There was a very interesting session with the editors of two
journals describing how to get your work published in a
journal that seeks to be read and archived by an exclusive
audience at the interface of biology, biostatistics, robotics,
engineering, bioanalytical chemistry and diagnostics,
emerging technology, microfluids and nanomedicine.
REALISTIC ABOUT JOURNAL SIGNIFICANCE
The editors have the goal of not having a large readership impact
factor (the commercial journals) rather be the resource of an
exclusive field in complex intersection of a number of fields.
In short, a specialty field.
1. Describe the topic that you wish to write on to the editor in
chief. Have the central message in 2-5 sentences providing the key
points. The topic should be targeted to the interest of the journal
readership. Negative results of an especially prevalent widely held
error is encouraged and can be published. It needs to be artfully
done extending or improving the concept and logically and
persuasively providing an alternative.
2. Send a cover letter and paper manuscript to the editor in chief
offering in the cover letter the gist of the article, possible reviewers
and people who for one reason or another should not be reviewers.
List who the corresponding author is.
3. It is important to read the author guidelines for detailed and
specific instructions about each one of the sections included
and provided as addenda electronically. There are generally word
count guidelines and sometimes that can be met by using archived
4. Six sections of a journal article included in a published full
paper were carefully described.
Results material and Method
References or citations and acknowledgements
5. Logical message sequences, like cause and effect, flow nicely
especially when composed by the authors and following the
order of the manuscript. Avoid not writing, concluding or
referring to data not described in the paper. Stay within
the page guidelines and only interpret conclusions guided
by the data presented.
6. Citations are critical to a good scientific paper and something
that all reviewers are quite mindful of.
8. Figures tables and legends
In my experience, this was the second time I met and spoke
with an editor about journal article writing. I did jointly
write and have published an article but. it is no longer
The editor did bring up the discussion of digital publication in
the vein of augmenting rather than replacing hard copy based
on publication counts.