Navigating the Process of Research Article Writing and Publication

The journey of a research article is like a Lego game - completing one objective at a time (research question) to connect to other existing pieces (knowledgebase), thus progressing the field or completing the Lego. The purpose of a research article is to answer a critical question in the field rigorously. It aims to answer a single question with multiple proofs of validation. Trying to answer multiple questions simultaneously only leads to complicated output with greater chances of rejection. Prior to zoning into the nitty-gritty of the research article, the utmost aim of a good research article should be to solve a crucial problem of the field that would help it to move forward. Contrary to the belief, the research project should not just be curiosity-driven, it should be carefully thought of. It should bridge the gap in the field with an overarching aim to improve a disease condition and patients’ life quality. Thus, the conceptualization phase is critical. Before initiating any research, the researcher should ask themselves- what question this research will answer, whether it is critical for the field, and will the field move forward based on their findings. If the answer to these questions is yes, the researcher should move forward and design the experiments. The time given during the conceptualization phase would ultimately shorten the time for research article preparation and publication.

For easier understanding, the process of publishing a research article can be divided into 5 phases- 1) Conceptualization; 2) Experimental design and Execution; 3) Making Figures; 4) Writing the article; and 5) Submission and review process. Phases 2 and 3 can happen concurrently.

Once the research question is defined, the next step is to design appropriate experiments. All the experiments should be scientifically sound with proper positive and negative controls. The researcher should know the expected outcome and the possible explanation. They should also be prepared for unexpected outcomes. Based on these they should design follow-up experiments and validation by multiple techniques. Simultaneously, they should start converting the data into figures. Doing this early would help the researcher visualize the project's progress and other required experiments as part of the main and supplementary figures.

After compiling and analyzing all the data into figures, authors should move to the next step of manuscript writing. As you know, the manuscript has five main sections- A) abstract--where the research project is summarized into one paragraph, highlighting its need, major findings, conclusion, and future directions. B) Introduction, which contains existing literature on the research question, the knowledge gap in the field, and how the study will fill this gap, signifying its impact. C) Materials and Methods, containing the protocol and materials required for each experiment. This should be detailed, such that it can be reproduced by other researchers, helping the community to grow together. D) Results and discussion comprising the question that the given experiment would address, the experimental design, the actual results, and its interpretation. Based on this, the researcher should lay a foundation for the next experiment and so on. E) Finally, the conclusion of the project, its limitations, and future direction. Care should be taken to draw a correct conclusion from the experiments, one should not over-interpret the results, which is one of the most common mistakes. Once the manuscript is finalized it should be shared with co-authors for both scientific and English vigor. After compiling all the corrections and suggestions, the research article is ready for submission.

The final and crucial stage for the manuscript is submission to an appropriate journal. While choosing the journal, determine whether the project is translational, clinical, or cellular, and which sub-discipline it belongs to. Reviewers appreciate a clear story with an appropriate conclusion and limitations. Manuscripts with complex scientific questions, over-drawn conclusions, containing loopholes, without proper validation, will go through many rounds of reviews or rejection. A research study is clear if one can state its outcome in a single sentence. Once the manuscript is submitted, during the wait time the authors can do anticipated experiments that would address potential reviewers’ comments. This would save them time, with a quick turnaround once they receive the comments. Alternatively, the authors can also decide the feasibility of addressing reviewers’ comments. If it takes a toll on available resources, and time, then they can send it to another appropriate journal. Nowadays, some journals themselves suggest their sister journals where the manuscript will be better appreciated. If the science is credible the publication turnover time is quick. Once the manuscript is accepted, it's time for celebration after the long haul.