To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The FNDC5 gene encodes the fibronectin type III domain-containing protein 5 that is a membrane protein mainly expressed in skeletal muscle and the FNDC5 rs3480 polymorphism may be associated with liver disease severity in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We investigated the influence of the FNDC5 rs3480 polymorphism on the relationship between sarcopenia and the histological severity of NAFLD.
370 adult individuals with biopsy-proven NAFLD were studied. Appendicular skeletal muscle mass was measured by bioelectrical impedance. The association between the key exposure sarcopenia, and the outcome liver histological severity, was investigated by binary logistic regression. Stratified analyses were undertaken to examine the impact of FNDC5 rs3480 polymorphism on the association between sarcopenia and the severity of NAFLD histology.
Patients with sarcopenia had more severe histological grades of steatosis and a higher prevalence of significant fibrosis and definite NASH than those without sarcopenia. There was a significant association between sarcopenia and significant fibrosis (adjusted odds ratio 2.79, 95%CI 1.31-5.95, p=0.008), independent of established risk factors and potential confounders. Among patients with sarcopenia, significant fibrosis occurred more frequently in the rs3480 AA genotype carriers than in those carrying the FNDC5 rs3480 G genotype (43.8% vs. 17.2%, p=0.031). In the association between sarcopenia and liver fibrosis, there was a significant interaction between the FNDC5 genotype and sarcopenia status (p-value for interaction=0.006).
Sarcopenia is independently associated with significant liver fibrosis, and the FNDC5 rs3480 G variant influences the association between sarcopenia and liver fibrosis in patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD.
Journal articles are the basic element located in the middle of journal article publication. After discussing students’ intuitive thoughts and real-life cases (Susan, Singer, and Einstein), the chapter presents the core concept related to journal articles, that is, scientific contributions. It is scientific contributions that make a manuscript publishable. Advancing scientific knowledge and improving human life are the ultimate goals of publishing journal articles. Scientific contributions can be further analyzed, in terms of (1) intended, perceived, and accomplished contributions, (2) empirical, synthesizing, theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions, and (3) directions and degrees of scientific contributions. Multiple practical suggestions are offered in the end: understanding that scientific contributions, rather than innovative ideas, graceful writing, or rigorous research, make a manuscript publishable, that scientific contributions are related to advancing scientific knowledge and improving human life, that scientific contributions are related to intended, perceived, and accomplished ones, that various types of contributions, such as empirical, synthesizing, theoretical, methodological, and practical, can be achieved, and that directions and degrees of scientific contributions can vary.
Empirical articles are familiar to students and researchers because they read and write in their college courses or their professional careers. These articles are also challenging and difficult to write well and publish in good journals because writing and publishing them requires not only various research skills (e.g., design, review, method, data analysis) but also the integration of these skills in one empirical article. Furthermore, writing and publishing empirical articles are useful and rewarding because a good empirical article might have empirical, theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions to knowledge. In this chapter, we have shown students’ intuitive thoughts, presented four real life cases (Yusel, Zaro, Robert, and Sheila and Feng), and discussed three core concepts (description research, practice-embedded research, and replication research) and two reporting standards (quantitative and qualitative). It ends with three practical suggestions, including finding highly publishable topics, understanding the diversity of empirical articles, and follow the report standards.
Ordinary people’s intuitive thinking about readers of journal articles typically focuses on the scientific community. The four real-life cases, Seth, Tim, and Chris, Singer and Willett, suggest that readers are important, diverse, complex, and broad. Among various types of readers, peer reviewers and science journalists are two special and critical groups of readers. To publish our manuscripts successfully, four practical suggestions are offered: understanding readers and always have our readers in mind before or after we prepare our manuscripts; understanding reviewers and always have peer reviewers in mind before we write a manuscript; and understanding journalists and always have scientific reporters in mind after we publish a journal article.
The core concept of this chapter is scientific authorship. In essence, authors must make substantial contributions to both research, writing, and publishing. Authorship comes with not only professional credits but also professional responsibilities. After presenting intuitive responses and multiple cases related to authorship (York, Michelle, Zack, and Chinese Graduate Students), the chapter discusses that authorship in the real world is diverse and complex, ranging from non-authors, co-authors, beginning authors, to ESL authors. It ends with several practical suggestions: being a good author focusing on both credits and responsibilities of authors rather than just credits; being a good coauthor focusing on changing professional contributions in the publication process; being a good first time author focusing on performing professional communication; and being a good ESL author focusing on making unique scientific contributions as ESL authors.
This chapter addresses various important issues that an author will have to deal with after a manuscript is submitted. It discusses students’ intuitive thoughts, four real-life cases (Lilly, Sue, Jeff, and Kris), and four core concepts (peer review, editorial decision, resubmission cover letter, manuscript revision). It ends with a graphic highlight of the core content of the chapter and four practical suggestions of understanding and appreciating the importance of peer reviews, editorial decisions, a professional and thoughtful cover letter, and good minor revisions or major revisions.
The key to publishing journal articles is to demonstrate your contributions to your field of study. If we identify our target articles, it means that we know explicitly rather than implicitly what previous contributions are and what our contributions are. This chapter firsts present intuitive thoughts of students and three real-life cases (Robert, Zoey, and Young) and then discusses several pairs of core concepts, that is, highly-cited articles vs. low-cited articles, theoretical articles vs. empirical articles, and publishability vs. responsibility. Based on the discussion in this chapter, practical suggestions are offered: identifying target articles before, during, and after writing our manuscripts, especially when we review the literature; citing target articles and assessing scientific contributions of these articles; and focusing on the positive side rather than the negative side of target articles when we assess them.
This chapter focuses on a basic model of professional communication and two basic goals of journal article publication. It has five major sections, Intuitive Thoughts, Frank and Neil, Professional Communication, Scientific Research, and Practical Suggestions. It starts with a discussion of intuitive thoughts of graduate students and then a discussion of two real-life cases (Frank and Nell) so that we can see how new authors think and act related to the central question of the chapter. After that, two core concepts, professional communication and scientific research, are discussed in detail, followed by several practical suggestions. In brief, there are two major reasons why we publish journal articles, that is, to develop skills of professional communication and ultimately to advance scientific knowledge and to improve human life.
The last chapter of the book focuses on the major future trends of journal article publication. It discusses good initial responses from students, current challenges for authors, as in the three cases of Ann, Zachary, and Pat, and four core concepts related to future journal publication, that is, open science, open access, transparency standards, and early career researchers. It ends with several practical suggestions: be aware of the current transition from paper-based scientific communication to digital-based scientific communication and from subscription-based journal publication to open-access-based journal publication, be knowledgeable about the impacts of these transitions, and be competent in new skills for open science in general and open access journal publication in particular.
This chapter addresses various issues that authors will have to deal with before manuscripts are submitted. It discusses how students initially thought about pre-submission work, how students and researchers experienced in the real world through three cases, and three major concepts related to what the pre-submission phase means, how to pass the initial editorial screen, and how an online journal management system works. It ends with three practical suggestions, including preparing a mature and well-developed manuscript so that it can pass the desk rejection and enter the peer review process, emailing the journal editor the pre-submission inquiry and checking the fit, and asking good colleagues or even senior faculty members to have a pre-submission review.
This chapter discusses students’ intuitive thoughts, four real cases (Chase, Marty, Judith, and Daniel), and four core concepts (Typology of Methodological Articles, Methodological Review, Methodological Empirical Research, Methodological Tutorial) with four examples regarding how to publish methodological articles. Based on the above review, it ends with three specific practical suggestions regarding writing methodological articles for publication, including writing and publishing different types of methodological articles to make different types of scientific contributions, developing a skill to identify various publishable topics, and expanding the Method section of an empirical study (e.g., a thesis, a dissertation, a final project, or a substantive study) to methodological articles (e.g., articles on design, measurement, or data analysis) and meanwhile applying methodological skills learned from writing and publishing methodological articles to improve the Method section of a study.
After deciding the target submission date, the second planning strategy is to choose the target journal. It could be through the process of finding the two best fits, the author–journal best fit and the journal–author best fit. After presenting students’ intuitive thoughts and four real cases (Chi, Laurel, Justin, and Liz), the chapter discusses multiple core concepts, that is, impact factors, professional rewards, readership benefits, turnaround time, and desk rejection. Based on the discussion of students’ intuitive thoughts, four real-life cases, and four core concepts, several strategies can be used to choose our target journal wisely: finding the first best fit, that is, the fit between the needs of authors and the features of journals. Consider our professional needs, and then search and choose a target journal; finding the second best fit, that is, the fit between features of journals and the needs of readers; developing a shortlist of target journals as early as possible, and reading the latest three issues of these journals and finding at least three-to-five articles.
This chapter addresses various issues that an author should handle after a manuscript is accepted. It discusses students’ celebration-based intuitive thoughts, three real-life cases (Todd, Einstein, and McClure), and three core concepts related to the post-acceptance work, Journal Production (the seven-step procedure such as copyediting and typesetting, proofing and proofreading) and Research Impacts (including scientific impacts and societal impacts). It ends with a graphic highlight of the core content of the chapter and three practical suggestions, including taking technical steps to make an accepted manuscript a published article, using multiple strategies to disseminate a published article, and using journal articles to advance scientific knowledge and improve human life.
Before submitting a journal article for publication, it is important to decide the target submission date first. After presenting nine intuitive thoughts and three cases (Xiaofang, Lisa, and Seema), the chapter discusses how two core concepts, project management and project complexity, can be applied to determine a thoughtful target submission date. It ends with a few practical suggestions: developing our project management skills deliberately. Project management is strongly related to project success, especially for novice writers; choosing our target submission dates in a timely manner. We should consider from the perspectives of authors, journals, and readers how to choose a target submission date in a timely manner; choosing our target submission dates thoughtfully. We can determine the project complexity based on the research cycle, the publication cycle, and the impact cycle; choosing our target submission dates using some methods (e.g., backward planning and forward planning).