ADVERTISEMENT
To Teach and To Learn: Why the Right Publication Process Is Important
Sharing what we know comes naturally to health care professionals. We share what we know with patients, caregivers, colleagues, and students, not to mention our relatives, neighbors, friends, and acquaintances looking for a second (or first) opinion. We rely on colleagues and trusted resources to stay up-to-date on developments in our own specialty area, the practice of health care in general, as well as nationwide and global trends that affect our patients or the way we practice. The latter requires little elaboration because we continue to share the lived experience of scrambling to learn as much as we can about a global pandemic, which continues to affect us all and includes the largely unknown long-term effects of COVID-19 exposure on human health.
The tradition of sharing what we know in print and learning from trusted resources is long and well established. The British Medical Journal was first published on October 3, 1840, as the Provincial Medical and Surgical Journal.1 The Medical Repository, founded in 1797, was the first United States medical journal.2
Much has changed since that time, including the implementation of many processes to improve the veracity and trustworthiness of the information presented. After all, what is published can directly affect patient care and outcomes.
Journals that are peer-reviewed and indexed in, for example, Medline or the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), including Wound Management & Prevention, follow established manuscript preparation, peer-review, and publication guidelines. This includes the American Medical Association’s (AMA) Manual of Style and the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), as well as guidelines for publications developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the Council of Science Editors.3-6
These resources are not “just” guidelines, they are an excellent resource for anyone aspiring to share their work in an indexed medical journal. For example, both the AMA and APA manuals provide detailed guidance on manuscript development, from content requirements to formatting tables and figures. As discussed on these pages 3 years ago, not adhering to guidelines for authors remains one of the most common reasons manuscripts are rejected for publication in this, and other, journals.7 Other common reasons for manuscript rejection also have not changed much in the past 3 years. They include lack of topic relevance; study design, methodology, analysis, reporting, and interpretation flaws; and poor writing and organization.7 More than one-third of manuscripts submitted to WMP are rejected, and almost half require major revisions. The latter often translates into the work not being published because, for one reason or another, not all requested changes can be made.
With reported manuscript rejection rates for medical journals of up to 90%,8 authors may be tempted to search for alternatives. The options to publish online are endless and many seem legitimate. There are hundreds of journals willing to take an author’s money in return for a fast manuscript turnaround time and publication. But buyer beware! In 2019, the journal Nature published the following definition:
Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices.9
These publications are not “just” a global threat to health and author’s wallets. The work may disappear overnight. Publication in a predatory journal can ruin a curriculum vitae. Even when an author realizes the mistake they have made, the work can never be published elsewhere because those publishers now own the copyrights, and peer-reviewed and indexed journals do not publish duplicate publications.
We rely on each other to continue teaching and learning. Without dedicated researchers and authors, there is no progress in health care. Without legitimate publication resources, editorial staff, and peer reviewers, there is no quality control. Without quality control, we cannot rely on the legitimacy of the information that we rely on to practice and teach. This process has worked for hundreds of years. It is far from perfect but look how far it has brought us!
The opinions and statements expressed herein are specific to the respective authors and not necessarily those of Wound Management & Prevention or HMP Global.
This article was not subject to the Wound Management & Prevention peer-review process.
1. TheBMJ. History of the British Medical Journal. Accessed July 12, 2021. https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/history-of-the-bmj
2. Kahn RJ, Kahn, PG. The Medical Repository¬¬–the first U.S. medical journal (1797-1824): N Engl J Med. 1997;337:1926-1930.
3. American Medical Association. Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 10th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020.
4. American Psychological Association. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 7th ed. American Psychological Association; 2019.
5. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated December 2019. Accessed July 14, 2021. http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf
6. Editorial Policy Committee (2011-2012). CSE’s white paper on promoting integrity in scientific journal publications, 2012 Update. Accessed July 14, 2021. www.CouncilScienceEditors.org
7. Van Rijswijk L. Preventing and managing manuscript rejection: an overview to help you publish. Wound Manag Prev. 2018;64(9):6.
8. American Psychological Association. Summary report of journal operations, 2019. Am Psychol. 2020;75(5):723–724.
9. Grudniewicz A, Moher D, Cobey KD, et al. Predatory journals: no definition, no defence. Nature; 2019; 576(7786): 210–212.
