Hassan R. Mir, MD, MBAJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma; Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery; Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
“The more work you can put in on the front end when writing the protocol and collecting data, the easier it will be to work through the editorial process and get your work published.”
Gregory D. Schroeder, MDClinical Spine Surgery; Spine; Journal of Orthopedic Trauma; The Spine Journal; The Global Spine Journal; JNS Spine; Neurosurgery
“Research can become frustrating, but the most important thing is to keep working to advance your field. Some of the studies that I have done that have received the most attention are projects that took multiple years to finish.”
Benjamin W.Y. Hornsby, PhDEar and Hearing; Journal of the Acoustical Society of America; Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research; American Journal of Audiology; International Journal of Audiology; Journal of the American Academy of Audiology; Seminars in Hearing; Trends in Amplification; Journal of Educational Audiology
“Be receptive and responsive to criticism and be persistent. It may be no surprise to you, but not every reviewer is going to love your paper. Some revisions are likely. When you get your reviews back, if some comments are not as positive as you’d like, give yourself some time before you start to revise and respond to make sure you can look at the comments in an objective fashion. If the editor gives you the opportunity to revise and resubmit, provide a cover letter and point by point response, including the reviewers original comments followed by your clear and concise response, to each comment. You don’t have to agree with every reviewer comment, or make every suggested change—in fact at some point you’ll probably have reviewers suggesting opposite courses of action. If you disagree with a reviewer’s suggested change, provide a clear rationale for your point-of-view. However, pick your ‘battles’ (those points you want to argue) carefully, remember- most reviewers are volunteering their time to help you! Where appropriate in your response, provide details regarding your specific changes and direct the reviewer to where they can find those changes in your revised paper. This is very helpful for a reviewer and you want to do what you can to make their job easier. This will help them—help you—make your paper better. Finally, nobody likes rejection, but if the editor suggests you look for another publication outlet… that is OK and will save you time in the long run. Unless the reviewers identified a fatal flaw in your study design—be persistent, modify the paper to address the concerns raised in the initial review and resubmit the stronger paper elsewhere. There are plenty of highly-cited papers that were rejected in their original form. Good Luck!”
