How to Write Articles That Get Published

Abstract

Publications are essential for sharing knowledge, and career advancement. Writing a research paper is a challenge. Most graduate
programmes in medicine do not offer hands-on training in writing and publishing in scientific journals. Beginners find the art and science
of scientific writing a daunting task. ‘How to write a scientific paper?, Is there a sure way to successful publication ?’ are the frequently
asked questions. This paper aims to answer these questions and guide a beginner through the process of planning, writing, and
correction of manuscripts that attract the readers and satisfies the peer reviewers. A well-structured paper in lucid and correct language
that is easy to read and edit, and strictly follows the instruction to the authors from the editors finds favour from the readers and avoids
outright rejection. Making right choice of journal is a decision critical to acceptance. Perseverance through the peer review process is
the road to successful publication.

Full text

Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2014 Sep, Vol-8(9): XG01-XG03 11
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/8107.4855 Postgraduate Education
Keywords: Medical writing, Publication In biomedical journal, Preparation of manuscript
INTRODUCTION
Writing and publishing scientific papers is the core business of
every researcher [1]. The scientific output medical researchers
generate is not only important for society to improve health through
advancement of knowledge but also for the individual researcher’s
career [2]. Effective scientific writing, however, is not easy [1].
Scientific paper has a required structure and style. However, a
research article is not only a technically rigid document, but also
a subjective intellectual product. Therefore, it requires good skills
in both structuring and phrasing. These skills are acquired through
experience, and can also be taught [3]. ‘Uniform Requirements
for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and
Editing for Biomedical Publication’ gives the required technical and
structural details of scientific papers [4]. Also, there is no dearth
of literature on scientific writing and publishing. Ironically, most
graduate programmes in medicine do not offer hands-on training in
writing and publishing in scientific journals. Therefore, most authors
learn the art and science of scientific writing the hard way; though
there are papers that provide step-by-step guide to writing [5].
What constitute a good paper- worthy of publication? There are no
straight answers. Some define a good paper as a clear, coherent,
focussed, well-argued document that uses unambiguous language
[3]. Editors and reviewers appreciate manuscripts that are easy to
read and edit [4]. However, no foolproof rules exist for success in
publishing a manuscript. Good scientific content of a paper alone
does not guarantee its publication in a good journal [5].
This article presents a review of the selected articles on writing and
publishing in biomedical journals and aims to provide beginners
the basics of effective scientific writing, and tips on successful
publishing.
Writing a Scientific Paper: Getting started
When planning a scientific paper, Berk’s memo to the authors in the
American Journal of Roentgenology is worth following [6]. He felt
that getting the things right the first time improved the chances of
acceptance and avoided revisions. He set out 5 guiding principles
for the inexperienced authors : They are : 1. Determine the specific
focus of your article, 2. Select the right journal, 3. Decide the type of
article, 4. Follow the guidelines for authors published in the selected
journal, 5. Revise, revise, and revise. Remember, ‘the most of the
important work of composing a manuscript occurs during the study
design that is critical for determining the resultant manuscript’s
publication [7]. Therefore, study design and methodology requires
Education Section
How to Write Articles
That Get Published
ABSTRACT
Publications are essential for sharing knowledge, and career advancement. Writing a research paper is a challenge. Most graduate
programmes in medicine do not offer hands-on training in writing and publishing in scientific journals. Beginners find the art and science
of scientific writing a daunting task. ‘How to write a scientific paper?, Is there a sure way to successful publication ?’ are the frequently
asked questions. This paper aims to answer these questions and guide a beginner through the process of planning, writing, and
correction of manuscripts that attract the readers and satisfies the peer reviewers. A well-structured paper in lucid and correct language
that is easy to read and edit, and strictly follows the instruction to the authors from the editors finds favour from the readers and avoids
outright rejection. Making right choice of journal is a decision critical to acceptance. Perseverance through the peer review process is
the road to successful publication.
careful planning; they form the touchstone on which results and
conclusions are tested.
PREPARING A MANUSCRIPT
The scope of work determines the type of article. The choice of
journal depends upon the field a journal covers, area of research,
time frame for publication, and the journal’s impact factor- a proxy
for relative importance of the journal within its field. ‘Uniform
requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals:
writing and editing for biomedical publication’ provides the
guidelines for preparing manuscripts for any journal [4]. The text
of observational and experimental articles is usually divided into
sections with the headings, introduction, methods, results, and
discussion, the so-called “IMRAD” structure. Other types of articles
have different structure. Therefore, it is necessary to familiarize
with and strictly follow the instructions to the authors of the target
journal.
To begin with read a paper written in the format you plan to write.
Prepare a skeleton of your paper [8]. Note down the key points in
each section. It is neither desirable nor practical to actually write the
article sections in sequential order. Introduction and the discussion
may wait till at the end. Abstract may be written the last.
Keep the language simple, concise and easy to understand. Follow
UK or US English as desired by the journal. Remove all unnecessary
words. Use active voice rather than passive. The sentences should
begin with the operative word and end with the message. Expand
the abbreviations when used for the first time. Check the grammar
and spelling. A word processing tool may be helpful. However,
many biomedical words do not exist in the vocabulary of the word
processing tools. Here, the textbooks or a medical dictionary may
be helpful.
Following text sequentially discusses the elements of the individual
sections of a scientific paper. Peer-review and reasons for rejection
are discussed subsequently.
Title: A good title should attract and inform the readers and be
accurate [9]. It should make it stand out from other literature in the
field [10]. Titles may be phrased in a variety ways. Some examples
of descriptive and informative titles are given below:
- Correlation of Tear Fluorescein Clearance and Schirmer test
scores with Ocular irritation symptoms (a descriptive title)
- What Are the Biomarkers for Glaucoma?
- Dry eyes: are new ideas drying up?
KIRTI NATH JHA

Kirti Nath Jha, How to Write Articles That Get Published www.jcdr.net
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2014 Sep, Vol-8(9): XG01-XG03
22
- Angiopoetin-2 levels are elevated in exudative pleural effusions
(informative title)
As a rule, the title should contain all the words that the readers
use for searching relevant literature. The authors may, to begin with,
consider a number of titles and finally choose the most appropriate.
Co-authors and peers may provide useful suggestions. Some
journals also ask for short running titles in limited characters to
be used at the top or bottom of the journal page. Provide a short
running title whenever asked.
Abstract: The abstract reflects the main story of the scientific paper.
While reading articles most readers go no beyond the abstracts.
Therefore, the abstract should attract the readers to go further.
Abstract may be structured or unstructured. Most journals ask for
a structured abstracts within given word limit. Structured abstract
is divided into:
1. Background: What is known and why is this study needed?
2. Methods: What did you do ?
3. Results: What did you find ?
4. Conclusion: What does it mean ?
Write the abstract in past perfect tense, active voice, and with no
citations.
Provide word count, if asked, and key words for indexing, preferably
confirming to medical subject heading (MeSH) vocabulary. MeSH
vocabulary is available on www.PubMed.com .
Introduction: A crisp introduction is an essential ingredient of a
good paper. A good introduction will ‘‘sell’’ the study to editors,
reviewers, readers, and sometimes even the media [11]. It should
tell what is known, what is unknown , and also the rationale behind
the study. The introduction should start with the background of
previous research, and state the aim, the research question, and
the study design. Give in the introduction only the strictly pertinent
references and do not include the data or conclusions from the
work being reported.
Methods: The methods tell how the study was conducted and
how the conclusions were arrived at. Methods of an original study
have four basic elements; study design, setting and subjects, data
collection, statistical methods, and ethical approval. Describe
the type of study (prospective/ retrospective/ experimental/
observational), the subjects or the study population (human/
animal), the sample size and sample size calculation, recruitment
of study population, methods of randomization, blinding, inclusion
and exclusion criteria, measurement tools, outcome measures, and
statistical analysis. The methods provides the readers insight into
correctness or otherwise of design. Also, details of methods allow
the readers to replicate the intervention or experiment so that they
can try and test for themselves the efficacy of an intervention and the
validity of conclusions. While describing new surgery or experiment
provide sufficient details. When you followed a standard procedures
described elsewhere, provide the relevant references.
Results: Results answers the research question without
interpretation. Structure the results like the material and methods
[12]. Be objective and use past tense. Remove all the superfluous
details that does not form the part of study question, outcome
measure or a factor affecting it. Start the results with recruitment
process, and a description of demographic characteristic of the
population. For controlled trials first describe the experimental group
followed by the control group. Give both the percentage and the
actual numerical values with decimals e.g. 90%(54/60). Wherever
applicable present the values with mean, standard deviation (SD)
and 95 % confidence interval. Describe the primary and secondary
outcome, and also the unexpected findings. Give p-values with
95 % confidence interval to state the beneficial / adverse effects
established by a test of statistical significance. Also provide effect
sizes e.g. odds ratio or relative risk with 95 % confidence interval.
Do not over interpret the results. Over interpretetation of result may
weaken the impact of conclusion and result in rejection of your
paper.
Tables, charts, graphs and figures reduce the text and makes visual
impact for easy reading. Number the figures, tables, charts, graphs
and the photographs serially. Mention them in the text at appropriate
places. Prepare the clinical photographs and diagrams on separate
pages in desired format (e.g. JPEG, TIFF, or PNG of desired file
size and resolution). Provide as a separate file for the legends for
figures, charts, and the clinical photographs. Place the legends after
the references. Additional media, like video, in desired file format of
given file size, may be submitted for online journals.
Discussion: Discussion interprets the results. Keep it concise.
Begin the discussion with brief recapitulation of the main findings
(the answer to the research question) without repeating the results.
Repeating results in the discussion is a common mistake. Refrain from
bringing in new findings. Compare your results with the findings of
similar studies by other authors and explain the reasons of variation.
Emphasise the new findings. Interpret the unexpected. Underline
the implications of your findings. Also, describe the strengths and
weaknesses of your study. Finally provide a conclusion - the take
home message.
References: References authenticate the scientific facts and
statements. Include only the essential references. Cite most
accessible reference, and the primary source rather than reviews.
Eliminate archaic and irrelevant references, and references for
established facts. Check the references for accuracy. Follow the
referencing style suggested by the target journal. Most biomedical
journals today follow Vancouver style or APA (American Psychological
Association) style. There may be a limit for the number of references
for a given type of article. Some journal offer online software for
checking accuracy of the listed references. Limited number
of references can be arranged manually. Especially designed
referencing software is useful for maintaining and managing large
volume of references. Annotation of references - sentence case or
superscript- also varies. Follow the individual journal’s guidelines.
Submission: Revise your paper thoroughly before submission.
Read it critically as you would another author’s paper. Ensure you
have strictly followed the instruction to authors. Failure to adhere to
the instructions may result in summary rejection of your paper. Check
and recheck the language and grammar for errors. Create separate
files for the cover letter, the abstract, the blinded article file (without
author details); figures, charts, tables, and images, legends, and
permission from copyright holder for use of published materials, etc.
Provide in the cover letter the title, main findings, and their relevance.
Ensure correctness of author details (name, surname, degree, etc.),
authorship (first author, co-author, guarantor, corresponding author),
and their mailing address and the institutional affiliation. Provide
all the information desired by the editor including contribution of
individual authors. Some journal require details of contributions of
each author e.g., conception and design, data collection, statistical
analysis, manuscript preparation and revision. Declare the conflict
of interest, if any. Online submission shall remain incomplete unless
you sequentially upload all the required sections, and the copyright
transfer form signed by each author. The copyright transfer form
should mention the corresponding author. Preserve the raw data
and the final submission for future reference.
Reasons for Rejection: Rejection is an unpleasant situation,
but common in scientific publishing. Initial rejection occurs at
the editorial level. During the peer review, reviewers assess the
quality of paper according to 2 main criteria: contribution to the
field and the adequacy of research design [13]. Deficiency in the
study design was the most commonly cited reason for outright
manuscript rejection according to a study that queried the editors
and reviewers [14]. A study that studied peer review evaluations of a
large number of papers concluded that ‘the main determinant of the

www.jcdr.net Kirti Nath Jha, How to Write Articles That Get Published
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2014 Sep, Vol-8(9): XG01-XG03 33
recommendation for acceptance or rejection of a given manuscript
was the relationship between the experimental design, the results,
and the conclusion. Inappropriate experimental design was again
strongly associated with rejection [15].
Failure to adhere to the ‘instruction to the authors’ is another
important reason for rejection. Plagiarism in any form is another
reason for summary rejection. Available software readily check
the submission for plagiarism. Also articles found unsuitable for
the journal on account of their content, language, grammar, and
format are summarily rejected. There are excellent works that have
identified the’ principles to improve the likelihood of publication
of a scientific manuscript’ and the’ the reasons why manuscripts
are not accepted for publication’ [6,13,16]. Lack of what improves
the likelihood of acceptance, is the cause of rejection. Common
reasons for rejection other than those mentioned above include:
poor study design, insufficient problem statement, incomplete,
inaccurate, or outdated review of literature, suboptimal reporting
of results, getting carried away in the discussion, and poor writing
[17]. Language poses a problem for researches from non-English-
speaking countries. Some publishers provide paid language-
services for manuscripts.
Peer review, Responding to Reviewers and Resubmission:
Peer review is considered the virtue of science communication
[18]. Peer review is an essential tool the journals apply to maintain
high quality and standard of the articles published in their journals.
The process starts after your paper is past the editorial scrutiny.
It supplements the authors work in making it more acceptable to
the wider readership. Some journals ask suggestions for potential
reviewers, and also those reviewers you will wish not to review
your paper. Reviewers may accept, reject or suggest minor/ major
revisions. Provide point-wise response to the reviewer’s comments
and in time resubmit the revised manuscript incorporating the
suggestions for change. Highlight the changes in the revised
manuscript. Remember, revision gives no guarantee for acceptance.
But failure to respond and resubmit closes the door.
CONCLUSION
Writing and publishing is integral to research. Scientific manuscript
has a required structure and style; the available literature provides
adequate guidelines. Online abstracts and full text references,
language services, and referencing software have made preparation
of manuscript easier. Read the instructions carefully and adhere
to them strictly. A beginner has to travel the learning curve of the
writing, peer review, and publishing. Originality of content, valid
study design, good manuscript- conforming to language, style,
and format- are prerequisite for successful publication. Attention
to details at every stage and perseverance through the arduous
process of research, manuscript preparation, peer review and
publication is essential for success.
LITERATURE SEARCH
A PubMed search of the database (1990 to 2004) was conducted.
Following key words were used: writing, publishing, biomedical
journals, and peer review. Additional sources included publications
cited in other articles. Relevant articles were reviewed and
included.
REFERENCES
[1] Kotz D, Cals JWL, Tugwell P, Knottneru JA. Introducing a new series on effective
writing and publishing of scientific papers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
2013;66:359-60.
[2] Knottnerus JA, Tugwell P. Communicating research to the peers. J Clin Epidemiol.
2007;60:645-47.
[3] Hengl T, Gould M. Rules of thumb for writing research articles 2002. http://www.
slideshare.net/alena_romanenko/hengl-gould-2002-rules-of-thumb-of-writing-
a-research-article accessed 08March 2014.
[4] Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals:
Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. www.ICMJE.org ; 1-36.
[5] Kliewer MA. Writing it up: a step-by-step guide to publication for beginning
investigators. AJR. 2005;185:591–96.
[6] Berk RN. Preparation of manuscripts for radiology journals: advice to first-time
authors. AJR. 1992;158:203-08.
[7] Provenzale JM. Ten principles to improve the likelihood of publication of a
scientific manuscript. AJR. 2007;188:1179–82.
[8] Kotz D, Cals JWL. Writing Tips Series (Effective writing and publishing
scientific papers- part I:how to get started). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
2013;66:397.
[9] Hartley J. Academic writing and Publishing- A practical guide.2008. New York:
Routledge. Pp. 23.
[10] Kotz D, Cals JWL. Writing Tips Series (Effective writing and publishing
scientific papers- part II: title and abstract). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
2013;66:585.
[11] Kotz D, Cals JWL. Writing Tips Series (Effective writing and publishing
scientific papers- part III: how to get started). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
2013;66:702.
[12] Kotz D, Cals JWL. Writing Tips Series (Effective writing and publishing
scientific papers- part V:how to get started). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.
2013;66:945.
[13] Georges B. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The Strengths
and Weaknesses in Medical Education Reports, Educating Physicians: Research
Reports, Academic Medicine. 2001;76(9):889-96.
[14] Byrne DW. Publishing your medical research paper. What they don’t teach in
medical school 1998. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
[15] Turcotte C, Drolet P, Girard M. Study design, originality and overall consistency
influence acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Journal. Can
J Anaesth. 2004;51(6):549–56.
[16] Pierson DJ; The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication.
Respiratory Care. 2004;49:1246-52.
[17] Celik Y. To Publish or Perish: Strengths, Weaknesses of a Medical Paper (I)
International. Archives of Medical Research. 2011;1(1):47-53.
[18] The pitfalls and rewards of peer review. Lancet. 2008;371:447.
PARTICULARS OF CONTRIBUTORS:
1. Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College & Research Institute, Pondy-Cuddalore Main Road, Pillaiyarkuppam, Pondicherry, India.
NAME, ADDRESS, E-MAIL ID OF THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Dr. Kirti Nath Jha,
Mahatma Gandhi Medical College & Research Institute, Pondy-Cuddalore Main Road,
Pillaiyarkuppam, Pondicherry-607 402, india.
Phone : 9443655640, E-mail : kirtinath.jha@gmail.com
FINANCIAL OR OTHER COMPETING INTERESTS: None.
Date of Submission: Nov 14, 2013
Date of Peer Review: Feb 17, 2014
Date of Acceptance: Aug 19, 2014
Month of Publishing: September, 2014