medigraphic.com
ISSN 1405-8871 (Print)

2025, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Aten Fam 2025; 32 (3)

Frequent Reasons for Rejection of Original Manuscripts Submitted to a Medical Journal

Dávila-Mendoza R, López-Ortiz G

Language: Spanish
References: 48
Page: 195-202
PDF size: 274.58 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze the most frequent reasons for rejection of original manuscripts submitted to a medical journal. Methods: Descriptive crosssectional study. All original manuscripts rejected after peer review and submitted to Atención Familiar between January 2018 and December 2023 were analyzed. Data on the topic, study design, and geographic origin were recorded. Reasons for rejection were classified according to the editorial process stage and manuscript sections. Results: A total of 149 manuscripts were included. The most common topic was diabetes mellitus (18.8%). Most manuscripts were cross-sectional studies (92.6%), and 94% were conducted in Mexico. Of the manuscripts, 53.7% were rejected during editorial screening, mainly due to failure to comply with author guidelines, among other reasons. The remaining 46.3% were rejected during peer review, primarily due to reporting limitations in the methods, results, discussion, and references sections, as well as failure to address reviewers’ comments. Conclusion: Most manuscripts were rejected during editorial screening. Among those rejected during peer review, the sections with the most frequent deficiencies were methods, results, discussion, and references. Although these findings are limited to a single journal, they reflect persistent challenges in medical writing. To mitigate these issues, authors should focus on improving the structure of key sections and conducting thorough reviews prior to submission.


REFERENCES

  1. Tarkang EE, Bain LE. The bane of publishing aresearch article in international journals by Africanresearchers, the peer-review process and the contentiousissue of predatory journals: a commentary.Pan Afr Med J. 2019;32:119.

  2. Zarbin M, Chuck R. The Elusive Nature of Truthin Scientific Studies and the Importance of PeerReview. Trans Vis Sci Tech. 2023;12(3):10.

  3. Heßler N, Rottmann M, Ziegler A. Empirical analysisof the text structure of original research articles in medicaljournals. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(10):e0240288.

  4. Liang TW, Feliciano DV, Koniaris LG. A surgerytrainee’s guide to writing a manuscript. Am J Surg.2017;214(3):558–563

  5. Botea F, Popescu I. How to Submit a Clinical Paper:Basics, Tips and Traps - Part III. Chirurgia(Bucur). 2020;115(5):554-562.

  6. Hall SA, Wilcox AJ. The fate of epidemiologicmanuscripts: a study of papers submitted to epidemiology.Epidemiology. 2007;18(2):262–265.

  7. About The New England Journal of Medicine[Internet]. [citado 2024 junio 26]. Disponible en:https://www.nejm.org/about-nejm/about-nejm

  8. Explore The BMJ | The BMJ [Internet]. [citado2024 octubre 10]. Disponible en: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/explore-bmj

  9. Morabia A, Costanza MC. Publishing in theAmerican Journal of Public Health: Don’t Be DeskRejected. Am J Public Health. 2023;113(3):245.

  10. Forero DA, Moore JH. Considerations for higherefficiency and productivity in research activities.BioData Min. 2016;9(1):35.

  11. Candal-Pedreira C, Rey-Brandariz J, Varela-LemaL, Pérez-Ríos M, Ruano-Ravina A. Challengesin peer review: how to guarantee the quality andtransparency of the editorial process in scientificjournals. An Pediatr (Engl Ed). 2023;99(1):54–59.

  12. Hillard T, Baber R. Peer review: the cornerstoneof scientific publishing integrity. Climacteric.2021;24(2):107–8.

  13. Parsi K, Elster N. Peering into the Future of PeerReview. Am J Bioeth. 2018;18(5):3–4.

  14. Mendiola Pastrana IR, Hernández AV, Pérez ManjarrezFE, López EO, Romero-Henríquez LF,López-Ortiz G. Peer-Review and Rejection Causesin Submitting Original Medical Manuscripts. JContin Educ Health Prof. 2020;40(3):182–186.

  15. Dwivedi YK, Hughes L, Cheung CMK, ConboyK, Duan Y, Dubey R, et al. Editorial: How to developa quality research article and avoid a journaldesk rejection. International Journal of InformationManagement. 2022;62:102426.

  16. Jawaid SA, Jawaid M. Common reasons for notaccepting manuscripts for further processing aftereditor’s triage and initial screening. Pak J Med Sci.2019;35(1):1–3.

  17. de Ru JA, Ward TN, Roberts JL. Veracity in theReview Process. Headache. 2019;59(9):1429–33.doi: 10.1111/head.13671

  18. Khadilkar SS. Journey of a Research Article. J ObstetGynaecol India. 2018;68(2):75–6.

  19. Menon V, Varadharajan N, Praharaj SK, AmeenS. Why Do Manuscripts Get Rejected? A ContentAnalysis of Rejection Reports from theIndian Journal of Psychological Medicine. IndianJ Psychol Med. 2022;44(1):59–65. doi:10.1177/0253717620965845.

  20. For Authors | JAMA | JAMA Network [Internet]. [citado2024 junio 26]. Disponible en: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/pages/for-authors#fa-about

  21. Gaceta Médica de México [Internet]. [citado 2024junio 27]. Disponible en: https://www.gacetamedicademexico.com/

  22. Gaceta Sanitaria, Métricas [Internet]. [citado 2024junio 27]. Disponible en: http://www.gacetasanitaria.org/es-metricas

  23. Métricas | Medicina de Familia. SEMERGEN[Internet]. [citado 2024 junio 27]. Disponible en:https://www.elsevier.es/es-revista-medicina-familia-semergen-40-metricas

  24. Ulloa-Aguirre A, Sepúlveda-Vildósola AC, Selman-Lama M, Oñate-Oñate L, Treviño-BecerraA, Oropeza-Abúndez C, y cols. Las revistascientíficas médicas en México. Gac Med Mex.2020;156(6):619–635.

  25. Mendiola-Pastrana IR, López-Ortiz E, Hernández-López RG, Romero-Henríquez LF, Dávila-Mendoza R, López-Ortiz G. Analysis of ScientificProduction in Family Medicine in Mexico. Publications.2024;12(4):31.

  26. Campbell KM, Washington JC, Baluchi D, RodríguezJE. Submit It Again! Learning From RejectedManuscripts. PRiMER. 2022;6:715584.

  27. Tullu M, Karande S. Success in Publishing: Selectingan Appropriate Journal and Braving the PeerreviewProcess. J Postgrad Med. 2018;64(1):1–4.

  28. Baron TH. ABC’s of writing medical papers inEnglish. Korean J Radiol. 2012;13(Suppl 1):S1-11. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2012.13.S1.S1.

  29. Rampal L, Liew BS, Oothuman P, Philip R, MohdSidik S, Hoe VC, et al. From the MJM Editors’Desk: Common errors authors make in submissionto the Medical Journal of Malaysia. Med JMalaysia. 2020;75(4):323–324.

  30. Rawson RE, Quinlan KM, Cooper BJ, FewtrellC, Matlow JR. Writing-skills developmentin the health professions. Teach Learn Med.2005;17(3):233–238.

  31. Leyva ALA, Chura QG, Chávez GJY. Nivel inferencialde la comprensión lectora y su relación conla producción de textos argumentativos. Bol AcadPeru Leng. 2022; (71);399-429.

  32. Kredo T, Bernhardsson S, Machingaidze S, YoungT, Louw Q, Ochodo E, et al. Guide to clinicalpractice guidelines: the current state of play. Int JQual Health Care. 2016;28(1):122–128.

  33. Collins S, Gemayel R, Chenette EJ. Avoidingcommon pitfalls of manuscript and figure preparation.FEBS J. 2017;284(9):1262–1266.

  34. Dávila-Mendoza R, López-Ortiz G. Pautas a seguirpara publicar en la revista Atención Familiar. AtenFam. 2023;30(1):73–7.

  35. Yanık B, Evcik D, Geler Külcü D, Koldaş DoğanŞ, Bardak AN, Zateri C, et al. Why do manuscriptssubmitted to the Turkish Journal of Physical Medicineand Rehabilitation get rejected? Turk J PhysMed Rehab. 2023;69(4):535–540.

  36. Hernández-Vargas A, Pérez-Manjarrez FE, Mendiola-Pastrana IR, López-Ortiz E, López-Ortiz G.Errores más comunes al redactar artículos médicosoriginales. Gac Méd Mex. 2019;155(6):635–640.

  37. Bhende VV, Sharma TS, Krishnakumar M, RamaswamyAS, Bilgi K, Mankad SP. Decoding theRejection Code: Understanding Why Articles GetAxed. Cureus. 2024;16(3):e56920.

  38. Prager EM, Chambers KE, Plotkin JL, McArthurDL, Bandrowski AE, Bansal N, et al. Improvingtransparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing.Brain Behav. 2019;9(1):e01141.

  39. Özçakar L, Rizzo J, Franchignoni F, NegriniS, Frontera W. Let’s Write a Manuscript: APrimer with Tips and Tricks for Penning anOriginal Article. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.2022;101(7):698–701.

  40. Khatri N, Varma A, Budhwar P. Commonly observedshortcomings in manuscripts submitted tomanagement journals. IIMB Management Review.2017;29(3):203–209.

  41. Barroga E, Vardaman M. Essential Componentsof Educational Programs on Biomedical Writing,Editing, and Publishing. J Korean Med Sci.2015;30(10):1381–7.

  42. Barroga E, Mitoma H. Improving Scientific WritingSkills and Publishing Capacity by DevelopingUniversity-Based Editing System and Writing Programs.J Korean Med Sci. 2018;34(1):e9.

  43. Ahmad S, Ahmad S, Ahmad U, Cheema HA,Iqbal N, Shahid A, et al. An assessment of publishingpractices and barriers faced by medical studentsto conduct research: A cross‐sectional studyfrom Pakistan. Health Sci Rep. 2022;5(5):e831.

  44. Fragoso-Mendoza MI, Dávila-Mendoza R, López-Ortiz G, Fragoso-Mendoza MI, Dávila-MendozaR, López-Ortiz G. Importancia y uso de guías parareportar los principales tipos de estudio en investigaciónmédica. Cir Cir. 2023;91(2):277–283.

  45. Ganga-Contreras F, Alarcón-Henríquez N, Suárez-Amaya W, Meleán-Romero RA, Ruiz G, Cueva-Estrada J. Causas que originan rechazo de artículoscientíficos en revistas científicas latinoamericanas.Ingeniare. 2022;30(3):602-618.

  46. Arroyo-Hernández H, Alarco-Jhonel J. El destinode los artículos originales rechazados. Análisis enuna revista de salud pública en Latinoamérica. RevCuerpo Med HNAAA. 2022;15(4):535-540.

  47. Amezcua M, Herrera-Justicia S, Orkaizagirre-GómaraA. Publicación científica: causas de rechazode manuscritos en función de la pertinencia. IndexEnferm. 2019;28(3):87-92.

  48. Ricardo-Zaldívar B. Algunas consideraciones sobrela redacción del artículo científico. Refer Pedagógica.2021;9(1):37-49.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com