Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Editors and Reviewers Look for: Tips for Successful Research Publication

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Medical Writing and Research Methodology for the Orthopaedic Surgeon

  • 814 Accesses

Abstract

Scientific reporting is challenging, but getting it right is important. A well reported trial informs thought and guide care, while a confusing or misleading one can cause harm. This chapter offers one approach to this complex and sometimes-frustrating process. Key elements include: Getting started (asking clear research questions), demonstrating the robustness of the project (methods), structuring a manuscript to make it easy to follow, communicating research results plainly and effectively, and maintaining perspective with one’s main messages. Finally, we summarize several pitfalls of scientific reporting, including conflicts of interest, the common kinds of bias in clinical research, ethical issues associated with authorship (plagiarism, duplicate submission, and redundant publication), and the difference between statistical significance and clinical importance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Oxford Centre for Evidence- Based Medicine. Critical appraisal tools. http://www.cebm.net/critical-appraisal/. Accessed 22 June 2015.

  2. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wupperman R, Davis R, Obremskey WT. Level of evidence in Spine compared to other orthopedic journals. Spine. 2007;32(3):388–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Leopold SS. Editorial: let’s talk about level IV: the bones of a good restrospective case series. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):353–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Paradis C. Bias in surgical research. Ann Surg. 2008;248(2):180–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pannucci C, Wilkins E. Identifying and avoiding bias in research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(2):619–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ring D, Leopold SS. Editorial: measuring satisfaction: can it be done? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(10):3071–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Oxford Centre for Evidence- Based Medicine. Asking focused questions. http://www.cebm.net/asking-focused-questions/. Accessed 22 June 2015.

  11. Leopold SS. Editorial: words and meaning in scientific reporting: consecutive, prospective, and significant. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(9):2731–2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Schiffer G. CORR insights: the minimum clinically important difference of patient-rated wrist evaluation score for patients with distal radius fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(10):3242–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors. 2014. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html. Accessed 21 June 2015.

  14. Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidelines. http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.

  15. Brand RA. Editorial: writing for clinical orthopaedics and related research. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:239–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors gratefully acknowledge Richard A. Brand, MD, whose efforts to refine and disseminate a question-driven approach to scientific reporting deeply influenced our own approaches and whose paper “Writing for Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research” [15] is a must read, regardless of what journal one is writing for.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Ryan Stancil & Adam Sassoon

  2. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Seth S. Leopold

Authors
  1. Ryan Stancil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seth S. Leopold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adam Sassoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan Stancil .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Associate Director of Service, Director of Orthopaedic Trauma and Research, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado, USA

    Cyril Mauffrey

  2. Departement Chirurgie Orthopédique, Clinique Chirurgicale St Michel, Toulon, France

    Marius M. Scarlat

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Stancil, R., Leopold, S.S., Sassoon, A. (2018). What Editors and Reviewers Look for: Tips for Successful Research Publication. In: Mauffrey, C., Scarlat, M. (eds) Medical Writing and Research Methodology for the Orthopaedic Surgeon. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69350-7_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69350-7_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-69349-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-69350-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation