The factors considered by editors of plastic surgery journals in evaluating submitted manuscripts.
The publication of clinical- or laboratory-based research in peer-reviewed journals is seen as the final end point rewarding many months of detailed work. For both trainees and established consultants alike, having a submitted manuscript rejected is both frustrating and disheartening. All journals publish details regarding manuscript structure and preparation. However these "in-house" guidelines tell little about what editors are looking for in their journals, and indeed what can be done to ensure acceptance of any work that researchers submit. The authors surveyed the editors of 40 peer-reviewed plastic surgery and related subspeciality journals regarding factors that influence their decision to accept or reject a manuscript. The aim was to establish factors that influence editors' decisions regarding submitted papers, which then would enable aspects to be highlighted that authors could address to expedite publication and produce relevant guidelines to facilitate this process. The results demonstrate that editors value an original, rigorously designed manuscript with valid methodology and appropriate conclusions. Adherence to the philosophy and aims of the journal and the journal's target audience will further improve the likelihood of successful publication for the submitting authors.
Caulfield
R H
RH
St Andrew's Centre for Burns and Plastic Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 7ET, UK. rcaulfield@talk21.com
Maleki-Tabrizi
A
A
Pleat
J M
JM
Tyler
M P H
MP
D006801:Humans; D008374:Manuscripts, Medical as Topic; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D013518:Surgery, Plastic; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires