Writing for publication

Tim Dornan

Outline

• Why publish?

• What possibilities are there?

• How do you set about it?

Why?

So as not to perish

To:•Influence policy•Reach people who share your

interest•Contribute to building knowledge•Teach

Possibilities: places

• Research journal - peer reviewed

• Book - whole or chapter (invited)

• Education or practice journal - +/- peer reviewed

• Report

• Other

Possibilities: types

• 'Empirical' (data)'Primary' - original research'Secondary' - rigorous, if not systematic, review

• Editorial• Book contribution• Opinion or description• Letter• Abstract

Quality of research publications

• Journal impact factor

• Frequency with which your work is cited

Tips• Good journals may invite short

descriptions of (evaluated) good ideas

• Letters to prestigious journals carry weight

• Submitted editorials occasionally accepted

• Conference abstracts are sometimes published in good journals

Publishing is ****** hard work!

How do you set about it?

• Have suitable material• Identify a suitable place to submit

it• Match the two well• Get (competent) mentoring, if

possible• Read the journal authors’

instructions

Abstract – write last

Structured – varies by journal• Background/aim• Setting• Methods• Results• Conclusions

• Must not go beyond what data can support

Introduction

Framing the topic

Specificity/generality determined by:

• The state of the research field• Application to which the work will

be put• Choice

• Big picture or detail• Methodology

Presenting the topic

Present it as an argument• Moral or ethical• Political• Statistical• Social change - purposeful or

accidental• Common sense

Literature review

Objectives:• Integrate existing

knowledge• Establish conceptual

orientation and scholarly question(s)

• Guide study design and methods

• Justify interpretation of study findings

Methods:• Cite articles relevant to

topic or study design• Critically discuss them

• Thoughtfully assess quality of studies

• Reflect on limitations or gaps in literature

After Cook et al 2007; Beckman and Cook 2007

Statement of study intent

Questions• It’s easier to provide an

answer if you have asked a question

• Can be closed enough that you know when you have arrived

• Phraseology reflects nature of research• How? vs What?

Aims and objectives• Aim – broad statement of

purpose• Objectives – outcomes

specified in enough detail that you can tell if you have achieved them

Hard to phrase; demands thought; Hard to phrase; demands thought; subject to revision as research progressessubject to revision as research progresses

Methods

• Ethics approval• Study design• Describe in enough detail that

another person could replicate your work

• Include statistical or qualitative methods

Results

• Details of subjects (table)• Succinct presentation of findings

Figure(s)/tables

Discussion

• Principal findings and meaning• Strengths and limitations• Relationship to other published

work• Implications

• Practice• Future research

Remainder of MS

• Tables• Figures and legends• References• (Annexes)

Presentation

• Read journal instructions• Page numbers• Version and date in header• 1.5-2x spacing• Adequate margins• 11 or 12 point font (eg arial)• Headings, subheadings etc

References

• Use a reference manager (Endnote or similar)

English style• Write in as simple language as

you can• Variable length sentences; shorter

rather than longer• Avoid verbage• Define abbreviations• Avoid undefined terms (jargon)• Punctuate carefully

Patients

What’s the topic?

Patients in UGME: Argument

• Medical students everywhere learn in authentic practice settings

• Interaction with patients is a central part of their learning

• At least early on, students are not active providers of care

• Impact on patients of students’ learning is a self-evidently important topic

Patients in medical education

The current literature in this area has several limitations. The majority of studies evaluated patient opinions using questionnaires, few offering patients the opportunity to expand on their answers and most requiring them to select from options that were in line with previous evidence, such as ‘better’, ‘same’ or ‘worse’. These methods have therefore given a fairly superficial description of the experience. Even semi-structured interviews have focused more on perceived benefits and disadvantages than in-depth analysis of the patient’s experience. In one study where 92% of patients reported benefits from student involvement, patients were interviewed by members of the faculty by whom they were treated. Despite being assured of anonymity, this could have led to patients feeling pressured to be more positive in their answers.

Emma McLachlan 2009

Patients in UGME

• How does involvement in medical student education affect a patient’s sense of identity?