HOW TO WRITE A WORLD CLASS PAPER Prof. Dr. Guowang Xu Elsevier Author Workshop Outline 1. To publish or not to publish… 2. Writing a quality manuscript • Preparations • Article construction • Language • Technical details 3. Revisions and response to reviewers 4. Ethical issues 5. Conclusions: getting accepted 1. To publish or not to publish… Why publish? •Scientists publish to share with the research community findings that advance knowledge and understanding •To present new, original results or methods •To rationalize published results •To present a review of the field or to summarize a particular topic Publishers do want quality WANTED • Originality • Significant advances in field • Appropriate methods, case studies and conclusions • Readability • Studies that meet ethical standards NOT WANTED • Duplications • Reports of no scientific interest • Work out of date • Inappropriate/incomplete methods or conclusions • Studies with insufficient data Publishers do not want zero-cited articles 2. Writing a quality manuscript 2.1 Preparations What type of manuscript? Full Length Methodology Research Letters / Rapid Communications / Short Communications Review Papers • Self-evaluate your work: Is it sufficient for a full article? Or are your results so thrilling that they need to be revealed as soon as possible? • Ask your supervisor and colleagues for advice on manuscript type. Sometimes outsiders may see things more clearly than you. Choosing the Right Journal  You must get help from your supervisor or colleagues!!! The supervisor (who is probably the corresponding author) has responsibility for your work. You are encouraged to chase your supervisor if necessary.  Articles in your references will likely lead you to the right journal.  Read recent publications (at least go through the abstracts) in each candidate journal. Find out the hot topics, the accepted types of articles, etc.  Current hot topics (go through recent abstracts) Which journal? • Consider: – Aims and scope (check journal websites and recent articles) – Types of articles – Readership Impact Factor development competing journals is not only factor for choosing a right journal 6 5 Analytical Chemistry Impact Factor Electrophoresis Journal of Chromatography A 4 Analytica Chimica Acta Journal of Chromatography B 3 ABC J. of Separation Science 2 Chromatographia 1 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 year 2004 2005 2006 Journal of Chromatography (JC) A or B? Aims and Scope of JCA Original research and critical reviews on all aspects of fundamental and applied separation science.  Strong emphasis on novelty and significance  Strong emphasis on fundamentals (theory, new approaches, etc)  Specific justification of novelty and significance required  Routine application papers (“Determination of compounds in specific samples”) not favoured unless there are novel and significant developments Modified from Paul Haddad, editor of JCA. Scope of JCB JCB is more focused on developments in separation science relevant to biology and biomedical research including both fundamental advances and applications • Analytical techniques which may be considered include the various facets of chromatography, electrophoresis and related methods, affinity and immunoaffinity-based methodologies, hyphenated and other multi-dimensional techniques, and microanalytical approaches. The journal also considers articles reporting developments in sample preparation, detection techniques including mass spectrometry, and data handling and analysis. • Developments related to preparative separations for the isolation and purification of components of biological systems may be published, including chromatographic and electrophoretic methods, affinity separations, field flow fractionation and other preparative approaches. Scope of JCB Applications to the analysis of biological systems and samples will be considered when the analytical science contains a significant element of novelty, e.g. a new approach to the separation of a compound, novel combination of analytical techniques, or significantly improved analytical performance. Areas to be considered include:  the qualitative and quantitative analysis of biopolymers including proteins, peptides and their post-translational modifications as well as nucleic acids and glycans  the comparative analysis of biological systems using proteomics, genomics, metabonomics and other "omics" approaches  clinical analysis, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, therapeutic drug monitoring, toxicological analysis, doping analysis, veterinary applications, analysis of environmental contaminants in biological systems  the screening and profiling of body fluids, tissues, cells, biological matrices and systems, analysis of endogenous compounds, biomarkers identification of new bioactive compounds Not within the Scope of JCB  Applications which utilize published or commercial analytical or preparative protocols with little or no modification or where the results of the application rather than the analytical methodology comprise the major element of novelty of the manuscript should be directed to more specialized journals. 中药成分分析、质量控制分析  Reports of analytical methods for compounds in early pharmaceutical development often lack general interest and will not be published unless the authors can demonstrate the broader significance of the methodology involved.  Quality control analyses of bulk drugs, natural products or pharmaceutical formulations are not within scope.  Modifications to a previously published method may be considered for a short communication in cases where the improvement in performance is significant. A universal HPLC Method for the Determination of Phenolic Acids in Compound Herbal Medicines A reversed phase high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC) method with diode-array detection (DAD) was established to separate and quantify thirteen phenolic acids in some compound herbal medicines. On a Sepax GP-C18 (5μm, 4.6 x 150 mm) column, a multi-step binary gradient elution program and a simplified sample pretreatment approach were used in the experiment. For all of the phenolic acids, detection limits ranged around 0.01 mg/L. Linear ranges of higher than two orders of magnitude were obtained with the correlation coefficient of 0.9991 to 1. Repeatability was Editor'stoComments to Author: 0.39% 2.24% (RSD) for intra-day, 1.17% to 3.96% (RSD) for inter-day, and to 5.33% forconsidered drug sample Recovery, tested of by The 0.14 manuscript can(RSD) only be foranalysis. publication in the Journal standard addition Bmethod, was rangedcan from 83.3% to 104.9% formethod various Chromatography when the authors demonstrate that their trace phenolic acids. can also be used in biological matrices, such as plasma or urine. Otherwise, the paper is more suitable for the Journal of Chromatography A (provided that there is enough chromatographic novelty) or for the Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2. Writing a quality manuscript 2.2 Article construction Article structure • • • • Title Authors Abstract Keywords Need to be accurate and informative for effective indexing and searching • Main text – Introduction – Experimental – Results and discussion – Conclusions • Acknowledgements • References • Supplementary material Each has a distinct function Title A good title should contain the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of a paper DO Convey main findings of research Be specific Be concise Be complete Attract readers DON’T Use unnecessary jargon Use uncommon abbreviations Use ambiguous terms Use unnecessary detail Focus on part of the content only Title Two methodologies (reduced species list index and quality of rocky bottoms index) to evaluate the quality of algae populations in the presence of varying pollution gradients Comparison of two methods for quality assessment of algae populations under varying pollution gradients Authors and affiliations Be consistent with spelling, full versus short names, full versus short addresses E.g., 欧阳钟灿 Standard: Ouyang Zhongcan (Ouyang Z. ), GB/T 16159-1996. 汉语拼音正词法基本规则 or OUYANG Zhong-can (Ouyang Z.C.), 中国学术期刊(光盘版)检索与评价数据规范 Following are also found in literature: Ou-yang Zhong-can, Ouyang Zhong-can, Ou-Yang Zhongcan, Ouyang, Z.C, Zhongcan Ouyang, Zhongcan Ou-Yang, …… Affiliation: Faculty of Medicine / Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences Abstract The quality of an abstract will strongly influence the editor’s decision A good abstract: •Is precise and honest •Can stand alone •Uses no technical jargon •Is brief and specific •Minimizes the use of abbreviations •Cites no references Use the abstract to “sell” your article JCB • The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions . An example from JCB 目的 Immunodepletion of high-abundance proteins from serum is a widely used initial step in biomarker discovery studies. In the present work we have investigated the 主要结果 reproducibility of the depletion step by comparing 250 serum samples from prostate cancer patients. All samples were depleted on a single immunoaffinity column over a time period of 6 weeks with automated peak detection and fraction collection. Reproducibility in terms of surface area of the depleted serum protein peak at 280 nm was below 7% relative standard deviation (R.S.D.) and the collected volume of the relevant fraction was 0.97mL (4.5% R.S.D.). Proteins in the depleted serum fraction were subsequently digested with trypsin and analyzed by MALDI-FT-MS. The degree of the depletion of albumin, transferrin and alpha-1antitrypsin was determined by comparing the intensity of peptide peaks before 结论 and after depletion of 11 samples taken at regular time intervals from amongst the 250 depleted, randomized samples. As a positive control we evaluated peaks of apolipoprotein A1 (the most abundant serum protein remaining after depleteion) showing a clear increase in intensity of these peaks in the depleted samples. From this study we conclude that the depletion of the 250 serum samples was complete and reproducible over a period of 6 weeks. L. J. Dekker et al. JC B, 847 (2007) 65–69 Traps to Avoid in an Abstract Example: “This paper presents an innovative set of tools developed to support a methodology to design and upgrade wastewater treatment systems (WTS). Previous work by Grey (2004), Lacey (2001) and others …This paper illustrates the merits of these tools to make the innovative methodology of interest to everyone involved in WTS and will become the new design standard worldwide.” Better to avoid: • Abbreviations, references (save for the introduction), and exaggerated conclusions Keywords Keywords are important for indexing: they enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited Check the Guide for Authors for journal requirements •Keywords should be specific •Avoid uncommon abbreviations (only abbreviations firmly established in the field may be eligible) and general terms Keywords Title: A Methodology for Extreme Groundwater Surge Predetermination in Carbonate Aquifers: Groundwater Flood Frequency Analysis K. Najib, H. Jourde, S. Pistre Journal of Hydrology (2008) 352, 1-15 Keywords: Groundwater flooding, frequency analysis, fractured aquifer, rainfall event, hydraulic head Bad keywords: methodology, predetermination, aquifer, flood, analysis Introduction Provide the necessary background information to put your work into context The introduction should provide: •Review of the problems that will be addressed through the methodology •General definition or overview of the approach and whether it has been used before or is novel •Description of how the data will be collected and analyzed •In brief terms, what was achieved Introduction DO •Consult the Guide to Authors for word limit •“Set the scene” •Outline “the problem” and hypotheses •Ensure that the literature cited is balanced, up to date and relevant •Define any non-standard abbreviations and jargon Introduction DON’T •Write an extensive review of the field •Cite disproportionately your own work, work of colleagues or work that supports your findings while ignoring contradictory studies or work by competitors •Describe methods, results or conclusions other than to outline what was done and achieved in the final paragraph •Overuse terms like “novel” and “for the first time” State the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. 研究背景 Begona Barroso, Rainer Bischoff， JCB， 814 (2005) 21–28 State the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. 目的相关工作进展本工作。。 Begona Barroso, Rainer Bischoff， JCB， 814 (2005) 21–28 Experimental The Experimental section should be the bulk of the paper and it must provide sufficient information so that a knowledgeable reader can reproduce the experiment Methods can include statistical, historical, sampling and/or theoretical Equations, algorithms, flow charts and figures/tables are often included in the methodology section for descriptive purposes Unless the Guide for Authors states otherwise, use present tense for methodology-type papers An example from JCB 试剂样品采集样品处理样品处理样品处理仪器分析数据处理 Results/Case Study Often consists of applying the methodology to a case study DO DON’T •Use figures and tables to summarize data •Show the results of statistical analysis •Confirm that the method is reliable •Justify the choice of methods •Define the limitations of the method •Duplicate data among tables, figures and text •Use graphics to illustrate data that can easily be summarized with text Graphics Figures and tables are the most effective way to present results BUT: •Captions should be able to stand alone, such that the figures and tables are understandable without the need to read the entire manuscript •Captions should not contain extensive experimental details that can be found in the methodology section •The data represented should be easy to interpret •Colour should only be used when necessary Graphics Illustrations should only be used to present essential data The information in the table can all be presented in one sentence: ‘The surface soils were dark grayish brown, grading to light olive brown (woodland), light olive brown (wetland), and pale olive (grassland) at 100 cm.’ Summarize results in the text where possible Graphics The figure and table show the same information, but the table is more direct and clear ECOLOGICAL GROUP Station I II III IV V 75U 75R 200R 500R 1000R 91.3 89.8 69.3 63.0 86.7 5.3 6.1 14.2 29.5 8.5 3.2 3.6 8.6 3.4 4.5 0.2 0.5 6.8 4.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 Graphics •Legend is poorly defined •Graph contains too much data •No trend lines Graphics •Legend is well defined but there is still too much data and no trendlines Graphics •Legend is clear •Data is better organized •Trend lines are present Discussion For some methodology journals, the discussion and conclusions are lumped into one section and are usually brief Describe •Did the methods address the model? •Were the methods successful? •How did the findings relate to those of other studies? •Were there limitations of the study? Avoid •Making “grand statements” that are not supported by the methods or the results of the case study Example: “This novel treatment will massively reduce the prevalence of malaria in the third world” •Introducing new results or terms Conclusions Put your study into CONTEXT Describe how it represents an advance in the field Suggest future applications Suggest areas of future research BUT Avoid repetition with other sections Avoid being overly speculative (过度推测) Don’t over-emphasize the impact of your study Conclusions Better to avoid: • Downplaying negative results and deeming them significant when there is no proof, making statements based on personal opinion without scientific support Example: “Although the statistical analysis did not provide a reasonable level of significance, we believe that the methodology is a valid approach towards the design of new wastewater treatment facilities. In fact, we argue that these methods could be adopted to the design of any treatment system worldwide.” Acknowledgements Acknowledge anyone who has helped you with the study, including: •Researchers who supplied materials, reagents, or computer programs •Anyone who helped with the writing or English, or offered critical comments about the content •Anyone who provided technical help State why people have been acknowledged and ask their permission Acknowledge sources of funding, including any grant or reference numbers References Check the Guide for Authors for the correct format Check Avoid •Spelling of author names •Personal communications, unpublished observations and submitted manuscripts not yet accepted •Punctuation •Number of authors to include before using “et al.” •Reference style •Citing articles published only in the local language •Excessive self-citation and journal self-citation Reference Style in JCB Text: Indicate references by number(s) in square brackets in line with the text. The actual authors can be referred to, but the reference number(s) must always be given. Example: "..... as demonstrated [3,6]. Barnaby and Jones [8] obtained a different result ...." List: Number the references (numbers in square brackets) in the list in the order in which they appear in the text. Examples: Reference to a journal publication: [1] J. van der Geer, J.A.J. Hanraads, R.A. Lupton, J. Sci. Commun. 163 (2000) 51-59. Reference to a book: [2] W. Strunk Jr., E.B. White, The Elements of Style, Macmillan, New York, 3rd ed., 1979. Reference to a chapter in an edited book: [3] G.R. Mettam, L.B. Adams, in: B.S. Jones, R.Z. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to the Electronic Age, E-Publishing, New York, 1994, pp. 281-304. Journal abbreviations source Journal names should be abbreviated according to Index Medicus journal abbreviations: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/tsd/serials/lji.html; List of serial title word abbreviations: http://www.issn.org/2-22661-LTWA-online.php; CAS (Chemical Abstracts Service): http://www.cas.org/sent.html. Supplementary material Information related to and supportive of the main text, but of secondary importance, may be contained in an appendix Includes: •Extensive statistical analysis •Supplementary mathematical analysis •Additional data •Video data Will be available online when the manuscript is published We often use the following order when writing: • • • • • • • Figures and Tables What “story” we can have based on the results Preliminary title Results and Discussion Experimental (Methods) Conclusions and Introduction Abstract and title 2. Writing a quality manuscript 2.3 Language Language • Attention! If the language prevents reviewers from understanding the scientific content of your work, the possibility of acceptance will be lowered greatly. • At the minimum, you should provide the best English you can manage along with your high quality science. Please have a skilled writer or someone fluent in English help to check your manuscript before submission. The three “C”s Good writing possesses the following three “C”s: •Clarity (清楚) •Conciseness (简明) •Correctness (accuracy)(精确) The key is to be as brief and specific as possible without omitting essential details Know the enemy Good writing avoids the following traps: •Repetition (重复) •Redundancy (冗余) •Ambiguity (含糊) •Exaggeration(夸大) These are common annoyances for editors Repetition and Redundancy Vary the sentences used when writing the abstract or describing findings at the end of the introduction Don’t copy from other sections verbatim! Avoid words with the same meaning In addition, a systematic analysis of the data was also presented… After statistical analysis of the data, the methods were then modified… Avoid using the same descriptive word twice in one sentence In this paper, a simple methodology for classifying simple composite wastes has been proposed. Exaggeration Effect of p.o. administration of tea and caffeine on tumor number Tumor number 60 * 50 40 30 20 10 0 Water Green Tea Black Tea Caffeine Treatment “There was a massive decrease in the number of tumors following p.o. administration of green tea” Beware of exaggeration but do indicate significance Language – long sentences • See the 80-word long sentence below. Even the editor found it incomprehensible. The luminous efficiency of MOLED device drawn down faster than PLED, which may be caused by different fabrication process, i.e., the distribution of (tpbi)2Ir(acac) dye in host is more uniform in liquid polymer from spin coating method than thermal deposition of solid organic small molecules, so that the quenching phenomena in small molecular device are more critical than in polymer device, even the doping concentration of phosphor dye in MOLED (2 wt%) is lower than that in PLED (4 wt%). From the editor of JCB: Terry M. Phillips Language • Finally, you should use English throughout the manuscript… Language - Abbreviations Abbreviations • Abbreviations should be defined on the first use in BOTH abstract and the main text. • Some journals even forbid the usage of abbreviations in the abstract. Refer to the Guide for Authors to see the requirements for abbreviations. 2. Writing a quality manuscript 2.4 Technical details Layout •Keep line spacing, font and font size consistent throughout – double-spaced 12-point Times New Roman is preferred •Use consistent heading styles throughout and no more than three levels of headings 1. 1.1 1.1.1 •Number the pages •Order and title sections as instructed in the Guide for Authors – Figure and Table sections are normally together following References Length “…25-30 pages is the ideal length for a submitted manuscript, including ESSENTIAL data only” Julian Eastoe, Co-editor, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science Consult the Guide for Authors for word and graphic limits Letters or short communications have stricter limits on the length. For example, 3000 words with no more than five illustrations Cover letter Include: • Editor name – Address to journal editor, not generic • First sentence – provide title, author list and journal name • Briefly describe: • the main findings of your research • the significance of your research • Confirm the originality of the submission • Confirm that there are no competing financial interests • Suggest potential reviewers Nomination of referees  Intended to assist editors to find appropriate referees  If you leave this section blank or suggest inappropriate referees, this sends a message to the editor that you are not fully familiar with the literature in your field  You are welcome to give reasons why you have nominated particular reviewers  Inappropriate reviewers are:       editors (or editors of other journals) The top separation scientists in the world Your research collaborators People from your own institution A group of reviewers drawn solely from your country People without a publication record in the field  Appropriate reviewers include:   People who publish actively in the field People whose work you have cited and discussed in the Introduction From Paul Haddad, editor of JCA. Submission checklist Prior to sending it to the journal's Editor for review, Ensure that the following items are present: One Author designated as corresponding Author: • E-mail address • Full postal address • Telephone and fax numbers All necessary files have been uploaded • Keywords • All figure captions • All tables (including title, description, footnotes) Further considerations • Manuscript has been "spellchecked" and "grammar-checked" • References are in the correct format for this journal • All references mentioned in the Reference list are cited in the text, and vice versa • Permission has been obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the Web) • color figures are clearly marked as being intended for color reproduction on the Web (free of charge) and in print or to be reproduced in color on the Web (free of charge) and in black-andwhite in print • If only color on the Web is required, black and white versions of the figures are also supplied for printing purposes Final checks Revision before submission can prevent early rejection What can I do to ensure my paper is in the best possible state prior to submission? •Ask colleagues to take a look and be critical •Check that everything meets the requirements set out in the Guide for Authors – again! •Check that the scope of the paper is appropriate for the selected journal – change journal rather than submit inappropriately Reasons for early rejection - preparation Editor decides that the paper is not in a form which allows it be sent to reviewers. How? Failure to meet submission requirements   Obvious failure to read Guide to Authors (highly annoying) Incorrect layout of text, figures and references Incomplete coverage of literature in Introduction  Excessive reference to own work Unacceptably poor English From Paul Haddad, editor of JCA. 3. Revisions and Response to Reviewers Revision/response to reviewers  Read reviewers’ comments dispassionately and do not take offence ( 生气)  Note carefully any instructions from the editor or the editorial office  Prepare a detailed letter of response in which:     You copy in each comment by the reviewer You provide a scientific response to that comment which accepts or rebuts the view of the reviewer You state specifically what changes (if any) you have made to the manuscript You write in a way that your responses can be given to the reviewer  Typical problems:    Authors are obviously offended Response is trivial (“Thank you”, “Done”, “Yes”) There is discussion but it is not clear what changes have been made  A further review of the revised manuscript is common  The reviewer will see your response From Paul Haddad, editor of JCA. Post-referee revision The reviewer is clearly ignorant of the work of Bonifaci et al. (2008) showing that the electric field strength in the ionization zone of the burned corona is less than the space charge free field before the corona onset…. Thank you for your comment. However, we feel that the assumption in our model is supported by recent work by Bonifaci et al. (2008), who showed that the electric field strength in the ionization zone of the burned corona is less than the space charge free field before the corona onset. Post-referee revision Clearly differentiate responses from reviewers’ comments by using a different font style Reviewer’s Comments: It would also be good to acknowledge that geographic routing as you describe it is not a complete routing solution for wireless networks, except for applications that address a region rather than a particular node. Routing between nodes requires further machinery, which detracts from the benefits of geographic routing, and which I don't believe you have made practical. Author’s reply: We agree and will add an appropriate caveat. Note that for data-centric storage (name-based exact-match and range queries for sensed events), the storage and query processing mechanisms "natively" address packets geographically – without a "node-to-location" database. Dr. Ramesh Govindan, Professor, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California 4. Ethical Issues Unethical behavior “can earn rejection and even a ban from publishing in the journal” Terry M. Phillips, Editor, Journal of Chromatography B Unethical behavior includes: •Multiple submissions (一稿多投) •Redundant publications (重复出版) •Plagiarism (抄袭) •Data fabrication and falsification (伪造数据) •Improper use of human subjects and animals in research •Improper author contribution Plagiarism of a figure and falsification of data Falsification Original 在论文投出前,所有作者都要阅读和同意论文中的内容! Improper author contribution Authorship credit should be based on 1. Substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data 2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content 3. Final approval of the version to be published Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3. Those who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. Check the Guide for Authors and ICMJE guidelines: http://www.icmje.org/ Standard Operating Procedures for dealing with an ethics complaint Elsevier has prepared a document and set of form letters to help editors in addressing queries about issues such as plagiarism, authorship disputes, multiple submission and/or publication, and research misconduct The Standard Operating Procedures manual contains • Policy discussions and definitions • A checklist of procedural and fact-checking issues  Identify the issue(s)  Document the complaint  Generally inform the complained-about author, journal  Exercise tact and diplomacy  Consider whether funding agency or employing institution/company should be informed  Consider remedies (retraction, notice of correction, editorial) Suggested forms of letters to be sent to complained-about authors, respective institutions and agencies. • • • • • • • • Form Letter A Communication to author Form Letter B Communication to complainant Form Letter C Communication to the institution Form Letter D Communication to the other journal (double publication) Form Letter E Communication to the funding agency Form Letter F Communication to reviewer Form Letter G Communication to complainant (re reviewer) Form Letter H Communication to the reviewer’s institution 5. Conclusion: Getting Accepted What gets you accepted? Attention to details Check and double check your work Consider the reviews English must be as good as possible Presentation is important Take your time with revision Acknowledge those who have helped you New, original and previously unpublished Critically evaluate your own manuscript Ethical rules must be obeyed – Nigel John Cook, Editor-in-Chief, Ore Geology Reviews Developed for Elsevier by the Edanz Group Based on a presentation created by Mingxin Zhou, Publishing Support Coordinator, Elsevier Content and Layout Additional Content Daniel McGowan PhD Molecular Neuroscience Renee Mosi PhD Bio-organic Chemistry Science Director – Edanz Group Editor – Edanz Group Additional Editing Shara McAuley MSc Reproductive Sciences Editor – Edanz Group Worldwide: www.edanzediting.com China: www.liwenbianji.cn Acknowledgement • The slides in this lecture were prepared mainly based on the materials provided by Elsevier. • Hunan University Questions? Thanks! [email protected]