Content provided in partnership with

Health Care Industry

Decisions and revisions

AORN Journal, August, 2006 by Cynthia Saver

You check your electronic and regular mailboxes each day, waiting for the news. Will your manuscript be accepted for publication? While you are waiting, you may ask yourself two questions: How does the editor decide what to publish, and what happens if I am asked to revise the manuscript? This article addresses both questions.

THE EDITOR'S POINT OF VIEW

Some nurses erroneously believe that manuscript acceptance depends solely on whether the editor likes the article. As in most cases, the reality is far more complex. The editor is the readers' advocate, and as their advocate, he or she considers several factors when evaluating a manuscript (Table 1).

Most Popular Articles in Health: Fuel your workout: exercisers who eat before they work out have more energy ...; Soothe a dry, itchy scalp: 5 easy expert solutions; Cocktails and calories: Beer, wine and liquor calories can really add up. ...; The sour truth about apple cider vinegar - evaluation of therapeutic use; The, six best supplements you've never heard of: these secret weapons can ...; More »

The key factor is whether the content is relevant for the journal's readers. For example, the editor of AORN Journal could review a well-written, informative article on insulin protocols, but if the author has not discussed the perioperative implications, it would not be appropriate for the Journal's readers.

Most writers are not surprised that editors look for a logical presentation of ideas and content that provides new insight for readers. They may not realize, however, that the editor also considers how the article fits into the editorial plan for the journal. Editors plan issues months in advance. If your topic fits well with a topic or another article planned for a particular issue, this may be to your advantage. On the other hand, the editor may just have accepted a manuscript that covers similar ground as your article. This is one good reason for querying the editor before writing an article.

DECISIONS, DECISIONS

The editor has three basic options when evaluating a manuscript for publication: accept, reject, or request revisions. Do not be discouraged if your article is rejected. This decision does not necessarily mean your article was not good. It may just mean that the timing does not fit with the editor's plan.

The editor will send a letter or e-mail rejecting the manuscript, but editors do not always include a reason for rejection. You may want to follow up with the editor to ask why the article was not accepted so you can determine how to increase your chances of being published in the future. You also may want to have more people read your manuscript to give you additional feedback, if you still feel the manuscript should be published, you may want to revise it to fit the needs of another publication.

A request for revisions is good news, but it does not guarantee publication. You can boost your chances of acceptance after revision by closely following the suggestions for revisions and returning the revised manuscript promptly.

READY TO REVISE

When the editor sends a request for revisions, he or she will provide you with the peer reviewers' comments and constructive criticism. For inexperienced and even experienced writers, reading these comments can be stressful. Positive comments bring a smile to your face; not-so-positive comments can make your ego deflate faster than an accidentally released pneumatic tourniquet. Try to look beyond a negative comment to assess its merits. Remember that peer reviewers usually are trying to do the best job possible for the editor.

Now is the time to put your ego aside and remember that the article is not about you--it is about delivering high-quality, useful information to readers. View yourself as part of a team consisting of you; the editors; and the peer reviewers, who are experts in the subject matter of the article. Each of you brings a unique perspective to the endeavor, and your article can be improved when you consider various points of view. You will find that you, too, can look at the article with fresh eyes if you have not seen it for several weeks. This is similar to what happens when you orient a new staff member. Suddenly, you see routine procedures in a new light as the staff person asks questions about steps you normally take for granted.

Reviewer comments may come as a separate document, be written directly on the manuscript, or appear as comments inserted into your original file. The editor may choose to summarize the comments or may send the comments verbatim. Typically comments will address such issues as

* too much or too little information in a section of the article,

* inaccuracies,

* missing or outdated key references, and

* suggestions for improving the organization of the article.

For example, the editor may recommend replacing a section of text with a table that summarizes the information.

Revising the manuscript based on the reviewers comments may involve rewriting, reorganizing, adding content, or deleting content. You do not have to accept every revision request, but if you do not, you should provide a reason why you did not make a change. Give the reason in a professional way, and do not be derogatory toward the reviewer. For example, write, "The latest studies by Hanover show that this step is no longer needed," instead of "This reviewer obviously has not read the latest research."

Health Care Industry

Decisions and revisions

AORN Journal, August, 2006 by Cynthia Saver

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: Technology

Most Popular Articles in Health

Most Popular Publications in Health