Presented by Benjamin Poulose, MD at the SAGES 2014 Meeting; Panel – Career Development Symposium
disclosures–1:03
strength of work–12:26
generalizability–3:18
other tips–4:13
what are your goals?–5:09
when you submit–5:41
ok, you’ve submitted…now what?–7:55
quick editor review–8:
Keyword(s): accept, accepting, American Surgeon, Annals of Surgery, applicability, argue, articles, axis, ballpark, Bard-Davol, bias, body of data, Career Development Symposium, case control studies, case reports, caution, change of manuscript, cohort study, colleagues, comments, common themes, completeness review, completion, contact information, content, continum, continuum, cover letter, data, editor, editorial decision, editorial groups, editorial office, editors, emphasis, evaluated, exchange, expectation, expert opinion, explanation, faculty, final editor decision, formula, generalizability, goals, grant submission process, guideline, guidelines for authors, high quality, humility, interested, JACS, JAMA, JAMA Surgery, JLAST, Journal of Surgical Research, journals, judgement, leaders, level I, level II, level III, level IV, level V, levels of evidence, malleable, manuscript, medical audience, medical societies, methods, modify, move on, national meeting, Nature, NEJM, non-surgeons, non-surgical audience, open access journals, peer review, peer review process, persistent, pleasantries, point, populations, prepared, presentation, presented, proofs, prospective, published, quality papers, quick editor review, RCT, realistic, reference, reject, requirements, research group, research question, research support, response letter, resubmit, retrospective, review, reviewers, revise, SAGES 2014 scientific session & postgraduate courses, salami slicing, salvageable, Science, society, specialty specific, strength of work, study, study design, successful submissions, suitability, Surgical Endoscopy, surgical journals, surgical science, themes, timely fashion, typographical errors, valid, W.L. Gore, wide readership
