Publishing Your Thesis
Category : PROspective
By Patrick Sullivan, DVM, PhD
Your Masters thesis is a major part of your MPH education and represents hundreds of hours of your work and a significant amount of time invested on the part of your thesis advisor or field advisor. A great way to get the most out of your thesis — both for your career and for the people whose health we hope to improve — is to publish your work in a peer-reviewed journal. As a frequent thesis advisor and the Editor of an epidemiology journal, I’ll share some things to consider as you decide how to move from thesis to journal article. This isn’t an exhaustive list of what makes a great paper; it is a list of some common things that can help you make the transition from your thesis document to a successful submission to a journal.
1) Pick the right journal.
In a world where everything is available electronically, the decision about which journal to submit to should be based on which journal will most likely get your work to the people who can use it to take the right public health actions and improve health. Talk to your thesis advisor or other faculty or colleagues who work in the area of your research. There are often subtle differences in who actively reads which journals and in which journal is most likely to see your work as a great fit for their readership.
2) Right size it.
Different journals have different limits on word count for research articles, and there’s a good chance you’ll need to cut the word count from your thesis to get it into shape for a journal. Most journals have an “Instructions to Authors” section that will give you the rules. Often the background sections of academic theses have a lot of literature review, and that’s a prime place to consider cutting back. Depending on the journal you submit to, the Editor and the readers might already have a lot of background knowledge about your area of research. A great introduction can be 3-4 paragraphs long. It makes the case of why your research is important, what is known on the topic already, what gap you’re trying to fill, and includes a short statement of what you did to fill that gap.
3) Pay attention to the rules.
The instructions to authors section will also let you know how many and what types of figures are allowed in the journal for different article types. Always take the time to read these and follow them. As a journal editor, I won’t reject an article just because the authors didn’t follow the guidelines, but it always helps your case when the Editor can tell that you really prepared this manuscript for the journal she leads. If you get a rejection from one journal and need to submit to another journal, take time to check the rules of the new journal and get your paper in line with those expectations.
4) Write a clear cover letter.
Some journals require this, but it’s always an option. A cover letter is your 1-page “elevator pitch” for your paper — a succinct case for why the journal editors should care about this topic and prioritize your work in their journal. If the journal has published papers on similar topics, this is a good place to let the Editor know that you are aware of the prior published work in the journal, and how your paper furthers that knowledge. Always point out why your work is important to improve health or the field — concisely. Let the Editor know that you are publishing your thesis work. I am always excited to see people early in their career bringing their work to the journal I edit. Finally, offer several suggestions for knowledgeable peer reviewers who you think could provide an informed and objective peer review. This helps the Editors get timely and high quality peer reviews.
5) Your Discussion section is key.
The discussion section is another place where you might need to cut back a bit from your thesis document. For most journals, a 7 or 8 paragraph discussion is about the right length. Even if you wrote the discussion for your thesis alone in the late night hours, I encourage you to set up a time with your thesis advisors and others who helped with your thesis to brainstorm the contents of the discussion section of the manuscript. In my editorial role, I’m looking at the Discussion to tell me what was learned, what we should do as a result, what the limitations of the knowledge gained are, and how this might help improve people’s health or help researchers improve their work. After all the literature review, working on methods, and fighting with word processing apps to get your tables looking right, this is your chance to think and communicate how your work will make the world better.
6) Don’t let the editors (or the reviewers) get you down.
At Annals of Epidemiology, where I am Editor, last year we accepted less than 10% of the manuscripts we received. In your career, you will have several rejection decisions for every acceptance. When you get a rejection, before or after reviews, it’s an opportunity to rethink your strategy. If you got a rejection without peer reviews, was the fit for the journal right? Some editors will provide you with a categorical reason for the rejection, but if not you can always ask. If you got comments from reviewers, you got a free gift — a list of ways to make your work better or to communicate more clearly for the next journal. I try to make revising and resubmitting a rejected manuscript a high priority — all the work is done in preparing the manuscript, and there’s no reason to let a good manuscript sit outside of a review process. In authorship (as in most parts of life), persistence is the only real predictor of success.
7) Share the news.
As someone who trained before social media ruled, this is a new one for me as a writer. When your publication comes out, share the link and your high-level highlight through social media to help people learn about the new knowledge you’ve shared. You can tweet a figure or a main message from the paper. The Emory Epi department and the Rollins communications staff are great about retweeting our work, so be sure to tag them when you tweet.
I hope you’ll make time to turn your thesis into a paper for peer review. If the research is worth doing, then the knowledge is worth sharing.
Dr. Patrick Sullivan (DVM, PhD) is a professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Rollins School of Public Health and serves as the Editor-In-Chief of Annals of Epidemiology.
Join the Conversation
Are you an alumni or current student in the Department of Epidemiology? Do you want to share your professional advice and experiences with a large audience of your peers? We want to hear from YOU! Consider becoming a contributing author for PROspective! To inquire, email your article idea directly to the editors at Confounder [at] emory [dot] edu!
