Journal of Family and Community Medicine

: 2000  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 17-

Tips from the Editor

Hassan Bella 

Correspondence Address:

How to cite this article:
Bella H. Tips from the Editor.J Fam Community Med 2000;7:17-17

How to cite this URL:
Bella H. Tips from the Editor. J Fam Community Med [serial online] 2000 [cited 2020 Aug 13 ];7:17-17
Available from:

Full Text

Common reasons why papers are rejected for publication

The study did not examine an important scientific issueThe study was not original (someone else has already done the same or a similar study)The study did not actually test the author's hypothesisA different type of study should have been donePractical difficulties (e.g. in recruiting subjects) led the authors to compromise on the original study protocolThe sample size was too smallThe study was uncontrolled or inadequately controlledThe statistical analysis was incorrect or inappropriateThe authors have drawn unjustified conclusions from their dataThere is considerable conflict of interest (e.g. one of the authors or a sponsor might benefit financially from the publication of the paper and insufficient safeguards were seen to be in place to guard against bias)The paper is so badly written that it is incomprehensible

(Source: Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. The basics of evidence-based medicine. London: British Medical Journal Publishing Group, 1997)

Problems encountered by technical and copy editors, authors, journal editors and reviewers

Inconsistency in: spellings, use of units, presentation of units, use of symbolsToo many tables/figures makes layout difficultLack of care in determining levels of headings (keep to a minimum)Literary not scientific language/lack of clarityErrors in quoting from source materialErrors in cross-referencing data (e.g. data in text does not match data in tables/figures; statements in abstract do not match statements/conclusions in text)Incomplete referencing: author, title, journal, volume, issue, date, page numbers, or author/editor, book title, place of publication, publisher, year, page numbersToo many references: are they all valid?Poor quality figures/photosPoorly designed tables

(Source: WHO and other sources)