2.95 How to write a scientific paper (Author) 2016∙Impact Factor 2.95 Smart investigator Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research July 04, 2017 How to write a scientific paper (Author) Being a good reviewer will help you to be a good author or vice versa (Reviewer) Hae-Sim Park MD, PhD Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Ajou University School of Medicine Suwon, South Korea e-aair.org

JCR 2016: ”Allergy” SCI Impact Factor 현황 Rank Abbreviated Journal Title ISSN Total Cites Impact Factor 5-Year Impact Factor Immediacy Index Citable Items Cited Half-Life Self cites (%) 1 J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUN 0091-6749 46218 13.081 12.376 3.175 314 6.8 11.007 2 ALLERGY 0105-4538 16206 7.361 6.060 1.773 185 7.3 6.557 4 J ALLER CLIMM-PRACT 2213-2198 1653 5.317 5.641 1.866 112 2.3 4.770 3 CLIN EXP ALLERGY 0954-7894 10959 5.264 4.871 1.508 132 8.1 4.659 5 CLIN REV ALLERG IMMU 1080-0549 2403 5.263 4.682 1.517 60 4.8 4.412 6 PEDIAT ALLERG IMM-UK 0905-6157 3787 3.775 3.554 1.03 99 5.9 3.058 8 CURR ALLERGY ASTHM RE 1529-7322 2071 3.735 3.188 0.793 87 4.5 3.555 7 ANN ALLERG ASTHMA IM 1081-1206 6970 3.728 3.23 0.423 182 8.3 3.298 12 IMMUNOL ALLERGY CLIN 0889-8561 1463 3.61 2.862 0.698 53 6.7 3.570 9 CURR OPIN ALLERGY CL 1528-4050 2861 3.463 3.273 0.593 81 3.308 22 CLIN TRANSIATIONAL ALLERGY 2045-7022 636 3.239 Not Available 0.450 40 3.054 14 ALLERGY ASTHMA IMMUN 2092-7355 1094 2.957 0.867 3.1 2.398 21 ALLERGOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 1323-8930 1487 2.879 1.283 4.9 15 ALLERGY ASTHMA CLIM 1710-1484 850 2.869 3.044 0.271 59 3.8 2.727 11 INT ARCH ALLERGY IMM 1018-2438 5175 2.720 2.617 0.265 98 8.6 2.335 10 ALLERGY ASTHMA PROC 1088-5412 1937 2.614 2.279 1.570 86 5.1 2.064 13 INT FORUM ALLERGY RH 2042-6976 1809 2.135 2.371 1.237 173 2.8 1.573 16 AM J RHINOL ALLERGY 1945-8924 3528 1.955 2.020 1.018 113 1.506 17 ASIAN PAC J ALLERGY Immunol 0125-877X 698 1.011 1.224 0.326 43 0.898 19 PEDIA ALLER IMM PUL 2151-321X 171 0.958 0.696 0.514 35 3.0 0.929 18 IRAN J ALLERGY ASTHM 1735-1502 457 0.812 1.033 0.075 0.710

Title, Abstract, Key messages Format Title, Abstract, Key messages Abstract/title : key message and clinical implications Important messages to help During performing experiments During data analysis During writing During submitting During reviewing

High originality, Be creative.. Editors look for: Is the topic relevant to the scope of the journal? Is the topic timely and unique? Is the topic significant(level of evidence)? Are the findings relevant to in vivo and disease conditions? General points: Is the study of good quality? Does it have proper ethical guarantees? Are the methods and their reproducibility stated clearly? Are the methods suitable for the problem being investigated? Are there enough numbers of patients/experiments to draw clear conclusions? 5

Is there a clear hypothesis/aim? Introduction Is the hypothesis and aim of the study appropriately introduced? Is the background information nicely introduced? Is there any unnecessary information? Are there any biases that may mislead the reader? Is there a clear hypothesis/aim? This should be stated in the abstract Justified in the introduction Established before results are mentioned Investigated with suitable methods 6

Title and abstract Introduction Methods Recommendation Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used tern in the title or the abstract Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary of what was done and what was found Introduction Background/rationale Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reported Objectives State specific objectives, including any specified hypotheses Methods Study design Present key elements of study design early in the paper Setting Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection Participants Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants Variables Clearly define all outcomes, exposure, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria, if applicable Data sources/ measurement For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment(measurement). Describe comparability of assessment methods of there is more than one group. Bias Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias Study size Explain how the study size was arrived at Quantitative variables Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen why Statistical methods Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions Explain how missing data were addressed If applicable, describe analytical methods taking account of sampling strategy Describe any sensitivity analyses

Results Participants Descriptive date Outcome date Main results Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study- eg numbers potentially eligible, examined for eligibility , confirmed eligible, included in the study , completing follow-up , and analyzed Give reasons for non-particioation at each stage Consider use a flow diagram Descriptive date Give characteristics of study participants (eg demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders. Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest Outcome date Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures Main results Give unadjusted estimates and, if applicable, con founder-adjusted estimates and their precision (eg, 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why they were included Report category boundaries when continuous variables were categorized If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a meaningful time period

Tables and Figures Is the date presentation accurate and well structured? Are the data consistent with the body of the paper? Are tables and figures clearly labelled? Is there any missing or duplicate information? Do the number of study samples and n: in data match and differences reasonably explained? Is original data shown(flow cytometry, western clots, immune histology) instead of bar graphs? Are the controls clearly presented? Is the “online repository” efficiently used? 9

Statistics Are the correct analysis, tests used? Are the test results accurately interpreted? Is the statistical analysis clearly presented? Is an expert consulted for sophisticated tests? Should the reviewer suggest having a biostatistics expert review the manuscript 10

Is the discussion relevant & focused? Is the study discussed against the background of current knowledge? Do the references appear correctly cited and accurate? Are uncertainties, limitations of the study and biases discussed? Is there a clear clinical or scientific message? Could the discussion (or any other section) be shorter? Key results Summaries key results reference to study objectives Limitations Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias. Interpretation Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence. Generalizability Discuss the generalizability (external validity) of the study results 11

Reviewer’s scoring-I 12

Reviewer’s scoring-II 13

Formal guidelines for clinical trials & systematic reviews CONSORT for clinical trials Flow diagram, exclusions, power calculations, concealed random allocation, patients lost to follow up (Ann intern Med 2001;134:663-94) QUORUM for systematic reviews Inclusion and exclusion criteria, publication bias (Lancet 1999;354:1896-900) 14

Re-read the title & abstract clinical implications/key messages Do they convey the content of the manuscript accurately? Write your suggestion, if you think the title may be improved Look for missing important data, overinterpretations, misinterpretations. Recheck instruction manual Format checking and English editing On line submission 15

in SCIe 2.95 2016∙Impact Factor Pl cite the recent AAIR articles pISSN 2092-7355 eISSN 2092-7363 in SCIe Web of Science® Pl cite the recent AAIR articles published during 2016-2017 e-aair.org The Korean Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Clinical Immunology The Korean Academy of Pediatric Allergy and Respiratory Disease