fred ashbury phd mace editor-in-chief june 30, 2018€¦ · reviewing manuscript 11-100 • paper...
TRANSCRIPT
Suppor&veCareinCancer
FredAshburyPhDMACE
Editor-in-ChiefJune30,2018
Toronto,Canada
SupporBveCareinCancer
WELCOMEWri$ngforPeer-ReviewedPublica$on:
KeyIssues&LessonsLearnedExperiencesfrom:
DrsF.Ashbury,J.Herrstedt,I.Olver
TableofContents
1. Welcome
2. AuthorPerspec$ve
3. EditorPerspec$ve–SubmissionProcess
4. ReviewerPerspec$ve
5. Editor-Resubmission
GoalandObjecBvesforSession
SpecificObjecBvesPar$cipantswillgainabeRerunderstandingofSCC’srequirementsfor:
– submissionprocessesandhowtoposi$onpapersproperly– preparingthemanuscript,includingelementsofsuccessfulwri$ng
– reviewerconsidera$ons,and– respondingeffec$velytodecisionsandrecommenda$ons
Goal:Tofacilitatepar$cipants'understandingoftherequirementsforpreparingandsubmiYng
manuscriptsforpublica$onconsidera$ontoSCC.
Par$cipantsinthissessionwillNOTgetaguaranteethat,asaresultofinvolvementinthisworkshop,anythingyouwritewillbe
published!
5
NOTE
TheAuthor’sView
IanOlverAMMDPhDProfessorofTransla$onalCancerResearchDirectorUniversityofSouthAustraliacancerResearchIns$tute
Disclosures
• MSDFundedResearchandSpeaker(FundstoUniSA)
PlanningtheSubmission:KeySteps
• Isthistherightjournalforyourpaper?• Whattypeofar$clesuitsbest?• Whoqualifiesforauthorship?• Howtopreparethemanuscript• ItisamaRerofstyle• Thesubmissionprocess• ResubmiYngaderreview
SubjectMaSer
• OfficialjournaloftheMul$na$onalAssocia$onofSuppor$veCareinCancer(MASCC)– Focusencompassesthefullspectrumofthesuppor$vecareof
cancerpa$entsfromdiagnosisthroughtreatmentextendingtosurvivorshipandend-of-lifecare
– Mul$disciplinary– Mul$na$onal(membersdrawnfrommorethan60countries)
• PartnershipwithISOO(Interna$onalSocietyofOralOncology)
• MASCCStudyGroupsprovideusefulframeofreference– www.mascc.org.-16groups
MASCCStudyGroups
• An$eme$c• Educa$on• Geriatrics• Neutropenia,Infec$onand
Myelosuppression• Nutri$onandCachexia• Pediatrics• Psychosocial• SkinToxici$es
• BoneComplica$ons• Fa$gue• Hemostasis• Mucosi$s• NeurologicalComplica$ons• OralCare• Pallia$veCare• SkinToxici$es• Rehabilita$on,Survivorship
andQOL
EvaluaBngtheSignificanceoftheManuscript’sCentralTheme
• Isaworthwhileques$on/topicbeingaddressed?• WillitbeofinteresttothereadersoftheJSCC?
• Hasthisques$on/topicbeenaddressedpreviously?
• Willthemanuscriptaddinameaningfulwaytotheexis$ngbodyofknowledge
⁻ Providingnewdata⁻ Confirmingpriorcontroversialfindings⁻ Challengingpriorfindings
TypesofArBcles
OriginalArBcles• 3500words,45references,nomorethansixfigures/tables• Mostcommonfortrialreportsetc.
ReviewArBcles• 4,000wordsMethodologicalguidelinesinclude
– CONSORTforrandomisedclinicaltrials(e.g.reportrefusalsanddropoutstoevaluatebias)
– STARDforstudiesofdiagnos$caccuracy– PRISMAorMOOSEforsystema$creviewsandmeta-analysis– STROBEforepidemiology– COREQforqualita$veresearch
• generallysolicitedbytheeditorsbutunsolicitedproposalsofabstractandoutlinecanbesenttotheeditorsforconsidera$on
TypesofArBcle
LeSertotheEditor• 1000words,10references• Occasionalifsubjectisanar$cleinJSCCandwillbepassedtooriginalauthorsforcomment
Commentary• 1000words,20references• Ar$clesofinnova$veareasoropportuni$esfor
furtherresearch
Authorship
Firstauthor• Primarycoordinatorofmanuscript• Primaryauthoroffirstdrad• Coordinatescontribu$onsofotherauthors• Responsibleformanuscriptsubmission• Coordinatesrevisionsandresponsetoreviewers
Authorship
ContribuBngauthorsMusthavehadsubstan$veroleinworkdetailedinmanuscript
• substan$alcontribu$onstoconcep$onanddesign,oracquisi$onofdata,oranalysisandinterpreta$onofdata;
• seenandapprovedthefinalversionofthemanuscript,andrevisions.
• dradedthear$cleorreviseditcontentcri$cally
ManuscriptPreparaBon:KeyComponents(IMRADFormat)
• TitleandAbstract• Introduc$on• Methods• Results
– Figures– Tables
• Discussion• References
TitleandAbstract
Title• Mustbeconcise• Mustsummarizethemainpointofthemanuscript• Ideallyshouldcatchtheinterestofreaderandreviewer
Abstract• Standalonesummaryofpaper• Formanyreviewersservesasacri$caldeterminantofmanuscript’svalue
• Unlesscompelling,willbeonlypor$onofthemanuscriptseenbymanyreaders
• SHOULDBEWRITTENLAST(soitsummarizeswhatisactuallyinthepaper)
IntroducBon
• Briefbackgroundontopicunderstudy• Citeanyrelevantpriorwork• Providera$onaleforcurrentreport• Beconciseandfocused-THISISNOTTHEDISCUSSION
• Explicitlystatethepurposeofthemanuscriptattheendontheintroduc$on
Methods
• Definepopula$onunderstudy• Studyendpoints:primaryandsecondary• Eligibility/Ineligibility• Randomizedtrials
⁻ Definerandomiza$onprocess⁻ Definestra$fica$onfactors
Methods
• Fulldescrip$onofthemethodsofevalua$on
– Quan$ta$veorqualita$vemethods
• Sta$s$calMethods– Methodsemployedtodefinesamplesize– Methodsemployedtoconducttheanalysisofoutcomes
• Describeethicsreviewconsentproceduresandpoten$alCOI
Results
• Fullycharacterizethepopula$onunderstudy– mostefficientlydonewithatablelis$ngsubjectcharacteris$cs
• Fullydetailoutcomesforallstudyendpoints– Efficacyoutcomes– Adverseeffects
• Everyitemcitedinthemethodssec$onshouldhaveacorrespondingentryintheresultssec$on
• Presentobjec$veinforma$ononly-SAVEINTERPRETATIONFORDISCUSSION
Results:TablesandFigures
• Appropriatevehiclesfordatanoteasilypresentedastext
• Classic“Table1”–Pa$entCharacteris$cs
• Shouldusesparingly
• Simplicityimportant–donotoverloadwithdata
• DONOTREPEATalltheinforma$onfoundinthetablesandfiguresinthetext
Discussion
• Beginbyansweringques$onposedattheendoftheintroduc$on
• Donotre-presentresults• Reviewrelevantinforma$onpertainingtothetopicof
interestprecedingthecurrentreport
• Detailhowthecurrentreportaddstotheexis$ngbodyofinforma$on
• Donotpresentanyresultsforthefirst$meinthediscussion
• Candidlycitethelimita$onsofthecurrentreport
• Brieflyspeculateonrelevantfutureresearch
References• Priortomanuscriptprepara$on,acomprehensive
literaturereviewshouldbeconductedtodefineallkeyreferences
• Provideappropriatecita$onsinintroduc$onanddiscussionsec$ons;under-referencingcommonerrorinsubmissions
• Accuratelyci$ngthereference;commonforerrors
• Primarysourcesratherthansecondaryinreviewar$cles
• Ensurethatcita$onsarethemostcurrentreportoftheciteddata(e.g.haveabstractsbeenpublished?)
StylisBcIssues
• Cri$callyimportanttoavoidgramma$calandspellingerrors
• Spellcheckisawonderfulthing(butnotassolecheck)• Beconcise-avoidredundantsentencesandcompound
words• Avoidjargon• Useparagraphsappropriately-newsubject=new
paragraph• Usecorrectverbtense• UniformrequirementsformanuscriptssubmiRedto
biomedicaljournalshRp://www.icjme.org/andstylemanuals(DukeUniversity)andJSCCinstruc$ons
ManuscriptSubmission
• CoverleRertoEditor-in-Chief– ImportantmeanstoconciselydefinethesignificanceofthemanuscriptanditsrelevancetothereadersofJSCC
• On-linesubmissionprocess– www.editorialmanager.com/jscc/
Submi]ngtoJSCC
Summary
• Doesthemanuscriptaddtotheexis$ngbodyofinforma$oninameaningfulway(isitgeneralizable)
• IsthesubjectmaRerappropriateforJSCC• Carefullyreviewandcomplywith“Instruc$onstoAuthors”• DefineintheIntroduc$onthekeyissuethemanuscript
addresses• Carefullydescribemethodsemployedandobjec$velydetail
results• Carefullydetailinthediscussionhowthemanuscript
addressesthekeyques$on(s)posedintheintroduc$on• Me$culouslyproofreadthemanuscripttoeliminatespelling
andgramma$calerrors• Ifaresubmissionisrequestedsubmita$melyresponse
Suppor&veCareinCancer
FredAshburyPhDMACE
Editor’sPerspecBveJune30,2018
Toronto,Canada
Facultydisclosure
None
Authorsubmitsmanuscript
EditorinChiefreviewssubmission
AssignstoAssociateEditor(AE)
Reject
AEiden$fiesandassignsreviewersandsetsdeadline
forreview
AEassessesreviewerscomments&submitsrecommenda$ontoEditor
Reject
REVIEW
MajororMinorRevisionAuthorsubmitsrevisedmanuscript
ACCEPTED
RejectREVIEW
TheSubmissionProcess
Thesubmissionprocess:CommunicaBngwiththeEditorEditorsselectcontent,overseetheeditorialoffice,managepeerreviewforaccurateandfairappraisalofsubmissions,andensuretheintegrityofthejournal.
Allcommunica$ons(Queries,submissionleRers,responsestocri$ques,andques$ons)shouldhaveaprofessionaltone.
CoverleRertoEditor-in-Chief• Importantmeanstoconciselydefinethesignificanceofthemanuscriptanditsrelevancetothereadersofthetargetjournal
EditorConsidera&ons….WhatdoPeer-ReviewedJournalEditorsthinkaboutwhentheyreceiveamanuscript?• Doesthear$clefitthejournal?–i.e.,isitrelevantfor
thereadership?• Isthesciencesolid?• Aretheresultsfairlyinterpretedforthescience?• Dotheresults,conclusions&recommenda$ons
advancethefield?– Relatedtothiswillthepaperbecitedbyothers?IMPACTFACTOR
• Isitwell-wriRen?• Aretheauthorsfreeofanyconflicts-of-interest?
33
ReviewingforMedicalJournals
JørnHerrstedtMD,DMSc
ProfessorofClinicalOncologyZealandUniversityHospitalRoskildeUniversityofCopenhagen,Denmark
Facultydisclosure
None
Reviewingyourfirst10manuscripts
• Papershouldbeinyourexactareaofexper$se
• Partnerwithanexperiencedcolleague
• Readinstruc$onsforauthorscarefully
• Takeyour$meanddoame$culousreview
• Learnfromtheotherreviewers
• Follow-up–hasthemanuscriptbeenaccepted/rejected?
Reviewingmanuscript11-100
• Papershouldbeinanareaofyourexper$se
• Youhavelearnedbyexperienceandimprovedwithprac$ce
• Less$me-consuming(butnotalways)
• Fine-tune“yourown”systemforastandardizedandfairreview
• Journalrejec$onrate?
• Peerreviewcanhelpauthorsimprovethequalityofa
manuscript
Reviewingmanuscript100+
• Don’tdoasloppyjob!
• Con$nuetocare!
FirstImpression
• Isthelanguageclear,includingaconcise$tleandabstract?
• Doesthemanuscriptfollowalogicalsequence?
Topic
• Q1 IsthetopicrelevantfortheJournal?• Q2 Researchques$on?• Q3 Doesthemanuscriptreportsomethingnew?
– Agoodpaperonthepharmacologyofadrugnolongerincommonusemaynotbeimportant.
– Astudythatconfirmswhatisalreadypublishedhaslimiteduse.
– Alocalexperienceonlyrelevanttoaverylocalsitua$onmaynothavegeneralinterest.
FundingSource
• Pharmaceu$calcompany– Medicalwriter?
• Peerreviewedexternalgran$ngbodies
• Internalfunds
Plagiarism• Maybediscoveredbychanceorbecauseoffamiliarity
withliterature.• Styleofasec$onmaydifferfromrestofpaper.• Theuseoflanguageofapapermaysuddenlyimprove
forasec$on.• Journalshavesophis$catedsodwarebutyoucanGoogle
phrasesifsuspicious.
Plagiarism
Wedidn’tfindanyplagiarism,butwefound6wri$ngissues.
www.grammarly.com
StructureofaReview
• Summarisethepaperbriefly• Strengthsandweaknesses• Thewri$ngandpresenta$on(languageandtypos)• Thequalityofthestudyandinteresttoapar$cular
group• Recommenda$onwithjus$fica$on
UniformRequirements
– Interna$onalCommiReeofMedicalJournalEditors– hRp:www.icmje.org/
• StyleManuals(e.g.DukeUniversityLibrary)• Instruc$onstoauthors-individualjournals
Title
• Concise
• DirectaRen$ontowhatthepaperwillreveal
• Doesn’tgiveconclusionsunlessdrama$c
• Journalstyle
Abstract
• Some$mesthatisallthatisread
• Itshouldthereforeaccuratelyreflectthecontentofthear$cle
• Whydidtheywanttodothestudy-hypothesis-introduc$on?
• Whatdidtheydo–method?
• Whatdidtheyfind–results(efficacyandtoxicity)?
• Whatdoesitmean–discussion?
IntroducBon
• Isthespecificpurpose(orhypothesis)stated?
• Onlyper$nentreferencesshouldbecited
• Nodatafromtheworkshouldbeincluded
• Noconclusionsfromtheworkshouldbeincluded
Methodology• Isthemethodologyappropriatetotheaim?
• Isitdescribedindetail,sothatdataandresultscanbereproduced?
• Methodologicalguidelinesinclude– CONSORTforrandomisedclinicaltrials– STARDforstudiesofdiagnos$caccuracy– PRISMAforsystema$creviewsandmeta-analysis– STROBEforobserva$onalstudies– EQUATORNetworkorNLM’sResearchRepor$ngGuidelinesandIni$a$vesforrepor$ngguidelines
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
BMJ 2010;340:c869
hRp://www.consort-statement.org/
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
Flowdiagramoftheprogressthroughthephasesofaparallelrandomisedtrialoftwogroups
BMJ 2010;340:698-702.
PotenBalProblemsinRCT• Samplesize• Randomisa$on• Stra$fica$on• Blinding• Controlarm• Inten$ontotreat• Sta$s$$calmethod(1sidedversus2sided)• Aredataanalyzedaccordingtoprotocolspecifica$ons?• Fromabstracttoar$cle?
• 254abstractsacceptedforthecongress• 169(67%)werelaterpublishedasar$cles
• In1.5%theconclusionwaschangedfromposi$vetonega$ve
• In5.1%theconclusionwaschangedfromnega$vetoposi$ve
• Intotalin6.6%oftheabstracts,theconclusionwaschanged!
StaBsBcs
Havedetermina$onsbeendoneprospec$vely?• Popula$onsamplesize• Defini$onofprimaryandsecondaryoutcomes
– Subanalysis?• Sta$s$calmethods–use95%CInotP-valuealone• Numberand$mingofinterimanalyses• Earlystoppingrules• Publica$onpolicy
Ethics
• Recognisethatthemanuscriptisaconfiden$aldocument
• Conflictsofinterest(reviewer)• Anunethicalexperimentshouldnotbepublished
– WastheprojectapprovedbyanethicscommiReeanddidthesubjectsgivewriReninformedconsent?
– WasthestudyinaccordancewiththeHelsinkiDeclara$on?
• Ascien$ficallyflawedstudycannotbeethical
Results• Areresultsreportedinalogicalway?• Hasthestudyques$onbeenanswered?
– reject/confirmahypothesis
• Arethemostimportantfindingsreportedfirst?
• Weredataonallprimaryandsecondaryoutcomesreported?
• Aredatagivenasabsolutenumbers(notpercentagesonly)?
• Areallcomponentsofacompositeendpointreported?
• Aredataduplicatedintables/diagramsandinthetext?
• Arepointsfordiscussionindicated?
Results• Areresultsreportedinalogicalway?• Hasthestudyques$onbeenanswered?
– reject/confirmahypothesis
• Arethemostimportantfindingsreportedfirst?
• Weredataonallprimaryandsecondaryoutcomesreported?
• Aredatagivenasabsolutenumbers(notpercentagesonly)?
• Areallcomponentsofacompositeendpointreported?
• Aredataduplicatedintables/diagramsandinthetext?
• Arepointsfordiscussionindicated?
Discussion
• Brieflysummarisethemainfindings
• Givestrongestresultfirst
• Aretheresultsinthecontextoftheliterature?
• Limita$onsofthestudy?
• Areconclusionsjus$fiedbytheresults?
• Anyimplica$onsforfutureresearch?
• Anyimplica$onsforclinicalprac$ce?
References
• Havetheoriginal(pivotalstudies)andthemostrecentreferencesintheareabeenincluded?
• Arereferencesnumberedconsecu$velyintheorderinwhichtheyaremen$onedinthetext?
• VancouverorHarvardsystem(journalinstruc$ons)
RecommendaBontotheeditor
• Accept
• Minorrevisionsneededbeforepoten$alacceptance
• Majorrevisionsneededbeforepoten$alacceptance
• Reject
Resubmission
• Didtheauthorsreplytoallcommentsandques$onsfromthereviewers?
• Didtheauthorsupdatethemanuscriptaccordingly?
• Hastherevisedmanuscriptachievedascien$ficlevelhighenoughtobepublished?
ResubmissionCommentsandquesBonsfromthereviewers Replyfromthe
authorsReviewer1
Q1
Q2
Q3
Reviewer2
Comment1
Q1
Reviewer3
Comment1
Q1
Q2
Resubmission
RespondingtotheEditorialReviewEditor’sPerspecBve…Again…!
RespondingtotheEditorialReview
Editorialdecisions• Reject• Poten$allyacceptablewithmajorrevisions
• Poten$allyacceptablewithminorrevisions• Accept
RespondingtotheEditorialReview
KeypointsinresubmiYng• LEARNFROMTHEREVIEWERS’COMMENTS• Developaresponsetoeachcommentinconcertwithalltheauthors
• Modifythemanuscriptaccordingly• DetailinaleReraccompanyingtheresubmissionspecificresponsestoeachreviewerscommentci$ngtheappropriatemanuscriptrevisions
• Ensuretoneofresponseisprofessional• Obtainallauthorsapprovalfortherevisions• BETIMELYINRESUBMITTING–thejournalmayhaveaspecifiedBmeframeforresubmission(e.g.,4weeks)
FinalThoughts
• Putyouregoaside–youwilllearnfromtheexperiences(good,badandugly)
• Whenyouarereadytosubmit/re-submit,createacheck-listtoensureyou’vecoveredeverythingrequiredbythejournaltoavoidre-workanddelays
72
SubmissionChecklist
q ManuscriptwithaTitlePage(worddoc)q Ensurelistofauthorsiscorrectq ConflictofInterestStatementincludedwithin
manuscriptjustbeforereferencesq AuthorshipDisclosureforms
⁻ Correspondingauthoratoriginalsubmission⁻ RemainingAuthorsforrevisedmanuscripts
q Figures/Tablesinseparatedocumentsq ResponsetoReviewersforRevisedManuscripts
⁻ Carefullyconsiderthereviewercommentsandsubmitalistofresponsestothecomments
q ReviewInstruc$onsforAuthorsonwebsite
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
Thankyou!
• Anyotherques$ons?
74