Post Acceptance Changes of Manuscripts

Proofs are supplied to the corresponding author once your manuscript has been approved for publication. Once approved by the corresponding author, your paper is assembled into an issue of the journal and published in its final form. After providing your proof revisions, you are not expected to provide additional input as the piece’s author.

There are three stages between submission and publication in a peer-reviewed journal:

  • The time elapsed between submission and the first decision.
  • The amount of time required for the authors to revise
  • The time it takes from acceptance to publishing. 

    Peer review occurs when an article is submitted to a target journal. However, multiple processes are frequently only known to the related author. When you make a manuscript submission to a journal, it travels quite a distance, and the manuscript status is tracked with the help of the manuscript number. If a paper is accepted after peer review, it goes through proof development and a review procedure before being published. This process is a time-consuming process that necessitates a thorough examination of your manuscript’s publication-ready version. If you make a mistake here, it may be tough to fix!

     Changes to Authorship

    Requests for adding an author before publication are less difficult to arrange than requests after publication. Requests to add authors before publication typically comes from inside the existing author team. When requests are made after publication, they rarely come from inside the existing team but rather from a disgruntled team member who believes they deserved authorship but were not properly credited.

     Changes to Manuscript

    Copyediting the manuscript carefully ensures that it is accurate, clear, legible, written in good English, and adheres to the journal’s house style. Typesetting in the journal’s format for print or pdf, with the appropriate fonts and symbols, and with the figures in their final sizes, is what typesetting entails.

    After consulting with co-authors, the corresponding author returns the PDF to Proof checking Services. Authors can assist by asking just necessary modifications (such as typos). Authors may believe their figures are too small and request that they be expanded. After the corresponding author and Proofreading Services have agreed on all revisions, a subeditor rereads the entire proof and cycles with the typesetter until it is finally correct.

    Errors Spotted by Readers

    Aside from what has been said above, inaccuracies in published articles may be discovered by readers other than the author. In such circumstances, the editor must seek clarification from the appropriate author. Furthermore, if necessary, agree on the phrasing of a corrigendum or erratum that meets the author’s and reader’s approval.

    The most serious cases involving requests for revisions to published articles occur when a reader reports that an article is:

    • Replicated or plagiarised
    • Data that has been faked or manipulated
    • There are catastrophic errors that the writers cannot repair or explain in an erratum or corrigendum. 

      Conclusion

      Requests to make changes to manuscripts after approval are quite rare. Editors do not keep a systematic record of such incidents. As a result, it isn’t easy to estimate how frequently this occurs or what the most common causes are.

Co-author Guide and Acceptance letter in a Journal

Some journals may send Co-Authors an email containing deep links to confirm Co-Authorship. Corresponding Authors may also be allowed to control the Other Author verification procedure by the Journal.

Who is the Co-author?

A Co-author is someone who has made a significant contribution to a journal publication. They also share accountability and responsibility for the outcomes.

If an article has more than one author, you’ll choose the corresponding author. This person will be in charge of all article correspondence and sign the publishing agreement on behalf of all authors. The corresponding author is in charge of ensuring that all of the authors’ contact information is correct.

Roles of Co-author

  • The corresponding (submitting) author is exclusively responsible for communicating with Scientific Reports and handling co-author correspondence. Do Correction and proofreading of manuscripts. Handle modifications and re-submissions of updated manuscripts until the manuscripts are accepted.
  • Accepting and signing the Author Publishing Agreement on behalf of all necessary co-authors and obtaining the signature of any third-party rights owners.
  • Arranging for APC (article processing charge) payment. Under Open Access Agreements, the corresponding author’s affiliation is considered to assess eligibility for discounted or waived APCs.
  • Act on behalf of all co-authors in responding to post-publication requests from all sources, including issues about publishing ethics, content reuse, and the availability of data, materials, and resources.

There are several compelling reasons why you should work together on a publication. Collaborations in research are one of the finest reasons. Collaborations in research might be one of the most satisfying aspects of your scientific career. Working with “masters” in your profession or experts from other fields can substantially extend your horizons and provide you with access to knowledge, methods, infrastructure, and labor. Collaborations in research frequently result in two or more publications. It is common for one publication to be driven by your partners in these instances. Your contribution is recognized with a co-authorship, several co-authorships, or, in ideal cases, an asterisk indicating “equal contribution.”

Acceptance letter for co-authors

Journal editors exclusively send emails to the corresponding author, not the co-authors. The corresponding author is the journal’s sole point of contact. The corresponding author’s responsibility is to relay the editor’s messages to the co-authors. Journal editor cannot send individual acceptance letters to every co-author. As a result, You should contact the associated author and request that the acceptance letter is forwarded to you if you require it.

Conclusion

Based on the Authors position in the research process and paper preparation, authors can be designated as the lead author, first author, co-author, or corresponding author. The corresponding author is in charge of the manuscript during the submission, peer review, and production processes.

From submission to publication, all communication will be with the relevant author. However, there is a recurrent dispute over whether or not an article can have more than one associated author. Some or several co-authorships may enhance scientific cooperation and reciprocal intellectual stimulation and expand your publication list and fill gaps in your publication history.  It is better to avoid publishing too many papers with many co-authorships.

5 Steps for Publishing in a High-Quality Medical Journal

Scientific writing and publishing is a vital component of medical advancement. Publications are used to transmit new developments in human knowledge to the rest of the world. This knowledge must be accurate, valid, reproducible, and clinically valuable. Many ambitious physicians and scientists aspire to publish their work in high-impact publications.

 What are the Effective Steps for Publishing in a High-Quality Medical Journal?

Choose a Journal and Read the Journal’s Instructions.

It is critical to decide on authorship and the order of authors, including the corresponding author, ahead of time. 6 All authors listed on the final manuscript must have contributed substantially to the work to be held accountable and accept public accountability for the publication’s content. When preparing your paper, carefully observe the author guidelines, including the word limit and the number of tables and figures allowed. Many journals permit the submission of supplemental material as part of your publication, subject to the word count and figures/tables constraints.

Prepare the Manuscript

  • Organize the Manuscript – Begin by outlining the manuscript with this basic structure in mind. The first rough draft would be a list of crucial points to describe beneath each section and subsection.
  • Prepare the Manuscript – Pay attention when drafting the manuscript to avoid plagiarism (including self-plagiarism), fraud, and fabrication.
  • Colleagues should provide feedback and revise the manuscript – After completing the work, share it with co-authors and one or two non-author colleagues for criticism and feedback. Address and correct the English after revising to verify that your idea or ideas have been appropriately and fully communicated.

 

Submit the Manuscript

The majority of scientific journals now demand submissions be made through their websites. Most journals allow authors to propose reviewers who should and should not evaluate an article during the manuscript submission process. Such comments are beneficial to the editorial staff of the journals. Choose your title and keywords carefully so that readers can discover your paper. A brief cover letter that includes a two- to a three-sentence overview of the manuscript’s relevance might provide essential context to the editor.

Receive the Editor’s Communication and Revise the Manuscript

Acceptance of a paper as submitted is extremely rare. Do not be offended if your manuscript is rejected. In reality, only about one in every four articles is approved by a top journal. If adjustments are requested, it is critical to provide a thoughtful and respectful response to maximize the likelihood of later acceptance.

Resubmit the Manuscript

Include a cover letter to the editor with point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ remarks and ideas when submitting a revised manuscript, and address all complaints and suggestions as extensively as possible. It would help to highlight the Changes in the updated text to evaluate thoroughly.

Conclusion

To summarise, the process of publishing a manuscript in a high-impact journal begins with selecting an important question, designing a sound study with statistical power, carrying out the work with impeccable integrity and attention to detail, writing an excellent manuscript, submitting it to the appropriate journal, fully responding to reviewer comments, and completing the standard post-acceptance checks. Nothing beats the satisfaction of seeing your paper published and visible to the rest of the world.

 

Reporting Guidelines for Medical Research

Health researchers might use a reporting guideline as a straightforward, structured tool when preparing publications.

What is a Reporting Guideline?

A reporting guideline is a collection of facts that you include in a manuscript to ensure that it can be, for example:

  • When a reader understands what you’re saying,
  • A researcher confirmed the findings.
  • A doctor will use it to make a medical decision, and
  • For conducting a systematic review.

Reporting guideline is used to prepare high-quality research reports since it requires the article to meet the checklist’s requirements. You can explain to the peer reviewer the checklist used to assess the document. Following this protocol, researchers can publish their findings with or without minor revisions.

What are the different types of Reporting Guidelines?

The EQUATOR Network (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research) is a global effort to improve the quality of research publications. It includes a complete set of reporting guidelines and other resources to aid in the improvement of reporting.

A list of all of the reporting guidelines for many different study designs is available to assist you in reporting your research.

  • PRISMA – Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses – for reporting the systematic review
  • CONSORT – Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials – for reporting randomized controlled trials
  • STROBE – Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology – its flow diagram for reporting observational study
  • MOOSE – Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology – for reporting observational epidemiological meta-analysis
  • STARD – Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies – for reporting diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of the study
  • SPIRIT – Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials – for clarifying the report
  • REMARK – Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies – for Oncology and Genetic studies
  • COREQ – Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research – for enhancing the quality of the report
  • CARE – Consensus-based clinical case reporting – for precise reporting
  • TRIPOD – Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis – for Prognostic studies
  • RIGHT – A Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care – for Clinical practice guidelines
  • SRQR – Standards for reporting qualitative research – for Qualitative research
  • ARRIVE – Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments – for Animal preclinical studies
  • SQUIRE – Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence – for Quality improvement studies

 

Advantages of Reporting guidelines 

  • The quality of reporting will improve if you follow the reporting guidelines.
  • Only publications that strictly follow the guidelines will be published in a high-impact journal.
  • Assists the reviewer in ensuring that all pertinent information has been reported.

 

Conclusion

Your article must provide a clear and comprehensive overview of your findings. Complete reporting makes it easier for editors, peer reviewers, and readers to comprehend what you did and how you did it.

Poorly reported research can skew the literature, resulting in findings that can’t be repeated or utilized in future meta-analyses or systematic reviews. Editors and peer reviewers will be able to analyze your article better if you follow these standards since they will understand what you did.

What are the good Research Topics for various Journals?

Finding a decent topic for the Journal to write about can be one of the most difficult aspects of writing a research paper. This article focuses on five different Research Topics, namely Animal Rights,

Art & art history, Computer Science, Business Studies, and English Literature.

Animal Rights

An animal rights research paper is usually created to demonstrate how humans exploit animals and violate their rights.

  • Preventing animals from being used in Laboratories
  • Animals’ right to be treated with respect – Relevance and Significance
  • What methods should be used to test compounds that may be detrimental to human health?
  • Would advancements in disease treatments have been conceivable without the use of animals? 

 

Art & Art History

Without delving too deeply into symbols and artists’ ideas, it’s good to conduct detailed research and present accurate facts. Various tools are available to learn more about art history and make studies easier.

  • The Evolution of Art Fairs
  • Comparison of Egyptian and Mesoamerican Pyramids
  • What Makes the Most Famous Conceptual Art Works So Special?
  • How Did Pop Art and the Use of Everyday Objects in Art Be Influenced by Cultural Attitudes?

 

Computer Science

Every day, technology improves and shrinks in size. A smartphone in the pocket can be as powerful as a laptop. Without question, the advancement of computer science is shaping our future. It’s difficult to count the number of technology and computer science research areas. The most crucial of these, though, is easy to identify.

  • How do Artificial Neural Networks work?
  • Computer Vision using Artificial Intelligence
  • What is the link between The IoT and AI?
  • Why are there so many different Programming Languages?

 

Business Studies

Business research papers are essential for aspiring company executives and entrepreneurs obtaining a business degree. They can assist in better understanding fundamental economic principles, numerous markets, operational logistics, global events, financial management, and their effects on the worldwide economy. In case you are having problems handling your finances and you are going bankrupt, here you can  The Pope Firm in Tennessee for legal help.

  • Diverse countries have different business cultures.
  • The benefits and drawbacks of Outsourcing in Business
  • What exactly is Consumerism Culture?
  • How Small are Businesses important as a foundation for economics?

 

English Literature

When it comes to English Literature, the topics you can explore in the novels are virtually endless. Starting wide and making it more particular and engaging for your readers is the easiest way to develop a study topic for your next English literature essay.

  • How is literature used as a propaganda tool?
  • Mythology as a form of literature
  • Shakespeare’s writings
  • In literature, irony and sarcasm are common.

 

Conclusion

The most obvious choice is to focus on a certain literary style. Classifying literature works, looking for common characteristics that signal that the piece belongs to a specific class, and identifying these characteristics can be challenging, especially when some contested results may or may not belong to this style. However, if you are passionate about the subject of your research, it may be gratifying because you may be surprised to find a plethora of books written in your preferred style.

Best Ways to Improve Journal Submission for Publication

The process of preparing a manuscript effectively enough to get it approved by a journal can be overwhelming, given the ever-increasing quantity of papers submitted for publication. Publishers don’t want to confront a gradual reduction in the number of submissions to their publication, but it happens all too regularly. The source of the collapse may not be obvious at first glance, but a close review of the journal may show several reasonable causes and possible solutions.

Here are the five ways to Improve Journal Submission for Publication:

Don’t put off writing until the last possible moment

Rejection and disappointment are less likely with a proactive approach and mindset. A logical flow of activities should dominate every research activity followed when drafting a manuscript. Re-reading your text at different times and possibly in other locations is one of these actions. Re-reading is critical in the research sector because it aids in identifying the most common faults in the paper that could otherwise go unnoticed.

Follow the journal’s guidelines for the author

Journals may set word limits for specific sections of the article, such as the Abstract (or Summary) and the Introduction, in addition to page limits and total word counts. The word restrictions must be rigorously adhered to by the authors. These portions should be written with caution. The manuscript’s Conclusion section is also crucial since it states the study’s preliminary results and how the study contributes to the respective field of research. Researchers frequently skim through studies, focusing primarily on the Abstract and Conclusions sections. As a result, it’s vital to concentrate on writing. Following the journal’s recommended sequence also aids in the development of coherence, allowing readers to comprehend the study better. Publishing the figures and tables in the journal’s preferred format is critical. It’s worth noting that the structure and style of each journal differ.

Learn Academic Writing Style

A formal style is used in modern academic writing. Concentrate on three important areas to improve your academic writing skills:

  • Write objectively and clearly
  • Use Accurate English
  • Use Technical Words

Get feedback from Peers

Once all of the manuscript’s elements have been put together, the authors should proofread the data and figures are precise and full.  . Proofreading is a must, and sharing your publications with peer groups and soliciting their criticism is quite beneficial.  The scientific study requires data collecting, and scientific research articles typically include data in tables, figures, graphs, or other statistics.

Use AI Tools for Proofreading

Machine learning algorithms are used in AI writing software to guide users through various stages of the writing process. Localization, grammar, research, and tone checks are all included in these products. Natural language processing (NLP) is used in these technologies to analyze text and provide recommendations or relevant information. AI can help authors write faster and more confidently, making time-consuming material creation more doable. Examples of Proofreading Softwares are Grammarly, ProWriting Aid, Hemingway App.

Conclusion

Before submitting work, authors should carefully read the journal’s rules. The quality and clarity of the writing and how the results are presented influence the possibility of the paper being accepted for publication.

Response to Reviewer Comments

  • Handling reviewer’s comment?

Reviewer’s comments should be taken positively and provide a scope for improvement.

  • Type of revision

Revisions can be minor or major. Whatever may be the case, it needs to be addressed. Sometimes reviewers write revisions that may span many pages and still are termed as minor. Whether minor or major, comments or revisions are often very error-free and informative. The comments are very clear with no possibility of doubts.

  • Arranging the comments

Comments are sometimes are not in form of a list and are retained with the text. In such a case, the comments should be shorted down and incorporated in a tabular format. The tables should have details of comments and also the response that is been given. All minor comments such as spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, style, and font should be addressed first. By dealing with minor ones first you will realize that maximum comments are being shorted out as we make errors while we write.

Comments should be answered in a well-mannered way; the writing style should be polite and not rough.

The comments should be addressed completely. Never ignore any comment.

Answer the comments with evidence. You must provide supporting evidence for the facts you mention.

Be optimistic that your efforts will be recognized and result in a successful publication.

How to fix 5 Desk Rejection

Rejection from a journal is no one’s cup of tea but then it’s a reality that a large number of the article gets rejected across different journals.  Also, Journals mention the acceptance rate or the changes of the article getting rejected on their web page.

High impact or top journals routinely reject the majority of the articles. Few changes can improve the chances of successful publication.

  • Non-accordance with the journal’s aim & scope

Very often while selecting a journal we feel that the aim and scope match our field of work; however, it’s not the case.  We need to read the former a couple of times along with the recently published articles to be doubly sure regarding the scope of journals.

  • Lack of proper language and presentation style

Language is an important medium for sharing scientific know-how. Grammatical and scientifically correct language and abiding by the journal formatting guild lines are mandated for avoiding desktop rejection.

  • Plagiarism and simultaneous submission to more than one journal

Copying someone’s work as our own data is a violation of professional ethics. Always give due acknowledgment to someone else’s data while writing. Never submit your work to multiple journals at a time. The author should wait till the editorial process of one journal is over or they have got a clear cut no from the journal.

  • Ambiguity in methodology

The process of the study or the research protocol is mentioned in the methodology. It should be clear and systematic. Any flaw in the methodology section represents non-clarity on how the study was conducted.

  • Abide by journal’s formatting guidelines

Stick to the journal’s requirement for word count, font, line spacing, and margin. Also, be careful with the number of figures and tables allowed and their format for submission. The placement of the figure and table is also crucial that is, whether it should be at the end of the manuscript or within the text itself. Reference formatting both in text and in the list at the end of the manuscript needs lots of precession.

Responding to Peer Review as an Early Career Scholar

Experience always counts irrespective of the field we belong to. However, experience comes with learning every new scholar at some point has to start handling the review process to proceed in his scientific endeavor.

  • Reading the reviews patiently and respond

The author is a master in his narrow topic. However, the reviewer has the broader experience and expertise therefore you should read in-depth reviews. If there are multiple reviewers then the comments of each reviewer should be balanced out. Also, the author should have a rational approach to understand whether the article is up to the mark to get published.

Emotionally you may not like the comments but nevertheless, you should not underestimate and try to understand the perspective of the reviewer.

Sometimes you’re and reviewer’s opinion may not match the article but don’t get upset, it’s a part of the publication journey. 

  • Celebrate the comments

Comments by reviewers are stepping stones towards successful publication. Sometimes we get a mail asking us to address the reviews and submit them back. This is an achievement as you have not been disqualified or have not faced desktop rejection. If you are getting comments means there is a scope that the article can be a part of the said journal. 

  • Compare the article and comments and then respond

The comments of reviewers can be minor ones that can be easily accommodated. Fix them up and write in the letter to the editor. However, there are some comments that you agree with the reviewer but shall take substantive time to execute. Please mention the changes in the manuscript (rewriting or additional content was added) that have been made. Minor stuff which you don’t agree with should also be part of the letter to the editor. Author those who disagree with the majority of reviewers’ comments should make a clear and authentic argument.

 Write back to the reviewer after you have revised the paper and addressed all the comments. Write clearly the changes you have made to address the reviews also highlight the positive comment of the author.

  • Resubmission

The ball is now in the court of the editor as they can compare the reviewed article with the original article relative to your response letter. The editor can also give the article to a new editor to check his opinion. We cannot control the review process except that we can give our best to address the reviews in a scientific, knowledgeable, and professional manner.

The 4-Step chaperone to publish your research articles

Performing a scientific work not only needs intellectual ability but demands time investment and dedication. After scarifying festive, family time, and a good night’s sleep, the hard-earned work is worth to be published.

  • Be aware of social spam 

One of the examples of misutilisation of technology is the speed of illegitimate and fake journal websites. They lure authors with fake promises of fast and hassle-free publication. We should be aware of fake emails and promotional emails of these fake websites. Rather should search individually by opting for authentic websites such as PubMed, SCOPUS, DOJA, or can even visit the particular journal website if You know the ISSN Number or website details.

Any basic and important query pertaining to APC, word count, review time, and type of article are mentioned with clarity within the reputed journals.

  • Search for high compatibility journals 

Aiming at the best-fit journals means having the utmost clarity not only regarding the objective of the research question but also on the AIM and SCOPE of the selected journal. Your work should sync with the domain of expertise of the journal. At the same time, you should maintain a realistic approach regarding the impact factor and quality of work. The best-fit journal is one that not only is par with your research interest but has less review time, is economical, guidelines are easy to comprehend, the submission process is straightforward and hassle-free, and lastly can positively assess and accommodate your generated work.

  • Clarity on the submission process 

You should have a list of the documents needed while the submission process such as cover letter, title page, highlights, supplementary data, patient consent, Copywrite form, etc. Also the format of submission such as its vial online or email ID based should be accessed before handed. An inventory of the needed document while summiting and password combination should be maintained.

Journals vary in reference formatting, along with a representation of figures and tables within text or as separate images. Journals can ask for American / British English containing manuscripts with a specific font, size, and margin of the doc or Latex file or can have specific template for formatting.

  • Appealing cover letter and Manuscript TITLE 

The cover letter should be written in a polite manner highlighting the gist of the paper. It should also clearly state regarding the authentication of the submitted work, non-submission in multiple journals, authors contribution along with mailing address of the corresponding author.

Similarly, the Title gives the 1st glimpse of the article therefore should be informative but not clumsy, compact, eye-catchy, and original in content.