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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11405847 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/pme.1517 | DOI Listing |
J Osteopath Med
January 2025
Director of Medical Education, OhioHealth/Doctors Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA.
Context: With the advent of the Single Accreditation System (SAS) within the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), few programs have achieved Osteopathic Recognition (OR) status to date. OR is an accreditation that graduate medical education (GME) programs can achieve to distinctly acknowledge the additional focus on osteopathic training. There is an effort by national osteopathic organizations to determine barriers for programs to achieve OR and what innovative methods might help overcome them.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJMIR Form Res
January 2025
Institute of Nursing Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Background: Health care systems and the nursing profession worldwide are being transformed by technology and digitalization. Nurses acquire digital competence through their own experience in daily practice, but also from education and training; nursing education providers thus play an important role. While nursing education providers have some level of digital competence, there is a need for ongoing training and support for them to develop more advanced skills and effectively integrate technology into their teaching.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Med Internet Res
January 2025
School of Public Health, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Background: Health inequalities among older adults become increasingly pronounced as aging progresses. In the digital era, some researchers argue that access to and use of digital technologies may contribute to or exacerbate these existing health inequalities. Conversely, other researchers believe that digital technologies can help mitigate these disparities.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJMIR Res Protoc
January 2025
University hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Center, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Background: The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) is a reliable and validated instrument for assessing the understandability and actionability of patient education materials. It has been applied across diverse cultural and linguistic contexts, enabling cross-field and cross-national material quality comparisons. Accumulated evidence from studies using the PEMAT over the past decade underscores its potential impact on patient and public action.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAJR Am J Roentgenol
January 2025
Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!