Nurse Educator Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 290-297 Copyright * 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Nurse Educator
Nursing Journal Editor Survey Results to Help Nurses Publish Sally Northam, PhD, RN & Danice B. Greer, PhD, RN, BC & Linda Rath, PhD, RN Amy Toone, PhD, APRN, FNP-BC & This study gathered data from 61 nursing journal editors (31% response rate) on 7 variables. The information is designed to help novice and seasoned authors make decisions about journal selection for article submission. Variables include the average number of submitted manuscripts annually, the percentage of initially accepted and resubmitted manuscripts, weeks from submission to decision, number of reviewers, types of accepted manuscripts, and top reasons for rejection. Keywords: journals; manuscript; nursing journals; nursing literature; writing for publication
M
anuscript publication is an important way for nurses to share ideas and disseminate research findings. It is also used as a measure of faculty scholarship for promotion and tenure. This article reports on a descriptive study that examined variables influencing author success in publishing manuscripts in nursing journals. Specifically, the study shows the average number of submitted manuscripts, the percentage of accepted manuscripts, and the percentage of accepted resubmissions annually. Information about weeks from submission to decision, number of reviewers, and reasons for rejection are also reported.
Background Knowledge Successful publishing in nursing journals is theorized to involve supply and demand from the journal’s standpoint1,2 and a process of developing writing skill from an author’s standpoint.3 Journals seek manuscripts that match the journal focus and guidelines, are written clearly, and fill gaps in the literature. Unfortunately, Kennedy,3 editor of the American Journal of Nursing, recently related that she and other editors have noticed a decline in the quality of submitted manuscripts. ‘‘Many come from students hoping to publish theirI projects required by master’s or doctoral programs I (but) wellestablished guidelines and formats for writingI scholarly papersI aren’t followed.’’3(p7) Author Affiliations: Professors (Drs Northam and Toone) and Assistant Professors (Drs Greer and Rath) of Nursing, The University of Texas at Tyler. This article is dedicated in memory of Suzanne Smith. She was the consummate editor who mentored and encouraged countless authors. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Correspondence: Dr Northam, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, The University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Blvd, Tyler, Texas 75799 ([email protected]). Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.nurseeducatoronline.com). Accepted for publication: August 9, 2014 DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000086
290
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Authors want to publish and share information but generally find the process challenging, especially as novices. Writing takes practice and can be time consuming4 and stressful.5 A 2014 poll of stressful jobs ranked newspaper reporters in the top 10 most stressful jobs.6 Anna Quindlen,7 a Pulitzer Prize winning author, recently said: ‘‘Some days I fear writing dreadfully, but I do it anyway. I’ve discovered that sometimes writing badly can eventually lead to something better. Not writing at all leads to nothing.’’7(p5) Thus, even professional writers can find the experience of writing stressful. Many articles have been written to help novice authors achieve success. Some recent articles offer advice for specific types of papers including theses,8 reviews of literature,9 stories from the bedside,10 capstone projects,11 program evaluations,12 research reports,13,14 clinical practice guides,15,16 and presentations.17 Transforming a paper or an idea into a publishable paper is a rigorous but worthwhile task, which is made easier by adhering to the guidelines offered by the target journal.
Purpose Journal Web sites have author guidelines with helpful information about details of the authorship and submission process. However, guidelines generally lack information about the annual manuscript submission, initial manuscript and resubmitted manuscript acceptance information, time from submission to decision, the number of reviewers, and reasons for rejection, which are helpful to aspiring authors making journal selection decisions. The purpose of this study was to gather that information into an accessible and useful report to increase the number and quality of articles available to journals and help authors find the best article-journal match possible.
Methods Design This descriptive survey study was based on the following research questions: What are the relationships among number Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
of annual issues, submitted manuscripts, and percentage of submitted and resubmitted accepted for publication? Does the number of reviewers influence original and resubmitted manuscript acceptance rates and weeks to notification of a decision? What types of manuscripts are accepted by journals? What are the common reasons for rejection, and what advice do editors have for nurse authors? A survey of journal editors was done to answer these questions.
Sample A list of 3092 journals in CINAHL18 was reviewed, and 200 journals with nursing in the title or known to be nursing journals were selected. The resulting list of 200 journals is close to the number of 212 nursing journals identified after an extensive 27-month search done by 3 librarians.19 Journal Web sites were reviewed, and detailed information was put into an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet includes the journal title, Web site link, editor name and e-mail, journal focus, and some author guideline information such as manuscript style and length. The spreadsheet provides nurse authors with a quick reference useful for reviewing journal foci and links to Web sites and is available as Table, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links .lww.com/NE/A164. Institutional review board approval was obtained for the study. Nursing journal editors were invited via e-mail to complete an online survey about their journal review process to gather data not available on the Web sites. The e-mail contained a link to a survey on Qualtrics, an online software program that stores responses on a secure server. After 1 month, a low response rate of 20% led to the use of several additional strategies to increase participation. Nonrespondent editors were sent a second e-mail requesting participation. Two editors replied to the e-mail and expressed concerns about how the information would be used. Per the suggestion of the Nurse Educator interim editor, a copy of a previously published journal survey article20 was attached to the e-mail so editors could see the prior manuscript content and style. In addition, an invitation to participate was posted along with the prior article on a nurse editor Listserv. The final response rate was 31%, with 61 peerreviewed journals represented. Instrument This survey included some previously used items from the 2010 version,20 with the addition of items about acceptance rates of submissions and revised manuscripts. The survey was shortened to reduce subject burden and facilitate a higher response rate than achieved in 2010 (27%). The survey items included fill-in items for the journal name, editorial pages per issue, average number of submitted manuscripts annually, the percentage of accepted manuscripts and accepted resubmissions annually, article word and page limits, weeks from submission to decision, and the number of reviewers. Visual analog items asked, ‘‘What percentage of the time does each of the following cause you to reject manuscripts?’’ with movable bars from 0% to 100% for each of 12 listed reasons commonly identified in the literature. Dichotomous yes/no items were used to determine whether the journal editor accepts literature reviews, original research, innovations in practice, case studies, articles with continuing education units, and concept analyses. A final open-ended item was: ‘‘Please feel free to offer input to prospective authors.’’ Nurse Educator
Results Data were downloaded from Qualtrics and analyzed using IBM SPSS version 20 (Chicago, Illinois). Exploratory data analysis was done following the guidelines of Field.21 No continuous variables met the parametric assumptions of normality, so nonparametric statistics were used to evaluate hypotheses.
Represented Journals Survey respondents represented a wide range of journals. When asked about the primary focus of the journal, the highest percentage of editors (26%) selected the ‘‘other’’ category instead of 1 of the 17 identified choices. Alternative foci offered by the editor in response to what ‘‘other’’ meant included policy, dermatology, neurology, and radiology. Research (19.7%) was the second most common focus, followed by general nursing practice (9.8%), education (8.2%), advanced practice (4.9%), maternal newborn (4.9%), critical care (4.9%), and cardiology (4.9%). Table, Supplemental Digital Content 2, lists the journals and their 3 primary foci, http://links.lww.com/NE/ A165. This table can help prospective authors target journals that match their manuscript focus. Manuscript Submission Number of issues per year ranged from 1 to 18 (mean, 6 [SD, 3]), with 2 nursing magazines excluded as outliers. The annual number of submitted manuscripts ranged from 10 to 1000 (mean, 179 [SD, 177]). Acceptance rates ranged from 10% to 95% (mean, 45.62 [SD, 21.70]), again with the magazines excluded as outliers. The percentage of revised manuscripts accepted ranged from 30% to 100% (mean, 77.57 [SD, 16.14]). There was a significant relationship between the number of annual issues and the number of submitted manuscripts (rs = .49, P G .01), but there was no significant relationship between annual issues and the percentage of accepted manuscripts. The researchers had expected that journals with more annual issues would have a higher acceptance rate. There was a significant inverse relationship between the number of submitted manuscripts and the percentage accepted (rs = j0.55, P G .01), indicating that journals that receive a large number of submissions can be more selective and thus reject more manuscripts. There was a significant relationship between the percentage of accepted manuscripts and the percentage of accepted revised manuscripts (rs = 0.37, P G .01). The researchers had expected a higher correlation. Manuscript Management The number of reviewers for each manuscript ranged from 2 to 4 (mean, 2.64 [SD, 0.64]). There was no significant difference in the percentage of accepted manuscripts or the percentage of accepted resubmitted manuscripts in the following 3 groups: journals with 2 reviewers, 3 reviewers, or 4 reviewers. The number of weeks for authors to be notified of decisions ranged from 3 to 16 (mean, 8.4 [SD, 3.6]). There was no relationship between the number of reviewers and the weeks to decision. Table 1 indicates the number of journal issues published per year, number of manuscript submitted and percentage accepted per year, reviewer information, and number of weeks from submission to author notification. Types of Accepted Articles Table 2 shows the varied types of articles published in journals and guides nurses in deciding on the type of manuscript to Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
291
Table 1. Journal Review Information
Journal Name
% of No. No. Weeks From No. Manuscripts Manuscripts Submission to % of Revised Accepts Uniform Accepted No. Issues Submitted Format per Year Reviewers Notification Articles Accepted per Year Yr
AACN Advanced Critical Care 4 ADVANCE for Nurses 21 Advanced Emergency 4 Nursing Journal Advances in Neonatal Care 6 Advances in Nursing Science 4 American Journal of Nursing 12 American Nurse Today 12 Biological Research for Nursing 4 4 Canadian Assoc of Nephrology Nurses and Technologists Journal Canadian Journal of Nursing 4 Leadership CIN: Computers, Informatics, 18 Nursing Complementary Therapies in 4 Clinical Practice Critical Care Nursing Clinics 4 Dimensions of Critical Care 6 Nursing Education for Primary Care 6 European Journal of Oncology 6 Nursing Family & Community Health 4 Health Care Management 4 Review Heart & Lung 6 Home Healthcare Nurse 10 International Breastfeeding online Journal International Nursing Review 4 Issues in Mental Health Nursing 12 Journal for Nurses in 6 Professional Development Journal of Advanced Nursing 12 Journal of Cardiovascular 6 Nursing Journal of Child Health Care 4 Journal of Christian Nursing 4 Journal of Family Nursing 4 Journal of Hospice and 8 Palliative Nursing Journal of Infusion Nursing 6 Journal of Nursing Care Quality 4 Journal of Nursing Education 12 + 2* Journal of Nursing Regulation 4 Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, 6 & Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN) Journal of Pediatric Health Care 6 Journal of Radiology Nursing 12 Journal of the American Assoc. 12 of Nurse Practitioners Journal of the Assoc. of Nurses 6 in AIDS Care
20 150 60
60 55 90
3 2 3
8 6 16
75 40
No Yes No
80 80 550 175 110 10
70 30 20 70 50 70
4 3 4 2 3 2
12 16 4 12 4 6
80 90 70 80 80 90
No No No Yes No Yes
60
50
3
12
90
No
100
34
3
12
500
35
4
5
80
Yes
40 350
40 70
3 2
12 8
90 65
Yes Yes
140 150
50 40
2 2
12 6
80
No Yes
30 175
60 35
3 3
8 12
30 85
No Yes
400 75 40
25 75 60
3 4 2
4 6 16
95 80
Yes No No
280 150 100
25 70 70
3 2 2
7 4 6
80 100 80
Yes No No
1250 1000
20 18
2 2
6 4
70 80
No Yes
153 150-175 160 120
30 75 30 70
2 2 3 3
8 8 6-10 8
70 95 75 90
No Yes No No
70 170 625 60 225
70 33 18-20 80 25
3 3 2 2 3
8 3 4 10 6
90 100 50 90 80
Yes No No Yes
320 43 400
18 88 15
3 2 2
6 10 8
70 90 50-80
No No No
120
50
3
5
80
No
No
(continues) 292
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Table 1. Journal Review Information, Continued
Journal Name Journal of the Dermatology Nurses Association MCN The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing Neonatal Network: Journal of Neonatal Nursing Nephrology Nursing Journal Nursing Forum Nursing History Review Nursing Inquiry Nursing made Incredibly Easy Nursing Outlook Nursing Philosophy Nursing Research Nursing Standard OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing Oncology Nursing Forum Perspectives in Psychiatric Care Quality Management in Health Care Research in Nursing & Health Teaching and Learning in Nursing The Diabetes Educator The Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice The Journal for Nurse Practitioners
% of No. No. Weeks From No. Manuscripts Manuscripts Submission to % of Revised Accepts Uniform Accepted No. Issues Submitted Format per Year Reviewers Notification Articles Accepted per Year Yr 6 80 95 2 8-10 100 No 6
150
54
3
6
42-80
No
6
55
40
4
8
90
Yes
6 4 1 4 6 6 4 6 50
50 150 35 140 60 87 80 250 200 100
60 40 10 25 70 32 30 20 75 20
3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
15 5 12 8 4 4 12 9 12 12
90 60 75 70 90 35 80 85 75 75
No No Yes No No No No Yes Yes
6 4 4
220 75
60 48
3 2 2
7 5 10
90 75 90
Yes No No
6 4
400 100
20 50
4 3
6 16
60 75
Yes Yes
6 2
275 20
35 50
2 3
16 4
95 100
No No
10
250
34
3
6
97
Yes
submit to these journals. Original research was the most common type of accepted manuscript by journals (n = 59, 92.2%). Editors also accepted reviews of literature (n = 55, 85.9%), practice innovations (n = 52, 81.3%), case studies (n = 49, 76.6%), and concept analyses (n = 36, 56.3%). Educational course papers may work as a springboard to an article, but editors caution that the work must be tailored to the journal focus and guidelines. One responding editor used the open comment item on the survey to note: ‘‘an academic paper is not automatically a manuscript; it must be reformatted, condensed, and sometimes refocused.’’
Reasons for Rejection Visual analog scales allowed the editors to offer reasons for rejections. Table 3 presents the rank order of reasons and indicates that the most common reason was that the manuscript did not provide any new information. Poorly written articles, methodology problems, and the manuscript not being relevant to the journal focus were also commonly cited problems that resulted in rejection. Reviewing these cited issues can help aspiring authors focus on avoiding problems that could result in rejection. This information also gives academic faculty valuable information for advising students about the imporNurse Educator
tance of readability and identifying topics that truly address a gap in the literature.
Editor Input to Writers Many editors took the time to offer pointers to prospective authors. One editor suggested that authors ‘‘make sure the manuscript is reviewed by your own peers or content experts before you send it in.’’ Several editors said they mentor new authors, and many reminded potential authors to read the journal’s aim, scope, and recent contents and to follow the author guidelines. Author guidelines often list the name and contact information for editors so writers can ask questions and seek input during article development.
Discussion Journal Circulation and Article Submissions The finding of no significant relationship between the number of annual issues and percentage of accepted manuscripts was surprising. It was expected that journals with more annual issues would have a higher acceptance rate. The acceptance rate information is important information for novice authors. Aspiring authors may increase their chances of acceptance by submitting manuscripts to journals that receive fewer manuscripts Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
293
Table 2. Types of Articles Accepted
AACN Advanced Critical Care Advance for Nurses Advanced Emergency Nursing Journal Advances in Neonatal Care Advances in Nursing Science American Journal of Nursing American Nurse Today Biological Research for Nursing Canadian Assoc. of Nephrology Nurses & Technologists Journal Canadian Journal of Nursing Leadership CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice Critical Care Nursing Clinics Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing Education for Primary Care European Journal of Oncology Nursing Family & Community Health Health Care Management Review Heart & Lung Home Healthcare Nurse International Breastfeeding Journal International Nursing Review Issues in Mental Health Nursing Journal for Nurses in Professional Development Journal of Advanced Nursing Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing Journal of Child Health Care Journal of Christian Nursing Journal of Family Nursing Journal of Hospice and Palliative Nursing Journal of Infusion Nursing Journal of Nursing Care Quality Journal of Nursing Education Journal of Nursing Regulation Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN) Journal of Pediatric Health Care Journal of Radiology Nursing Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care Journal of the Dermatology Nurses Association MCN The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing Neonatal Network: Journal of Neonatal Nursing Nephrology Nursing Journal Nursing Forum Nursing History Review Nursing Inquiry Nursing Made Incredibly Easy Nursing Outlook Nursing Philosophy Nursing Research Nursing Standard
Practice Innovations Case Studies
CEUs
Concept Analyses
Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No Yes Yes No No No No No No
No No No Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No Yes
Yes No No No Yes No No No Yes
Yes Yes No No No Yes No No Yes
Publish ROL
Research
Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes
(continues) 294
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Table 2. Types of Articles Accepted, Continued
OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing Oncology Nursing Forum Perspectives in Psychiatric Care Quality Management in Health Care Research in Nursing and Health Teaching and Learning in Nursing The Diabetes Educator The Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice The Journal for Nurse Practitioners
Publish ROL
Research
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Practice Innovations Case Studies Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
CEUs Yes No No No No No No Yes
Concept Analyses Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Abbreviations: CEUs, continuing education units; ROL, review of literature.
per year and have higher acceptance rates, as long as the manuscript fits the journal foci, fills a gap, and is well written. Several specialty journals had high acceptance rates including ones related to radiology, nursing regulation, infusion nursing, and dermatology. Authors with expertise in any of those areas may find that interesting, fact-based, evidentiary articles have a good chance to be published in these journals. For example, the Journal of Dermatology receives about 80 manuscripts a year and has a high acceptance rate of 95%. Novice nurse authors are likely to have a more difficult time getting a manuscript accepted by journals with low acceptance rates such as Heart & Lung (acceptance rate, 25%), the Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing (acceptance rate, 18%), and the Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (acceptance rate, 15%), among others in Table 1. The researchers had also expected higher rates of resubmitted manuscripts that are accepted. Accepted articles routinely need some additional work after acceptance and initial submission. Reviewers provide clear suggestions, and authors are expected to make changes based on the input and resubmit the manuscript. For example, Home Healthcare Nurse: The Journal of the Home Care and Hospice Professional reported an acceptance rate of 75% and a resubmission acceptance rate of 95%. It is clear that novice authors can expect to make revisions even if an article is accepted, but there are no guarantees that the resubmitted manuscript will be accepted for publication.
tion decisions and as a guide for revisions; however, novice authors were less satisfied.24 Inconsistent input from reviewers25 and vague reviews without clear guidelines for revision26 have been reported and may partially explain why resubmitted manuscripts are not accepted. While some authors reported receiving harsh reviews,24,27 authors should respect the time and energy involved in doing reviews and expect to make changes rather than abandon the manuscript. The range of time from submission to editor notification of a decision ranged from 3 to 16 weeks. Researchers eager to disseminate important, current findings can target a journal with faster notification times and also communicate with the editor about the desire for rapid dissemination. Palese et al28 reported on the time from research to publication, which averaged 981 days for 1152 studies published in nursing journals in 2009. Researchers eager to advance science by sharing research findings can use the reported time to decision to publish as key information as to how rapidly their article will likely be disseminated. Future research should include surveying editors about the typical time involved from resubmission to publication.
Acceptance and Rejection Decisions Not surprisingly, original research was the most common type of accepted manuscript. Quantitative studies yielding significant findings are more likely to get published than those involving nonsignificant findings29 or qualitative research.30
Reviewer Influence and Timelines The number of reviewers had no impact on article acceptance rates or time to decision. Rejection has been experienced by most authors, and it can be discouraging, especially to novice authors. It is important for novice authors to recognize that the review process may result in rejection of a quality paper that was simply submitted to the wrong journal because it does not match the journal focus.22 Peer review is a safeguard used by journal editors to ensure the strength and quality of the articles included in their journals. Double-blind reviews, in which both the authors and reviewers are anonymous, are common in nursing; both editors and reviewers support the process,23 despite criticism that validity and reliability issues exist in the review process.22 Studies have shown that a majority of authors found reviewer comments helpful in understanding the acceptance or rejec-
Reasons for Rejection No new knowledge Poorly written Methods problems Not relevant to journal focus Statistical problems Not current Inaccurate Too short/superficial Not per author guidelines Recently published a similar article Other issues Not clinically relevant
Nurse Educator
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Table 3. Reasons for Rejection Mean 61.08 60.40 58.70 57.71 52.27 52.09 48.79 48.07 44.53 37.38 33.47 30.13
SD 30.56 28.97 33.21 38.38 36.00 35.90 41.66 34.59 36.55 31.28 35.47 28.21
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
295
Authors interested in publishing other types of manuscripts can use the editor input from this study to identify potential journals. A paper that received a favorable grade in a course will almost always require extensive editing and revision to tailor it to the target journal.31 Reasons for rejection of submitted articles were based largely on the substance of the information and its presentation. The visual analog scale allowed the researchers to gauge the problems perceived by the journal editors. This method was believed to offer a good reflection of reasons for rejection.20 Because ‘‘no new knowledge’’ was the most common reason for rejection, authors are advised to clearly identify and relate the gap in nursing knowledge filled by the manuscript so reviewers can clearly see it. This insight should alert the aspiring writer of the importance of a thorough literature review and the need to find an innovative slant that makes the information fresh and applicable by the journal readers to increase the possibility of acceptance. To avoid the pitfall of a ‘‘poorly written manuscript,’’ the author should seek editorial and statistical consultation to review manuscripts and reduce the chances of rejection because of writing, methods, and statistical problems. Targeting the right journal is guided by careful selection of a journal that matches the manuscript aim and using similar words for reviewers to discern easily the relevance for the journal. Query letters to editors including an abstract can gauge interest without tying the article up in the review process, which delays publication and undermines the currency of the information and references. Getting input early can also help the author frame the point or direction of the article to complement the needs of the journal. Publication is a joint venture between author and editor; success is a win-win for both. The reasons for rejection were similar to those reported by others. Shatell et al24 reported reviewer recommendations both for acceptance and rejection were writing/grammar (79.2%), professional/practice significance (50.5%), methods/scholarly approach (35.4%), innovation/creative significance (16.6%), and theoretical significance (14.3%). Northam et al20 identified the most common reasons in a 2010 study: (1) the paper was poorly written; (2) the topic was not relevant to the journal focus; and (3) there were methodology problems. Addressing the causes of rejection early in the writing process gives the author an additional chance of successful publication.
Limitations While a wide variety of journal types were represented, the majority of journal editors elected not to respond. It is likely the editors frequently receive requests for survey participation and focus their time and attention on their demanding jobs. The survey was shortened from an earlier version20 to improve the response rate from 27% in 2010 to 31% in 2014, but this number leaves many journals unrepresented.
Summary Sixty-one editors participated in this descriptive research study designed to gather journal information. Of the editors responding, 20% edit research, 10% edit general practice, and 8% represent nursing education journals. Many specialty journal editors also participated in the study. Nurse authors can use the study results to select a target journal that offers the best chance of successful publication. 296
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
This study contains new information about the acceptance rate of the reporting journals, which can provide insight into likelihood of acceptance by authors, especially fragile novice writers who are just entering the writing for publication arena. Selecting a journal with a high acceptance rate improves a nurse author’s chance of manuscript acceptance. New information is also included about journals that accept topics that complement doctoral nursing courses. Adapting, revising, and expanding these course-generated papers can allow aspiring authors to make a significant contribution to the literature while enjoying the professional and personal sense of accomplishment at publishing an article. Nursing science is only as strong as the evidence that supports the profession. Nursing evidence is contained and disseminated through quality nursing journals available to nurses. Contributing to the body of nursing evidence is both a privilege and responsibility of every nurse who seeks to make a difference in today’s healthcare landscape. Knowing what editors want will enhance the shared responsibility for creating and disseminating nursing science to truly sculpt tomorrow healthcare system.
References 1. Sugimoto CR, Lariviere V, Ni C, Cronin B. Journal acceptance rates: a cross disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures. J Informetr. 2013;7(4):897-906. 2. Scholes J. Publication: in whose interests? Nurs Crit Care. 2012;3:6. Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. 3. Kennedy M. Getting writing right. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):7. 4. Sanderson B, Carter M, Schuessler J. Writing for publication: faculty development initiative using social learning theory. Nurse Educ. 2012;37(5):206-210. 5. Keen A. Writing for publication: pressures, barriers and support strategies. Nurs Ed Today. 2007;27(5):382-388. 6. Kensing K. The most stressful jobs of 2014. CareerCast. Available at http://www.careercast.com/jobs-rated/most-stressful-jobs-2014. Accessed June 9, 2014. 7. Quindlen A. Sunday with Anna Quindlen. Parade. 2014;5:15. 8. Ahern K. How to create a journal article from a thesis. Nurse Res. 2012;19(4):21-25. 9. Riesenberg L, Justice E. Conducting a successful systematic review of the literature, part 2. Nursing. 2014;44(6):23-26. 10. Ayello E. How to write a ‘‘stories from the bedside’’ article for the WCET Journal: hints and tips for first-time authors. World Council Enterostomal Ther J. 2014;34(1):28. 11. Resnick B. Publishing a DNP capstone: the where, what and how. Geriatr Nurs. 2013;34(2):95-7. 12. Abrams S. Essentials for publishing program evaluations. Public Health Nurs. 2012;29(1):1-2. 13. Berkey B, Moore S. Preparing research manuscripts for publication: a guide for authors. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2012;39(5):433-435. 14. Roederer M, Marciniak MW, O’Connor SK, Eckel SF. An integrated approach to research and manuscript development. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013;70(14):1211-1218. 15. Happell B. Writing and publishing clinical articles: a practical guide. Emerg Nurse. 2012;20(1):33-38. 16. Batcheller J, Kirksey K, VanDyke Y, Armstrong M. Publish or perish: writing clinical manuscripts suitable for publication. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2012;43(1):44-48. 17. Happell B. From conference presentation to journal publication: a guide. Nurse Res. 2008;15(2):40-48. 18. Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) [database]. Available at http://www.ebscohost.com/biomedicallibraries/the-cinahl-database. Accessed June 9, 2014 Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
19. Sherwill-Navaroo P, Kennedy JC, Allen M. Developing an evidencebased list of journals for nursing. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102(2): 105-109. 20. Northam S, Yarbrough S, Haas B, Duke G. Journal editor survey: information to help authors publish. Nurs Educ. 2010;35(1):29-36. 21. Field A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2013. 22. Jasper M, Vaismoradi M, Bondas T, Turunen H. Validity and reliability of the scientific review process in nursing journals—time for a rethink? Nurs Inquiry. 2014;21(2):92-100. 23. Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC, Freda MC, Kearney MH. Blinding in peer review: the preferences for reviewers for nursing journals. J Adv Nurs. 2008;64(2):131-138. 24. Shatell MM, Chinn P, Thomas SP, Cowling WR. Authors’ and editors’ perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2010;42:58-65. 25. Starbuck WH. Turning lemons into lemonade: where is the value in peer reviews? J Manag Inq. 2003;12:344-351.
26. Kearney MH, Freda MC. Nurse editors’ views on the peer review process. Res Nurs Health. 2005;28:442-452. 27. Miner JB. Commentary on Arthur Bedeian’s ‘‘the manuscript review process: the proper roles of authors, referees, and editors.’’ J Manag Inq. 2003;12:339-343. 28. Palese A, Coletti S, Dante A. Publication efficiency among the higher impact factor nursing journals in 2009: a retrospective analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(4):543-551. 29. van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. Getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper. J Adv Nurs. 2002;37: 506-511. 30. Mulhall A, Kelly D, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. JAN forum: your views and letters... getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper by E. van Teijlingen and V. Hundley. J Adv Nurs 2002;37:506-511. J Adv Nurs. 2002;39(5):490. 31. Burns S. ‘‘I got an ‘A’, then a lot of red!’’: converting an academic paper to a suitable manuscript. J Perianesth Nurs. 2011;26(3): 179-182.
Journal Impact Factors Released The journal impact factors (IFs) for 2013 were released recently. The IF is the number of citations to articles published in a journal during the preceding 2 years. Only journals indexed in the Web of Science database have an IF. That database includes more than 12 000 journals, but currently there are only 106 nursing journals in it, which is why so few nursing journals have an IF. Nurse Educator is 1 of only 5 nursing education journals with an IF, and our IF for 2013 was 0.667, in line with the other education journals. Journals that publish research reports, literature reviews, and articles with long reference lists tend to have higher IFs because those articles are cited frequently by others. In the 2-year period used to calculate IFs, Nurse Educator published no systematic or literature reviews and had many articles with short reference lists. IFs are based on citations and do not reflect the quality of the articles or journal. If you gain new ideas from articles in Nurse Educator and use them in your teaching, then we are having ‘‘impact.’’ Submitted by: Marilyn H. Oermann, PhD, RN, ANEF, FAAN, Editor-in-Chief, [email protected]. DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000089
Nurse Educator
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
297
Nurse Educator
Nursing Journal Editor Survey Results to Help Nurses Publish Sally Northam, PhD, RN & Danice B. Greer, PhD, RN, BC & Linda Rath, PhD, RN Amy Toone, PhD, APRN, FNP-BC & This study gathered data from 61 nursing journal editors (31% response rate) on 7 variables. The information is designed to help novice and seasoned authors make decisions about journal selection for article submission. Variables include the average number of submitted manuscripts annually, the percentage of initially accepted and resubmitted manuscripts, weeks from submission to decision, number of reviewers, types of accepted manuscripts, and top reasons for rejection. Keywords: journals; manuscript; nursing journals; nursing literature; writing for publication
M
anuscript publication is an important way for nurses to share ideas and disseminate research findings. It is also used as a measure of faculty scholarship for promotion and tenure. This article reports on a descriptive study that examined variables influencing author success in publishing manuscripts in nursing journals. Specifically, the study shows the average number of submitted manuscripts, the percentage of accepted manuscripts, and the percentage of accepted resubmissions annually. Information about weeks from submission to decision, number of reviewers, and reasons for rejection are also reported.
Background Knowledge Successful publishing in nursing journals is theorized to involve supply and demand from the journal’s standpoint1,2 and a process of developing writing skill from an author’s standpoint.3 Journals seek manuscripts that match the journal focus and guidelines, are written clearly, and fill gaps in the literature. Unfortunately, Kennedy,3 editor of the American Journal of Nursing, recently related that she and other editors have noticed a decline in the quality of submitted manuscripts. ‘‘Many come from students hoping to publish theirI projects required by master’s or doctoral programs I (but) wellestablished guidelines and formats for writingI scholarly papersI aren’t followed.’’3(p7) Author Affiliations: Professors (Drs Northam and Toone) and Assistant Professors (Drs Greer and Rath) of Nursing, The University of Texas at Tyler. This article is dedicated in memory of Suzanne Smith. She was the consummate editor who mentored and encouraged countless authors. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Correspondence: Dr Northam, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, The University of Texas at Tyler, 3900 University Blvd, Tyler, Texas 75799 ([email protected]). Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.nurseeducatoronline.com). Accepted for publication: August 9, 2014 DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000086
290
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Authors want to publish and share information but generally find the process challenging, especially as novices. Writing takes practice and can be time consuming4 and stressful.5 A 2014 poll of stressful jobs ranked newspaper reporters in the top 10 most stressful jobs.6 Anna Quindlen,7 a Pulitzer Prize winning author, recently said: ‘‘Some days I fear writing dreadfully, but I do it anyway. I’ve discovered that sometimes writing badly can eventually lead to something better. Not writing at all leads to nothing.’’7(p5) Thus, even professional writers can find the experience of writing stressful. Many articles have been written to help novice authors achieve success. Some recent articles offer advice for specific types of papers including theses,8 reviews of literature,9 stories from the bedside,10 capstone projects,11 program evaluations,12 research reports,13,14 clinical practice guides,15,16 and presentations.17 Transforming a paper or an idea into a publishable paper is a rigorous but worthwhile task, which is made easier by adhering to the guidelines offered by the target journal.
Purpose Journal Web sites have author guidelines with helpful information about details of the authorship and submission process. However, guidelines generally lack information about the annual manuscript submission, initial manuscript and resubmitted manuscript acceptance information, time from submission to decision, the number of reviewers, and reasons for rejection, which are helpful to aspiring authors making journal selection decisions. The purpose of this study was to gather that information into an accessible and useful report to increase the number and quality of articles available to journals and help authors find the best article-journal match possible.
Methods Design This descriptive survey study was based on the following research questions: What are the relationships among number Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
of annual issues, submitted manuscripts, and percentage of submitted and resubmitted accepted for publication? Does the number of reviewers influence original and resubmitted manuscript acceptance rates and weeks to notification of a decision? What types of manuscripts are accepted by journals? What are the common reasons for rejection, and what advice do editors have for nurse authors? A survey of journal editors was done to answer these questions.
Sample A list of 3092 journals in CINAHL18 was reviewed, and 200 journals with nursing in the title or known to be nursing journals were selected. The resulting list of 200 journals is close to the number of 212 nursing journals identified after an extensive 27-month search done by 3 librarians.19 Journal Web sites were reviewed, and detailed information was put into an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet includes the journal title, Web site link, editor name and e-mail, journal focus, and some author guideline information such as manuscript style and length. The spreadsheet provides nurse authors with a quick reference useful for reviewing journal foci and links to Web sites and is available as Table, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links .lww.com/NE/A164. Institutional review board approval was obtained for the study. Nursing journal editors were invited via e-mail to complete an online survey about their journal review process to gather data not available on the Web sites. The e-mail contained a link to a survey on Qualtrics, an online software program that stores responses on a secure server. After 1 month, a low response rate of 20% led to the use of several additional strategies to increase participation. Nonrespondent editors were sent a second e-mail requesting participation. Two editors replied to the e-mail and expressed concerns about how the information would be used. Per the suggestion of the Nurse Educator interim editor, a copy of a previously published journal survey article20 was attached to the e-mail so editors could see the prior manuscript content and style. In addition, an invitation to participate was posted along with the prior article on a nurse editor Listserv. The final response rate was 31%, with 61 peerreviewed journals represented. Instrument This survey included some previously used items from the 2010 version,20 with the addition of items about acceptance rates of submissions and revised manuscripts. The survey was shortened to reduce subject burden and facilitate a higher response rate than achieved in 2010 (27%). The survey items included fill-in items for the journal name, editorial pages per issue, average number of submitted manuscripts annually, the percentage of accepted manuscripts and accepted resubmissions annually, article word and page limits, weeks from submission to decision, and the number of reviewers. Visual analog items asked, ‘‘What percentage of the time does each of the following cause you to reject manuscripts?’’ with movable bars from 0% to 100% for each of 12 listed reasons commonly identified in the literature. Dichotomous yes/no items were used to determine whether the journal editor accepts literature reviews, original research, innovations in practice, case studies, articles with continuing education units, and concept analyses. A final open-ended item was: ‘‘Please feel free to offer input to prospective authors.’’ Nurse Educator
Results Data were downloaded from Qualtrics and analyzed using IBM SPSS version 20 (Chicago, Illinois). Exploratory data analysis was done following the guidelines of Field.21 No continuous variables met the parametric assumptions of normality, so nonparametric statistics were used to evaluate hypotheses.
Represented Journals Survey respondents represented a wide range of journals. When asked about the primary focus of the journal, the highest percentage of editors (26%) selected the ‘‘other’’ category instead of 1 of the 17 identified choices. Alternative foci offered by the editor in response to what ‘‘other’’ meant included policy, dermatology, neurology, and radiology. Research (19.7%) was the second most common focus, followed by general nursing practice (9.8%), education (8.2%), advanced practice (4.9%), maternal newborn (4.9%), critical care (4.9%), and cardiology (4.9%). Table, Supplemental Digital Content 2, lists the journals and their 3 primary foci, http://links.lww.com/NE/ A165. This table can help prospective authors target journals that match their manuscript focus. Manuscript Submission Number of issues per year ranged from 1 to 18 (mean, 6 [SD, 3]), with 2 nursing magazines excluded as outliers. The annual number of submitted manuscripts ranged from 10 to 1000 (mean, 179 [SD, 177]). Acceptance rates ranged from 10% to 95% (mean, 45.62 [SD, 21.70]), again with the magazines excluded as outliers. The percentage of revised manuscripts accepted ranged from 30% to 100% (mean, 77.57 [SD, 16.14]). There was a significant relationship between the number of annual issues and the number of submitted manuscripts (rs = .49, P G .01), but there was no significant relationship between annual issues and the percentage of accepted manuscripts. The researchers had expected that journals with more annual issues would have a higher acceptance rate. There was a significant inverse relationship between the number of submitted manuscripts and the percentage accepted (rs = j0.55, P G .01), indicating that journals that receive a large number of submissions can be more selective and thus reject more manuscripts. There was a significant relationship between the percentage of accepted manuscripts and the percentage of accepted revised manuscripts (rs = 0.37, P G .01). The researchers had expected a higher correlation. Manuscript Management The number of reviewers for each manuscript ranged from 2 to 4 (mean, 2.64 [SD, 0.64]). There was no significant difference in the percentage of accepted manuscripts or the percentage of accepted resubmitted manuscripts in the following 3 groups: journals with 2 reviewers, 3 reviewers, or 4 reviewers. The number of weeks for authors to be notified of decisions ranged from 3 to 16 (mean, 8.4 [SD, 3.6]). There was no relationship between the number of reviewers and the weeks to decision. Table 1 indicates the number of journal issues published per year, number of manuscript submitted and percentage accepted per year, reviewer information, and number of weeks from submission to author notification. Types of Accepted Articles Table 2 shows the varied types of articles published in journals and guides nurses in deciding on the type of manuscript to Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
291
Table 1. Journal Review Information
Journal Name
% of No. No. Weeks From No. Manuscripts Manuscripts Submission to % of Revised Accepts Uniform Accepted No. Issues Submitted Format per Year Reviewers Notification Articles Accepted per Year Yr
AACN Advanced Critical Care 4 ADVANCE for Nurses 21 Advanced Emergency 4 Nursing Journal Advances in Neonatal Care 6 Advances in Nursing Science 4 American Journal of Nursing 12 American Nurse Today 12 Biological Research for Nursing 4 4 Canadian Assoc of Nephrology Nurses and Technologists Journal Canadian Journal of Nursing 4 Leadership CIN: Computers, Informatics, 18 Nursing Complementary Therapies in 4 Clinical Practice Critical Care Nursing Clinics 4 Dimensions of Critical Care 6 Nursing Education for Primary Care 6 European Journal of Oncology 6 Nursing Family & Community Health 4 Health Care Management 4 Review Heart & Lung 6 Home Healthcare Nurse 10 International Breastfeeding online Journal International Nursing Review 4 Issues in Mental Health Nursing 12 Journal for Nurses in 6 Professional Development Journal of Advanced Nursing 12 Journal of Cardiovascular 6 Nursing Journal of Child Health Care 4 Journal of Christian Nursing 4 Journal of Family Nursing 4 Journal of Hospice and 8 Palliative Nursing Journal of Infusion Nursing 6 Journal of Nursing Care Quality 4 Journal of Nursing Education 12 + 2* Journal of Nursing Regulation 4 Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, 6 & Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN) Journal of Pediatric Health Care 6 Journal of Radiology Nursing 12 Journal of the American Assoc. 12 of Nurse Practitioners Journal of the Assoc. of Nurses 6 in AIDS Care
20 150 60
60 55 90
3 2 3
8 6 16
75 40
No Yes No
80 80 550 175 110 10
70 30 20 70 50 70
4 3 4 2 3 2
12 16 4 12 4 6
80 90 70 80 80 90
No No No Yes No Yes
60
50
3
12
90
No
100
34
3
12
500
35
4
5
80
Yes
40 350
40 70
3 2
12 8
90 65
Yes Yes
140 150
50 40
2 2
12 6
80
No Yes
30 175
60 35
3 3
8 12
30 85
No Yes
400 75 40
25 75 60
3 4 2
4 6 16
95 80
Yes No No
280 150 100
25 70 70
3 2 2
7 4 6
80 100 80
Yes No No
1250 1000
20 18
2 2
6 4
70 80
No Yes
153 150-175 160 120
30 75 30 70
2 2 3 3
8 8 6-10 8
70 95 75 90
No Yes No No
70 170 625 60 225
70 33 18-20 80 25
3 3 2 2 3
8 3 4 10 6
90 100 50 90 80
Yes No No Yes
320 43 400
18 88 15
3 2 2
6 10 8
70 90 50-80
No No No
120
50
3
5
80
No
No
(continues) 292
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Table 1. Journal Review Information, Continued
Journal Name Journal of the Dermatology Nurses Association MCN The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing Neonatal Network: Journal of Neonatal Nursing Nephrology Nursing Journal Nursing Forum Nursing History Review Nursing Inquiry Nursing made Incredibly Easy Nursing Outlook Nursing Philosophy Nursing Research Nursing Standard OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing Oncology Nursing Forum Perspectives in Psychiatric Care Quality Management in Health Care Research in Nursing & Health Teaching and Learning in Nursing The Diabetes Educator The Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice The Journal for Nurse Practitioners
% of No. No. Weeks From No. Manuscripts Manuscripts Submission to % of Revised Accepts Uniform Accepted No. Issues Submitted Format per Year Reviewers Notification Articles Accepted per Year Yr 6 80 95 2 8-10 100 No 6
150
54
3
6
42-80
No
6
55
40
4
8
90
Yes
6 4 1 4 6 6 4 6 50
50 150 35 140 60 87 80 250 200 100
60 40 10 25 70 32 30 20 75 20
3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
15 5 12 8 4 4 12 9 12 12
90 60 75 70 90 35 80 85 75 75
No No Yes No No No No Yes Yes
6 4 4
220 75
60 48
3 2 2
7 5 10
90 75 90
Yes No No
6 4
400 100
20 50
4 3
6 16
60 75
Yes Yes
6 2
275 20
35 50
2 3
16 4
95 100
No No
10
250
34
3
6
97
Yes
submit to these journals. Original research was the most common type of accepted manuscript by journals (n = 59, 92.2%). Editors also accepted reviews of literature (n = 55, 85.9%), practice innovations (n = 52, 81.3%), case studies (n = 49, 76.6%), and concept analyses (n = 36, 56.3%). Educational course papers may work as a springboard to an article, but editors caution that the work must be tailored to the journal focus and guidelines. One responding editor used the open comment item on the survey to note: ‘‘an academic paper is not automatically a manuscript; it must be reformatted, condensed, and sometimes refocused.’’
Reasons for Rejection Visual analog scales allowed the editors to offer reasons for rejections. Table 3 presents the rank order of reasons and indicates that the most common reason was that the manuscript did not provide any new information. Poorly written articles, methodology problems, and the manuscript not being relevant to the journal focus were also commonly cited problems that resulted in rejection. Reviewing these cited issues can help aspiring authors focus on avoiding problems that could result in rejection. This information also gives academic faculty valuable information for advising students about the imporNurse Educator
tance of readability and identifying topics that truly address a gap in the literature.
Editor Input to Writers Many editors took the time to offer pointers to prospective authors. One editor suggested that authors ‘‘make sure the manuscript is reviewed by your own peers or content experts before you send it in.’’ Several editors said they mentor new authors, and many reminded potential authors to read the journal’s aim, scope, and recent contents and to follow the author guidelines. Author guidelines often list the name and contact information for editors so writers can ask questions and seek input during article development.
Discussion Journal Circulation and Article Submissions The finding of no significant relationship between the number of annual issues and percentage of accepted manuscripts was surprising. It was expected that journals with more annual issues would have a higher acceptance rate. The acceptance rate information is important information for novice authors. Aspiring authors may increase their chances of acceptance by submitting manuscripts to journals that receive fewer manuscripts Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
293
Table 2. Types of Articles Accepted
AACN Advanced Critical Care Advance for Nurses Advanced Emergency Nursing Journal Advances in Neonatal Care Advances in Nursing Science American Journal of Nursing American Nurse Today Biological Research for Nursing Canadian Assoc. of Nephrology Nurses & Technologists Journal Canadian Journal of Nursing Leadership CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice Critical Care Nursing Clinics Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing Education for Primary Care European Journal of Oncology Nursing Family & Community Health Health Care Management Review Heart & Lung Home Healthcare Nurse International Breastfeeding Journal International Nursing Review Issues in Mental Health Nursing Journal for Nurses in Professional Development Journal of Advanced Nursing Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing Journal of Child Health Care Journal of Christian Nursing Journal of Family Nursing Journal of Hospice and Palliative Nursing Journal of Infusion Nursing Journal of Nursing Care Quality Journal of Nursing Education Journal of Nursing Regulation Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing (JOGNN) Journal of Pediatric Health Care Journal of Radiology Nursing Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care Journal of the Dermatology Nurses Association MCN The American Journal of Maternal Child Nursing Neonatal Network: Journal of Neonatal Nursing Nephrology Nursing Journal Nursing Forum Nursing History Review Nursing Inquiry Nursing Made Incredibly Easy Nursing Outlook Nursing Philosophy Nursing Research Nursing Standard
Practice Innovations Case Studies
CEUs
Concept Analyses
Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No Yes Yes No No No No No No
No No No Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No Yes
Yes No No No Yes No No No Yes
Yes Yes No No No Yes No No Yes
Publish ROL
Research
Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes No Yes
(continues) 294
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Table 2. Types of Articles Accepted, Continued
OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing Oncology Nursing Forum Perspectives in Psychiatric Care Quality Management in Health Care Research in Nursing and Health Teaching and Learning in Nursing The Diabetes Educator The Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice The Journal for Nurse Practitioners
Publish ROL
Research
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Practice Innovations Case Studies Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
CEUs Yes No No No No No No Yes
Concept Analyses Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Abbreviations: CEUs, continuing education units; ROL, review of literature.
per year and have higher acceptance rates, as long as the manuscript fits the journal foci, fills a gap, and is well written. Several specialty journals had high acceptance rates including ones related to radiology, nursing regulation, infusion nursing, and dermatology. Authors with expertise in any of those areas may find that interesting, fact-based, evidentiary articles have a good chance to be published in these journals. For example, the Journal of Dermatology receives about 80 manuscripts a year and has a high acceptance rate of 95%. Novice nurse authors are likely to have a more difficult time getting a manuscript accepted by journals with low acceptance rates such as Heart & Lung (acceptance rate, 25%), the Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing (acceptance rate, 18%), and the Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (acceptance rate, 15%), among others in Table 1. The researchers had also expected higher rates of resubmitted manuscripts that are accepted. Accepted articles routinely need some additional work after acceptance and initial submission. Reviewers provide clear suggestions, and authors are expected to make changes based on the input and resubmit the manuscript. For example, Home Healthcare Nurse: The Journal of the Home Care and Hospice Professional reported an acceptance rate of 75% and a resubmission acceptance rate of 95%. It is clear that novice authors can expect to make revisions even if an article is accepted, but there are no guarantees that the resubmitted manuscript will be accepted for publication.
tion decisions and as a guide for revisions; however, novice authors were less satisfied.24 Inconsistent input from reviewers25 and vague reviews without clear guidelines for revision26 have been reported and may partially explain why resubmitted manuscripts are not accepted. While some authors reported receiving harsh reviews,24,27 authors should respect the time and energy involved in doing reviews and expect to make changes rather than abandon the manuscript. The range of time from submission to editor notification of a decision ranged from 3 to 16 weeks. Researchers eager to disseminate important, current findings can target a journal with faster notification times and also communicate with the editor about the desire for rapid dissemination. Palese et al28 reported on the time from research to publication, which averaged 981 days for 1152 studies published in nursing journals in 2009. Researchers eager to advance science by sharing research findings can use the reported time to decision to publish as key information as to how rapidly their article will likely be disseminated. Future research should include surveying editors about the typical time involved from resubmission to publication.
Acceptance and Rejection Decisions Not surprisingly, original research was the most common type of accepted manuscript. Quantitative studies yielding significant findings are more likely to get published than those involving nonsignificant findings29 or qualitative research.30
Reviewer Influence and Timelines The number of reviewers had no impact on article acceptance rates or time to decision. Rejection has been experienced by most authors, and it can be discouraging, especially to novice authors. It is important for novice authors to recognize that the review process may result in rejection of a quality paper that was simply submitted to the wrong journal because it does not match the journal focus.22 Peer review is a safeguard used by journal editors to ensure the strength and quality of the articles included in their journals. Double-blind reviews, in which both the authors and reviewers are anonymous, are common in nursing; both editors and reviewers support the process,23 despite criticism that validity and reliability issues exist in the review process.22 Studies have shown that a majority of authors found reviewer comments helpful in understanding the acceptance or rejec-
Reasons for Rejection No new knowledge Poorly written Methods problems Not relevant to journal focus Statistical problems Not current Inaccurate Too short/superficial Not per author guidelines Recently published a similar article Other issues Not clinically relevant
Nurse Educator
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Table 3. Reasons for Rejection Mean 61.08 60.40 58.70 57.71 52.27 52.09 48.79 48.07 44.53 37.38 33.47 30.13
SD 30.56 28.97 33.21 38.38 36.00 35.90 41.66 34.59 36.55 31.28 35.47 28.21
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
295
Authors interested in publishing other types of manuscripts can use the editor input from this study to identify potential journals. A paper that received a favorable grade in a course will almost always require extensive editing and revision to tailor it to the target journal.31 Reasons for rejection of submitted articles were based largely on the substance of the information and its presentation. The visual analog scale allowed the researchers to gauge the problems perceived by the journal editors. This method was believed to offer a good reflection of reasons for rejection.20 Because ‘‘no new knowledge’’ was the most common reason for rejection, authors are advised to clearly identify and relate the gap in nursing knowledge filled by the manuscript so reviewers can clearly see it. This insight should alert the aspiring writer of the importance of a thorough literature review and the need to find an innovative slant that makes the information fresh and applicable by the journal readers to increase the possibility of acceptance. To avoid the pitfall of a ‘‘poorly written manuscript,’’ the author should seek editorial and statistical consultation to review manuscripts and reduce the chances of rejection because of writing, methods, and statistical problems. Targeting the right journal is guided by careful selection of a journal that matches the manuscript aim and using similar words for reviewers to discern easily the relevance for the journal. Query letters to editors including an abstract can gauge interest without tying the article up in the review process, which delays publication and undermines the currency of the information and references. Getting input early can also help the author frame the point or direction of the article to complement the needs of the journal. Publication is a joint venture between author and editor; success is a win-win for both. The reasons for rejection were similar to those reported by others. Shatell et al24 reported reviewer recommendations both for acceptance and rejection were writing/grammar (79.2%), professional/practice significance (50.5%), methods/scholarly approach (35.4%), innovation/creative significance (16.6%), and theoretical significance (14.3%). Northam et al20 identified the most common reasons in a 2010 study: (1) the paper was poorly written; (2) the topic was not relevant to the journal focus; and (3) there were methodology problems. Addressing the causes of rejection early in the writing process gives the author an additional chance of successful publication.
Limitations While a wide variety of journal types were represented, the majority of journal editors elected not to respond. It is likely the editors frequently receive requests for survey participation and focus their time and attention on their demanding jobs. The survey was shortened from an earlier version20 to improve the response rate from 27% in 2010 to 31% in 2014, but this number leaves many journals unrepresented.
Summary Sixty-one editors participated in this descriptive research study designed to gather journal information. Of the editors responding, 20% edit research, 10% edit general practice, and 8% represent nursing education journals. Many specialty journal editors also participated in the study. Nurse authors can use the study results to select a target journal that offers the best chance of successful publication. 296
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
This study contains new information about the acceptance rate of the reporting journals, which can provide insight into likelihood of acceptance by authors, especially fragile novice writers who are just entering the writing for publication arena. Selecting a journal with a high acceptance rate improves a nurse author’s chance of manuscript acceptance. New information is also included about journals that accept topics that complement doctoral nursing courses. Adapting, revising, and expanding these course-generated papers can allow aspiring authors to make a significant contribution to the literature while enjoying the professional and personal sense of accomplishment at publishing an article. Nursing science is only as strong as the evidence that supports the profession. Nursing evidence is contained and disseminated through quality nursing journals available to nurses. Contributing to the body of nursing evidence is both a privilege and responsibility of every nurse who seeks to make a difference in today’s healthcare landscape. Knowing what editors want will enhance the shared responsibility for creating and disseminating nursing science to truly sculpt tomorrow healthcare system.
References 1. Sugimoto CR, Lariviere V, Ni C, Cronin B. Journal acceptance rates: a cross disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures. J Informetr. 2013;7(4):897-906. 2. Scholes J. Publication: in whose interests? Nurs Crit Care. 2012;3:6. Academic Search Complete, Ipswich, MA. 3. Kennedy M. Getting writing right. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):7. 4. Sanderson B, Carter M, Schuessler J. Writing for publication: faculty development initiative using social learning theory. Nurse Educ. 2012;37(5):206-210. 5. Keen A. Writing for publication: pressures, barriers and support strategies. Nurs Ed Today. 2007;27(5):382-388. 6. Kensing K. The most stressful jobs of 2014. CareerCast. Available at http://www.careercast.com/jobs-rated/most-stressful-jobs-2014. Accessed June 9, 2014. 7. Quindlen A. Sunday with Anna Quindlen. Parade. 2014;5:15. 8. Ahern K. How to create a journal article from a thesis. Nurse Res. 2012;19(4):21-25. 9. Riesenberg L, Justice E. Conducting a successful systematic review of the literature, part 2. Nursing. 2014;44(6):23-26. 10. Ayello E. How to write a ‘‘stories from the bedside’’ article for the WCET Journal: hints and tips for first-time authors. World Council Enterostomal Ther J. 2014;34(1):28. 11. Resnick B. Publishing a DNP capstone: the where, what and how. Geriatr Nurs. 2013;34(2):95-7. 12. Abrams S. Essentials for publishing program evaluations. Public Health Nurs. 2012;29(1):1-2. 13. Berkey B, Moore S. Preparing research manuscripts for publication: a guide for authors. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2012;39(5):433-435. 14. Roederer M, Marciniak MW, O’Connor SK, Eckel SF. An integrated approach to research and manuscript development. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013;70(14):1211-1218. 15. Happell B. Writing and publishing clinical articles: a practical guide. Emerg Nurse. 2012;20(1):33-38. 16. Batcheller J, Kirksey K, VanDyke Y, Armstrong M. Publish or perish: writing clinical manuscripts suitable for publication. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2012;43(1):44-48. 17. Happell B. From conference presentation to journal publication: a guide. Nurse Res. 2008;15(2):40-48. 18. Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) [database]. Available at http://www.ebscohost.com/biomedicallibraries/the-cinahl-database. Accessed June 9, 2014 Nurse Educator
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
19. Sherwill-Navaroo P, Kennedy JC, Allen M. Developing an evidencebased list of journals for nursing. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102(2): 105-109. 20. Northam S, Yarbrough S, Haas B, Duke G. Journal editor survey: information to help authors publish. Nurs Educ. 2010;35(1):29-36. 21. Field A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2013. 22. Jasper M, Vaismoradi M, Bondas T, Turunen H. Validity and reliability of the scientific review process in nursing journals—time for a rethink? Nurs Inquiry. 2014;21(2):92-100. 23. Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC, Freda MC, Kearney MH. Blinding in peer review: the preferences for reviewers for nursing journals. J Adv Nurs. 2008;64(2):131-138. 24. Shatell MM, Chinn P, Thomas SP, Cowling WR. Authors’ and editors’ perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2010;42:58-65. 25. Starbuck WH. Turning lemons into lemonade: where is the value in peer reviews? J Manag Inq. 2003;12:344-351.
26. Kearney MH, Freda MC. Nurse editors’ views on the peer review process. Res Nurs Health. 2005;28:442-452. 27. Miner JB. Commentary on Arthur Bedeian’s ‘‘the manuscript review process: the proper roles of authors, referees, and editors.’’ J Manag Inq. 2003;12:339-343. 28. Palese A, Coletti S, Dante A. Publication efficiency among the higher impact factor nursing journals in 2009: a retrospective analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(4):543-551. 29. van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. Getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper. J Adv Nurs. 2002;37: 506-511. 30. Mulhall A, Kelly D, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. JAN forum: your views and letters... getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper by E. van Teijlingen and V. Hundley. J Adv Nurs 2002;37:506-511. J Adv Nurs. 2002;39(5):490. 31. Burns S. ‘‘I got an ‘A’, then a lot of red!’’: converting an academic paper to a suitable manuscript. J Perianesth Nurs. 2011;26(3): 179-182.
Journal Impact Factors Released The journal impact factors (IFs) for 2013 were released recently. The IF is the number of citations to articles published in a journal during the preceding 2 years. Only journals indexed in the Web of Science database have an IF. That database includes more than 12 000 journals, but currently there are only 106 nursing journals in it, which is why so few nursing journals have an IF. Nurse Educator is 1 of only 5 nursing education journals with an IF, and our IF for 2013 was 0.667, in line with the other education journals. Journals that publish research reports, literature reviews, and articles with long reference lists tend to have higher IFs because those articles are cited frequently by others. In the 2-year period used to calculate IFs, Nurse Educator published no systematic or literature reviews and had many articles with short reference lists. IFs are based on citations and do not reflect the quality of the articles or journal. If you gain new ideas from articles in Nurse Educator and use them in your teaching, then we are having ‘‘impact.’’ Submitted by: Marilyn H. Oermann, PhD, RN, ANEF, FAAN, Editor-in-Chief, [email protected]. DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000089
Nurse Educator
Volume 39 & Number 6 & November/December 2014
Copyright © 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
297
