A brief guide to the science and art of writing manuscripts in biomedicine

Writing a manuscript for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal: Guidance from the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy

Publishing in reputable peer-reviewed journals is an integral step of the clinical pharmacy research process, allowing for knowledge transfer and advancement in clinical pharmacy practice. Writing a manuscript for publication in a journal requires several careful considerations to ensure that research findings are communicated to the satisfaction of editors and reviewers, and effectively to the readers. This commentary provides a summary of the main points to consider, outlining how to: (1) select a suitable journal, (2) tailor the manuscript for the journal readership, (3) organise the content of the manuscript in line with the journal's guidelines, and (4) manage feedback from the peer review process. This commentary reviews the steps of the writing process, identifies common pitfalls, and proposes ways to overcome them. It aims to assist both novice and established researchers in the field of clinical pharmacy to enhance the quality of writing in a research paper to maximise impact.

Ten Ways to Improve Getting a Scientific Manuscript Accepted

BACKGROUND

Scientific publication is the cornerstone to academic and private practice advancement in patient management and outcomes. Writing a manuscript requires a certain discipline and skill set that can be achieved with diligence and hard work.

METHODS

Anecdotal and review.

RESULTS

Several factors must be considered in scientific writing and journal manuscript submission and acceptance. Choosing where to submit the manuscript; understanding the instructions to authors; disclosing ethically; formatting correctly; never plagiarizing; supplying high quality appropriate images; creating meaningful tables; curating a pertinent but thorough bibliography; having valid, supported conclusions; and respecting timelines.

CONCLUSION

A discussion of relevant components in manuscript writing and journal submission to improve your chances of acceptance.

R programming environment in wildlife: Are Veterinary Sciences at the same level than other research areas?

The computing environment has revolutionized the management and analysis of data in sciences during the last decades. This study aimed to evaluate the use of R software in research articles addressing the study of wildlife worldwide, particularly focusing on the research area "Veterinary Sciences". For this purpose, a systematic review mainly performed in the Web of Science database was conducted. Out of a total of 509 articles reviewed, our results show an increasing trend of the number of publications using the R software over time, as well as a wide geographical distribution at a global scale, particularly in North America, Europe, Australia and China. Most publications were categorized in research areas related to "Biological Sciences", while a minority of them was included in "Veterinary Sciences" (5.9%; 30/509). About the species groups assessed, many articles evaluated a single species group (96.5%), being mammals (50.7%) and birds (14.8%) the most studied ones. The present study showed a high variety of R-packages used in the publications reviewed, all of them related to data analysis, the study of genetic/phylogenetic information and graphical representation. Interestingly, the common use of packages between different research areas is indicative of the high interest of using R software in scientific articles. Our study points the R software as an open-source programming language that allows to support research addressing the study of wildlife, becoming a key software for many research areas, including "Veterinary Sciences". However, an in-depth methodological description about the use of R software in publications to improve the tracking, reproducibility and transparency is encouraged.

Exploring plagiarism

ABSTRACT

Plagiarism is a common issue in academic and professional communities. This article discusses ways to avoid plagiarism by identifying valuable resources, such as appropriate paraphrasing, creative work organizing, and new technology. Understanding copyright law safeguards is critical to avoiding plagiarism.

PROBE 2023 guidelines for reporting observational studies in endodontics: Explanation and elaboration

Observational studies play a critical role in evaluating the prevalence and incidence of conditions or diseases in populations as well as in defining the benefits and potential hazards of health-related interventions. There are currently no reporting guidelines for observational studies in the field of Endodontics. The Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology (PRIDE) team has developed and published new reporting guidelines for observational-based studies called the 'Preferred Reporting items for OBservational studies in Endodontics (PROBE) 2023' guidelines. The PROBE 2023 guidelines were developed exclusively for the speciality of Endodontics by integrating and adapting the 'STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)' checklist and the 'Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP)' principles. The recommendations of the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines were adhered to throughout the process of developing the guidelines. The purpose of this document is to serve as a guide for authors by providing an explanation for each of the items in the PROBE 2023 checklist along with relevant examples from the literature. The document also offers advice to authors on how they can address each item in their manuscript before submission to a journal. The PROBE 2023 checklist is freely accessible and downloadable from the PRIDE website (http://pride-endodonticguidelines.org/probe/).

Worldwide research trend of publications concerning spermatogenesis over past 10 years: A bibliometric study

Fertility is a hot topic and many publications on spermatogenesis has been published during the past 10 years (2012-2021). This study aims to analyse the research trends and dynamics on spermatogenesis using bibliometric methods. In this study, only articles with an annual average citation of 1 or more were selected for analysis, and a total of 4849 articles were analysed. The results show that in the field of spermatogenesis over the past 10 years, mainland China and the United States are the two leading countries, and international collaboration becoming increasingly close; Nanjing Medical University is the most widely published and collaborated institution; PLOS One and Biology of Reproduction are the most published and cited journals; Andrologia is the most popular journal in Andrology subspecialty; Zhang has made the largest contribution, with the highest number of publications and total citations; 'testis', 'male infertility' and 'apoptosis' were the most researched trend topics. The future trends on spermatogenesis are likely to favour hot topics such as 'inflammation', 'transcriptomics' and 'exosomes'. In the conclusion, our study analyses the research trends on spermatogenesis over the past 10 years, which will provide a reference for researchers in this field.

The importance of adherence to international standards for depositing open data in public repositories

There has been an important global interest in Open Science, which include open data and methods, in addition to open access publications. It has been proposed that public availability of raw data increases the value and the possibility of confirmation of scientific findings, in addition to the potential of reducing research waste. Availability of raw data in open repositories facilitates the adequate development of meta-analysis and the cumulative evaluation of evidence for specific topics. In this commentary, we discuss key elements about data sharing in open repositories and we invite researchers around the world to deposit their data in them.

Creating Logical Flow When Writing Scientific Articles

Numerous guidelines on how to write a scientific article have been published. Many books and articles giving detailed instructions on how to develop a research question, perform a literature search, or design a study protocol are widely available. However, there are few guidelines on how to create logical flow when writing a scientific article. Logical flow is the key to achieving a smooth and orderly progression of ideas, sentences, paragraphs, and content towards a convincing conclusion. This article provides guidelines for creating logical flow when writing the text and main sections of a scientific article. The first step is creating a draft outline of the whole article. Once completed, the draft outline is developed into a single, coherent article that logically explains the study. Logical flow in the text is created by using precise and concise words, composing clear sentences, and connecting well-structured paragraphs. The use of transitions connects sentences and paragraphs, ensuring clarity and coherence when presenting academic arguments and conclusions. Logical flow in the main sections of a scientific article is achieved by presenting the whole story of the article sequentially in the introduction, methods, results, and discussion, focusing attention on the most important points in each section, and connecting all of these to the main purpose of the study.

Open science practices for eating disorders research

This editorial seeks to encourage the increased application of three open science practices in eating disorders research: Preregistration, Registered Reports, and the sharing of materials, data, and code. For each of these practices, we introduce updated International Journal of Eating Disorders author and reviewer guidance. Updates include the introduction of open science badges; specific instructions about how to improve transparency; and the introduction of Registered Reports of systematic or meta-analytical reviews. The editorial also seeks to encourage the study of open science practices. Open science practices pose considerable time and other resource burdens. Therefore, research is needed to help determine the value of these added burdens and to identify efficient strategies for implementing open science practices.