Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39290445›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2024

"The Best Home for This Paper": A Qualitative Study of How Authors Select Where to Submit Manuscripts.

Lauren A Maggio, Natascha Chtena, Juan Pablo Alperin, Laura Moorhead, John M Willinsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Scientific fraud and dubious publication practices].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. How to Write a Pathology Research Paper-Basic Principles and Beyond-A Primer for Residents.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Lauren A MaggioDepartment of Medical Education, University Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2997-6133
Natascha ChtenaPublic Knowledge Project at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0009-0006-3586-5372
Juan Pablo AlperinPublishing Program at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9344-7439
Laura MoorheadSan Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9185-6290
John M WillinskyGraduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6192-8687

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: For authors, selecting a target journal to submit a manuscript is a critical decision with career implications. In the discipline of medical education, research conducted in 2016 found that authors were influenced by multiple factors such as a journal's prestige and its mission. However, since this research was conducted the publishing landscape has shifted to include a broader variety of journals, an increased threat of predatory journals, and new publishing models. This study updates and expands upon how medical education authors decide which journal to submit to with the aim of describing the motivational factors and journal characteristics that guide authors' decision making. Methods: The authors conducted five qualitative focus groups in which twenty-two medical education authors and editors participated. During the focus groups participants were engaged in a discussion about how they select a journal to submit their manuscripts. Audio from all focus groups was transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using codebook thematic analysis. Results: Participants considered multiple factors when selecting a target journal. Factors included a journal's impact, the scope of a journal, journal quality, and technical factors (e.g., word limits). Participants also described how social factors influenced their process and that open access plays a role that could both encourage or deter submission. Discussion: The findings describe the motivational factors and influential signals that guide authors in their journal selection decision making. These findings confirm, extend, and update journal selection factors reported in medical education and other disciplines. Notably, these findings emphasize the role of social factors, relationships and personal experiences, which were absent from previous work. Additionally, we observed increased consideration of open acces and a shift away from an emphasis on journal prestige.

Indexed as

Focus GroupsPublishingQualitative ResearchAuthorshipDecision MakingHumansMotivationPeriodicals as Topic

Identifiers

PMID39290445
PMCPMC11405847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.