Guide to writing and publishing a scientific manuscript: Part 1-The structure.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Stiell IG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8904337 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Guide to writing and publishing a scientific manuscript: Part 1-The structure.
CJEM 20211221 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:The landscape of scholarly writing, publishing, and university promotion can be complex and challenging. Mentorship may be limited. To be successful it is important to understand the key components of writing and publishing. In this article, we provide expert consensus recommendations on four key challenges faced by junior faculty: writing the paper; selecting contributors and the importance of authorship order; journal selection and indexing; and responding to critiques. After reviewing this paper, the reader should have an enhanced understanding of these challenges and strategies to successfully address them.
| S-EPMC6225948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Major changes are afoot in the world of academic publishing, exemplified by innovations in publishing platforms, new approaches to metrics, improvements in our approach to peer review, and a focus on developing and encouraging open access to scientific literature and data. The FAIR acronym recommends that authors and publishers should aim to make their output Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable. In this opinion article, I explore the parallel view that we should take a collective stance on making the dissemination of scientific data fair in the conventional sense, by being mindful of equity and justice for patients, clinicians, academics, publishers, funders and academic institutions. The views I represent are founded on oral and written dialogue with clinicians, academics and the publishing industry. Further progress is needed to improve collaboration and dialogue between these groups, to reduce misinterpretation of metrics, to minimise inequity that arises as a consequence of geographic setting, to improve economic sustainability, and to broaden the spectrum, scope, and diversity of scientific publication.
| S-EPMC5247776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Experience plays a critical role in crafting high-impact scientific work. This is particularly evident in top multidisciplinary journals, where a scientist is unlikely to appear as senior author if he or she has not previously published within the same journal. Here, we develop a quantitative understanding of author order by quantifying this "chaperone effect," capturing how scientists transition into senior status within a particular publication venue. We illustrate that the chaperone effect has a different magnitude for journals in different branches of science, being more pronounced in medical and biological sciences and weaker in natural sciences. Finally, we show that in the case of high-impact venues, the chaperone effect has significant implications, specifically resulting in a higher average impact relative to papers authored by new principal investigators (PIs). Our findings shed light on the role played by experience in publishing within specific scientific journals, on the paths toward acquiring the necessary experience and expertise, and on the skills required to publish in prestigious venues.
| S-EPMC6294962 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientific societies provide numerous services to the scientific enterprise, including convening meetings, publishing journals, developing scientific programs, advocating for science, promoting education, providing cohesion and direction for the discipline, and more. For most scientific societies, publishing provides revenues that support these important activities. In recent decades, the proportion of papers on microbiology published in scientific society journals has declined. This is largely due to two competing pressures: authors' drive to publish in "glam journals"-those with high journal impact factors-and the availability of "mega journals," which offer speedy publication of articles regardless of their potential impact. The decline in submissions to scientific society journals and the lack of enthusiasm on the part of many scientists to publish in them should be matters of serious concern to all scientists because they impact the service that scientific societies can provide to their members and to science.
| S-EPMC5615203 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientists often perceive a trade-off between quantity and quality in scientific publishing: finite amounts of time and effort can be spent to produce few high-quality papers or subdivided to produce many papers of lower quality. Despite this perception, previous studies have indicated the opposite relationship, in which productivity (publishing more papers) is associated with increased paper quality (usually measured by citation accumulation). We examine this question in a novel way, comparing members of the National Academy of Sciences with themselves across years, and using a much larger dataset than previously analyzed. We find that a member's most highly cited paper in a given year has more citations in more productive years than in in less productive years. Their lowest cited paper each year, on the other hand, has fewer citations in more productive years. To disentangle the effect of the underlying distributions of citations and productivities, we repeat the analysis for hypothetical publication records generated by scrambling each author's citation counts among their publications. Surprisingly, these artificial histories re-create the above trends almost exactly. Put another way, the observed positive relationship between quantity and quality can be interpreted as a consequence of randomly drawing citation counts for each publication: more productive years yield higher-cited papers because they have more chances to draw a large value. This suggests that citation counts, and the rewards that have come to be associated with them, may be more stochastic than previously appreciated.
| S-EPMC5453441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We model the growth of scientific literature related to COVID-19 and forecast the expected growth from 1 June 2021. Considering the significant scientific and financial efforts made by the research community to find solutions to end the COVID-19 pandemic, an unprecedented volume of scientific outputs is being produced. This questions the capacity of scientists, politicians and citizens to maintain infrastructure, digest content and take scientifically informed decisions. A crucial aspect is to make predictions to prepare for such a large corpus of scientific literature. Here we base our predictions on the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) and exponential smoothing models using the Dimensions database. This source has the particularity of including in the metadata information on the date in which papers were indexed. We present global predictions, plus predictions in three specific settings: by type of access (Open Access), by domain-specific repository (SSRN and MedRxiv) and by several research fields. We conclude by discussing our findings.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-022-04536-x.
| S-EPMC9548429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We present a decentralised solution for managing scientific communication, based on distributed ledger technologies, also called blockchains. The proposed system aims to solve incentive problems displayed by traditional systems in scientific communication and publication. A minimal working model is presented, defining roles, processes, and expected results from the novel system. The proposed solution is viable, given the current status of blockchain technology, and should lead to a rethinking of current practices and their consequences for scientific communication.
| S-EPMC6701880 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11229795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Medical research shapes public health actions, emphasising the need for greater investments in health. Despite a surge in scientific publications, disparities exist in authorship from low-income countries and among female researchers. Addressing these gaps is vital for studying real-world health outcomes and promoting universal healthcare delivery. Methods: A descriptive quantitative study using an online questionnaire to gather data from Indian nephrologists and nephrology fellows was conducted by members of Women in Nephrology, India, from September 2023 to December 2023. The survey collected data on demographics, publication experience and challenges in scientific paper writing. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Version 25.0, with significance at p < 0.05. Results: The survey included 156 participants, with a mean age of 35.55 ± 8.91 years. The majority were males (55.8%) and practicing nephrologists (69.9%). Most respondents practiced in medical institutions (45.5%) and metropolitan cities (60.3%), with an average practice duration of 12.29 ± 9.12 years. Only 44.9% published their thesis work, and 52.6% preferred writing case reports. Key challenges included time constraints (82.1%), funding (67.9%), limited access to research articles (65.4%), lack of statistical analysis knowledge (64.7%) and limited access to research software (60.2%). Younger nephrologists faced more funding (68.9%) and knowledge-related barriers (74.4%). Discussion: Multiple challenges exist in scientific paper writing among Indian nephrologists, emphasising the need for targeted interventions. Funding for research, burnout and article processing charges are significant barriers. Addressing these challenges is crucial for enhancing research output and improving healthcare outcomes in resource-limited countries.
| S-EPMC11872293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:While scientific researchers often aim for high productivity, prioritizing the quantity of publications may come at the cost of time and effort dedicated to individual research. It is thus important to examine the relationship between productivity and disruption for individual researchers. Here, we show that with the increase in the number of published papers, the average citation per paper will be higher yet the mean disruption of papers will be lower. In addition, we find that the disruption of scientists' papers may decrease when they are highly productive in a given year. The disruption of papers in each year is not determined by the total number of papers published in the author's career, but rather by the productivity of that particular year. Besides, more productive authors also tend to give references to recent and high-impact research. Our findings highlight the potential risks of pursuing productivity and aim to encourage more thoughtful career planning among scientists.
| S-EPMC11126996 | biostudies-literature