Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38766586›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2023

Why do manuscripts submitted to the Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation get rejected?

Burcu Yanık, Deniz Evcik, Duygu Geler Külcü, Şebnem Koldaş Doğan, Ayşe Nur Bardak, Coşkun Zateri, Birkan Sonel Tur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Burcu YanıkDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-6158-552X
Deniz EvcikDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Private Güven Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Duygu Geler KülcüDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, UMU Haydarpaşa Numune SUAM, Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-5491-5383
Şebnem Koldaş DoğanDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences, Antalya SUAM, Antalya, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-0484-1336
Ayşe Nur BardakDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Göztepe Medikal Park Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-7800-4982
Coşkun ZateriDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Onsekiz Mart University Faculty of Medicine, Çanakkale, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-7948-5383
Birkan Sonel TurDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-0798-4554

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to examine the reasons for the rejection of manuscripts, considering the increased rejection rates of our journal of up to 73% in 2022, and help authors realize what the editors and referees are paying attention to while assessing the manuscript. Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, original articles, case reports, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses submitted and rejected to the Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine Rehabilitation were searched between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2022. After reviewing the referee's evaluations and editorial opinions for all rejected articles, the reasons for rejection were classified under three main headings: journal, manuscript, and ethical issues. The manuscript issues were detailed under 11 subheadings. Results: A total of 1,293 rejected submissions were reviewed. Of these, 35% were rejected at the editorial stage, while 65% were rejected after peer review. Thirty-three submissions were rejected for ethical reasons, 168 were out of the journal's field of interest, and 1,092 (84%) submissions were rejected for reasons related to the manuscript. The three most common reasons for rejection were protocol/methodology errors (44%), lack of contribution to the literature (41%), and lack of adequate discussion (40%). Conclusion: Before starting the studies, supporting the hypotheses with the current literature review, planning with the right protocol, and interpreting the findings in the discussion will facilitate the acceptance of the manuscripts to our journal.

Indexed as

Articlejournalpublicationrefereerejection.

Identifiers

PMID38766586
PMCPMC11099858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.