View
219
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Welcome
A writing workshop to help you publish
your work
IHI National ForumOrlando, FL
December 10, 2017
Objectives
1. Identify improvement-based methods
for effective manuscript preparation
2. Employ SQUIRE 2.0 Publication
Guidelines to craft a strong manuscript
3. Develop strategies to increase the
probability of successful journal
submission
Today’s faculty,
Daisy Goodman, Greg Ogrinc,
and David Stevens,
have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Your healthcare improvement
work is incomplete until it is
published.
Agenda1. Introduction
Who’s in the room?
What do we know about peer review as an improvement process?
2. Exercise I”Using SQUIRE 2.0 as a guide to writing about your Context and Rationale”
3. Break
4. Exercise II“Strategies to increase the probability of successful journal submission”
5. Group Discussion – Improvement techniques for writing more effectively.
6. Journaling: Personal next steps
Who’s in the room?
1. Your name.
2. Your principal work in a typical day.
3. The draft title for the writing proposal or
paper that you want to work on today.
Learning strategy
Extensive work together
as both
author and reader/reviewer
Reader/reviewers
contribute to your paper
throughout its development
from the earliest informal reader,
to coauthors,
to formal journal peer reviewers.
The scientific evidence for how
peer review works is slim
• Three decades of quadrennial
Congresses on the “Contribution of
Peer Review to Scientific Publication”
• Systematic reviews of journal peer
review
The variability in findings of studies of peer review is probably because the research methods
that have been employed do not serve complex social processes
well. -Overbeke and Wager
Peer review is an improvement
process• Your published paper is the product of countless
reader/reviewers’ contributions—criticism, expert
advice, suggestions and counsel from colleagues
along the way to publication.
• It follows a path of classical principles of
improvement—systematic assessments that
ultimately contribute in formal and informal ways to its
progressive improvement.
• There are general rules that apply at each of the
progressive steps in that path.
General rules A reader/reviewer’s shortlist
1. Be specific.
2. Prioritize advice.
3. Systematically read the entire draft segment
4. Summarize explicit strengths and weaknesses.
5. Cite sections where there are opportunities for improvement, accompanied by appropriate, specific suggestions.
6. What’s missing?
Strategies for your successful
journal submission
• Start by identifying your intended reader
• Develop a writing style that speaks directly to your reader
• Use a systematic process to identify early the journal that is likely to find that reader
Develop a writing style that speaks directly
to your reader.
“Forget your generalized audience.In the first place, the nameless,
faceless audience will scare you to death and in the second place,
unlike the theater, it doesn’t exist.In writing, your audience is one single reader.
I have found that sometimes it helps to pick out one person — a real
person you know, or an imagined personand write to that one.”
-John Steinbeck, In a 1962 letter to his friendRobert Wallsten
“Who is your reader?”
• What’s your paper’s message, in a
sentence?
• Who do you want to hear that
message?
• Who were your paper’s subjects?
• Who were the professionals involved
in your work?
Use a systematic process for selecting a journal
• “Why would this journal’s readers want to read my paper?” Is there a fit with their interests?
• Consider several pragmatic issues: editorial idiosyncrasies, would count, publication guidelines, instructions to authors
• Narrow to 3 journals and scan recent issues for current topics, methods, and themes
• Make a decision early before getting too far into the revision process
A strategy for finding your journalStart with your reader
1. Working alone, address in 1 to 5 sentences the question : “Who is my reader?” – 10 minutes
2. Working in pairs, discuss – 15 minutes
3. Working further in pairs: what journal is likely to lead to this reader? – 10 minutes
4. Large groupl discussion – 10 minutes
Questions?
Recommended