Research- Exam 3- Study Guide

tables, figures and text all have a role to play and

deciding where each one goes is not easy but readers appreciate the effor

Once a manuscript is submitted, the journal's editorial staff

does a preliminary review and decides whether to send the manuscript to external peer reviewers.

Data presented in tables should not be

duplicated in graphs, and vice versa.

Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are key in the practice of

evidence-based medicine, and a review of existing studies is often quicker and cheaper than embarking on a new study.

what are the best means of presenting scientific data?

figures

A commentary may also draw attention to current advances and speculate on

future directions of a certain topic, and may include original data as well as state a personal opinion.

the introduction will introduce the problem and provide

general information

Tables, photographs and figures are an integral part of a

well-written scientific paper, not an adjunct.

what is common or general knowledge?

what a typical person in the discipline would know- this does not need to be cited

It has been suggested that writer's block is more than just a mentality. Under stress, a human brain will

"shift control from the cerebral cortex to the limbic system". The limbic system is associated with the instinctual processes, such as "fight or flight" response; and behavior that is based on "deeply engrained training". The limited input from the cerebral cortex hinders a person's creative processes, which are replaced by the behaviors associated with the limbic system. The person is often unaware of the change, which may lead them to believe they are creatively "blocked".

Figures are often the best means of

presenting scientific data

reason for rejection of a manuscript: it is incomplete

.• The article contains observations but is not a full study. • It discusses findings in relation to some of the work in the field but ignores other important work.

what are the general steps of hypothesis testing?

1- State the hypothesis 2- Set up criteria for the decision 3- Compute a test statistic 4- Make a decision

examples of common knowledge in the medical field:

1. Normal vital signs in human adults:TemperatureRectal (most accurate) / Aural (the ear) is 99.6 F / 37.7 C, Oral is 98.6 F / 37 CBlood pressure: systolic (100-120 mmHg), diastolic below (80 mm Hg)Pulse: normal resting pulse can range between 60-100 beats per minute. This number is decreased in athletes.2. The immune system is very complex and can fight many diseases on its own. 3. Persistent headache is something that should encourage you to see your doctor ASAP.4. Cleanliness and good general hygiene reduces your chances of getting sick. Hand washing is essential. 5. Medicine cannot cure everything, in fact, medicine helps relieve the signs and symptoms of a disease more often.6. Patient-doctor relations are very important. If you don't feel comfortable with your doctor, try seeing someone else. Your doctor will most likely be not offended by this.7. Psychological health is as important as physical health, and many of the diseases that we still don't truly understand may be caused by stress.8. Sport is essential for the body and the mind. I cannot stress this enough! 9. Natural and healthy diet is vital for overall well being.

At any stage of the review process, reviewers can recommend manuscript rejection. They then choose from one of the following reasons:

1. The manuscript contains fundamental errors that cannot be rectified through author revisions 2. There are serious concerns about ethical issues in the manuscript that cannot be rectified through author revisions 3. The authors are unwilling or unable to address my concerns sufficiently to make this manuscript suitable for publication

In the Author's information, you may be asked by some journals to suggest

3-5 individuals known in your field of expertise

What is a bibliography?

A Bibliography is a list of the books referred to in a scholarly work, usually printed as an appendix... or a list of the books of a specific author or publisher, or on a specific subject.

null vs alternative hypothesis

A null hypothesis is a hypothesis that says there is no statistical significance between the two variables. It is usually the hypothesis a researcher or experimenter will try to disprove or discredit. An alternative hypothesis is one that states there is a statistically significant relationship between two variables.

Manuscripts will not be seen by an Academic Editor or peer reviewers

until they pass this check.

The final decision on a manuscript is made by the

Academic Editor the time to receive a decision depends on how long it takes for the editor to assess the reviews.

After a manuscript passes the quality control check, it is assigned to an

Academic Editor according to relevant expertise. The Academic Editor is asked to evaluate the manuscript based on the standards set by the journal.

when you are done, make sure you are sending in your best work

All of the above work may seem time-consuming, but to very often you only get one shot at an editor's attention. For you best shot at publishing success, make your manuscript the best it can be.

randomized controlled trial

An experimental study in which researchers randomly assign individuals to either an experimental or a control group and expose the experimental group to the manipulated variable of interest. experimental studies are less susceptible to confounding (surprise of confusion) because the investigator determines who is exposed and who is unexposed. in particular, if exposure is allocated randomly and the number of groups or individuals randomized is large then even unrecognized confounding effects become statistically unlikely.

what is a double barrel question?

Avoiding multiple question-questions ("double barrel" questions that actually address multiple issues and require more than one answer) A double-barreled question (sometimes, double-direct question) is an informal fallacy. It is committed when someone asks a question that touches upon more than one issue, yet allows only for one answer.

Reason for manuscript rejection: failing technical screening

Before they even go to the editor-in-chief, articles are checked for technical elements. The main reasons they are rejected are: • The article contains elements that are suspected to be plagiarized, or it is currently under review at another journal. • The manuscript is not complete; it may be lacking key elements such as the title, authors, affiliations, keywords, main text, references and all tables and figures). • The English is not sufficient for the peer review process, • The figures are not complete or are not clear enough to read. • The article does not conform to the Guide for Authors for the journal it is submitted to. • References are incomplete or very old.

The questionnaire may include questions about factors which might influence the relationship between key exposure and outcomes. These are called Potential Confounders.

Example: Adults who smoke tobacco products may be more likely to consume large volumes of alcohol. In a study between the level of tobacco smoking and liver disease, alcohol drinking may be a potential confounder.

is it important to spell check and proofread the manuscript for grammatical errors:

First, use your word processing program's spelling and grammar check feature to ensure there are no glaring errors. Then proofread carefully. Your familiarity with the material somewhat hinders you in this capacity (hence, the "fresh eye" heed, above).

What are some barriers faced by researchers?

Firstly, writers must overcome the barrier to getting started. Secondly, writers must find ways to prolong their periods of High Productivity which usually occurs at the start of the writing process. Lastly, most writers become mentally fatigued during the writing process and at some point lose the desire to finish....at this point they must find the motivation to persevere and complete the writing so that the report can be finalized and submitted for publication.

general strategies for successful writing in the medical/health field:

Focus on the story, Be Organized, Make steady progress, Learn from others, Be persistent

In an RCT or experiment, the researcher randomly assigns study subjects to conditions (such as a treatment or a virus) and records the outcome

For example, a researcher interested in the relationship between smoking and lung cancer could randomly assign a group of people who are representative of the general population (selected through random sampling, for example) to smoke a certain number of cigarettes over a certain period of time and assign a second, control group not to smoke.

reason for rejection of a manuscript: does not fall within aims and scopes

For example: the journal Antibiotic Development, the material studied may contain antibiotics, but is not about antibiotic. • The study uses a antibiotics but the focus is on something different.

formatting your manuscript for the target journal is very important:

Formatting properly for your particular publisher is critical for the production stage of the manuscript and can make the difference between a smooth publishing process and or one with delays or problems.

What is Google Scholar?

Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. Released in beta in November 2004, the Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online academic journals and books, conference papers, theses and dissertations, preprints, abstracts, technical reports, and other scholarly literature, including court opinions and patents.

other good things about google scholar:

Google Scholar is the ability to get a copy of the article....for most citations, from a variety of sources. Some are just abstracting sources and some full article sources. At the least you can read the abstract to see if the article is worth exploring further. A second item I appreciate is the placing of the citation for that article into the different major style examples.

Sit on your work- not literally

However, putting some time and space between you and you manuscript. Letting it "sit" without re-reading or editing for at least a couple of days

The Systematic Review Process Requires:

Identification of an appropriate narrow study Selection of a well-defined and valid search strategy Screening of all potentially relevant articles to determine whether they meet the predefined eligibility criteria Extraction of relevant information from all eligible articles Summarization of the findings of these articles.

It is critical for you as the author not to get emotional about the reviewer comments

It is not personal. Most reviewers have your best interest in mind and want you and the scientific community to benefit from your research.

The most important decisions made by the researcher in a systematic review are the

Key Words and Inclusion Criteria used.

get feedback from your manuscript

Make sure your manuscript "reads" as well as it can. The more eyes the better...well most of the time

Editorial Process: Initial checks

New submissions go through an in-house quality control check to ensure adherence to our policies and requirements, including: • ethical requirements for human and animal experimentation • financial disclosures • competing interests • data deposition

what is the purpose of editorial and peer review assignments?

Peer review in all its forms plays an important role in ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. It is hoped they will provide helpful guidance to researchers, be a reference for journals and editors in guiding their reviewers, and act as an educational resource for institutions in training their students and researchers

The introduction should also:

Provide essential background information State the objectives/hypothesis Identify the study design including experimental studies and randomization method(s) Describe the source population including section methods and eligibility criteria, recruiting methods, the setting (location) and dates of the study. The last sentence or two should state your specific aim(s) and should act as a transition to the next sections of the research report

Validity and reliability are not always aligned

Reliability is needed, but not sufficient enough to establish validity.

Just because a reviewer recommends a change, it does not mean you have to accept that change.

Reply to the specific reviewer comment and then justify your answer to the editor. however: Most reviewer comments, if followed, will result in a much stronger paper.

what are two rules of the introduction?

Rule #1: Do not begin your introduction until you have made a detailed outline of what you want to cover in your outline. Rule #2: Do not begin your introduction until you have made a detailed outline of what you want to cover in your outline.

What should the methods include?

Statistical methods used Define key exposures and key outcomes Describe how the required size was estimated Discuss ethical considerations such as IRB approval, whether inducement was offered, how consent was documented Give citations for methods previously used that are part of your methods

Tables and figures are an integral part of a well-written scientific paper , not an adjunct.

The bulk of the detailed information in a paper is typically presented in its tables.

Should a reviewer withdraw from the review process, they retain their anonymity.

The handling editor is alerted whenever a reviewer withdraws or recommends rejection.

Reviewers do not receive payment for their services.

They use their own personal or professional time to do the review. Some article reviews may take all day or even two days to do correctly.

Internal validity:

This asks whether the questions we pose can really explain the outcome we want to research.

Content validity:

This is related to our ability to create questions that reflect the issue we are researching and make sure that key related subjects are not excluded.

We can get high reliability and low validity.

This would happen when the wrong questions are asked over and over again, consistently yielding bad information.

reasons part 2:

To connect with professors and researchers Publishing in the journal will help connect students to those faculty members in a way that isn't often achieved in the typical classroom setting. To display leadership and initiative Working as part of the editorial team or being involved in the publication process is hard work. Faculty, employers, and graduate school admissions committee members will understand this and recognize pursuing this endeavor as an example of leadership and drive.

Having an article published as medical student has a wide variety of benefits and can present new opportunities to students involved in the publication process. Here are a few of the reasons to consider publishing as an undergraduate:

To help improve writing and research skills The process of researching, writing, editing, and publishing an article for the first time will provide valuable feedback on what steps may require improvement and where strengths may be. To experience the scholarly publication process Publication is a requirement in many disciplines. Going through the process will make the experience familiar when it may be required later. It will also provide context and understanding of the field.

reasons part 3:

To inform a future career path The process of publishing a paper may help inform a future career path and illuminate opportunities that may otherwise have not been considered. Working with faculty and other student researchers will allow students to enter a scholarly community that may help them decide on a future career path.

to get started, you can browse the top 100 publications in several languages, ordered by their five-year h-index and h-median metrics.

To see which articles in a publication were cited the most and who cited them, click on its h-index number to view the articles as well as the citations underlying the metrics.

Authors must address every comment by every author individually it is the author's responsibility to:

Understand and appreciate different perspectives. Balancing conflicting sets of advice about what would strengthen the paper. Rewriting the portions of the paper that were confusing to the reviewer(s). Recover from negative comments and to demonstrate resiliency by moving forward.

what is ranked question?

When you are numbering something from 1 to 4 You must include what numbers 1-4 mean •Provide clear instructions about the acceptable types of answers for each question....Add a response for "Not applicable" when relevant. It is often helpful to start with a list of main categories of questions and then add specifics to each question

when will you see this decision?

While the Academic Editor is entering the decision, authors may see on-line the status "Decision in Process." When the decision is final, authors will receive the notification by email and see the decision term in the submission system

what is writers block?

Writer's block is a condition, primarily associated with writing, in which an author loses the ability to produce new work, or experiences a creative slowdown. The condition ranges in difficulty from coming up with original ideas to being unable to produce a work for years.

polar-survey question

Yes-no question. ... In linguistics, a yes-no question, formally known as a polar question, is a question whose expected answer is either "yes" or "no". Formally, they present an exclusive disjunction, a pair of alternatives of which only one is acceptable.

when you are finished reviewing

You then send an email to the editor The overall summary should discuss what you perceive to be the biggest problems with your paper. For example, any points that more than one of the reviewers brought up are probably important. Any points that required a major change in the paper are probably important. Minor points can just be listed out in a bulleted form. make sure you: Respond to every comment and give a reason

you have to figure out if

a figure or table is more apropriate

The most important factors in selecting a target journal depend on your publishing goals; it may be most important to select a journal with

a high impact factor, fast publishing time or specific target audience

A bibliography is NOT a

a literature cited section and a bibliography has a different function than does a Literature Cited section.

what is specific knowledge?

a statistic or the results of a particular field or lab study- this must be cited

Validity is concerned with the

accuracy of our measurement, and it is often discussed in the context of sample representativeness. However, validity is also affected by survey design since it also depends on asking questions that measure what we are supposed to be measuring.

The Goal is to craft a search strategy that identifies

all the articles ever published on the narrow well-defined area covered by the review.

In medical research, a cross-sectional study (also known as a cross-sectional analysis, transversal study, prevalence study) is a type of observational study that

analyzes data collected from a population, or a representative subset, at a specific point in time—that is, cross-sectional data.

When anonymity is important,

avoid asking questions that could allow the participant's identity to be determined based on his/her responses. For many types of studies, there is no need to collect names, contact information, or other identifiable information. From the IRB perspective, this makes approval much easier (Exempt vs Full IRB review).

In order for a survey to be of value and of use, it must be

be both reliable and valid.

Once a survey instrument is drafted the wording of each question (and associated response) should be

be carefully checked and should be in a logically sequential order.

each figure should serve a purpose or

be omitted

Scam journals may not even send the article out for review but

but accept it as long as they are paid to print the submitted article

Manuscripts should be formatted and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal as soon as

co-authors agree that the project is complete and all of the data has been analyzed.

Poorly rendered figures or figures that merely repeat information given in the text, however, can

confuse the reader or clutter the manuscript; thus, each figure should serve its purpose well or be omitted.

each journal has its own requirements for the

corresponding author

a cross-sectional study is not

costly to perform, does not require a lot of time and can capture a specific point in time

Commentary articles seek to provide a

critical or alternative viewpoint on a key issue or provide an insight into an important development that is of interest to a large number of scientists. These narrowly focused articles are usually commissioned by the journal.

most journals have an author guidelines section on their website or printed in one of their hard copy issues and it is

critical that authors become familiar with this section prior to organizing their research for writing. Making an error in formatting

what is the difference between common knowledge and general knowledge?

general knowledge is "culturally valued knowledge communicated by a range of non-specialist media", and is considered an aspect of ability related to intelligence. Therefore, there are substantial individual differences in general knowledge as opposed to common knowledge

If an article is rejected without review, the authors should be prepared to

identify a different target journal that might be a better fit; this should be done prior to the initial submission (Back-up plan).

The responsibility of the reviewer is to

identify weaknesses in the manuscript and asking authors to carefully think about the areas of the paper to fix.

The bulk of the detailed information in a paper is typically presented

in its tables.

The author of a commentary probably has

in-depth knowledge of the topic and is eager to present a new and/or unique viewpoint on existing problems, fundamental concepts, or prevalent notions, or wants to discuss the implications of a newly implemented innovation

Reviewers can recommend rejection for reasons including

including manuscripts being out of scope, pseudoscientific or faith-based content and the singling out of persons or organizations for attack.

the discussion is the place for

interpreting the results

what is common knowledge?

is known by everyone or nearly everyone, usually with reference to the community (Scientific or medical) in which the term is used.

what is the downside of google scholar?

is that most of the citations are 6-10 years old so consider Google Scholar as a starting point to gain an overview of a topic...just not a current overview.

what is the plus side of google scholar?

is that you can immediately get scholarly articles on just about any scientific and medical topic....a good starting place.

Cross-sectional studies involve data collected at a defined time and are often used to assess the

prevalence of acute or chronic conditions, or to answer questions about the causes of disease or the results of intervention.

Who is the corresponding author?

is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal's administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee, conflict of interest and such.

Ethical issues can include a

lack of sufficient oversight and approval from relevant ethics committees and deceptive practices during research on the part of authors.

A longitudinal study is different from a cross-sectional study, but

like a cross-sectional study, it is observational.

While a commentary may be critical of an article published in the journal, it is important to

maintain a respectful tone that is critical of ideas or conclusions but not of authors.

What is falsification?

manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record such that it can support the original hypothesis set for the research study

what are presented in figures?

many of the descriptions and basic concepts, key natural trends, key discoveries, and some of the conclusions

Editors may choose to perform the evaluation on the basis of their own expertise, or

may assign external reviewers which is the most common case.

journals with a broad audience and high impact factor are not

necessarily the right target journal for every study. Your research may reach more of your target audience if it is published in a smaller journal with a more specific topic focus or a lower impact journal that is widely read in your field.

What is anonymity?

no one, not even the researcher, knows the identity of the subjects Anonymity protects the participants and allows them to provide honest answers to sensitive questions.

often, common knowledge does

not need to be cited

So, once again, researchers do not interfere with their subjects. However, in a longitudinal study, researchers conduct

observations of the same subjects over a period of time, sometimes lasting many years. For example, the longitudinal study of the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys prospectively follows a 1% sample of the British population that was initially identified at the 1971 census. Outcomes such as mortality and incidence of cancer have been related to employment status, housing, and other variables measured at successive censuses.

The p-value is the probability of finding the

observed or the more extreme results when the null hypothesis of the study is true

the overall goal of hypothesis testing is to determine the likelihood that the

population parameter such as the mean is likely to be true it determines whether there is enough evidence in a sample that it can be applied to an entire population

Systematic reviews use a

predetermined and comprehensive searching and screening method to identify relevant articles....this method is designed to minimize the bias that may occur when researchers handpick relevant articles.

What do tables do?

present numbers for comparison with other numbers or summarize or define concepts, terms, or other details of a study.

The Materials and Methods section is a vital component of any formal lab report. This section of the report gives a detailed account of the

procedure that was followed in completing the experiment(s) discussed in the report. Such an account is very important, not only so that the reader has a clear understanding of the experiment, but a well written Materials and Methods section also serves as a set of instructions for anyone desiring to replicate the study in the future

The advantages of cross-sectional study is to

prove and/or disprove assumptions.

The goal of publishing commentaries is to advance the research field by

providing a forum for varying perspectives on a certain topic under consideration in the journal.

Considering the importance of "reproducible results" in science, it is

quite obvious why this second application is so vital.

The peer-review process is an opportunity to

receive expert constructive feedback about a draft report submitted for publication.

Scholar Metrics summarize

recent citations to many publications, to help authors as they consider where to publish their new research.

what do graphs reveal?

reveal trends or delineate selected features. Sometimes the two purposes overlap, but they rarely substitute for one another.

The alternative hypothesis, denoted by H1 or Ha, is the hypothesis that

sample observations are influenced by some non-random cause.

The null hypothesis, denoted by H0, is usually the hypothesis that

sample observations result purely from chance.

scientific studies that use hypotheses to define their study may lead to

scientific misconduct

even after considering your specific field of research you may still have

several journals to choose from when you have a short list of 3-5 good candidate journals, think about your publishing goals to help narrow the list. Consider factors shown above to select the best target journal.

it is imperative that the authors consult the target journal on the requirements

so they know how many tables and figures to include in keeping with the journal requirements, you should determine if you want the table to be in WORD or EXCEL format or maybe another program may be required.

A good questionnaire is carefully crafted for a

specific purpose and usually works best if designed with a specific purpose.

The Introduction is a very important because it introduces

specific vocabulary, concepts, important literature and important past critical and pivotal events necessary for the readership to understand your research project.

The methods and results will provide

specific, detailed information about this research project.

Readers typically study tables and figures before they read the text . Therefore, each table and figure should

stand alone, complete and informative in itself. Each table, Graph or Figure needs to tell a story and needs to be designed so that each can stand alone and confer information to the reader independently of the rest of the manuscript.

Questionnaire designers should consult with a

statistician to make sure the questions are designed so that the maximum amount of information can be gathered from them.

In the process of publishing your research project, one of the most important

steps is receiving critical feedback from reviewers once the journal you submitted your paper to, receives it, the editor will send it to known experts in the subject area of your paper.

A questionnaire or survey study instrument is a tool for

systematically gathering information from study participants. A good questionnaire is carefully crafted for a specific purpose and usually works best if designed with a specific purpose.

Reliability, on the other hand, is concerned with the consistency of our measurement

that's the degree to which the questions used in a survey elicit the same type of information each time they are used under the same conditions..

Reliability is also related to internal consistency, which refers to

the degree different questions or statements measure the same characteristic.

you should discuss things like

the major findings, the results, using outside published sources to support your statements. You need to support your opinions/interpretations of the data with other published reports.

Reliability refers to the

the repeatability of findings. Reliability also applies to individual measures. When people take a vocabulary test two times, their scores on the two occasions should be very similar.

Many questions can be asked in more than one valid way

the researcher must decide the question type and the precision of response needed.

Publication of medical and health care related projects is a priority for many health researchers especially if

the work they are doing has not ben previously published. If it has not been published then it is not contributing to advancing knowledge in their discipline. From the broad perspective...if research has not been published then it is as if the work was never done.

You can also explore publications in research areas of your interest. To browse publications in a broad area of research,

then select one of the options. For example: Databases & Information Systems or Development Economics. Browsing by research area is, as yet, available only for English publications. You can, of course, search for specific publications in all languages by words in their titles. Scholar Metrics are currently based on our index as it was in June 2017.

One of the main functions of the introduction is to educate your readership so that

they can understand your research project and what you want to tell the scientific/medical community about your work.

Both tables and figures are used to support conclusions or illustrate concepts, but

they have essential differences in purpose.

if the results show large variation, they may

they may be valid, but not reliable. So, don't forget to think about reliability and validity when writing a survey: always strive for reliable and valid results.

Some journals list this section as Methods while others us Material and Methods, regardless

this section talks about the materials, methods and techniques used in the study.

Most reputable journals aim to check manuscripts as efficiently as possible, but

timing may vary depending on whether they need to return the submission to the author for follow-up queries or additional information.

Google Scholar Metrics provide an easy way for authors

to quickly gauge the visibility and influence of recent articles in scholarly publications.

Most surveys often have what is called face validity

which is a matter of appearances. The questions seem like a reasonable way to obtain the information we are looking for, but are they really? There are other types of validity survey writers should strive for:

In the above case, the authors should update the manuscript to match the

writing style and formatting requirements of the new target journal, and submit to the new journal as soon as possible.

what do you do to synthesize information?

you must synthesize the information that you have read and then write about it in your own words and cite the source(s) of that information

When authors are invited to revise and resubmit (R&R) their manuscript to the same journal, they need to prepare two documents:

• An edited version of the manuscript • A file providing a response to each and every reviewer comment

What are specific strategies for successful writing in the medical or health field:

• At one end of the spectrum these can be organized by the senior scientists, with students and junior members encouraged or required to participate. • At the other end, groups of students or early-career researchers can join together to set up activities they think will benefit their own development, and request input from the senior staff as appropriate .• Other activities can enhance your ability to write well and write effectively, many are not directly related to writing. For example:• Join a journal club - people getting together and discussing a journal article • Join a writing club - people get together and write projects • Get feedback from others or groups on something you have written • Practice reviewing articles that others have written

reason for rejection of a manuscript: it is simply a small extension of a different paper, often from the same authors

• Findings are incremental and do not advance the field. • The work is clearly part of a larger study, chopped up to make as many articles as possible.

criteria your manuscripts should possess when selecting a primary journal

• Format outline structure (Intro, M&M, Results, Discussion...) • Appropriate voice and writing style • Amount of technical detail to include • Reference and citation style• Aim and scope of the journal • The journal's audience (Scientists? Clinicians?) • The journal's impact factor and other metrics • Cost of publication • Online access options

Figures encompass at least four substantially different kinds of illustrations in black and white, shades of gray, color, or some combination:

• Graphs (line, bar, pie, etc.). • Line drawings or maps. • Photographs and micrographs. • Journal of events. Animated illustrations, which are shown in stop-motion frames in printed journals and sometimes also in full animation in the electronic

What is a confounding variable?

• In statistics, a confounder (also confounding variable or confounding factor) is a variable that influences both the dependent variable and independent variable causing a spurious association. •Confounding is a causal concept, and as such, cannot be described in terms of correlations or associations.

reason for rejection of a manuscript: it is boring

• It is not archival, is incremental or of marginal interest to the field (see point 6). • The question behind the work is not of interest in the field. • The work is not of interest to the readers of the specific journals.

the discussion section of a manuscript should include:

• Main findings of the study • Discuss the main results with reference to previous research • Policy and practice implications of the results • Strengths and limitations of the study

other aspects of manuscripts:

• Procrastination may render your work useless because the health science related information becomes obsolete and no longer publishable .• Submission does not mean that the manuscript is perfect, it just means it is ready to receive comments by the reviewers. • Most manuscripts must be revised based on the comments and recommendations of the reviewers. • Manuscript revision is less complicated if the project is still fresh in your mind so submit your manuscript as soon as you can, following the completion of your project.

lastly you can enhance your resume or CV:

• Supports that author is part of the scholarly community. • Reinforces that the author(s) are capable of following a project through to its completion. • Shows that the authors can handle constructive criticism. • The research project becomes part of the author's permanent record. • Successfully publishing can improve job opportunities. • The published paper or manuscript is a tangible representation of the hard work of collecting and analyzing data, writing and publishing. • Provide the momentum to examining new questions and to seek funding to support this new projects.

reason for rejection of a manuscript: the conclusions cannot be justified on the basis of the rest of the paper

• The arguments are illogical, unstructured or invalid. • The data does not support the conclusions. • The conclusions ignore large portions of the literature.

reason for rejection of a manuscript: it is incomprehensible

• The language, structure, or figures are so poor that the merit can't be assessed. Have a native English speaker read the paper. Even if you ARE a native English speaker.

reason or rejection of a manuscript: the procedures and/or analysis of the data is seen to be defective

• The study lacked clear control groups or other comparison metrics. • The study did not conform to recognized procedures or methodology that can be repeated. • The analysis is not statistically valid or does not follow the norms of the field.

for the methods:

•Always follow the specific journal's format for this section. •When writing your Methods section, REMEMBER that you are writing so that others can follow the exact methods and techniques you used so that they can replicate your study exactly even to the manufacturer and lot number of a solvent used, therefore... The devil is in the detail.

what are some things that occur in the process of transition from research to writing the final report:

•By the time you are ready to write a final report about your project, the majority of the work is done and the data analyzed. Transitioning from the research to the writing mode is often intimidating and difficult to begin and often ....put off to be done at a later time. Many times it is never completed. •Some authors can sit down and crank out the manuscript in a large single burst. •Most authors experience cycles of high motivation followed by periods of low motivation or even periods where they have no interest in writing up their research (this is more common than not).