How your submission will be evaluated by European Urology reviewers: Reviewer template and Publication guidelines Jim Catto Associate Editor European Urology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding the Basics of Peer Review: Part 1 – Receiving a Manuscript IMPULSE Journal for Undergraduate Neuroscience This is a the first of a two part.
Advertisements

Research article structure: Where can reporting guidelines help? Iveta Simera The EQUATOR Network workshop.
Protocol Development.
AERA Annual Meeting, April 10, 2011 How To Get Published: Guidance From Emerging and Senior Scholars Learning the Language of the Review Process Patricia.
Submission Process. Overview Preparing for submission The submission process The review process.
Doug Altman Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Oxford, UK
ROLE OF THE REVIEWER ESSA KAZIM. ROLE OF THE REVIEWER Refereeing or peer-review has the advantages of: –Identification of suitable scientific material.
ESU 20: How to write a manuscript and get it published in European Urology James Catto Editor in Chief European Urology.
The material was supported by an educational grant from Ferring How to Write a Scientific Article Nikolaos P. Polyzos M.D. PhD.
PUBLISH OR PERISH Skills Building Workshop. Journal of the International AIDS Society Workshop Outline 1.Journal of the International.
How does the process work? Submissions in 2007 (n=13,043) Perspectives.
Statistical presentation in international scientific publications 5. A statistical review (group work) Malcolm Campbell Lecturer in Statistics, School.
“But WHAT did they actually do?” Poor reporting of interventions: a remediable barrier to research translation Associate Professor Tammy
Chapter 7. Getting Closer: Grading the Literature and Evaluating the Strength of the Evidence.
II THE PUBLICATION PROCESS. Conduct literature review Start the paper Conduct study/analyze data Organize/summarize results succinctly Get early, frequent.
Guidelines for the reporting of evidence identification in decision models: observations and suggested way forward Louise Longworth National Institute.
How to Write a Scientific Paper Hann-Chorng Kuo Department of Urology Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital.
What Health-Professionals Should Know About Research and Why They Should Know It Bill Galey Director of Graduate and Medical Education Programs Howard.
How to Critically Review an Article
Tips for Authors Submitting Manuscripts for the Special Issue on The Science of Community Engagement Darius Tandon, PhD Deputy Editor Eric B. Bass, MD,
Reading Scientific Papers Shimae Soheilipour
Dr. Dinesh Kumar Assistant Professor Department of ENT, GMC Amritsar.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE
Introduction to writing scientific papers Gaby van Dijk.
Authors of manuscripts stemming from either platform and poster presentations are invited to submit an article for publication in the CAC Supplement that.
Structure of a Manuscript Microdis Annual Meeting Brussels- Feb
Skills Building Workshop: PUBLISH OR PERISH. Journal of the International AIDS Society Workshop Outline Journal of the International.
How to write a basic research article to be relevant for the readers of European Urology Jean-Nicolas CORNU Associate Editor European Urology.
CONSORT: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Evidence-based, minimum set of recommendations for reporting clinical trials Rennie (JAMA) urged the.
Being an Effective Peer Reviewer Barbara Gastel, MD, MPH Texas A&M University
Critical Appraisal of the Scientific Literature
Title of the Paper Your Name Critical Care Medicine School of Medicine University of Pittsburgh.
How to write a scientific article Nikolaos P. Polyzos M.D. PhD.
AERA Annual Meeting, April 16, 2012 How To Get Published: Guidance From Emerging and Senior Scholars Ethical Issues and Understanding the Review Process.
ICHPER  SD Journal of Research Writers’ Workshop Steven C. Wright, Ed.D. Kinesiology Pedagogy Coordinator University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH
THE REVIEW PROCESS –HOW TO EFFECTIVELY REVISE A PAPER David Smallbone Professor of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, SBRC, Kingston University Associate.
Emerald Group Publishing Limited Supporting ‘Research you can use’ Practitioner Author Pack IDEA – PUBLISH – AUDIENCE.
PUBLISHING THE RESEARCH RESULTS: Researcher Motivation is an Important Step Dr.rer.nat. Heru Susanto Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat.
How to write a manuscript and get it published in European Urology Common problems and potential solutions Giacomo Novara, M.D., F.E.B.U. Assistant professor.
AuthorAID Workshop on Research Writing Tanzania June 2010.
Guidelines for Critically Reading the Medical Literature John L. Clayton, MPH.
FEMS Microbiology Ecology Getting Your Work Published Telling a Compelling Story Working with Editors and Reviewers Jim Prosser Chief Editor FEMS Microbiology.
Manuscript Review Prepared by Noni MacDonald MD FRCPc Editor-in-Chief Paediatrics and Child Health Former Editor-in -Chief CMAJ
Principals of Research Writing. What is Research Writing? Process of communicating your research  Before the fact  Research proposal  After the fact.
Research article structure: Where can reporting guidelines help? Iveta Simera The EQUATOR Network workshop 10 October 2012, Freiburg, Germany.
Scientific Writing Scientific Papers – Original Research Articles “A scientific paper is a written and published report describing original research.
Unit 11: Evaluating Epidemiologic Literature. Unit 11 Learning Objectives: 1. Recognize uniform guidelines used in preparing manuscripts for publication.
How To Be A Constructive Reviewer Publish, Not Perish: How To Survive The Peer Review Process Experimental Biology 2010 Anaheim, CA Michael J. Ryan, Ph.D.
Source: S. Unchern,  Research is not been completed until the results have been published.  “You don’t write because you want to say something,
Dr. Aidah Abu Elsoud Alkaissi An-Najah National University Employ evidence-based practice: key elements.
 Exemplary Care  Cutting-edge Research  World-class Education  Title of the paper Your name Critical Care Medicine School of Medicine University of.
Publishing research in a peer review journal: Strategies for success
Dr.V.Jaiganesh Professor
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF A JOURNAL
Writing Scientific Research Paper
How to write an introduction
The peer review process
First glance Is this manuscript of interest to readers of the journal?
Research Methods Project
STROBE Statement revision
The Anatomy of a Scientific Article: IMRAD format
Reading Research Papers-A Basic Guide to Critical Analysis
Writing your manuscript: Results and Discussion
What the Editors want to see!
“Selecting a Title: Dos and Don’ts”
Advice on getting published
Roya Kelishadi,MD Isfahan University of Medical Sciences Dec18,2018.
MANUSCRIPT WRITING TIPS, TRICKS, & INFORMATION Madison Hedrick, MA
Presentation transcript:

How your submission will be evaluated by European Urology reviewers: Reviewer template and Publication guidelines Jim Catto Associate Editor European Urology How to Write a Manuscript and Get It Published in European Urology

Reviewer template and Publication guidelines The manuscript The authorThe reviewer

1. The manuscript Content: Quality of work Novelty of question Report Type Manuscript Structure Checklists etc.

1. The manuscript Content: Quality of work Novelty of question Report Type Manuscript Structure Checklists etc. Quality metrics: Content Strength of Message

2. The review: Tasks for the reviewer a). Judge the work Quality of work Novelty of question Level within the field Interest to readership… Checklists etc.

2. The review: Tasks for the reviewer a). Judge the work Quality of work Novelty of question Level within the field Interest to readership… Checklists etc. b). Improve the work Structured review

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Add enough to the published literature? What does it add? Cite relevant references to support your comments on originality

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Does this work matter? Will it help our readers to make better decisions and, if so, how? Is a European Urology the right journal for it?

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Clearly defined: –Question or –Aims or –Objectives or –Hypothesis Is this appropriately answered?

Structured reviews Design – Appropriate – Adequate Participants: – Clearly described and defined – Inclusion and exclusion criteria described? – How representative are of this category of patients? Originality Importance to readers Science – Defined question – Study design – Participants – Methods – Results – Interpretation/Disc/Conc lusion – References

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Adequately described? State main outcome measure? Reporting standards: –RCTs –Systematic reviews –Observational studies –Health economics studies Checklist’s? Ethics –IRB/EC approval –Reviewer opinion

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Do they answer the question? Are the outcomes credible? Are the data well presented Justify and pay attention to the –Tables –Figures ? Supplementary data

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Are these warranted by the data Discussed in the light of previous evidence Is the message clearly stated?

Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Conc lusion –References Up to date and relevant Any glaring omissions? Pertinent to European Urology ? Adherence to & role of limited numbers

The Abstract Does it reflect the data? Is it clear? Does it serve purpose? Does it stand alone or lead into the paper? Consistency The Abstract is very important

Reporting guidelines Used to standardize reporting of clinical studies Aim to enhance quality and transparency of health care research We advocate their use for these reasons But for you …. they are a wealth of helpful information about what and how to write? Manuscripts conforming to CONSORT are more likely to be accepted

Reporting guidelines

Reporting guidelines

Reporting guidelines CONSORT: For RCT’s, but also excellent general advice STARD: For diagnostic studies PRISMA: For systematic reviews and meta- analyses STROBE: Epidemiology REMARK: Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies

Thank-you