一篇关于拒稿原因分析的摘要欣赏

标准的摘要包含五个要素，分别是问题陈述（背景）、动机（本文目的）、研究方法、结果（即发现）和结论（结果是否回答了动机，或者研究意义）。这里分享的《头疼》杂志上一篇关于该期刊拒稿原因的文章的摘要，按顺序介绍了动机、背景、研究方法、结果和结论。原文按五个要素分成了五段，这里的译文按标准整合成了一段，并将背景放在动机之前，且分属不同要素的句子使用了不同颜色来区分。

Chelsea M Hesterman , Christina L Szperka , Dana P Turner Headache. 2018  Reasons for Manuscript Rejection After Peer Review From the Journal Headache，Headache. 58(10):1511-1518 

获取原文请扫码，或使用链接 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm./30011058/

摘要

人们发表过许多以拒稿为题材的社论、评论和研究论文。然而，这些论文很少系统地评估同行评审后被拒绝的原因。没有一个是专门针对神经病学或头痛医学领域的（背景）。本文目的是确定并描述《头痛》杂志审稿后被拒绝的原因（动机）。我们采用的方法是，对2014年1月1日至2016年12月31日提交的所有头痛病例进行回顾性分析。对每份手稿的同行评审者和编辑评论进行了评审，并为每份手稿编码了无限的拒绝理由。拒绝的详细原因被分为9大类（方法）。我们发现，从2014年1月1日至2016年12月31日，共收到784份意见书。其中，336项立即被拒绝，434项继续进行同行评审。在此期间，总体拒绝率为62.6%，同行评议后的拒绝率为35.7%。同行评审后拒绝的6个最常见原因是: 方法和研究设计的缺陷、方法的不良报告、不良统计分析、结论的夸大、协变量或结果的问题以及对照组或病例组的问题（结果）。于是，方法和研究设计的缺陷是2014-2016年间《头痛》杂志同行评审后被拒绝的最常见原因（结论）。

Abstract

Objective: To identify and characterize the reasons manuscripts are rejected after peer review from the journal Headache.

Background: Numerous editorials, reviews, and research manuscripts have been published on the topic of manuscript rejection. However, few of these papers evaluate the reasons for rejection after peer review systematically. None are specific to the field of neurology or headache medicine.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of all submissions to Headache from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2016 was performed. Peer reviewer and editor comments for each manuscript were reviewed, and unlimited reasons for rejection were coded for each manuscript. Detailed reasons for rejection were then grouped into 9 broader categories.

Results: A total of 784 submissions were received from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2016. Of those, 336 were immediately rejected and 434 went on to peer review. During this period, the overall rejection rate was 62.6% and the rejection rate after peer review was 35.7%. The 6 most common reasons for rejection after peer review were: flaws in methodology and study design, poor reporting of methodology, poor statistical analysis, overstatement of conclusions, problems with covariates or outcomes, and problems with the control or case group.

Conclusion: Flaws in methodology and study design were the most common reasons for rejection after peer review from Headache between 2014-2016.