Tag: writing for publication

Publishing in Medical Education: Is it all about the metrics?

Posted on by sarah.allsop
Sarah Allsop

In the latest publishing blog, BMERG blog editor Dr Sarah Allsop explores what research metrics are and if these are the only way for medical educators to show their impact.

Photo by Moritz Mentges on Unsplash

We are often told that we need to publish, we need to think about journal metrics, we need to build our research profile; but what do these things actually mean and they the best way for education researchers to show and share their impact?

Lets start by taking a look at the term ‘research metrics’.

Research metrics (or indicators) are numerical markers designed to help evaluate research outputs. There are a number of different metrics in use, considered at different levels depending on whether they are indicators about an article, a journal or the author. Some of the most common metrics are citation counts, altmetrics, h-index and journal impact factors.

Citation counts: This is an article metric and is a simple count of the number of times an article has been cited in others work. It is a very commonly used metric aiming to quantitatively measure the impact and influence of a publication.

Altmetrics: Short for alternative metrics, this is an article metric, but in contrast to the traditional citation count includes tracking the online attention and engagement received by research outputs, including social media mentions, downloads, views, and media coverage. This is often displayed as a colourful ‘donut’. Altmetrics therefore potentially offer a broader perspective on the impact and reach of research beyond citations. Tools like Altmetric Explorer can help you to track this type of metric.

H-index: This is one of the most commonly used author metric proposed as a way to measure both the quantity (number of publications) and the quality (number of citations) of an author’s work. An author has an h-index of h, if h of their publications have been cited at least h times each, for example, an h-index of 5, means at least 5 papers that have been cited at least 5 times each.

Journal Impact Factors: The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) is perhaps the most commonly used journal metric, and assesses the average number of citations received by articles published in a specific journal within a particular timeframe. Of note whilst it is an indicator of reach and popularity, it has been criticised as a measure of prestige rather than necessarily quality [1].

So, are there other ways to show impact?

Whilst it is undoubtedly true that research metrics are important, you can also highlight reach, value and impact of your work in other ways. This can range widely and can also incorporate a more qualitative approach to impact evidence sharing your own story, plus testimonials from others. Examples include:

Using case studies: Do you have examples of where you have advised others on their practice or shared techniques or guidance with other institutions? Use these as case studies of external impact of your expertise.

Exploring networks: Think big – are you involved with working with other associations, companies or professional bodies? Don’t forget to highlight and share your work in this way and the extended reach these activities might have. Think local – are you involved with local mentoring schemes or other programmes of work that support others to achieve. Not all examples have to be national or international to show profound impact for those around you.

Using multimedia: Are there other ways you can be communicating your work that might raise awareness and increase the audience for your work. You could consider a blog, writing for a website, making YouTube videos, podcasts or designing infographics of your work. Thinking outside the box can have amazing consequences, perhaps leading to invitations to speak at new places due to sharing your work more innovatively and visibly.

Which leads me on to my one really important point – in order to show your impact, you need to think about your visibility. Are you visible on your institution’s profile pages? Do you have professional social media accounts or ResearchGate, Google Scholar or LinkedIn profiles? Consideration for how you build your profile using these tools will allow you to highlight your achievements and share your resources to a potentially wider audience. Watch out for a new blog coming soon on maximising your external profile.

Read more about research metrics:

Publishing in Medical Education: Conference Series – Writing effective conference abstracts

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Building on our previous BMERG Publishing in Medical Education blogs, in this post Dr Sally Dowling introduces our Writing for Publication Conference Series. Here she talks about a different sort of writing and dissemination of your work – responding to calls for conference presentations and posters.

Image: The Climate Reality Project/Unsplash

Why should you present your work at academic conferences?

Academics choose to present their work at conferences and meetings for a range of reasons. It’s an important part of the dissemination of finished research projects, but it can also be an opportunity to gain feedback on ‘work in progress’, as well as to hear from and meet others in your field and those whose work may be related to yours.

If you are an early career researcher it can be a good way to build connections and network. If you are able to obtain funding to attend a conference it can be a good way to have some ‘time-out’ from everyday pressures to think about, and discuss, your work. You may also get the opportunity to visit some interesting places! Post-covid, some conferences now offer hybrid attendance and others have remained online.

What’s the difference between a paper presentation and a poster?

A paper presentation, sometimes called an oral presentation (or if you are the main speaker, a ‘keynote’ presentation) is where someone delivers a talk to an audience. In some disciplines this might mean literally reading a paper (similar to a journal article); in others it is more usual to deliver a talk accompanied by a slide presentation.

This may be to a large lecture hall full of people or to a smaller audience in parallel sessions – depending on the type and structure of the conference. Length of presentations varies and may or may not include time for questions. Sometimes all presenters in a session will give their presentations and questions will follow, addressed to the speakers as a panel.

Conference posters are usually displayed for the duration of the conference – they are large (often A1 or A0) posters presenting reports of a research project or other work, usually including words and images. Recently the use of electronic posters is also becoming more common, either made available to view online or physically on large screens at the conference venue.

The aim is to give conference attendees the chance to find out about a range of relevant work and, usually, to ask questions of the researcher or representative of the research team. Some conferences expect poster presenters to stand with their posters at specific times (coffee breaks or lunchtimes, or an early evening session, for example) in order to ‘talk to’ their poster if required.

What is a ‘call for papers’?

Many conferences publish a ‘call for papers/posters’ well in advance of the conference. These will usually be on the websites of relevant organisations (such as AMEE or ASME). You can keep an eye out and find out what time of year these usually appear by visiting our BMERG Abstract Calls! page.

When you look at the call there will be important information to note:

  • Submission format: Some conferences will want you to submit your abstract as an attachment – others will use an online platform, which may require you to register.
  • Deadline: There will usually be a strictly-enforced deadline.
  • Word count: This is usually very specific and may be constrained by allowances of online text boxes.
  • Structure: It is important to note whether the abstract should be structured or unstructured. If they require that the abstract is structured it will often follow a Background, Aim, Methods, Results, Conclusions format (see figure 1 below) – if there are different headings to be used make sure you are aware of this.
  • References: Instructions may also specify whether or not you can use references and, if so, may give a limit (usually a small number).
  • Themes and Streams: Details should be on the conference website of themed conference streams or specific types of sessions you can submit to; make sure you are clear about these and indicate which you prefer if asked.
  • Presentation format: You may be asked if you are submitting for an oral or a poster presentation, and if there is more than one author you will usually be asked to indicate who will be the presenter.
Example of conventional headings for a structured abstract
HeadingContent
BackgroundSpecify the nature and size of the problem; outline its importance to practice, and the gap that needs to be addressed. This section should emphasise the relevance and significance of the issue to the conference delegates and should embrace a relevant theme
AimSpecify this clearly and simply, including study design/approach
MethodsSample
Data collection Data analysis Ethical issues
Results/ FindingsReport this clearly and succinctly to provide the reader with a fair impression of the data
ConclusionIt is important to be specific and produce a balanced conclusion based on the results and how it captures the selected conference theme
Figure 1: Example of conventional headings for a structured abstract. From Albarran and Dowling (2017, p.325).

What should I put in my abstract?

Writing a good abstract will maximise your chances of acceptance. It’s also a way for people to read about your project in advance, or after the conference. Some conferences publish abstracts after the event; sometimes as a supplement to a journal connected to the conference.

What you say in your abstract will act as a ‘hook’ to bring people to your presentation or poster, or to want to contact you to find out more about your work. Use an engaging and academically persuasive tone, take time to refine what you have written and proof-read carefully before submission. Asking a critical friend to read through your abstract can be helpful.

Guidance on how to format your abstract
Guideline
Name of lead presenter and contact detailsYou will be required to provide details of your place of work and qualifications
Name of authors, titles and contact detailsObtain full addresses, titles, professional qualifications and contact details including email address
TitleThis should be kept to 12 words or less. If reporting the results of a study, audit or service improvement, it is good practice to include methodology in the title. A good title should provoke interest, curiosity and relate to the chosen theme
HeadingsEmploy the headings as suggested and in the order recommended
Word limitThis will range between 200–300 words maximum—abbreviations are often discouraged, check this out
Key termsYou may be invited to provide 4–6 search terms that embrace the content of your abstract
Font size and typeThis will normally be prescribed—ensure you follow the recommendations.
Referencing style and numberConfirm the referencing style permitted prior to drafting the abstract, and how many are allowed; some will limit the number to a maximum of three
Conflicts of interestIf you have any conflicts of interest, declare these
FundingSome scientific committees expect you to state whether your project was externally funded; if it has, confirm this
Permission to publish your abstractShould you be accepted to present, the abstract may be published as part of conference proceedings. Note that you may not have the opportunity to revise
AbbreviationsGenerally these are discouraged, so it is sensible to check the guidelines; it is likely that only universally accepted abbreviations may be permitted
Figure 2. Guidance on how to format your abstract. Table adapted from Albarran and Dowling (2017, p.326).

What happens to my abstract after submission?

Most conferences will have a conference committee who will review abstracts received before the deadline (so this is a form of peer review). Depending on the conference preparation timeline, it can take some time to hear, so be patient! Some conferences will give a date on their webpages, telling you when you will hear from them; others don’t do this. Wait to hear and then start preparing for your conference!

The next blog in this series coming soon: Tips on how to produce your conference poster

Further reading:

Albarran, J. & Dowling, S., 2017, Writing an effective conference abstract British Journal of Cardiac Nursing. 12, 7, pp. 324-328

Higgins, M., Eogan, M., O’Donoghue K., Russell, N. (2013) How to write an abstract that will be accepted. BMJ, 346: 2974 doi:10.1136/bmj.f2974 

Pieper, P. (2014) Writing Your Journal or Conference Abstract. Journal of Pediatric Surgical Nursing. 3(2), pp. 47-50

More about this blog’s author

Sally is a Lecturer at Bristol Medical School, working both for the Health Professions Education programme and as Co-Director of the MSc Reproduction and Development. She also runs a series of writing for publication workshops (see programme here) for the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Bristol.

Check out our previous Publishing in Medical Education Posts

Publishing in Medical Education: Harnessing Open Access to Communicate your Research Effectively

Posted on by sarah.allsop

This latest blog in our publishing series is a must read for all researchers, not just those in medical education.

In this blog research support librarian Kate Holmes will introduce you to Open Access publishing, why it matters, a few handy tools, and how it might influence where you decide to place your article.

Open sign by Viktor Forgacs (Unsplash)

You’ve decided you want to write an article. You’ve thought about your structure, maybe using some of the support and advice from this blog. Maybe you’ve even begun to think about where you’d like to place it. So, how might publishing Open Access influence the process?

What is Open Access?

Open Access (OA) is free, unrestricted online access to research outputs.

This means that anyone with an internet connection can read your work because it is available without someone having to go through a paywall or log into a system.

There are two common routes to Open Access:

Gold: where the library pays the publisher to make the article available on the publisher’s website free of charge to readers, with their formatting and copyediting.

Green: where you upload the Author Accepted Manuscript to an online data repository such as Pure for anyone to read. (This is the last word document you sent the publisher prior to copyediting and typesetting.)

The UK Reproducibility Network have a great introducing the open research practice of open access and why it is important:

Why do it?

  • Research Culture

Paywalls prevent people from reading your research because not every institution can afford to pay for subscriptions to every journal. This means that much of the research conducted is inaccessible to researchers who don’t have access to libraries with large budgets, such as those in the global south, or to patients who want to learn more about their own conditions.

Unsurprisingly, Open Access articles are read and cited more, allowing them to make more impact in the academic community and to interested parties, such as patients.

Choosing to publish Open Access means that you are participating in open research practices and a movement that aims to improve research culture. These practices improve research rigour by being as transparent as possible about how research is done.

Publishing Open Access is one element of open research; you can see it as the front door to wider open research practices.  

  • Funder requirements

Publishing Open Access is required by some funders like the UKRI’s Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, Wellcome Trust and Cancer Research UK. These organisations provide funds to cover Gold Open Access costs for the research they have funded. You can find out if you can request these funds by contacting your institutions library and filling out an open access form (see also University of Bristol Article processing charge guidance).

If this is the case, your funder will commonly ask you to:

  • apply a CC-BY licence,
  • acknowledge your funding by quoting their name and the grant number in the article
  • provide a data access statement for any data you created to write the article.

It is important that you include this information and that you publish your article Gold Open Access because this is a condition of their funding your work. Seek advice from your institutional OA team for the specific details of funder requirements so that they can help you understand them more (see also University of Bristol Open Access Policies). Note, not complying may lead to a funder blacklisting an institution or imposing financial penalties.

  • Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2029

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the UKs system for assessing the quality and impact of UK research. We’re still waiting to hear exactly what the Open Access requirements are going to be for REF 2029. However, we currently need to ensure that we upload the Author Accepted Manuscript to Pure within 3 months of its acceptance for the article to be eligible to be submitted as part of REF.

Many institutions, including Bristol, have developed policies to support researchers to make their work more accessible. At Bristol this is the University’s Scholarly Works Policy, which supports researchers to post the accepted version of articles to the online repository (Pure) in a way that meets REF and funder requirements. If you do not manage to upload your article in time, then there are sometimes ‘exceptions’ that can be applied, and your library team can help you with this.

What might this mean for choosing where you place your work?

Publishing Open Access benefits society and is part of your duty as a good researcher. The good news is that you can choose how your work appears by making choices about where you publish.

Although Green Open Access publication is great and can be cited in the same way as a journal’s formatted article, most people prefer to have a free version of their article available on the publisher’s website.

If you want this to happen, there are a couple of different routes you can take:

Diamond Open Access: no fees to authors or to readers, making all research free to read and free to publish. These journals are typically funded by libraries and scholarly organisations.

Gold Open Access: final published version of the research is made open access on the publisher’s webpage in exchange for a fee. If you don’t have funding, you can often still publish Gold Open Access (where the library pays a fee). As part of the journal packages your library buys for you to read, OA teams can make articles in certain journals Gold Open Access. These are known as ‘Read and Publish’ agreements. Your library will often have a directory where you can check whether the journal you are interested in is covered, e.g. UoB Read and Publish deal finder tool.

If you want to make the most of your research, then incorporate choices about Open Access into your journal selection process. That way, it can support you to communicate your research as widely as possible!

More author the blog author:

Dr Kate Holmes advocates for Open Access as a Research Support Librarian. She uses her experience in research to help academics understand more about the benefits of Open Access and the requirements they need to fulfil.

Publishing in Medical Education: Writing for Publication – Writing your article

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Building on our previous BMERG Publishing in Medical Education blogs, in this post Dr Sally Dowling talks about what to think about when you write your article.

Photo by Daniel Thomas on Unsplash

In the previous BMERG blog, Writing for publication: getting started, I wrote about getting started on your journal article, and all the important things there are to do before you even begin to write. These include being really clear about what you are writing, who you are writing for (your audience) and the specific requirements of your chosen journal. Some useful guidance on this topic is also available from the publishers Taylor and Francis here ‘How to write and structure a journal article’.

In this blog, I talk about taking the next steps, and moving on to writing your journal article.

Where to start?

Titles, abstracts and keywords are very important in making your article discoverable through database and other searches – and ultimately, in ensuring that your work reaches its intended audience. Writing the title and abstract for your article may be something you write/finalise near the end of the process or you may, like me, like to start with this.

Titles

Titles serve a number of purposes – they need to clearly and concisely articulate what the article is about in order to grab attention and lead to someone reading the whole article. A title which is funny or focused on a pun may be enjoyable to write, but may not do the job so well as one which is a clear description. Generally titles should be short – some journals specify word length, often 12 or 14 words. Some like to see the methodology in the title, others are not specific – check the author guidance and review recent publications to check what you need to do for the submission you are planning. Avoid unnecessary words and make sure that key information about why readers should be interested is included.

Abstracts

Abstracts are also very important. Sometimes, when searching databases, potential readers may search using the ‘title and abstract only’ function. Read the author guidelines for your chosen journal to check word allowance (most are quite strict about this) and whether or not you need to structure your abstract using headings. If you are not sure have a look at articles already published in the journal.

Keywords

Some journals will ask you to select keywords from drop-down lists, others will allow you to add your own – some will do both. Make sure that keywords for your article are repeated both in title and abstract (some maybe only once, some repeated throughout). Again, this will maximise discoverability. Some more useful information, from publisher PLOS, about writing titles and abstracts can be found here, ‘How to Write a Great Title’.

Writing the main body of your article – Top tips

Getting down to actually writing your article can be both exciting and daunting. These are some tips based on my experience:

  • Stay organised: If you will be doing this with others, be clear with each other about who is doing what – will one person write the first draft and then others edit? Or will you each write a section and then one person edit for consistency later?
  • Be clear about authorship: the journal will usually ask you to confirm each person’s contribution. Read more about the ethics of authorship from the Commission of Publication Ethics (COPE).
  • Plan carefully before you start writing: How many words are you allowed by your chosen journal? Does this include references? Plan your content to fit with these requirements and try and stick to the word count as much as you can whilst writing – it’s much harder to edit down when you are very many words over!
  • Consider your headings: Does your chosen journal want you to stick to pre-determined headings? Can you add your own sub-headings? Think about what is needed under each heading and plan what you will include.
  • Know your referencing style: What is the referencing style used by the journal? If you are unfamiliar with it make sure you follow it exactly. Using a referencing manager will help but you will still need to check carefully.
  • Consider your writing style: Write clearly and concisely, include explanations of terms if you think they are needed. Think about your audience – if they are international will they understand the context you are writing about? Is the journal readership a specialist or a generalist one? How does this affect what you say – and how you say it?
  • Keep a checklist of key information: Identify important details to include and make sure that you do! These can include ethical approval numbers, information on recruitment and participants, any limitations on what you did, and so on.
  • Show your decision making: Your reader needs to clearly understand the background and context to your work and your motivation for undertaking the study. They need to know about the methods you chose and why you chose them. Data collection should be clearly explained and results outlined (the format for these will depend on the methodology of your paper). A discussion should relate your findings to what was already known about the issue, highlighting and discussing what you found in relation to this

Thinking about structure

It might be helpful to think of the earlier parts of the paper, like the introduction and background, as an inverted triangle or funnel – starting out broad, setting the scene and context before narrowing down to your specific focus. The conclusion is the opposite:

Finishing your article

When you have finished your article and you (and co-authors are happy with it), there are still a number of cross-checks to move your manuscript towards submission:

  • Double check the journal’s requirements – do you need a separate title page?
  • Do you need to anonymise all references to authors in the main text (including to previous publications)?
  • Have you followed all style and formatting instructions (have they asked for a specific font, or do you need to add line numbers, for example)?

Finally, write a brief letter to the editor, explaining why your article is a good fit for the journal and why they might be interested in publishing it. Now you are ready to submit! More on this next time.

More about the blog author

Sally is a Lecturer at Bristol Medical School, working both for the Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals programme and the MSc Reproduction and Development (Co-Director). She also runs a series of writing for publication workshops for the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Bristol and helps to facilitate the BMERG ‘Shut Up and Write’ sessions. Sally has experience of publishing journal articles as sole author and with others, publishing with students and writing book chapters. She has co-edited one book and is currently co-authoring a second. She has acted as a peer-reviewer for many submitted papers and worked as an Editorial Team member for two journals.

Watch out for Sally’s next blog in the new year on how to navigate the process of submission, including responding to reviews.

Hot Topics: The Journey Travelled

Posted on by sarah.allsop

In this wonderfully insightful blog, Dr Sarah McLaughlin reflects upon a recent journal article rejection and suggests looking back at the journey travelled to put academic setbacks into perspective. 

Photo by Daniel Herron on Unsplash

How many of us have shared this experience – the article you poured your heart and soul into, and submitted to a journal is returned and has not been accepted?

You are thanked for your submission and it is their pleasure to inform you that the referee’s responses are contained in the email. The referees are unable to accept your article for publication in its current form, but if you are willing to substantially revise according to their requirements and resubmit it, they will reconsider your article.

At this point your heart drops and you feel like you are never going to get any further in academia. Does this sound familiar? It happened to me this week. I know I am not alone in this experience. 

At first you may hear that this is a rejection of your work. Maybe you hear – you are not good enough, you are not as good as the others or maybe you should give up.

This time I have approached this set back differently and want to share my thoughts with you. How about looking not at where you want to be: published and accomplished – but you look back. You look back at how far you have come to get to this point. You focus not on what you have yet to achieve, but you focus on the journey travelled. 

Let’s take our first look back.

To get the point of submitting an article to a journal, you have spent hours writing and completing an article ready for submission.

To get to the point where you write your first sentence, you have conducted some research.

Maybe this was for your Masters or doctoral qualification where you worked your way from your proposal, poured over the literature, worked through your ethics application, to recruiting participants, gathering your data and spending hours writing up your research in order to submit your dissertation or thesis. That is one big achievement in itself.

But let’s look back a little further.

How did you get to the point where you commenced your current studies? There was a time when you were applying to university to commence your undergraduate degree, wondering if you would be accepted. Would you pass your entry requirements? Would you even make it to day one of your undergraduate degree?  

Maybe look back even further.

Did you walk into the exam hall for your GCSEs or school exams wondering if you had done enough revision, worked hard enough and would you be able to answer all the questions within the tight time given to sit your exam. Maybe you did not pass your exams first time and had to resit them.  

Maybe you didn’t enter university through the traditional A level route and returned to education as a mature student through an Access course or an equivalent. Can you even remember as far back as your school exams? How many years have passed, how many times have you submitted an assignment or sat an exam since then? How many other times have you received disappointing feedback or felt like giving up… but you didn’t?

So, now let’s come back to our current feelings.

What was your journey to the point where you uploaded your article to the journal and crossed your fingers? How was the journey you travelled to get there? How long did it take you? How many setbacks did you overcome? How many times did you feel like giving up? These reflections may help put this current feeling of rejection and your article into perspective.  

Switching from looking back to moving forward

Photo by Rumman Amin on Unsplash

Firstly, take a break.

Come back to the feedback with fresh eyes and see it for what it is – some advice on how to make your article more aligned with the journal’s aims or make your arguments clearer, or analysis more aligned with theory. It is an opportunity to improve.

Read the feedback carefully to understand why it was not accepted. What you can do to improve your article, and importantly, increase your chances of your revision being accepted and published? 

Don’t take it personally.

Rejection is common, and it demonstrates that these journals have high standards to maintain, which is a good thing. It does not reflect your worth as an academic. Most importantly, don’t give up.

Keep going.

You are one of many scholars who have had an article sent back to amend. This is a normal and common part of the journey towards article publication. Receiving what feels like a rejection may feel like a blow, but it is part of your journey. Looking back at how far you’ve come may help you see that this is just one more step along the way. Don’t give up. Keep going. It’s all about the journey travelled. 

You got this. 

More about this blog author

Sarah is a Lecturer and the MSc. Co-Lead (Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals) and Foundations in Medical Education Programme Lead. She is part of the Centre for Higher Education Transformations research centre (CHET) and tag them (@chet_for)

Publishing in Medical Education: Writing for Publication – Getting Started

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Building on our previous BMERG Publishing in Medical Education Blogs, in this post Dr Sally Dowling talks about the exciting, but often challenging process of getting started with writing for publication, and the things that are important to do before you start writing.

Sally is a Lecturer at Bristol Medical School, working both for the Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals programme and the MSc Reproduction and Development (Co-Director). She also runs a series of writing for publication workshops for the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Bristol.

Photo by Thought Catalog on Unsplash

Many of us have pieces of work that we’d like to publish. This might be an idea from your area of expertise, a completed audit or evaluation, an innovation from your medical education practice, the outcomes of a study/research project/dissertation – or maybe an opinion piece, commentary or book review. Whatever this might be, there are several things that are important to do before you start writing. Many of these are in the form of questions you might need to ask yourself, or things that you might need to find out. It’s a good idea to do this type of preparation before you actually start to write as this will really increase the chance of your paper being sent for review.

So, how do you get started?

Ask yourself:

  • What am I trying to communicate – what is my aim?
  • What writing style/who is my audience?
  • Why is my message important/relevant?
  • What type of article do I want to write?

When you are clear about what you want to do, there is still more research needed before you start writing.

Should you write with others – or are you planning to write alone?

It depends! Have you undertaken the work with others (including as part of a doctoral or masters project)? Understanding publication ethics is important, as is thinking about authorship (see www.icmje.org/). Things to consider include what contribution each author has made to the manuscript, remembering that authors are accountable for the rigour, accuracy and integrity of the content – and don’t forget to agree the author order from the beginning! Usually these issues can be talked through straightforwardly (after all, you have probably been working together for a while) but they can sometimes be tricky to resolve.

Where do you want to publish your work?

Now you can start to think about where you would like to submit, and how that influences what and how you write it. Sarah Allsop covered some of this in her BMERG blog Publishing in Medical Education: Matching.  Explore journal websites and look at author guidelines – these will very specifically tell you about word length, abstract format, general formatting, including use of sub-headings, referencing style (and, sometimes, number permitted), the layout for tables/graphs, digital artwork etc (and how many you can include). It’s always much easier to write your article as the journal want to see it, rather than retrospectively make it fit to the guidelines.

Have you fully informed yourself about your target journal?

It’s also a good idea to read some papers published by your chosen journal, as well as looking at who is on the editorial board (do you know their work? Are they from a range of countries?). Is the potential journal open to a range of methodologies. Does it have an Impact Factor (a mark of quality, international standing)? Is this important to you? (or your department!). Can you find out what the time lag is between acceptance and publication – and is this important to you? Does the journal require an Article Processing Charge in order to publish your work, or is this optional? Yes, this is a lot of questions, but checking out all of these things before you start is really worthwhile and highly recommended.

Taking the time to work through this process at the start of your writing journey may seem onerous at first, but in the long term it not only helps your writing process, but it might just improve your chances of publishing where you want in the long term.

If you’d like to have an opportunity to explore these issues more, consider coming to one of the Medical Education Research Writing for Publication and Conference workshop sessions (contact Sally Dowling or see full programme here).

Hot topics: Students as Researchers

Posted on by sarah.allsop

In the latest ‘hot topic’ blog, BMERG introduces one of our Bristol second year medical students, Rahul Kota. Rahul talks about their experience of being involved with research as an undergraduate, including some great top tips for getting started.

…..

Photo by Brooke Cagle on Unsplash

Being involved in research is something that the modern medical careers have made feel almost compulsory for career progression and is often sold to students as something they ‘have to do’ to get to where they want to be. I’m here to tell you otherwise. Whilst undertaking research for your future career may be important, the skills and experience you gain in the process are just as valuable in the present.

My research journey started right at the start of medical school, during my first year in 2021. I had an idea that I wanted to be a surgeon before I came to medical school and knew that if I wanted to have a competitive surgical career application one day, I would need to get extra experience. I looked to find a surgeon who would allow me to come to theatre and shadow them.

Going in with the attitude of “if you don’t ask, you don’t get”, I found the email of Professor Gianni Angelini and emailed him asking if I could shadow him in theatre. I was thrilled when the reply came back as a ‘yes’. If you ask me now why I emailed Prof. Angelini, he was a cardiac surgeon, a career which I find incredibly inspiring and he also had a very impressive description of what he had done in the past online; probably not as important was that he came up on the first page of the ‘Bristol Our People’ website so I didn’t have to look very far.

During my first day shadowing Prof. Angelini, I was inspired by his work and the magic of cardiac surgery; and perhaps most importantly that day, I met Prof’s Angelini’s registrar. Mr Daniel Fudulu is single-handily responsible for inspiring me to start researching; without him, I would not be in the position I am in today.

It was quite lucky how my research journey started. I had been shadowing the team for about 3 months, and one day a researcher who worked with Daniel was in theatre as well, and I got talking to him about how I was keen to do some research. So, we asked if there were any projects I could help with and Daniel suggested I should attend their research group. Once I joined the research group, involvement in a project soon followed. I was supported to research and write my first paper.

I find research quite enjoyable due to its collaborative nature – it is a team sport in a way; you are interacting with many different people from many different specialities, and I like the team spirit and comradery in uniting to achieve a common goal. I also really enjoyed actually writing the paper. It may sound an odd thing to find enjoyable, but for me it as quite satisfying and rewarding to write a paper and then step back and look at the completed product. It really gives a strong sense of achievement.

It is also amazing to be able to say you have contributed to the advancement of medicine. I enjoy reading about the history of medicine and where we have come from, and it is those previous researchers who have been able to advance medicine to where it is today, so to say that I have also contributed to advancements in medicine is rewarding and fulfilling.

Personally, whether correct or not; I do also think research is a marker of success in a career. I would like to do a PhD or an MD one day and aspire to hopefully become a professor in my chosen field. Research is a core part of that dream and journey, so I can one day be knowledgeable enough to be seen as a leader in my chosen field.

My publishing journey did have ups and downs, but I had an excellent mentor in Mr Daniel Fudulu. The first journal we submitted to returned a rejection, so we had to rethink our target. I had never been involved in research and publishing before, so I was confused as to why our paper had been rejected. Daniel helped to explain that it was very rare that a paper gets accepted the first time and we should stay calm and think of another target. This advice is something which will stick with me, and made me feel that it was a team effort to get the paper published. When we got the paper published in Frontiers in Surgery, this was an incredibly proud moment, the culmination of over a year of hard work. I cannot overstate Daniel’s role in supporting me getting the paper published; I think it would have been a very different experience without his support. 

Research can be quite time-consuming, so as a student, balancing it with my studies is very important. There is a misconception that medical students do not have any free time, but in truth, there is free time, it is just how you decide to use it. I personally block out a few hours in a week to concentrate on research, maybe on a weekend or on a weekday after I have finished my uni work; and I find that this has been very effective for me. I am also lucky to have an incredible support network around me in terms of my family, friends and mentors.

Rahul’s top tips for getting involved in research as a student:

  1. Find a mentor: it is essential to find a mentor who will support you and understand your career goal – finding the right person can be transformative in promoting your research journey.
  2. Be proactive: Nobody told me how to get research or how to do it, you have to seek opportunities out yourself and make the most of them.
  3. Don’t be scared of rejection: Often nothing happens the first time, so don’t be scared if a paper gets rejected or a consultant has no research for you; dust yourself off and pick yourself back up and carry on.
  4. Enjoy the journey: Share your wins and losses with your peers, friends and family, because they can be people to take stress off your shoulders or people to celebrate with, they are just as excited to be on this journey as you are.

You can read Rahul’s paper here:

Kota R, Gemelli M, Dimagli A, Suleiman S, Moscarelli M, Dong T, Angelini GD and Fudulu DP (2023) Patterns of cytokine release and association with new onset of post-cardiac surgery atrial fibrillation. Front. Surg. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1205396