had time to trace the source of my paraphrase. It was Oscar Wilde who said: 

“I was working on the proof of one of my poems all the morning, and took out a comma. In the afternoon I put it back again.”

Hi Ian,

Long time - no see (or should I say hear). It's great to be in contact again - and it's very cool to hear the sage words of the late, great Oscar Wilde. I shall be using that one with my Master's and PhD students. It will support my 'nice and slow - and attention to detail' advice - even if that is not what the wit of Oscar Wilde intended.

@Dean: I think that Wilde was also making a serious point. Namely that detail is so important ( and unfortunately takes time!)

That was exactly my point Ian - 'nice and slow - and attention to detail'. If he were alive today, he might even pinch my line!!

There is still an option left out to publish an Erratum to a previously published article to include missing or wrong data.