Henk J. Busscher

The WJ Kolff Institute for Biomedical Engineering and Materials ScienceUniversity of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen

Groningen, The Netherlands

How to write a world-class paper-

Looking through the eyes of an editor

Henk J. BusscherFounding-editor: Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces

1992 – present

Web-of-Science Summary (October 2014)

Number of articles 545Total number of citations 16117Average number of citations per paper 29.57H-factor 60

Total number of theses (co-)supervised 84

JW Costerton (died age of 80, 2 years ago)

5133814774.3680

What is the first question going through your mind?What has this guy established

himself in science?

None deliberately

Most cited papers

FEMS Microbiology reviews 491Applied and Environmental Microbiology 402Colloids and Surfaces 252Journal of Biomedical Materials Research 251Biomaterials 246

What is the second question going through your mind?How many world class papers did he write?

I will not teach you

how to write a world-class paper

1. Show you how I perform my duties as an editor.

2. Teach you how to look at your manuscripts

through the eyes of an editor.

Disclaimer

AUTHOR Henk J. Busscher dislikes

EDITOR Henk J. Busscher as much as you will do after this talk.

AUTHOR Henk J. Busscher will not always write his papers according to the instructions of

EDITOR Henk J. Busscher.

FOR YOU:EDITOR Henk J. Busscher

is always right.

FOR MY STUDENTS AND CO-WORKERS: AUTHOR Henk J. Busscheris always more right thanEDITOR Henk J. Busscher.

About Colloids and Surfaces B

Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces isan international journal

devoted to fundamental and applied research on colloid and interfacial phenomena

in relation to systems of biological origin,

having particular relevance to the medical, pharmaceutical, biotechnological, food and

cosmetic fields.

I do not want to remain editorof a mediocre journaltarget region

Editors want higherImpact Factors

for their journals

What is the thing to do

for an editor to increasethe Impact Factor?

REJECTversus

IMPROVE(in the old days, when there were less papers)

Steps we took

BIGGEST STEP: Got rid of the “Oh my God papers”

- very long because of ridiculous sentences:“this results of this study show data that indicate that journals impact factors increase with increasing rejection rates of manuscripts by the editor”

- introduction is knowledge exhibition without an aim

- lots of figures and tables with combined Results and Discussion section

SECOND BIGGEST STEP: Enforced our identity as a journal

- adhere strictly to aim and scope

THIRD STEP: …………………….

What is your biggestfrustration as an author?

Rejection within 2 min,

“after careful reading and consideration”

Do you think an editor willread your entire paper?

IMPOSSIBLE,

even if you only receive

400 manuscripts per year

How much time do you believe an editor should spend on a paper

for taking a first decision?

The publication system

is

completely overheated(15 - 30 min max for first decision?)

Do you believe I understand allthe papers that I handle?

NO

CONCLUSION OF ALL THIS:Initial editorial decisions are largely intuitive

This is why author Henk J. Busscherwants every comma and

dot in his papers at the right place!

The abstract to be clear and informative,the cover letter to be convincing, etcetera.

What do I initially look at?

Title- Do I understand what the paper will be about

- Informative

- Appealing to a large group of readers

What do I initially look at?

Abstract- In line with title

- Indicate the general significance

- Aim

- Results described in sufficient detail

- Conclusion, preferably in broader perspective

- Use all the words we offer (do not forget to change your abstract after rejection by Nature allowing only 50 words for an abstract)

What do I initially look at?

Introduction- Not about what you know (“knowledge exhibition”)- Does it identify knowledge gaps in the current literature- Does it explain an urgency to fill these gaps- What will the paper yield to fill that gap- A clear aim

A BAD aim:- To make an inventory of authors responses to rude editors - The aim of this study is to study editors responses to rude authors(“research for the sake of research”)

A GOOD aim:- To find a relation between editors rudeness and the impact factor of a journal(“may reveal a mechanism”)

What do I initially not look at?

Materials and Methods

- Not at the initial stage

What do I look at?

Figures and Tables

- Clear, standard deviations with explanations.

- Do they present data in a way to suggest analysis ofmechanisms?

NOT table 1: editors rudeness for different journalstable 2: impact factor of different journals

YES a graph of rudeness versus impact factor

- We are an basic science journal with a physics background, DATA should not only be electron micrographs, histologicalimages, or a photograph of a test tube

What do I look at

Results and discussion combined?Authors combining both sections usually- Have a lot of data and do not know what

to make of them

OR

- Have little data and hide that in a cloud of literatureconsiderations

I want to see what data the authors add (RESULTS) and how it fits in and forwards the field (DISCUSSION)

If in doubt about suitabilityfor CSB,

I consult the references

- Are the majority of the references to ourcompetitor journals in the field (excellent!).

- Or to CSB (even better).

If still in doubt,I consult the cover letter

I never base my decision solelyon a cover letter

(may be different with Nature and Science,

taking only 2 min per decision)

And when still in doubt,I look at suggested reviewers

International spread:A paper from UMCG with only UMCG reviewerssuggested??????

Sufficient detail:Reviewer: 1243@gmail.com??????

I always use one editorial board member and possibly another external reviewer

The characteristicsof a good paper

1. I look at the title.

2. I want to read the abstract.

3. It excites me and I want to read the introduction.

4. The 20.00 hours news starts, but I tell my wife I have no interest today.

5. I want to finish reading the whole paper beforedoing anything else!

And there you go: rejected or taken into consideration

80% rejection rate upon submission

BUT

once you are in, 80% chance of acceptance

Is it a fun job to be editor?

It felt like an honour to be asked in 1992

It feels like a duty to science now

It is a miserable job with the increase in the number of papers received

BUT

1. It forces me to keep reading papers

2. It teaches me about what is behindthe scenes in publishing

1. It gives a great network

The biggest reward

Young authors that thank youfor teaching them

how to improve their manuscript

How to write a world-class paper-

TAKE HOME MESSAGE(never more than 3!)

Try to realize how editors think and work when writing your paper