ABC’s of Publishing a Scientific Paper in a Journal for the Novice Researchers

Writing a scientific paper, choosing a journal, submitting/uploading the paper in the journal website, the peer review process, revising the paper based on the reviewer's comments, and galley proofreading after the acceptance of the paper are the essential components of publishing a paper. Publishing is the ultimate goal of all researchers. Writing a scientific paper requires an extensive literature search, collection of reference articles, acquisition of data of research work, analysis of data and discussing the results comparing with other findings published in similar papers. The final version of the paper should be read by all authors and approved before the submission of the manuscript. One has to select the journal and edit the paper as per the author's instructions of that journal before submission. The article will be reviewed by two experts in that field and they will send their comments about the contents of the paper. The comments should be answered point by point, and the revised paper should be sent again to the editor. If required one has to be prepared to do more than one revision of the paper. If the paper is rejected, one should not be disappointed. You can further improve the quality of the paperby including the answers for the deficiencies and send the revised paper to another suitable journal. Finally, when it is accepted, the galley proof of the article should be read carefully and send the corrected proof to the editor in-time. The 'pdf' copyof the published paper should be kept for sending a copy to the people who request a reprint of your article.

Risk Analysis and Countermeasures Investigating Based on Medical Device Registration Review Process / 中国医疗器械杂志

In order to strengthen the supervision and management of medical devices, China implements pre-market registration and approval system for medical device. Technical evaluation is a key point of Chinese medical device registration management system. This study, by process-oriented, systematically sorts out the risks existing in each part of the review process. The countermeasures for risk prevention are proposed, hoping to strengthen the quality control of the whole process of review, improve the quality and efficiency of the review effectively, and ensure the various reform measures of the medical device review and approval system effectively.

Analysis of Ethical Review Work of Ethics Committee in a Top Three Hospital and Experience / 中国医学伦理学

This paper summarized the construction of ethics committee in a top three hospital and analyzed its operation from three aspects of project review, review conference and training of member. And on the basis of ana-lyzing the practice of ethical review work in the past five years, this paper put forward that it can provide reference for the standardization of ethics committee from four aspects of strengthening ethics training, establishing ethics re-view exchange mechanism, accelerating legislating and standardizing review process.

Changes in Providers' Behavior after the Reviewer Unification of Auto Insurance Medical Benefit Claims / 보건행정학회지

BACKGROUND: This study aims to analyze the behavioral changes of healthcare providers and influencing factors after the reviewer unification of auto insurance medical benefit claims by an independent review agency. METHODS: The comparison data were collected from the second half of 2013 and the same period of 2014. The key indicators are the number of admission days, the number of outpatient visits, inpatient ratio, inpatient medical expenses, and outpatient medical expenses. RESULTS: Four indicators (number of admission days, number of outpatient visits, inpatient ratio, and outpatient medical expenses) showed statistically significant drops, while one indicator (inpatient medical expenses) showed no significant change. CONCLUSION: The reviewer unification of auto insurance medical benefit claims by an independent review agency showed significant reduction in cost and patient days.

Polaridad de los comentarios y consistencia interna en los informes de arbitraje de artículos de investigación / Polarity of comments and internal consistency in peer review reports on scientific research articles / Polaridade dos comentários e consistência interna nos informes de arbitragem de artigos de pesquisa

El informe de arbitraje en los procesos de revisión por pares de artículos de investigación es un género clave para explicar cómo se construye colectivamente el conocimiento científico. En estos informes los evaluadores emiten, junto con una serie de comentarios, una recomendación de publicación. El análisis de la calidad del proceso de evaluación por pares se ha realizado a partir de indicadores, como las tasas de rechazo o el grado de acuerdo entre los evaluadores. Sin embargo, aún queda pendiente una evaluación cualitativa del proceso. El objetivo de este trabajo fue describir la proporción, según su polaridad (positiva, negativa y neutra), de los comentarios de 56 informes de evaluación de la Revista Onomázein y determinar si esa proporción era consistente con la recomendación de los evaluadores (Aceptado, Aceptado con enmiendas mayores o menores, y Rechazado). Del análisis de 1.472 comentarios se determinó que, independientemente de la decisión, la mayor proporción corresponde a comentarios negativos. Asimismo, podemos afirmar que los procesos analizados presentan un alto grado de consistencia. Mientras más favorable es la recomendación de los árbitros mayor es la proporción de comentarios positivos emitidos y, correspondientemente, menor es la proporción de comentarios negativos.

Peer review reports on scientific articles means a key genre to explain how scientific knowledge is collectively constructed. In these reports, reviewers write a recommendation for publication along with a series of comments. The quality analysis of the peer review process has been commonly conducted based on indicators, such as rejection rates and the agreement level among evaluators. However, a more qualitative investigation on the process still remains outstanding. This work aims at describing the polarity (positive, negative and neutral) of comments corresponding to 56 peer review reports belonging to the journal Onomázein and determining whether this proportion is consistent with the reviewers recommendation, i.e. Accepted, Accepted with major revisions, Accepted with minor revisions and Rejected). After the analysis of 1.472 comments, it was possible to determine that the highest proportion of comments is negative, independent of the decision. The analyzed processes also showed a high level of consistency. The more favorable the recommendation, the higher the proportion of positive comments, and, consequently, the less the proportion of negative comments.

O informe de arbitragem nos processos de revisão por pares de artigos de pesquisa é um gênero chave para explicar como se constrói coletivamente o conhecimento científico. Nestes informes os avaliadores emitem, junto com uma série de comentários, uma recomendação de publicação. A análise da qualidade do processo de avaliação por pares foi realizada a partir de indicadores, como as taxas de recusa ou o grau de acordo entre os avaliadores. No entanto, ainda resta pendente uma avaliação qualitativa do processo. O objetivo deste trabalho foi descrever a proporção, segundo a sua polaridade (positiva, negativa e neutra), dos comentários de 56 informes de avaliação da Revista Onomázein e determinar se essa proporção era consistente com a recomendação dos avaliadores (Aceito, Aceito com emendas maiores ou menores, e Recusado). Da análise de 1.472 comentários se determinou que, independentemente da decisão, a maior proporção corresponde a comentários negativos. Assim mesmo, podemos afirmar que os processos analisados apresentam um alto grau de consistência. Quanto mais favorável for a recomendação dos árbitros maior será a proporção de comentários positivos emitidos e, correspondentemente, menor é a proporção de comentários negativos.

Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM): instrumento de avaliação do processo psicoterapêutico / Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM): instrument of evalution of psychotherapeutic process / Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM): instrumento de evaluación del proceso psicoterapéutico

O objetivo deste trabalho foi apresentar a versão brasileira do Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM) a partir da análise de uma sessão de um processo de psicoterapia psicanalítica. O TCM é um método de análise de textos por computador que identifica os momentos-chave no discurso de paciente, psicoterapeuta, ou de ambos, em interação. As análises são feitas com o auxílio de um software (Cycles Model), que dispõe de listas de palavras de tom emocional e de abstrações, permitindo a classificação do texto em duas categorias: conteúdo emocional e cognitivo das verbalizações na sessão. Buscou-se ilustrar uma possibilidade de utilização do TCM a partir de uma sessão de psicoterapia. A análise exploratória dos conteúdos verbalizados pela dupla, paciente e psicoterapeuta, a partir dos ciclos terapêuticos demonstrou que esse instrumento contribui na identificação de momentos clinicamente significativos do discurso do paciente em sessões individuais. Sendo assim, o TCM pode ser mais uma ferramenta para compreender o processo terapêutico e, com isso, auxiliar o psicoterapeuta em sua prática...

The objective of this study was to present the Brazilian version of Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM) from the analysis of a psychoanalytic psychotherapeutical process. TCM is a method of computer analysis of texts by identifying key-moments in the speech of the patient, therapist, or both in interaction. The analysis is performed with the software (Cycles Model), which provides word lists of emotional tone and abstractions, allowing classification of text into two categories: emotional and cognitive content of utterances in the session. We have tried to illustrate a possibility of TCM's use from a psychotherapy session. Exploratory analysis of the contents verbalized by the double patient and psychotherapist demonstrated that this instrument helps in identifying clinically significant moments in speech of the patient in individual sessions. Thus, the TCM can be a tool in comprehending psychotherapeutic processes, helping psychotherapist in practice...

El objetivo de este trabajo fue presentar la versión brasileña del Therapeutic Cycles Model (TCM) partiendo del análisis de una sesión de un proceso de psicoterapia psicoanalítica. El TCM es un método computarizado de análisis de textos que identifica los momentos clave en el discurso del paciente, del psicoterapeuta o de la interacción entre ambos. El proceso de análisis se realiza con el auxilio de un software (Cycles Model), que dispone de listas de palabras de tono emocional y de abstracciones, permitiendo la clasificación del texto en dos categorías: contenido emocional y contenido cognitivo de las verbalizaciones durante la sesión. Se buscó la posibilidad de utilización del TCM a partir de una sesión de psicoterapia. El análisis exploratorio de los contenidos verbalizados por la dupla paciente/psicoterapeuta demostró que este instrumento ayuda en la identificación de momentos clínicamente significativos del discurso del paciente en sesiones individuales. De este modo, el TCM puede ser una herramienta más para comprender el proceso terapéutico y por lo tanto auxiliar al psicoterapeuta en su práctica...

¿DISENSO ENTRE PARES REVISORES? NO SE PREOCUPE, QUE A FIN DE CUENTAS EL EDITOR SIEMPRE TIENE LA ÚLTIMA PALABRA / DISSENT BETWEEN PEER REVIEWERS? DON'T WORRY, ULTIMATELY THE EDITOR HAS THE LAST WORD

Todos hemos sometido algún artículo científico a revisión con la idea de que sea publicado en cierta revista. Frecuentemente, los autores experimentan muchas barreras para alcanzar el éxito (lograr la publicación) cuando someten artículos a revisión. Estas barreras dependen de la escritura del artículo en sí mismo, de los sesgos de los pares revisores, de la forma en que se escribe la carta de presentación (cover letter), y de la manera en la cual se implementa una estrategia para abordar y responder a las observaciones (erradas o no) que emiten los pares revisores y el editor de la revista. El propósito de este artículo vivencial es el de brindar consejos útiles a autores que investigan en el área de la ingeniería clínica, sobre cómo publicar artículos que aborden temas en el área de la salud en revistas de alto impacto en el área del operations research & management sciences.

All of us have at some point submitted a scientific paper for review with the idea of being published in a given journal. Often, the authors experience many barriers to success (achieving publication) when they submit articles for publication. These barriers depend on the quality of the writing itself, on the biases of the peer reviewers, the way you write your cover letter, and the way in which you address and respond to the observations (erroneous or not) emitted by peer reviewers and the editor of the journal. The purpose of this paper is to provide useful pieces of advice on how to publish articles that tackle issues in the health area in high impact journals in the area of Operations Research & Management Sciences.

Composición esciita en universitarios: papel del contacto visual en la revisión de textos / Writte compositiion in university students: role of the visual contact on the text revision

Se evaluó el papel del contacto visual del escritor con lo que escribe, sobre la coherencia y precisión. 24 estudiantes de psicología leyeron un artículo de un diario, después escribieron una cita y su opinión. En la segunda sesión, realizaron tareas similares pero leyeron otro artículo. Se formaron 2 grupos, en uno, los participantes no tenían contacto visual con lo que escribían (SCV) y en el otro si tenían contacto visual (CV). El grupo CV escribió textos más precisos. Ambos grupos alcanzaron índices de coherencia similares. Se discute que la relevancia de revisar lo que se escribe depende de otros elementos de la interacción escritora específica. Se sugiere revalorar el concepto de revisión en el análisis de la elaboración de textos.

We evaluated the role of the visual contact with what the writer writes, on the coherence and precision. 24 students of psychology read an article of a diary, later they wrote a quote and their opinion. In the second session, conducted similar tasks but read another article. There were 2 groups, in one, the participants did not have visual contact with what was writing (NCV) and in other one did have visual contact (CV). The group CV wrote more precise texts. Both groups reached similar indexes of coherence. There is discussed that the relevancy of revision what one writes depends on other elements of the specific written interaction. It is suggested to revaluate the concept of revision in the analysis of the elaboration of texts.

A Study on the Academic Paper Review Process of Medical Societies / 대한의료정보학회지

The subjects in this study were the directors in charge of article inspection from 127 academies that are registered with the Korea Academy of Medical Science. After a questionnaire was prepared covering the examination process, judging committee organization, problems with examination and possible reform measures, a survey was conducted by e-mail and facsimile from October 4 through 20, 2001. The responses from 79 academies were gathered, a response rate of 62.2%, and the collected data were analyzed with SAS. The most common examination process was C type, which convenes publishing committees, employed by 59 academies_(74.6%), and these institutes found it satisfactory. Thirty-four academies_(43.0%) had 10 to 19 judges, and these judges were separately in charge of different fields, whereas 79 academies_(77.3%) allocated five or less judges to each field. Thirty_(38.0%) academies had their judges comply with related official directions or guidelines, and 50 academies_(63.3%) conducted investigation just twice. Fifty-four academies_(68.4%) weren't satisfied with their examination process. As for the problems with the examination process, many_(41.8%) pointed out that it's time-consuming work and that a lot of procedures were repeated. Concerning the benefit of the online examination program, 41 academies_(51.9%) thought that it was more efficient and less time-consuming. Forty-one academies_(51.9%) were aware of the online examination program, but only 23 academies_(29.1%) were willing to use it. In order to realize an online paper review, there should be appropriate criteria and guidelines for the construction of an online paper review system that suits various types of paper review process employed by the academies. The usability of online information and technology for more efficient and higher-quality judgment should be widely be publicized, and consideration should be given for the types of paper review system that might be suitable for those who are neither aware of the use of the internet nor willing to utilize.