How to write a manuscript and get it published in European Urology

Common problems and potential solutions

Giacomo Novara, M.D., F.E.B.U.

Assistant professor in urology

University of Padua, Italy

Associate editor of European Urology

Giacomonovara@gmail.com

Common problems and potential solutions

• All the sections of the paper are common sites of problems!

• They are not equally relevant

Title

• Title too long, unclear, wordy, sensationalistic

Solution• Be concise, clear, informative; avoid jargon,

abbreviations, metaphors, creative words.• Think that the title is indexed

Abstracts

• Data presented in the abstracts are not identical to those presented in the full text paper; the format is not in line with the journal request

Solution• Write the abstract at the very end of the

process• Check instruction for authors; have a look at

some recent publication from the target journal

Introduction

• Too long, synthesis of all the available literature, repeating concepts well known, starting from Adam and Eve

• Solution: use a standardized similar format for most of you papers (at least at the beginning)

Introduction

• 1st paragraph: brief background in present tense to establish context, relevance, or nature of the problem, question, or purpose (what we know)

• 2nd paragraph: importance of the problem and unclear issues (what we do not know - gap in knowledge - why it is important to fill that gap)

• 3rd paragraph: rationale, hypothesis, main objective, or purpose (why the study was done - hypothesis for how you will fill that gap in knowledge).

Materials and methods

• Do not include study results (by definition, they go in the “Results” section)

• Do not include comments on patients characteristics, indications, inclusion and exclusion criteria (they go in the “Discussion” section)

http://www.equator-network.org

http://www.equator-network.org

Results

• Systematic duplication of data in text, tables, and figures

Solution: adopt a standardized format• “Table 1 summarizes…”• “Table 2 summarizes…”• “Figure 1 shows cancer-specific survival…”

Tables

• Poor quality (few data, badly readable)

Solution• Appropriate title; extensive use of legends;

spell abbreviations; report all the data (and do not repeat them in the text)

Tables

Figures

• Poor quality: bad definitions, poor readibility, not “standing alone”

Solutions:• Appropriate title; extensive use of legends;

spell abbreviations; embed tables with rough numbers

• High quality images

Figures

Discussion

• Often too long, adding new results, overemphasizing results and clinical implications, ignoring limitations

Solution: • Seek for assistance of an expert colleague• Length= 1/3 of the manuscript• Cite systematic reviews, if any

Conclusions

• Often unrelated to study purpose and data

Solution:• Be short, and in line with the main aim of

the study• Conclusion is a short answer to the question

proposed in the Introduction

References and bibliography

• Too many references, including very old one• Duplicated references or references in an

incorrect format or incorrect order

Solutions:• Read instruction for the authors• Use a reference software (many available – I

use EndNote)

Other issues

• Add continuous line numbering• Remember to recheck everything when a

rejected paper is resubmitted to another journal (and adapt to the new one)