The purpose of the Discussion is to state your interpretations and opinions, explain the implications of your findings, and make suggestions for future research. Its main function is to answer the questions posed in the Introduction, explain how the results support the answers and how the answers fit in with existing knowledge on the topic. The Discussion is considered the heart of the paper and usually requires several writing attempts.
The organization of the Discussion is important. Make it short and sweet-clearly and fully stating, supporting, explaining, and defending your take home points. Care must be taken to provide a commentary and not a reiteration of the results. Side issues should not be included.
Organize from specific to the general: your findings to the literature, to theory, to practice. Use the same key terms and the same point of view as the introduction. Begin by re-stating your hypothesis-then summarize whether this was supported or not. Explain how your results relate to expectations and the literature.
Address all the results relating to the hypotheses/questions, whether or not the findings were statistically significant. Describe the patterns, principles, and relationships shown by each major finding and put them in perspective. Discuss and evaluate conflicting explanations of the results. Discuss any unexpected findings.
Identify potential limitations and weaknesses and comment on importance of these to your interpretation of the results. Summarize concisely the principal implications of the findings. Provide recommendations (no more than two) for further research. Explain how the results and conclusions of this study are important and how they influence our knowledge or understanding of the problem being examined.
Professionally acknowledge individuals and organizations that were important in making your study possible. Avoid being "gushy" or overly flip. Feel free to acknowledge the help of this project: The University of Maryland Online Dissemination and Implementation Institute funded by the University of Maryland and the John A. Hartford Foundation.
2012 NAHRS Selected List of Nursing Journals Beall’s List of Predatory Open-Access Publishers Hartford list of geriatric focused nursing journals
JAMDA JAGS JAPA Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Journal of Nursing Administration Journal of Professional Nursing Medical Care Medical Ethics Translational Behavioral Medicine Journals focused on cardiology; acute care; oncology; dermatology; orthopedics etc.
1. Clinical issues for all types of nurses 2. Research/scholarship for all nursing or health care topics 3. Specialty focus-clinical and/or research 4. Education 5. Management
Measure of citations Total number of citations received by a journal in a given year to articles published in the previous two years divided by total number of citable items in that two year period Many journals are not included in ISI database
Right audience Right level Right time-special issue or topic overdone? Right style-word limits, journal guidelines May want to pick 2-3 journals and rank
Stick to format type of manuscript that journal publishes Read the guidelines ◦ Ask the managing editor….particularly if something does not make sense
Look for ‘lengthy words’ & replace with simpler words/phases. Simplify sentences of more than 20 words Shorten paragraphs of more than 8 sentences Delete unnecessary punctuation Use consistent terms Minimize abbreviations Run spell/grammar check
Write in active voice where the subject comes before the verb. Example: “The nurse injected the patient”, rather than “The injection was given by the nurse”
Past tense for events of the past (e.g., previous research) Present tense when giving instruction Future tense for events yet to occur
Copyright Authorship Plagarism
The author(s) or author’s employer is usually copyright holder, unless and until you transfer the copyright to someone else in a signed agreement (e.g. publisher) Assigning your rights matters: An author who has transferred copyright w/o retaining these rights must ask permission The copyright holder controls the work Transferring copyright doesn’t have to be all or nothing
Types of copyright agreements, licenses vs transfer: Varies between journals—CHECK POLICY Enables owners of intellectual property to retain copyright in journal article, but publisher retains commercial publishing and journal compilation rights Allows articles to be published and made freely available for online access, enables owners of intellectual property to retain copyright Authors relinquish copyright Open Access Journals—may not require copyright transfer
Authorship=responsibility for published article Reflects significant contribution in 2 or more areas Conception/design Execution Data analysis & interpretation Manuscript preparation and revision PI=overall responsibility for all pubs from a project, but ALL authors review final ms & accept responsibility for the work
ALL 3 Must Be Present: Substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content Final approval of the version to be published
23 Acquisition of funding The collection of data Supervision of the research group Financial or technical assistance Site acquisition ◦ Acknowledgement of the above is appropriate
Standards vary by field/discipline (author order conventions) Open discussion—all authors—written agreement Weigh contributions. If equal across multiple papers may rotate authorship Each author provides written statement of contributions
As appropriate and consistent with guidelines for authorship: Include students as authors Students can/should include dissertation committee members
Discuss authorship/expectations at project beginning. Determine authorship & order at onset of paper development Discussion should include what to do if an author “drops out” Evaluate performance prior to submission Deceased authors should be listed with footnote If authorship dispute emerges after publication (e.g. name added or withdrawn), editor contacts corresponding author to establish veracity
It is UNETHICAL to submit the same or similar material in different journals The principle is distributive justice Most journals consider only work not published elsewhere For some journals authors must provide copies of all related materials/publications
“Is there anything…that would embarrass you if it were to emerge after publication and you had not declared it?” Lancet, 1998 That is, by not disclosing interests the validity of the results would be undermined as well as the integrity of the author(s). Evidence of “competing interests/loyalties”
Be prepared…if you are not familiar with the webpage or the journal and the electronic submission process it may take an hour or two. After submission be prepared to wait for a few months!
Consistent with journal mission, content “Not our Cup of Tea” Consistent with science and level of discourse “Not Even Close” Consistent with methodological sophistication “Fatally Flawed” Clearly state contribution (e.g. gap filled, contribution to science/practice) “So What?”
32 Consider yourself lucky if you are invited to revise and resubmit! ◦ Expect to make revisions Follow ALL reviewers’ suggestions Provide a cover letter with each of your responses
33 Receive feedback from the editor Summarize how reviewers’ comments were addressed Justify suggestions not followed Contact editor with questions
Copy the review and respond to each item directly in paragraph form Do not simply indicate in a one sentence letter that all reviewer comments have been addressed. Do not try and skip any comment You may disagree with comments – just provide a rational for why you disagree and what you are doing instead.
35 Carefully read the entire manuscript Answer author queries Meet the return deadline
Submit your full manuscript for review by October 31st (yes, Halloween!) and let us know if you want to get your manuscript into the Geriatric Nursing Supplement or where you plan to submit. Feedback will be provided in terms of reviewer comments on the paper and further information/recommendations on the submission process.