Writing for publication: avoiding the common pitfalls

Sharing research findings has become an increasingly important part of research as nursing is increasing required to base practice on the best available evidence. This editorial offers an insight into some of the common pitfalls to avoid when writing and submitting a paper for publication.

In an age when every aspect of nursing practice should be informed by the best available evidence, it has become even more important that nurses undertaking research share their research findings with practitioners (Timmins, 2015).This dissemination can be achieved in many ways, including conference presentations and, in more recent years, the use of social media.Despite recent technological advances, journals remain one of the most effective ways to share research findings with those who might use the new evidence to guide their professional nursing practice.Journals have the added advantage that they create an archive of research and evidence.Technology has made it much easier to access journal content and with the current drive towards open access publishing it should soon be possible to access all published research.
Whilst it is important to publish research, it is even more important to ensure that only good quality research is published.Poor research, with nothing to contribute to the professional practice of nursing, risks creating a poor evidence base and, more importantly, could have a detrimental impact on patient care.The main way that journals ensure the quality of the research appearing within their pages is through the process of peer review (Shattell, et al., 2010).Whilst there might be some problems with peer review, it remains the best way to review papers submitted and to make decisions about what should be published and what should not.
The editors of most journals will invite at least two peers to undertake reviews of the papers submitted to their journal.In most cases, these reviews are blinded to help ensure greater objectivity and neutrality in the review process.As they receive the reviews, the editor will make a decision about whether a) to publish the paper, b) to invite the authors to undertake revisions or c) to reject the paper.Authors will clearly be hoping to avoid the rejection outcome, but rejection is something that all authors have to accept as part of the process of seeking publication.Even the most eminent and experienced authors will sometimes have papers rejected by journals.
In this editor's experience, there are at least eight reasons why editors choose not to accept papers for publication.If authors were to reflect on these factors when preparing and submitting papers to journals, there would be fewer rejection outcomes for authors and editors and peer reviewers would spend less time reading papers that will not progress to publication.

Lack of adherence to author guidelines. 1.
''Thank you for submitting your paper for consideration, but unfortunately, your paper has not been submitted in a style that can be considered for publication.Please refer to our author guidelines.'' Above is a phrase sometimes used when preparing a response to an author.All journals publish author guidelines that are intended to help authors ensure that papers meet the journal's basic requirements and these guidelines are normally available on journal websites.On far too many occasions authors fail to adhere to the guidelines or to meet the journal's requirements.For example, journals will have word limits but authors will often exceed limits, sometimes by thousands of words.When this happens, editors are left with little option but to reject papers even before they are sent for peer review.
Mismatch with the journal's scope.

2.
select the right journal for their research.Regardless of the quality of the research, an editor will not accept a paper for publication if it doesn't match the scope of their journal.For example, a paper about strategies to minimise falls in the elderly will not be published in the European Journal of Oncology Nursing.Similarly, papers reporting research findings will not be published in Nurse Researcher, which only publishes research methodology papers.By selecting the right journal in which to publish, authors can avoid disappointment and wasted time in having to revise the paper to meet the requirements of another journal.

Lack of originality. 3.
''Please make a clear statement about what this paper adds to the current body of knowledge.''Journals are always seeking to publish research papers that offer their readers an original insight.Editors and reviewers will ask: ''What does this paper add to what is already known?''Authors can improve the chances of having their paper accepted for publication if they can include statements about the originality of what they are presenting and how their research might have an impact on patient care (McClelland, 2006).Papers that have nothing new to say are unlikely to be published.
Flaws in study design.4.
''Your paper has been peer reviewed and the reviewers have highlighted some methodological flaws in your research.'' If seeking to publish research findings, one of the key factors influencing whether a paper will be accepted for publication is the design of the research.The journal's peer reviewers and editor will want to be reassured that the research has been conducted in a methodologically rigorous manner and that readers can have confidence in the findings of the research.If a flaw is identified in how the research was conducted, then journals will not publish to avoid damaging the journal's reputation.Publishing a research paper that later has to be retracted because a reader has spotted a flaw in the research can cause considerable damage to a journal and to the journal's publishers.
Poor writing and organisation.5.
to avoid being rejected for this reason is to seek peer review prior to submission to a journal, in the hope that the reviewers will highlight the parts of the paper needing revision rather than waiting for the journal's reviewers to identify the same problems (Ness, et al., 2014).So, the question that authors should ask themselves is 'Am I telling a good story?' Poor language, spelling and grammar.6.
''There are multiple typographical and grammatical errors in this paper, which sometimes detract from the flow of the paper.Please, undertake a careful proofread and edit.'' Papers submitted to journals must be well written with attention to detail.If there are basic errors in the way the paper is written, including misplaced apostrophes and the random scattering of comas, these will need to be corrected before the paper can be considered for publication and the editor and the journal's editorial teams will not have the time to do this.Such errors can also detract from the flow of the text or might even alter the meaning of the text.Often papers are submitted to journals too soon and don't appear to have been subjected to a final proofread and edit.There is an understandable urgency to get published, but sometimes taking a little time to ensure a paper is ready to submit can save considerable time in getting published.

''The figures and tables you have presented are sometimes unnecessarily complicated and appear to add little to the text.''
Research papers should be easy to read and this includes the visual elements within papers, including tables, figures and diagrams.These should be clear, easy to read and should add to the paper's text.On too many occasions, these visual elements are too complicated and it is not clear to the editor or the peer reviewers why they have been added.

Unintentional ethical issues. 8.
''It is this journal's policy only to publish research where research ethics approval was obtained before commencing the research.Please add a statement confirming that research ethics approval was obtained.If you are unable to do this, we will not be able to consider publishing this paper.''Ethical issues can be subdivided into two categories: research ethics and publication ethics (Stichler, 2014).If a paper is presenting research findings where the research involved human participants, the journal will not consider publishing the paper if research ethics approval was not sought before beginning the research.Journals will usually expect a statement confirming this in the methods section of the paper.The journal will also want to be reassured that the content of the paper has not been plagiarised and that the paper has not been submitted to another journal.Whilst researchers and authors might be under considerable pressure to publish, it is never acceptable to breach the principles of publication ethics.With modern technology, it is becoming increasingly difficult to get away with such breaches.Most journals will now submit all papers to software that will examine similarity to other papers and it is not uncommon to identify papers that do contravene these basic principles.
In seeking to publish their research, authors should consider each of the above issues.Sometimes, if one of these issues is not quite right, the editor might invite the author to undertake revisions to improve the paper.There is, however, an accumulative effect, so if there are multiple issues, then the editor is more likely to reject the paper either before or after peer review.
It is a considerable frustration to many editors that good papers are often presented badly, making it difficult for the journal to consider the paper for publication (Griffiths & Norman, 2016).A journal's pool of peer reviewers is an extremely valuable resource and editors will be reluctant to burden them with reviewing papers when there is clearly a fundamental problem with the paper.Having a paper rejected for publication will also cause authors considerable frustration so it makes sense to seek to address these common causes of rejection before submitting a paper.
The objective for authors should be to avoid receiving feedback as highlighted above.In doing so, I would suggest that they will move more quickly between submission and publication.Journals will not miss or overlook these issues so it makes little sense for authors not to address them before asking an editor to read their paper.Publishing and sharing research has become such an important part of what nurse researchers do and has become a priority in a health environment in which all practice should be evidence based.It is hoped that this Editorial has offered some insight into what authors can do to get published without delay.