Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Writing for Publication

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Healthcare Simulation Research

  • 2180 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter addresses writing for publication from eight perspectives: (a) motivation to write, (b) types of publications, (c) International Committee on Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations, (d) study design and reporting conventions, (e) peer review, (f) words of wisdom, and (g) the craft of writing. Writing for professional publication is hard work that can improve with practice and feedback. Newcomers to professional writing are encouraged to seek advice from experienced colleagues and from many other published resources. The future of healthcare simulation research will depend, in part, on scholars and writers who advance this craft.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. McGaghie WC. Scholarship, publication, and career advancement in health professions education. AMEE Guide No. 43. Med Teach. 2009;31(7):574–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tekian A, Harris I. Preparing health professions leaders worldwide: a description of masters-level programs. Med Teach. 2012;34(1):52–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Strunk W, White EB. The elements of style. 4th ed. New York: Longman; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Singh AA, Lukkarila L. Successful academic writing: a complete guide for social and behavioral scientists. New York: Guilford Press; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McGaghie WC. Varieties of integrative scholarship: why rules of evidence, criteria, and standards matter. Acad Med. 2015;90(3):294–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Available at: http://www.icmje.org

  8. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Promoting integrity in research publication. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/. Accessed 2019

  9. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(11):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Appelbaum M, Cooper H, Kline RB, Mayo-Wilson E, Nezv AM, Rao SM. Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: the APA publications and communications board task force report. Am Psychol. 2018;73(1):3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4(10):e297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N, et al. Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND Statement. Am J Pub Health. 2004;94(3):361–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng A, Kessler D, Mackinnon R, et al. Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements. Simul Healthc. 2016;11:238–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–900.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen ER, McGaghie WC, Wayne DB, et al. Recommendations for reporting mastery education research in medicine (ReMERM). Acad Med. 2015;90(11):1509–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, et al. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89:1245–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Levitt HM, Bamberg M, Creswell JW, Frost DM, Josselson R, Suárez-Orozco C. Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: the APA publications and communications board task force report. Am Psychol. 2018;73(1):26–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. RAMSES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 2013;11:21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. van de Wijngaert L, Bouwman H, Contractor N. A network approach toward literature review. Qual Quant. 2014;48:623–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:w1–w12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ogrinc G, Mooney SE, Estrada C, et al. The SQUIRE (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence) guidelines for quality improvement reporting: explanation and elaboration. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(Suppl. 1):i13–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. EQUATOR Network. Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research. Available at: http://www.equator-network.org/. Accessed 2019.

  25. Cicchetti DV. The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: a cross-disciplinary investigation. Beh Brain Sci. 1991;14:119–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sharts-Hopko NC. How does a peer review scholarship? J Assn Nurses Aids Care. 2001;12(6):91–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hancock GR. In: Mueller RO, editor. The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences. New York: Routledge; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Durning SJ. In: Carline JD, editor. Review criteria for research manuscripts. 2nd ed. Washington DC: Association of American Medical Colleges; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bordage G. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med. 2001;76(9):889–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Bordage G. Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: a systematic review. Med Educ. 2007;41:737–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Meyer HS, Durning SJ, Sklar D, Maggio LA. Making the first cut: an analysis of Academic Medicine editors’ reasons for not sending manuscripts out for external peer review. Acad Med. 2018;93(3):464–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sternberg RJ. How to win acceptances by psychology journals: 21 tips for better writing. Pan-Pacific Mgmt Rev. 2008;11(1):51–9.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kellogg RT. Professional writing expertise. In: Ericsson KA, Charness N, Feltovich PJ, Hoffman RR, editors. The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 389–402.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Belcher WL. Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: a guide to academic publishing success. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rocco TS, Hatcher T, editors. The handbook of scholarly writing and publishing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Medical Education and Northwestern Simulation, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    William C. McGaghie

Authors
  1. William C. McGaghie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William C. McGaghie .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monash Institute for Health and Clinical Education, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

    Debra Nestel

  2. Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Joshua Hui

  3. Department of Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Kevin Kunkler

  4. Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Mark W. Scerbo

  5. Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA

    Aaron W. Calhoun

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

McGaghie, W.C. (2019). Writing for Publication. In: Nestel, D., Hui, J., Kunkler, K., Scerbo, M., Calhoun, A. (eds) Healthcare Simulation Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26837-4_42

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation