Getting published

Getting published is one of the most effective ways of reaching a wide audience. However, there are some basic rules to follow in order to successfully ‘break into’ publishing.

Rule 1

Consent may be needed for publication if the work was funded, for while the intellectual property of material on which you have worked is yours, the data may belong to the paymaster – a tricky relationship and one that needs careful negotiation.

Rule 2

How to choose which journal? First consider why you are publishing, then where. Weekly professional magazines have house styles, which lend themselves to a ‘quick read’, unlike the more academically prestigious research and development journals, which in general demand a more attentive perusal. The former will be ideal to bring issues to the attention of many, without too much detail; the latter will more advantageous in attracting a good rating in the overall academic review system , and possibly help the author to become established as an expert in their chosen field. As a general rule it is better to publish one solid paper of around 5000 words rather than two or three short articles. However, having published the substantive paper it is a very good move in terms of dissemination to extract several short papers subsequently, referring back to the original work.

Publishing houses have different styles of layout and referencing, and to help would-be authors they usually produce guidelines for authors, either in each issue, or on request. The two major referencing systems used in the UK are the Vancouver system, which places a number beside a reference within the text, and then lists references in numeric order at the end of the paper, or the Harvard references which brackets the name and date within the text and lists the references alphabetically at the end of the paper. All references should be properly sourced, and if more than one is used to illustrate a point then they should be listed in the text in date order – usually the most recent being the first. Do not be fooled into thinking that referencing is unimportant as it comes at the end of a paper or article – it is crucial to properly conducted work and important in acknowledging the work of others. A good example of referencing is given at the back of every issue of Nursing Times Research, in its guide to authors (Emap Healthcare).

Rule 3

This is about clarity and style. Whichever publishing source you decide to seek, it is important to be clear as to what the message is in the work that you are going to present. Your chance to express yourself should not be wasted, so don’t lose your reader with jargonistic style or repetitive sentences. It may be helpful to read the text out loud before you put it away for a while - it is amazing how, particularly with word-processing, one can type entire sentences leaving out essential verbs! Finally, put the writing away in a drawer and leave it alone for week or so. The improved objectivity that this brings is well worth the delay.

Processes:

Once you have sent your work to the journal of your choice it is will be logged into their system and a letter or acknowledgement is sent to the author. The work is then usually sent out to experts in the field, without author identification, for review. This process which can take from a week or so to some months, depending on the reviewer who is not usually paid and fits this activity in with the many other aspects of their work and travels. Real objectivity comes with the editors’ and external reviewers’ comments, and this can be hard to take, but it is wise to assume that they are given with goodwill, and to try to amend the paper in the light of the comments made. Editors are gatekeepers, selecting the good and rejecting those either bellow the required standard or containing material, which is inappropriate for their journal. Papers are normally accepted that are considered to include the following:

  • Original work
  • Scientifically sound
  • Relevant to the readership
  • Not previously published

In return the publishers have a duty to handle work sensitively, and within reasonable time scales. It is up to the editor to facilitate unbiased and collaborative working with reviewers and authors. As an author I have found reviewers’ comments invaluable, and I know from my work as an editor that many very senior academics have appreciated the thought and attention given to improve their work. The firm reject is, of course, the hardest to bear but many a good author has been the recipient of one or more of these, so either try another outlet, or start again. Once the ‘glass ceiling’ is smashed there is a knock on effect, which means you are kept busy for sometime, if you have the inclination! Seek the help of known experts; consider being a second author for a first try.

The reviewing process over, and publication agreed, printed ‘galleys’ are usually sent to the author for checking - this is not the time to change large quantities of words, merely to check for misprints or omissions from the original. Publication time will vary from journal to journal and in some cases may be dependent on issues of the day and the ‘newsworthiness’ of the work. However, all journals, in their aim to attract authors, try to publish within a few months of acceptance.

Getting published is exciting – it brings a new dimension to your work and opportunities for interaction with fellow professionals and they with you. How you take that dimension forward is up to you, but the possibilities are endless, from developing a certain amount of authority at a local level to developing your own web-site, to speaking at conferences and contributing to major publications.

Key points:

  • Is consent to publish required?
  • Select the appropriate magazine/journal for the topic
  • Follow the publishing house format
  • Use plain English and read the work aloud before sending it off
  • Learn from reviewers’ comments
  • Don’t give up!

Adapted from: Bishop V. 2003. Knocking down ivory towers; publish and be damned. In eds. Freshwater D, Bishop V. Nursing Research in Context: Appreciation, Application and Professional Development. Palgrave/Macmillan, Basingstoke.