Suppor&veCareinCancer

FredAshburyPhDMACE

Editor-in-ChiefJune30,2018

Toronto,Canada

SupporBveCareinCancer

WELCOMEWri$ngforPeer-ReviewedPublica$on:

KeyIssues&LessonsLearnedExperiencesfrom:

DrsF.Ashbury,J.Herrstedt,I.Olver

TableofContents

1. Welcome

2.  AuthorPerspec$ve

3.  EditorPerspec$ve–SubmissionProcess

4.  ReviewerPerspec$ve

5.  Editor-Resubmission

GoalandObjecBvesforSession

SpecificObjecBvesPar$cipantswillgainabeRerunderstandingofSCC’srequirementsfor:

–  submissionprocessesandhowtoposi$onpapersproperly–  preparingthemanuscript,includingelementsofsuccessfulwri$ng

–  reviewerconsidera$ons,and–  respondingeffec$velytodecisionsandrecommenda$ons

Goal:Tofacilitatepar$cipants'understandingoftherequirementsforpreparingandsubmiYng

manuscriptsforpublica$onconsidera$ontoSCC.

Par$cipantsinthissessionwillNOTgetaguaranteethat,asaresultofinvolvementinthisworkshop,anythingyouwritewillbe

published!

5

NOTE

TheAuthor’sView

IanOlverAMMDPhDProfessorofTransla$onalCancerResearchDirectorUniversityofSouthAustraliacancerResearchIns$tute

Disclosures

•  MSDFundedResearchandSpeaker(FundstoUniSA)

PlanningtheSubmission:KeySteps

•  Isthistherightjournalforyourpaper?•  Whattypeofar$clesuitsbest?•  Whoqualifiesforauthorship?•  Howtopreparethemanuscript•  ItisamaRerofstyle•  Thesubmissionprocess•  ResubmiYngaderreview

SubjectMaSer

•  OfficialjournaloftheMul$na$onalAssocia$onofSuppor$veCareinCancer(MASCC)–  Focusencompassesthefullspectrumofthesuppor$vecareof

cancerpa$entsfromdiagnosisthroughtreatmentextendingtosurvivorshipandend-of-lifecare

–  Mul$disciplinary–  Mul$na$onal(membersdrawnfrommorethan60countries)

•  PartnershipwithISOO(Interna$onalSocietyofOralOncology)

•  MASCCStudyGroupsprovideusefulframeofreference–  www.mascc.org.-16groups

MASCCStudyGroups

•  An$eme$c•  Educa$on•  Geriatrics•  Neutropenia,Infec$onand

Myelosuppression•  Nutri$onandCachexia•  Pediatrics•  Psychosocial•  SkinToxici$es

•  BoneComplica$ons•  Fa$gue•  Hemostasis•  Mucosi$s•  NeurologicalComplica$ons•  OralCare•  Pallia$veCare•  SkinToxici$es•  Rehabilita$on,Survivorship

andQOL

EvaluaBngtheSignificanceoftheManuscript’sCentralTheme

•  Isaworthwhileques$on/topicbeingaddressed?•  WillitbeofinteresttothereadersoftheJSCC?

•  Hasthisques$on/topicbeenaddressedpreviously?

•  Willthemanuscriptaddinameaningfulwaytotheexis$ngbodyofknowledge

⁻  Providingnewdata⁻  Confirmingpriorcontroversialfindings⁻  Challengingpriorfindings

TypesofArBcles

OriginalArBcles•  3500words,45references,nomorethansixfigures/tables•  Mostcommonfortrialreportsetc.

ReviewArBcles•  4,000wordsMethodologicalguidelinesinclude

–  CONSORTforrandomisedclinicaltrials(e.g.reportrefusalsanddropoutstoevaluatebias)

–  STARDforstudiesofdiagnos$caccuracy–  PRISMAorMOOSEforsystema$creviewsandmeta-analysis–  STROBEforepidemiology–  COREQforqualita$veresearch

•  generallysolicitedbytheeditorsbutunsolicitedproposalsofabstractandoutlinecanbesenttotheeditorsforconsidera$on

TypesofArBcle

LeSertotheEditor•  1000words,10references•  Occasionalifsubjectisanar$cleinJSCCandwillbepassedtooriginalauthorsforcomment

Commentary•  1000words,20references•  Ar$clesofinnova$veareasoropportuni$esfor

furtherresearch

Authorship

Firstauthor•  Primarycoordinatorofmanuscript•  Primaryauthoroffirstdrad•  Coordinatescontribu$onsofotherauthors•  Responsibleformanuscriptsubmission•  Coordinatesrevisionsandresponsetoreviewers

Authorship

ContribuBngauthorsMusthavehadsubstan$veroleinworkdetailedinmanuscript

•  substan$alcontribu$onstoconcep$onanddesign,oracquisi$onofdata,oranalysisandinterpreta$onofdata;

•  seenandapprovedthefinalversionofthemanuscript,andrevisions.

• dradedthear$cleorreviseditcontentcri$cally

ManuscriptPreparaBon:KeyComponents(IMRADFormat)

•  TitleandAbstract•  Introduc$on•  Methods•  Results

– Figures– Tables

•  Discussion•  References

TitleandAbstract

Title•  Mustbeconcise•  Mustsummarizethemainpointofthemanuscript•  Ideallyshouldcatchtheinterestofreaderandreviewer

Abstract•  Standalonesummaryofpaper•  Formanyreviewersservesasacri$caldeterminantofmanuscript’svalue

•  Unlesscompelling,willbeonlypor$onofthemanuscriptseenbymanyreaders

•  SHOULDBEWRITTENLAST(soitsummarizeswhatisactuallyinthepaper)

IntroducBon

•  Briefbackgroundontopicunderstudy•  Citeanyrelevantpriorwork•  Providera$onaleforcurrentreport•  Beconciseandfocused-THISISNOTTHEDISCUSSION

•  Explicitlystatethepurposeofthemanuscriptattheendontheintroduc$on

Methods

•  Definepopula$onunderstudy•  Studyendpoints:primaryandsecondary•  Eligibility/Ineligibility•  Randomizedtrials

⁻ Definerandomiza$onprocess⁻ Definestra$fica$onfactors

Methods

•  Fulldescrip$onofthemethodsofevalua$on

–  Quan$ta$veorqualita$vemethods

•  Sta$s$calMethods– Methodsemployedtodefinesamplesize– Methodsemployedtoconducttheanalysisofoutcomes

•  Describeethicsreviewconsentproceduresandpoten$alCOI

Results

•  Fullycharacterizethepopula$onunderstudy–  mostefficientlydonewithatablelis$ngsubjectcharacteris$cs

•  Fullydetailoutcomesforallstudyendpoints–  Efficacyoutcomes–  Adverseeffects

•  Everyitemcitedinthemethodssec$onshouldhaveacorrespondingentryintheresultssec$on

•  Presentobjec$veinforma$ononly-SAVEINTERPRETATIONFORDISCUSSION

Results:TablesandFigures

•  Appropriatevehiclesfordatanoteasilypresentedastext

•  Classic“Table1”–Pa$entCharacteris$cs

•  Shouldusesparingly

•  Simplicityimportant–donotoverloadwithdata

•  DONOTREPEATalltheinforma$onfoundinthetablesandfiguresinthetext

Discussion

•  Beginbyansweringques$onposedattheendoftheintroduc$on

•  Donotre-presentresults•  Reviewrelevantinforma$onpertainingtothetopicof

interestprecedingthecurrentreport

•  Detailhowthecurrentreportaddstotheexis$ngbodyofinforma$on

•  Donotpresentanyresultsforthefirst$meinthediscussion

•  Candidlycitethelimita$onsofthecurrentreport

•  Brieflyspeculateonrelevantfutureresearch

References•  Priortomanuscriptprepara$on,acomprehensive

literaturereviewshouldbeconductedtodefineallkeyreferences

•  Provideappropriatecita$onsinintroduc$onanddiscussionsec$ons;under-referencingcommonerrorinsubmissions

•  Accuratelyci$ngthereference;commonforerrors

•  Primarysourcesratherthansecondaryinreviewar$cles

•  Ensurethatcita$onsarethemostcurrentreportoftheciteddata(e.g.haveabstractsbeenpublished?)

StylisBcIssues

•  Cri$callyimportanttoavoidgramma$calandspellingerrors

•  Spellcheckisawonderfulthing(butnotassolecheck)•  Beconcise-avoidredundantsentencesandcompound

words•  Avoidjargon•  Useparagraphsappropriately-newsubject=new

paragraph•  Usecorrectverbtense•  UniformrequirementsformanuscriptssubmiRedto

biomedicaljournalshRp://www.icjme.org/andstylemanuals(DukeUniversity)andJSCCinstruc$ons

ManuscriptSubmission

•  CoverleRertoEditor-in-Chief–  ImportantmeanstoconciselydefinethesignificanceofthemanuscriptanditsrelevancetothereadersofJSCC

•  On-linesubmissionprocess– www.editorialmanager.com/jscc/

Submi]ngtoJSCC

Summary

•  Doesthemanuscriptaddtotheexis$ngbodyofinforma$oninameaningfulway(isitgeneralizable)

•  IsthesubjectmaRerappropriateforJSCC•  Carefullyreviewandcomplywith“Instruc$onstoAuthors”•  DefineintheIntroduc$onthekeyissuethemanuscript

addresses•  Carefullydescribemethodsemployedandobjec$velydetail

results•  Carefullydetailinthediscussionhowthemanuscript

addressesthekeyques$on(s)posedintheintroduc$on•  Me$culouslyproofreadthemanuscripttoeliminatespelling

andgramma$calerrors•  Ifaresubmissionisrequestedsubmita$melyresponse

Suppor&veCareinCancer

FredAshburyPhDMACE

Editor’sPerspecBveJune30,2018

Toronto,Canada

Facultydisclosure

None

Authorsubmitsmanuscript

EditorinChiefreviewssubmission

AssignstoAssociateEditor(AE)

Reject

AEiden$fiesandassignsreviewersandsetsdeadline

forreview

AEassessesreviewerscomments&submitsrecommenda$ontoEditor

Reject

REVIEW

MajororMinorRevisionAuthorsubmitsrevisedmanuscript

ACCEPTED

RejectREVIEW

TheSubmissionProcess

Thesubmissionprocess:CommunicaBngwiththeEditorEditorsselectcontent,overseetheeditorialoffice,managepeerreviewforaccurateandfairappraisalofsubmissions,andensuretheintegrityofthejournal.

Allcommunica$ons(Queries,submissionleRers,responsestocri$ques,andques$ons)shouldhaveaprofessionaltone.

CoverleRertoEditor-in-Chief•  Importantmeanstoconciselydefinethesignificanceofthemanuscriptanditsrelevancetothereadersofthetargetjournal

EditorConsidera&ons….WhatdoPeer-ReviewedJournalEditorsthinkaboutwhentheyreceiveamanuscript?•  Doesthear$clefitthejournal?–i.e.,isitrelevantfor

thereadership?•  Isthesciencesolid?•  Aretheresultsfairlyinterpretedforthescience?•  Dotheresults,conclusions&recommenda$ons

advancethefield?–  Relatedtothiswillthepaperbecitedbyothers?IMPACTFACTOR

•  Isitwell-wriRen?•  Aretheauthorsfreeofanyconflicts-of-interest?

33

ReviewingforMedicalJournals

JørnHerrstedtMD,DMSc

ProfessorofClinicalOncologyZealandUniversityHospitalRoskildeUniversityofCopenhagen,Denmark

Facultydisclosure

None

Reviewingyourfirst10manuscripts

•  Papershouldbeinyourexactareaofexper$se

•  Partnerwithanexperiencedcolleague

•  Readinstruc$onsforauthorscarefully

•  Takeyour$meanddoame$culousreview

•  Learnfromtheotherreviewers

•  Follow-up–hasthemanuscriptbeenaccepted/rejected?

Reviewingmanuscript11-100

•  Papershouldbeinanareaofyourexper$se

•  Youhavelearnedbyexperienceandimprovedwithprac$ce

•  Less$me-consuming(butnotalways)

•  Fine-tune“yourown”systemforastandardizedandfairreview

•  Journalrejec$onrate?

•  Peerreviewcanhelpauthorsimprovethequalityofa

manuscript

Reviewingmanuscript100+

•  Don’tdoasloppyjob!

•  Con$nuetocare!

FirstImpression

•  Isthelanguageclear,includingaconcise$tleandabstract?

•  Doesthemanuscriptfollowalogicalsequence?

Topic

•  Q1 IsthetopicrelevantfortheJournal?•  Q2 Researchques$on?•  Q3 Doesthemanuscriptreportsomethingnew?

–  Agoodpaperonthepharmacologyofadrugnolongerincommonusemaynotbeimportant.

–  Astudythatconfirmswhatisalreadypublishedhaslimiteduse.

–  Alocalexperienceonlyrelevanttoaverylocalsitua$onmaynothavegeneralinterest.

FundingSource

•  Pharmaceu$calcompany– Medicalwriter?

•  Peerreviewedexternalgran$ngbodies

•  Internalfunds

Plagiarism•  Maybediscoveredbychanceorbecauseoffamiliarity

withliterature.•  Styleofasec$onmaydifferfromrestofpaper.•  Theuseoflanguageofapapermaysuddenlyimprove

forasec$on.•  Journalshavesophis$catedsodwarebutyoucanGoogle

phrasesifsuspicious.

Plagiarism

Wedidn’tfindanyplagiarism,butwefound6wri$ngissues.

www.grammarly.com

StructureofaReview

•  Summarisethepaperbriefly•  Strengthsandweaknesses•  Thewri$ngandpresenta$on(languageandtypos)•  Thequalityofthestudyandinteresttoapar$cular

group•  Recommenda$onwithjus$fica$on

UniformRequirements

–  Interna$onalCommiReeofMedicalJournalEditors–  hRp:www.icmje.org/

•  StyleManuals(e.g.DukeUniversityLibrary)•  Instruc$onstoauthors-individualjournals

Title

•  Concise

•  DirectaRen$ontowhatthepaperwillreveal

•  Doesn’tgiveconclusionsunlessdrama$c

•  Journalstyle

Abstract

•  Some$mesthatisallthatisread

•  Itshouldthereforeaccuratelyreflectthecontentofthear$cle

•  Whydidtheywanttodothestudy-hypothesis-introduc$on?

•  Whatdidtheydo–method?

•  Whatdidtheyfind–results(efficacyandtoxicity)?

•  Whatdoesitmean–discussion?

IntroducBon

•  Isthespecificpurpose(orhypothesis)stated?

•  Onlyper$nentreferencesshouldbecited

•  Nodatafromtheworkshouldbeincluded

•  Noconclusionsfromtheworkshouldbeincluded

Methodology•  Isthemethodologyappropriatetotheaim?

•  Isitdescribedindetail,sothatdataandresultscanbereproduced?

•  Methodologicalguidelinesinclude–  CONSORTforrandomisedclinicaltrials–  STARDforstudiesofdiagnos$caccuracy–  PRISMAforsystema$creviewsandmeta-analysis–  STROBEforobserva$onalstudies–  EQUATORNetworkorNLM’sResearchRepor$ngGuidelinesandIni$a$vesforrepor$ngguidelines

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

BMJ 2010;340:c869

hRp://www.consort-statement.org/

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

Flowdiagramoftheprogressthroughthephasesofaparallelrandomisedtrialoftwogroups

BMJ 2010;340:698-702.

PotenBalProblemsinRCT•  Samplesize•  Randomisa$on•  Stra$fica$on•  Blinding•  Controlarm•  Inten$ontotreat•  Sta$s$$calmethod(1sidedversus2sided)•  Aredataanalyzedaccordingtoprotocolspecifica$ons?•  Fromabstracttoar$cle?

• 254abstractsacceptedforthecongress• 169(67%)werelaterpublishedasar$cles

• In1.5%theconclusionwaschangedfromposi$vetonega$ve

• In5.1%theconclusionwaschangedfromnega$vetoposi$ve

• Intotalin6.6%oftheabstracts,theconclusionwaschanged!

StaBsBcs

Havedetermina$onsbeendoneprospec$vely?•  Popula$onsamplesize•  Defini$onofprimaryandsecondaryoutcomes

–  Subanalysis?•  Sta$s$calmethods–use95%CInotP-valuealone•  Numberand$mingofinterimanalyses•  Earlystoppingrules•  Publica$onpolicy

Ethics

•  Recognisethatthemanuscriptisaconfiden$aldocument

•  Conflictsofinterest(reviewer)•  Anunethicalexperimentshouldnotbepublished

– WastheprojectapprovedbyanethicscommiReeanddidthesubjectsgivewriReninformedconsent?

– WasthestudyinaccordancewiththeHelsinkiDeclara$on?

•  Ascien$ficallyflawedstudycannotbeethical

Results•  Areresultsreportedinalogicalway?•  Hasthestudyques$onbeenanswered?

–  reject/confirmahypothesis

•  Arethemostimportantfindingsreportedfirst?

•  Weredataonallprimaryandsecondaryoutcomesreported?

•  Aredatagivenasabsolutenumbers(notpercentagesonly)?

•  Areallcomponentsofacompositeendpointreported?

•  Aredataduplicatedintables/diagramsandinthetext?

•  Arepointsfordiscussionindicated?

Results•  Areresultsreportedinalogicalway?•  Hasthestudyques$onbeenanswered?

–  reject/confirmahypothesis

•  Arethemostimportantfindingsreportedfirst?

•  Weredataonallprimaryandsecondaryoutcomesreported?

•  Aredatagivenasabsolutenumbers(notpercentagesonly)?

•  Areallcomponentsofacompositeendpointreported?

•  Aredataduplicatedintables/diagramsandinthetext?

•  Arepointsfordiscussionindicated?

Discussion

•  Brieflysummarisethemainfindings

•  Givestrongestresultfirst

•  Aretheresultsinthecontextoftheliterature?

•  Limita$onsofthestudy?

•  Areconclusionsjus$fiedbytheresults?

•  Anyimplica$onsforfutureresearch?

•  Anyimplica$onsforclinicalprac$ce?

References

•  Havetheoriginal(pivotalstudies)andthemostrecentreferencesintheareabeenincluded?

•  Arereferencesnumberedconsecu$velyintheorderinwhichtheyaremen$onedinthetext?

•  VancouverorHarvardsystem(journalinstruc$ons)

RecommendaBontotheeditor

•  Accept

•  Minorrevisionsneededbeforepoten$alacceptance

•  Majorrevisionsneededbeforepoten$alacceptance

•  Reject

Resubmission

•  Didtheauthorsreplytoallcommentsandques$onsfromthereviewers?

•  Didtheauthorsupdatethemanuscriptaccordingly?

•  Hastherevisedmanuscriptachievedascien$ficlevelhighenoughtobepublished?

ResubmissionCommentsandquesBonsfromthereviewers Replyfromthe

authorsReviewer1

Q1

Q2

Q3

Reviewer2

Comment1

Q1

Reviewer3

Comment1

Q1

Q2

Resubmission

RespondingtotheEditorialReviewEditor’sPerspecBve…Again…!

RespondingtotheEditorialReview

Editorialdecisions•  Reject•  Poten$allyacceptablewithmajorrevisions

•  Poten$allyacceptablewithminorrevisions•  Accept

RespondingtotheEditorialReview

KeypointsinresubmiYng•  LEARNFROMTHEREVIEWERS’COMMENTS•  Developaresponsetoeachcommentinconcertwithalltheauthors

•  Modifythemanuscriptaccordingly•  DetailinaleReraccompanyingtheresubmissionspecificresponsestoeachreviewerscommentci$ngtheappropriatemanuscriptrevisions

•  Ensuretoneofresponseisprofessional•  Obtainallauthorsapprovalfortherevisions•  BETIMELYINRESUBMITTING–thejournalmayhaveaspecifiedBmeframeforresubmission(e.g.,4weeks)

FinalThoughts

•  Putyouregoaside–youwilllearnfromtheexperiences(good,badandugly)

•  Whenyouarereadytosubmit/re-submit,createacheck-listtoensureyou’vecoveredeverythingrequiredbythejournaltoavoidre-workanddelays

72

SubmissionChecklist

q  ManuscriptwithaTitlePage(worddoc)q  Ensurelistofauthorsiscorrectq  ConflictofInterestStatementincludedwithin

manuscriptjustbeforereferencesq  AuthorshipDisclosureforms

⁻  Correspondingauthoratoriginalsubmission⁻  RemainingAuthorsforrevisedmanuscripts

q  Figures/Tablesinseparatedocumentsq  ResponsetoReviewersforRevisedManuscripts

⁻  Carefullyconsiderthereviewercommentsandsubmitalistofresponsestothecomments

q  ReviewInstruc$onsforAuthorsonwebsite

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Thankyou!

•  Anyotherques$ons?

74