Finding and choosing an appropriate journal Where to look for the journal: –Personal experience –Colleagues’ experience –Library –Citations –Online

Appropriate Journal General versus Specialty International versus Local High versus Low impact LOOK AT THE JOURNAL LOOK AT THE AUDIENCE

What type of paper you wrote ? research report (“original article”) review paper special article editorial case report letter to the editor Brief report

Be realistic –This is your first manuscript or you have already a real track of publications on the topic ? –Are the co-authors or the Institution were you are based recognized in the field ? –Are you an Iranian author submitting to a national, a European or an American journal ? –Reviews are mostly only by invitation but national journals can be quite open –Determine the odds that a particular journal will appreciate the newness and importance of your manuscript in the context of the existing medical literature

Know your journal targets? a)Impact factor and prestige b)Normal content of one of the journal issues a)Which kind of manuscripts are published ? b)What are the preferred formats ? c)Style and recent trends in the journal d)Who is the editor-in-chief ? Can you contact him ? e)Who are the members of the editorial-board? They are very aware of the journal’s publication policy…you can try to contact some of them with questions

J Natl Cancer Institute J of Clinical Oncology Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research Oncogene Gene Chromosome Cancer Int Jrnl Cancer Cancer Annals of Oncology Impact Factor: Oncology

Journal Impact factors The ISI Impact Factor indicates how often articles in a certain journal are cited within the two years following the publication date. For example, the ISI Impact Factor for Ecology in 1996 is calculated as the sum of all 1996 citations of articles published in Ecology in 1994 and 1995 divided by the total sum of all articles published in Ecology in those two years.

Impact factors (2) Will anyone ever cite this paper? Or will it be a dead weight on our impact factor, no matter how “worthy”? Heavily cited: reviews; highly original papers; papers that receive high press attention

Impact Factor: Oncology Above 10 [ 5 – 10 ] [ 3 – 5 ] Below 3

Impact factor differences between subject areas

Normal content of the journal ? Is the topic within the scope of the journal? Is the topic represented in the journal frequently, or only rarely? Would the journal offer the best match of audience and topic? What formats are acceptable to the journal?

Normal Content of the journal ?

Style and recent trends Do look at a recent issue of the journal you plan to submit to Do read the Instruction to authors of the journal ( links to 3500 journals’ Instructions at ) Be aware of word/figure/table limits Use the appropriate reference and citation styles Help Editors and Referees (and yourself) – Number all pages

–Who is the editor-in-chief ? –If you can contact him, query the editor be specific sell your product –Editorial board members? Editor in chief and editorial board

For each manuscript Apply the Editor’s questions: –“So what?” –“Who cares?”

–He may belong to a specific editorial board –He senses new opportunities Launching of a new journal Accurate format to sell your product –Provides a more realistic point of view Ask your mentor

What is your own agenda when publishing ? Prestige journal vs. rapid publication National visibility vs international fame Issues of timeliness and in-depth track do matter

Timeliness and friendliness of the submission process Hot topic? the average reviewing time (assistant of the editors) Is there an online submission process? Can you track your manuscript status online

Online submission

It’s not just the impact factor…

PAUSE & PONDER select journal carefully consider audience consider chances of success review Instructions for Authors

Remember: Every paper will get published somewhere! “There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature citation too biased or egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self- serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.” Rennie (JAMA, 1986)