Abstract
Introduction
Our goal was to study the influence of the author’s compliance with the Instructions for Authors for a submitted manuscript to a journal, on the final outcome of the submission.
Material and methods
1200 consecutive submissions to the journal Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy have been evaluated and divided into four groups: A: Accepted, R: Rejected, I + : Instructions for Authors followed, I − : Instructions for Authors not followed. The quantity of manuscripts in the groups was measured and compared through statistical tests. We tried to determine if a specific category of authors was more likely to incorrectly follow the Instructions for Authors by verifying the lists of authors and the tables of contributions of co-authors. 322 (26.83%) manuscripts were accepted, 248 were I + , 74 were I − ; 878 (73.16%) were rejected, 526 were I + ; 352 were I − .
Results
The comparisons of the observed values and percentages showed significant differences between the groups. We could not identify a specific type of author associated with non-compliance with the Instructions for Authors.
Conclusion
Most of the guidelines that have been published concern the preparation of the scientific contents of the manuscript (How to write), but the submission process (How to submit) has rarely been explained. We suggest including the rules of submitting a manuscript in graduate and post-graduate medical education.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bannas P, Reeder Scott B (2017) How to write an original radiological research manuscript. Eur Radiol 27:4455–4460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4879-8
Chipperfield L, Citrome L, Clark J, David FS, Enck R, Evangelista M, Gonzalez J, Groves T, Magrann J, Mansi B, Miller C, Mooney LA, Murphy A, Shelton J, Walson PD, Al W (2010) Authors' Submission Toolkit: A practical guide to getting your research published. Curr Med Res Opin 26:1967–1982. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2010.499344
Guilford WH (2001) Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing. Adv Physiol Edu 25(3):167–175
Heinemann MK (2016) How not to write a medical paper. A practical guide. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Limited, Utta Pradesh
Hyatt JP, Bienenstock EJ, Tilan JU (2017) A student guide to proofreading and writing in science. Adv Physiol Educ 41:324–331. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00004.2017
Oyibo SO (2019) Developing a beginner’s guide to writing a clinical case report: a pilot evaluation by junior doctors. Cureus 11:e6370. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6370
Rylski B (2015) How to write a perfect scientific manuscript. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 48:179. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezv217
Tomaszewski KA, Henry BM, Ramakrishnan PK, Roy J, Vikse J, Loukas M, Tubbs RS, Walocha JA (2017) Development of the Anatomical Quality Assurance (AQUA) Checklist: guidelines for reporting original anatomical studies. Clin Anat 30:14–20
Wynnea KE, Simpson BJ, Berman L, Rangel SJ, Grosfeld JL, Moss RL (2011) Results of a longitudinal study of rigorous manuscript submission guidelines designed to improve the quality of clinical research reporting in a peer-reviewed surgical journal. J Pediatric Surg 46:131–137
Funding
None of the authors received any funds for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
FD: collecting the data. All the authors participated in the writing, editing corrections, tables and figures preparation.
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crampon, F., Prum, G., Trost, O. et al. Does the quality of the presentation influence the outcome of a submitted manuscript? A plea for including “How to submit” in medical education. Surg Radiol Anat 43, 579–583 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-020-02561-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-020-02561-0