|
 
 |
| CORRESPONDENCE |
|
|
|
| Year : 2014 | Volume
: 32
| Issue : 3 | Page : 350-351 |
| |
Rejection of a manuscript: The other side of the story
R Patnayak1, A Jena2
1 Department of Pathology, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Department of Surgical Oncology, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
| Date of Web Publication | 10-Jul-2014 |
Correspondence Address:
R Patnayak
Department of Pathology, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0255-0857.136611
How to cite this article:
Patnayak R, Jena A. Rejection of a manuscript: The other side of the story. Indian J Med Microbiol 2014;32:350-1 |
Dear Editor,
We have read the article "Rejection of a manuscript" by Kapil, with interest. [1] The points raised by this article are relevant in the field of microbiology as well as in other disciplines. As mentioned in the article, the reviewers are indeed the pillars of the entire process.
In view of today's motto of "publish or perish" many budding authors are encountered daily. [2] Surprisingly, the number of scientific journals is also mushrooming in a proportionate manner.
For the first timer authors, getting a manuscript rejected is an entire novel experience. [3] For many of them, it results in heartburns. The role of an experienced reviewer in this matter lies in giving constructive comments, and suggestions to improve the manuscript. The time taken to review also should be reasonable. Many reviewers will be busy with their routine work besides reviewing the manuscripts. So, if they could not give adequate time to review an article, they should intimate the same to the journal website promptly. Many of the articles submitted to the journal would not meet the criteria set by that particular journal. In these cases they should be returned to the authors without causing unnecessary delay.
On their part, the authors prior to writing their articles should spend considerable time in the pre-planning stage itself, so as to have an appropriate study design. While writing the introduction and discussion part, they should make marginal notes in order to properly cite the accurate source of information and avoid the allegation of plagiarism. [1] Going through the journal's website for knowing the journals preferences and other instructions including reference style also can save precious time. Whenever necessary, statistics also should be used. [3] Copy right and ethical board clearance tends to be other tricky issues. Therefore, before conducting a study, consent forms should be prepared and properly explained to the patients and their attendants.
In spite of all this, even if an article gets rejected, then instead of getting dejected, one should go back to the paper again, take suggestions from the reviewers' comments and try to rewrite the article. The articles, particularly, case reports should be carefully chosen so as to have a clinical significance. After all, ultimately, our articles should contribute towards scientific literature as well as help the patients.
| ~ References | |  |
| 1. | Kapil A. Rejection of a manuscript. Indian J Med Microbiol 2013;31:329-30. 
[PUBMED]  |
| 2. | Satyanarayana S. Unethical practices in scientific publications. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2011;54:1-2.
[PUBMED] |
| 3. | Ramsay-Baggs P. Feeling rejected? Ann Maxillofac Surg 2012;2:1-2.
[PUBMED] |
|
