TEMPLATE FOR MSM SUBMISSIONS
Year : 2012 | Volume
| Issue : 1 | Page : 208-213
|Revised Template for MSM Submissions 2012
Ajai R Singh
Editor, MSM, India
|Date of Web Publication||28-Apr-2012|
Ajai R Singh
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Introduction|| |
This is a revised brief write-up for MSM authors meant to be a check-list to adhere to in their submissions 2012 onwards. It is based on, but replaces, Template for MSM Submissions (Singh, 2011b 2 ) at http://www.msmonographs.org/article.asp?issn=0973-1229;year=2011;volume=9;issue=1;spage=320;epage=323;aulast=Singh .
It is a working model for potential authors and not meant to replace detailed Instructions to Contributors which appear elsewhere in this monograph (p250) and at http://www.msmonographs.org/contributors.asp, and detailed article on MSM Referencing (Singh, 2012 3 ), which appears on p184-8 in this monograph, and at http://www.msmonographs.org/article.asp?issn=0973-1229;year=2012;volume=10;issue=1;spage=184;epage=188;aulast=Singh. More details are also available at About Us at http://msmonographs.org/aboutus.asp
| Template|| |
1. All papers, including those invited, must adhere to this Template, and any subsequent revisions. The language is UK English. While writing, do look into the following:
2. Add an Abstract at the beginning (100-150 words).
3. Add Key Words after Abstract (4-6 key words from the text), in alphabetical order, separated by semi-colons. Add Running Title, a brief form of the actual title, which is later to appear on top of every page of the write-up. Add Word Count below Running Title, in 2 divisions: 1) Total word count [includes total no of words, from start to end]; and 2) Net word count [includes matter from Introduction to Take Home. Means only actual running matter.]
4. Add Author/s Professional Qualifications, Affiliations , and email id, in that order, below Net Word Count. It starts with details of principal author and is followed by all other authors. Add [*] to corresponding author, and add correspondence address below his/her details.
5. Start article on next page with Introduction . Break the write-up into suitable paragraphs, with headings and subheadings as required. State clearly where tables, figures, if any, are to be placed by writing: 'Fig/Table … here' Place Table/Fig at appropriate place in the write-up, also add it/them at the end in an appendix.
6. Add Flowchart of the paper , at the end of the write up but before Concluding Remarks, as a figure that includes salient features of the paper and its important findings, so readers can get a pictorial overview of the paper and the thought as it flows through the text. This helps both the reader understand the author and helps the author clarify his thoughts, both for the reader, and most importantly, for himself. For flowchart, see any MSM paper, 2010 onwards.
7. Add Concluding Remarks (100-150 words, in 1-2 paragraphs, which conclude the arguments and put the author/s findings/viewpoint in a nutshell for the reader).
8. Add Take Home message (3-4 lines) after concluding remarks. Take home should be the absolute gist of the paper, 3-4 points, and less than concluding remarks.
9. Add Conflict of Interest [COI] statement , if any, after Take Home message [If none, say so. COI statement is to acknowledge any funding/sponsorship etc by any agency which could be construed to have influenced the write-up -- this is essential for readers to know, especially as some authors, especially in scientific papers, are funded by agencies which may have a direct/indirect interest in influencing results/write-ups.] Any research grants, pharma or institutional funding should be clearly acknowledged.
10. Add Declaration that it is your original unpublished work, not submitted for publication elsewhere. Also declare that, if accepted, copyright of the write-up rests with Mens Sana Monographs, and any subsequent publication of the paper, in part or whole, will be only with the written permission of MSM.
11. Add Acknowledgements , if any, after Declaration, in which you may acknowledge assistance of colleagues, peers, Institutions etc [not funding agencies] towards the write-up.
12. Points 1-11 above are mandatory requirements for any paper, including the editor's. As are all other points which follow.
13. Why Concluding Remarks, Take Home and Flowchart of Paper?
The reason why we insist on Concluding remarks, Take Home and Flowchart of Paper is to present the final summary and absolute gist of the paper to
- Encourage the reader to give the paper a second read.
- Re-understand the paper in a clearer manner after reading it the first time: often so many ideas are presented in the text of the paper that the reader may be drowned in attempting to make sense; Concluding remarks,Take home message and Flowchart of the Paper help a reader get a clearer grasp.
- Start the first reading of the paper with some grounding in what the paper is trying to essentially say.
- Help clarify the author's thoughts to himself/herself.
- Flowchart adds a pictorial dimension which adds to clarity and breaks the monotony of a write-up.
All these methods are meant to help make the author intelligible, the paper readable, and the thoughts digestible.
14. Add Questions that the Paper Raises after Acknowledgement/ Declaration. These are 4-7 questions that readers/researchers can deliberate over in the light of your write-up and to advance future research in the field. They are research type, not text book or CME type, questions.
15. Add 100-150 words About the author with a recent high-resolution jpg photo to go along with your write-up, after Questions that the Paper Raises.
16. Add References in MSM style [see References below, point 23, or an article at MSM website www.msmonographs.org 2012 onwards for details] after About the author .
17. Full length article : A paper may ordinarily not be more than 4500 words, complete with an abstract (150 words maximum), introduction, concluding remarks (150 words maximum), take home and flowchart and Reference List. Each Article may ordinarily contain not more than 40 references, 50% of which are ten years or later, and 25% 5 years or later. [This is so that recent work does not go unnoticed.]. For example, out of 40 references in a paper published in 2012, 20 references [50%] should be from 2002-2012, and 10 references [25%] from 2007-2012. Authors should specially check that they do not forget to cite work published in the last 2 years, as also related work published in MSM.
18. Editorial : An editorial may ordinarily not be more than 2500 words with max 30 references [50% of which are 10 yrs or later, 25% 5 yrs or later].
19. Feature and Communications : Musings max 1500 words. Reflections, The Looking Mirror max 2500 words, with 20 references [50% 10 yrs or later]. Letters to editor word limit is 1000 words. MSM Book review word limit is 2000 words.
20. All submissions in MS WORD , Times New Roman 12pt font size.
21. Editorial and Peer Review: All submissions, including those invited, are subject to editorial and anonymous peer review. Submissions found suitable for peer review first undergo an extensive editorial review to conform to MSM submission guidelines. After peer review, they may undergo further editorial review/corrections and copyediting.
22. Deadlines: Authors are adviced to cooperate and stick to deadlines of submissions strictly. As also carry out editorial corrections and peer review modifications as per time schedule given by the editorial office as follows: [The deadline for this submission is: … or Please get back by…]
Make a special effort to look at all relevant work of the last 10 yrs, and cite appropriate ones. Work of the last 5 yrs are especially important, and those of the last 2 yrs not to be missed at all. All authors are adviced to make a special effort to scan through previous issues of MSM and cite relevant work published therein.
Authors must check authenticity of references and other facts quoted before submission. They must specially check that all references in text are included in reference list, and vice versa. No reference not in text should occur in the reference list. Do not prepare a separate Bibliography/Internet Citation list/Suggested Reading list etc. They should be incorporated in the reference list itself, and only if cited in the text.
In the text, references should occur with only surnames with superscripts numbers matching their number in the reference list, and in the following form e.g. for one name (Fulford, 2011 6 ); for two names (Singh and Singh, 2011 14 ); for more than 2 names (Drubach et al., 2011 4 ).
Reference should be in MSM style (Singh, 2012 3 ). This is different from what we followed from 2003-2011.
In Short, What Has Changed?
In a nutshell, the differences are:
- As before, we shall continue to have authors' surnames in the text, but will now change to add numbers as a superscript, for instance, for one name (Fulford, 2011 6 ); for two names (Singh and Singh, 2011 21 ); and for more than two names (Drubach et al., 2011 8 ).
- These numbers in superscript must correspond to the number of the individual reference in the reference list at the end of the paper.
- Reference list should continue to be arranged in alphabetical order.
- Reference style for individual references of journal articles should be changed as follows:
iv .a. For Journal articles in general : Giussani DA. The vulnerable developing brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011;108:2641-2.
iv .b. For Books in general: Andreasen NC. The Creating Brain: The Neuroscience of Genius. New York and Washington DC: Dana Press; 2005.
Please carefully follow details especially with respect to abbreviations, italics, spacing, order, punctuation marks, page no etc.
Preparing The Reference List
All References should be bunched together in alphabetical order at the end of the submission in a reference list called References . They should follow the following pattern:
i. For References of Same Author in One Year
For two or more references from the same author/authors in the same year, (a) and (b) maybe used after the year of publication. For example:
1. Woodruff T. Letters: The medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry: when will we open our eyes? eMJA 2004a;18:458-9.
2. Woodruff T. Pharmaceutical marketing, the PBS, and patient care. New Doct 2004b;81:21-2.
ii. For Editorials
Angell M. Is Academic Medicine for Sale? (Editorial). N Engl J Med 2000;342:1516-8.
iii. For Papers:
iii.a. For a single author: Schafer A. Biomedical conflicts of interest: A defence of the sequestration thesis-learning from the cases of Nancy Olivieri and David Healy. J Med Ethics 2004;30:8-24.
iii.b. For more than one author [all names preferred; et al may be used only after naming 6 authors]: Phillips B, Nylander K, Harnaha J, Machen J, Lakomy R, Styche A, Gillis K, Brown L, Lafreniere D, Gallo M, Knox J, Hogeland K, Trucco M, Giannoukakis N. A microsphere-based vaccine prevents and reverses new-onset autoimmune diabetes. Diabetes. 2008;57(6):1544-55.
Phillips B, Nylander K, Harnaha J, Machen J, Lakomy R, Styche A, et al. A microsphere-based vaccine prevents and reverses new-onset autoimmune diabetes. Diabetes 2008;57:1544-55.
iv. For Books and Monographs:
iv.a. Reference of a book: Baars B. A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1988.
iv.b. Reference of a monograph series:
ii) Singh AR, Singh SA. Medical Practice, Psychiatry and the Pharmaceutical Industry: And Ever the Trio shall Meet-I: The Connection between Academia and Industry. Mens Sana Monogr 2005;II(6):5-35.
iv.c. Where a book chapter is referenced: Dulany DE. Psychology and the study of consciousness. In: Bayne T, Cleeremans A, Wilken P, editors. The Oxford Companion to Consciousness. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 540-4.
iv.d. Where an encyclopedia entry is referenced:
Shaffer J. Mind-Body Problem. In: Edwards P, editor. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol 5 & 6. New York: Macmillan; 1972. p. 343.
iv.e. Where a book in translated: Heidegger M. In: Being and Time (Sein und Zeit) Macquarrie J, Robinson E, translators. New York: Harper and Row; 1927/1962.
iv.f. Where an older book is republished:
Heidegger M. In: Being and Time (Sein und Zeit) Macquarrie J, Robinson E, translators. New York: Harper and Row; 1927/1962.
iv.g. Where a book has been edited: Flew A, editor. A Dictionary of Philosophy. London: Pan Books in association with The Macmillan Press; 1983.
iv.h Where a book has been edited by someone other than the author: Hume D. In: A Treatise of Human Nature. Selby-Bigge L, editor. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1739/1888.
iv.i. Where a book has been published by two publishers: Flew A, editor. A Dictionary of Philosophy. London: Pan Books in association with The Macmillan Press; 1983.
iv.j. Where a book is published by one but reprinted by another: James W. The Principles of Psychology. Ch 9. Vol. 2. New York: Henry Holt; 1890/1999. Reprinted Bristol: Thoemmes Press; 1999.
v. For Web References:
Hickey LP. The Brain in a Vat Argument. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2010. Last updated Oct 22, 2005. Available at http://www.iep.utm.edu/brainvat [Last accessed on 2011 Dec 26]
vi. For News Paper/Magazine Articles/News Agency/Channels with URLs:
vi.a. Newspaper/Magazine: Sharma S. Don't blame superbug on India, it's everywhere. Hindustan Times. 2010, 13 August. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/Don-t-blame-superbug-on-Indiait-s-everywhere/Article1-585926.aspx [Last accessed on 2011 Jan 13].
vi.b. News agency: Indo-Asian News Service. Linking India to superbug unfair and wrong, says India. Hindustan Times. 12 August 2010. Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/Linking-Indiato-superbug-unfair-and-wrong-says-India/Article1-585840.aspx . [Last accessed on 2011 Jan 13].
vi.c. News channel: Pandey G. India rejects UK scientists' 'superbug' claim. BBC News. 2010, 12 August. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10954890 . [Last accessed on 2011 Jan 13].
vii. Personal communications:
Personal communication may not ordinarily be quoted as a reference. If at all done, it should be with the written permission of the communicator.
24 . Concurrence of all authors
In a paper with more than one author, the final draft of all submissions must be read and agreed to by all co-authors before they are finally accepted for publication. This is to prevent potential retraction by any co-author (Singh, 2011a 1 )
25. Typical Paper, Editorial, and other submissions
For a typical review article, see
For a typical editorial, see
For a typical Book review, see
For typical MSM Poem, see
For a typical Journalology article, see
For a typical article in the Looking Glass, see
For a typical article in Reflections, see
For a typical article in Musings, see
For typical obituary, see
26. Copyright and Republication
Copyright of material published rests with the Mens Sana Monographs. However, authors are permitted to disseminate their published work for non-commercial purposes freely by post or electronic means, and to put up links on their personal/institutional web sites for the information and knowledge of their viewers and fellow researchers, with due acknowledgement of the original source of publication (MSM).
Authors should contact and obtain permission from MSM editor if they intend republication of their work in any other form later. Such requests are ordinarily granted on due acknowledgement of first publication in MSM.
All principal authors/sole authors receive a complementary hard copy of the MSM in which their paper is published. Co-authors do not ordinarily receive a complementary copy, but may approach the editor for the same.
| References|| |
|1.||Singh AR. Science, names giving and names calling: Change NDM-1 to PCM. Mens Sana Monogr 2011a;9:294-319. |
|2.||Singh AR. Template for MSM submissions. Mens Sana Monogr 2011b;9:320-3. |
|3.||Singh AR. Referencing modification in Mens Sana Monographs from 2012. Mens Sana Monogr 2012;10:184-8. |
| Article Access Statistics|
| Viewed||2934 |
| Printed||194 |
| Emailed||0 |
| PDF Downloaded||47 |
| Comments ||[Add] |