research paper publication benefits

Guide to Getting Published in Journals

• Why publish in journals?
• Identifying potential journals
• Creating a journal comparison spreadsheet
• Aims & Scope
• Editorial Board
• How different journals approach peer review
• Different open access models
• Interpreting traditional metrics like the Impact Factor
• Alternative metrics
• Ethics and malpractice statements
• Recognising and avoiding predatory journals
• Instructions for authors
• Submitting your paper

Introduction

What is a journal? And why is important to publish your work in one? Finding the right journal for your work can make a big difference to the way it is received, so the process of selecting a journal can be an important one.

There are several key benefits to publishing research in journals:

DISCOVERABILITY

• Publishing in journals can give your work visibility among other researchers in your field, outside of your immediate circle of contacts and colleagues.
• Journals can makes your work more discoverable, as they are already being read by circles of interested readers.
• Journals often have sophisticated distribution networks, placing work into libraries, organisations and institutes, and through letterboxes of readers around the world.

CONTRIBUTING TO THE RECORDS OF RESEARCH IN THE FIELD

• Journal publication helps to preserve your work in the permanent records of research in the field.
• Adding your work to this record involves you in the active research community for a topic, helping to expand your professional network, increasing potential for collaboration and interaction with peers.
• Publishing your work through visible sources helps others to learn. By adding your experiences to the literature of the field, it helps to build the corpus of knowledge in your subject area.

THE BENEFITS OF PEER REVIEW

• The peer review process helps improve the presentation and communication of research. The feedback can help you to frame your arguments in the most effective ways, and may even present valuable new insights into your own work. In addition, the peer review process can also help you reach peers and senior members of the research community by having journal editors, editorial boards and reviewers read your work.

DISSEMINATION AND IMPACT

• Selecting the appropriate journals can help add information to the public discussion of contemporary topics, beyond academic circles.
• You may be required by funding agencies to publish your work in certain journals, as open access, or meeting other criteria stipulated in your grant award.
• As well as the publication itself, particular journals may help you to engage with audiences, and meet requirements to achieve or provide certain impact metrics, evidence of engagement and interaction with your work.

CAREER ADVANCEMENT

• Publishing in particular journals can be an essential component to advance your career, by meeting necessary assessment criteria and output performance targets.

PREVENTING DUPLICATION OF EFFORT

• And last but by no means least, publishing your work can prevent waste and increase efficiencies, by enabling others to build on your achievements or avoid unnecessary duplication of efforts.

As you can see, your choice of journal can make a significant difference to the impact your paper may have. With much to consider, choosing the right journal for your research is both important and difficult.

The different modules will dig further into the ideas presented here, helping you identify the journals that will maximise the potential in your paper, reach the most appropriate audiences, and enhance your career.

• << Previous: Getting started
• Next: Identifying potential journals >>
• Last Updated: Sep 18, 2023 1:28 PM
• URL: https://ifis.libguides.com/journal-publishing-guide

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

• Open access
• Published: 30 April 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 909–913, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Clara Busse   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-1000 1 &
• Ella August   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5151-1036 1 , 2  

263k Accesses

15 Citations

706 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper. In this article, we explain the basic structure of a scientific paper and describe the information that should be included in each section. We also identify common pitfalls for each section and recommend strategies to avoid them. Further, we give advice about target journal selection and authorship. In the online resource 1 , we provide an example of a high-quality scientific paper, with annotations identifying the elements we describe in this article.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice

Sascha Kraus, Matthias Breier, … João J. Ferreira

Plagiarism in research

Gert Helgesson & Stefan Eriksson

Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science

Dietmar Wolfram, Peiling Wang, … Hyoungjoo Park

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Writing a scientific paper is an important component of the research process, yet researchers often receive little formal training in scientific writing. This is especially true in low-resource settings. In this article, we explain why choosing a target journal is important, give advice about authorship, provide a basic structure for writing each section of a scientific paper, and describe common pitfalls and recommendations for each section. In the online resource 1 , we also include an annotated journal article that identifies the key elements and writing approaches that we detail here. Before you begin your research, make sure you have ethical clearance from all relevant ethical review boards.

Select a Target Journal Early in the Writing Process

We recommend that you select a “target journal” early in the writing process; a “target journal” is the journal to which you plan to submit your paper. Each journal has a set of core readers and you should tailor your writing to this readership. For example, if you plan to submit a manuscript about vaping during pregnancy to a pregnancy-focused journal, you will need to explain what vaping is because readers of this journal may not have a background in this topic. However, if you were to submit that same article to a tobacco journal, you would not need to provide as much background information about vaping.

Information about a journal’s core readership can be found on its website, usually in a section called “About this journal” or something similar. For example, the Journal of Cancer Education presents such information on the “Aims and Scope” page of its website, which can be found here: https://www.springer.com/journal/13187/aims-and-scope .

Peer reviewer guidelines from your target journal are an additional resource that can help you tailor your writing to the journal and provide additional advice about crafting an effective article [ 1 ]. These are not always available, but it is worth a quick web search to find out.

Identify Author Roles Early in the Process

Early in the writing process, identify authors, determine the order of authors, and discuss the responsibilities of each author. Standard author responsibilities have been identified by The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [ 2 ]. To set clear expectations about each team member’s responsibilities and prevent errors in communication, we also suggest outlining more detailed roles, such as who will draft each section of the manuscript, write the abstract, submit the paper electronically, serve as corresponding author, and write the cover letter. It is best to formalize this agreement in writing after discussing it, circulating the document to the author team for approval. We suggest creating a title page on which all authors are listed in the agreed-upon order. It may be necessary to adjust authorship roles and order during the development of the paper. If a new author order is agreed upon, be sure to update the title page in the manuscript draft.

In the case where multiple papers will result from a single study, authors should discuss who will author each paper. Additionally, authors should agree on a deadline for each paper and the lead author should take responsibility for producing an initial draft by this deadline.

Structure of the Introduction Section

The introduction section should be approximately three to five paragraphs in length. Look at examples from your target journal to decide the appropriate length. This section should include the elements shown in Fig.  1 . Begin with a general context, narrowing to the specific focus of the paper. Include five main elements: why your research is important, what is already known about the topic, the “gap” or what is not yet known about the topic, why it is important to learn the new information that your research adds, and the specific research aim(s) that your paper addresses. Your research aim should address the gap you identified. Be sure to add enough background information to enable readers to understand your study. Table 1 provides common introduction section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

The main elements of the introduction section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Methods Section

The purpose of the methods section is twofold: to explain how the study was done in enough detail to enable its replication and to provide enough contextual detail to enable readers to understand and interpret the results. In general, the essential elements of a methods section are the following: a description of the setting and participants, the study design and timing, the recruitment and sampling, the data collection process, the dataset, the dependent and independent variables, the covariates, the analytic approach for each research objective, and the ethical approval. The hallmark of an exemplary methods section is the justification of why each method was used. Table 2 provides common methods section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Results Section

The focus of the results section should be associations, or lack thereof, rather than statistical tests. Two considerations should guide your writing here. First, the results should present answers to each part of the research aim. Second, return to the methods section to ensure that the analysis and variables for each result have been explained.

Begin the results section by describing the number of participants in the final sample and details such as the number who were approached to participate, the proportion who were eligible and who enrolled, and the number of participants who dropped out. The next part of the results should describe the participant characteristics. After that, you may organize your results by the aim or by putting the most exciting results first. Do not forget to report your non-significant associations. These are still findings.

Tables and figures capture the reader’s attention and efficiently communicate your main findings [ 3 ]. Each table and figure should have a clear message and should complement, rather than repeat, the text. Tables and figures should communicate all salient details necessary for a reader to understand the findings without consulting the text. Include information on comparisons and tests, as well as information about the sample and timing of the study in the title, legend, or in a footnote. Note that figures are often more visually interesting than tables, so if it is feasible to make a figure, make a figure. To avoid confusing the reader, either avoid abbreviations in tables and figures, or define them in a footnote. Note that there should not be citations in the results section and you should not interpret results here. Table 3 provides common results section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Discussion Section

Opposite the introduction section, the discussion should take the form of a right-side-up triangle beginning with interpretation of your results and moving to general implications (Fig.  2 ). This section typically begins with a restatement of the main findings, which can usually be accomplished with a few carefully-crafted sentences.

Major elements of the discussion section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Next, interpret the meaning or explain the significance of your results, lifting the reader’s gaze from the study’s specific findings to more general applications. Then, compare these study findings with other research. Are these findings in agreement or disagreement with those from other studies? Does this study impart additional nuance to well-accepted theories? Situate your findings within the broader context of scientific literature, then explain the pathways or mechanisms that might give rise to, or explain, the results.

Journals vary in their approach to strengths and limitations sections: some are embedded paragraphs within the discussion section, while some mandate separate section headings. Keep in mind that every study has strengths and limitations. Candidly reporting yours helps readers to correctly interpret your research findings.

The next element of the discussion is a summary of the potential impacts and applications of the research. Should these results be used to optimally design an intervention? Does the work have implications for clinical protocols or public policy? These considerations will help the reader to further grasp the possible impacts of the presented work.

Finally, the discussion should conclude with specific suggestions for future work. Here, you have an opportunity to illuminate specific gaps in the literature that compel further study. Avoid the phrase “future research is necessary” because the recommendation is too general to be helpful to readers. Instead, provide substantive and specific recommendations for future studies. Table 4 provides common discussion section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Follow the Journal’s Author Guidelines

After you select a target journal, identify the journal’s author guidelines to guide the formatting of your manuscript and references. Author guidelines will often (but not always) include instructions for titles, cover letters, and other components of a manuscript submission. Read the guidelines carefully. If you do not follow the guidelines, your article will be sent back to you.

Finally, do not submit your paper to more than one journal at a time. Even if this is not explicitly stated in the author guidelines of your target journal, it is considered inappropriate and unprofessional.

Your title should invite readers to continue reading beyond the first page [ 4 , 5 ]. It should be informative and interesting. Consider describing the independent and dependent variables, the population and setting, the study design, the timing, and even the main result in your title. Because the focus of the paper can change as you write and revise, we recommend you wait until you have finished writing your paper before composing the title.

Be sure that the title is useful for potential readers searching for your topic. The keywords you select should complement those in your title to maximize the likelihood that a researcher will find your paper through a database search. Avoid using abbreviations in your title unless they are very well known, such as SNP, because it is more likely that someone will use a complete word rather than an abbreviation as a search term to help readers find your paper.

After you have written a complete draft, use the checklist (Fig. 3 ) below to guide your revisions and editing. Additional resources are available on writing the abstract and citing references [ 5 ]. When you feel that your work is ready, ask a trusted colleague or two to read the work and provide informal feedback. The box below provides a checklist that summarizes the key points offered in this article.

Checklist for manuscript quality

Data Availability

Michalek AM (2014) Down the rabbit hole…advice to reviewers. J Cancer Educ 29:4–5

Article   Google Scholar  

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors: who is an author? http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authosrs-and-contributors.html . Accessed 15 January, 2020

Vetto JT (2014) Short and sweet: a short course on concise medical writing. J Cancer Educ 29(1):194–195

Brett M, Kording K (2017) Ten simple rules for structuring papers. PLoS ComputBiol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619

Lang TA (2017) Writing a better research article. J Public Health Emerg. https://doi.org/10.21037/jphe.2017.11.06

Download references

Acknowledgments

Ella August is grateful to the Sustainable Sciences Institute for mentoring her in training researchers on writing and publishing their research.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clara Busse & Ella August

Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

Ella August

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ella August .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

(PDF 362 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Busse, C., August, E. How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal. J Canc Educ 36 , 909–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Download citation

Published : 30 April 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Manuscripts
• Scientific writing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide

Affiliations.

• 1 Clinical Biochemistry, Department of Pediatric Laboratory Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
• 2 Clinical Biochemistry, Department of Pediatric Laboratory Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Chair, Communications and Publications Division (CPD), International Federation for Sick Clinical Chemistry (IFCC), Milan, Italy.
• PMID: 27683470
• PMCID: PMC4975196

Peer review has been defined as a process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. It functions to encourage authors to meet the accepted high standards of their discipline and to control the dissemination of research data to ensure that unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations or personal views are not published without prior expert review. Despite its wide-spread use by most journals, the peer review process has also been widely criticised due to the slowness of the process to publish new findings and due to perceived bias by the editors and/or reviewers. Within the scientific community, peer review has become an essential component of the academic writing process. It helps ensure that papers published in scientific journals answer meaningful research questions and draw accurate conclusions based on professionally executed experimentation. Submission of low quality manuscripts has become increasingly prevalent, and peer review acts as a filter to prevent this work from reaching the scientific community. The major advantage of a peer review process is that peer-reviewed articles provide a trusted form of scientific communication. Since scientific knowledge is cumulative and builds on itself, this trust is particularly important. Despite the positive impacts of peer review, critics argue that the peer review process stifles innovation in experimentation, and acts as a poor screen against plagiarism. Despite its downfalls, there has not yet been a foolproof system developed to take the place of peer review, however, researchers have been looking into electronic means of improving the peer review process. Unfortunately, the recent explosion in online only/electronic journals has led to mass publication of a large number of scientific articles with little or no peer review. This poses significant risk to advances in scientific knowledge and its future potential. The current article summarizes the peer review process, highlights the pros and cons associated with different types of peer review, and describes new methods for improving peer review.

Keywords: journal; manuscript; open access; peer review; publication.

• Apply for Graduation
• Register for Summer 2024

Benefits of Writing a Quality Research Paper

• April 2, 2021

Contributed by ACHS alumni Melissa Abbott, MS, CPT, NC

Why It’s Important?

You have just been informed that you’re going to write a research paper and you have no idea how you are going to start the writing process. You may even doubt that you can take on such a challenge. I’m here today to say YES you absolutely can do this! The following writing tips and support strategies offered below are important incentives and motivations involved in the writing process, for your career, and future goals. The writing process involves your body, mind, and spirit. It is all included because you put all your energy and immerse your whole being into it.

Here’s the exciting part, can you imagine having your paper being read by several hundred maybe even thousands of other academic professionals, researchers, and scientists from around the world? It is one of the most incredible feelings to achieve a status of recognition from your hard work in research and the passion(s) you have in holistic health from your peers. Scientists, doctors, holistic professionals in every domain, researchers, collaborators looking for you, your knowledge, and expertise. Sound too good to be true, nope, it happened to me and I hope that it can happen for you too!

The significant impact and support that I received in my first class at ACHS, RES501 : Assessment and Integration of Research Online, with Professor Dr. Nicole Betschman , was empowering. Dr. Betschman armed and mentored us with the best skills and writing techniques, coping strategies for our anxiety and doubts, and outlines to produce quality research and writing. However, she said one thing that stuck out in my mind throughout my studies at ACHS, register with an online platform where you can post your papers for others to read and get yourself noticed in your chosen field of interest. I did just that and since posting my very first paper to ResearchGate (researchgate.com), it has garnered over 1,000+ reads from others in my area of concentration who have emailed me to ask me questions, inquire about my future projects, and offers of potential future collaborations.

Listed below are just a few of the many benefits to writing a quality research paper:

• Recognition from peers in your field of work for all your hard work and showing pride for your academic institution.
• Collaboration with others in your field of expertise from around the world and the potential for research jobs or job recruitment offers.
• Opportunities for growing your business and career while contributing and supporting your field of interest.
• A showcase of your accomplishments and research papers on your resume or curriculum vitae that highlights your chosen area of expertise to potential employers, clinical trials, and research collaborations.

How to start the writing process?

You may be asking yourself … where do I begin, how do I pick a topic, what do I research? Let me help by offering a few strategies or “tools” for your writing “toolbox” to get you in the headspace to explore these brainstorming questions.

1. Sit comfortably with a notebook, make a cup of tea, turn on a diffuser with a blend that promotes increased focus and cognitive awareness, put on some background music, create a space for exploration with little to no distraction, and remember to take several deep breaths during your research sessions. We tend to hold our breath when we’re deep in the research and writing process. This always helps refocus the brainstorming process as well as reduce your stress and anxiety accumulating in your body, mind, and spirit. I do understand these feelings and they can distract you from your best intentions.

2. I highly recommend that you pick a topic and formulate your hypothesis on something you already know well, or an area of interest that supports your future career goals, or on a health condition a friend, family, or that you are challenged with; this is a great place to start. My first paper that received all the recognition came from years of personal experience which made the writing process so much easier. This takes so much of the anxiety away from picking a topic at random. If you are invested in the subject you will want to produce a quality paper with integrity that resulted from years of your experiences and knowledge. You are worth it!

3. Time management is key to staying on task and your module assignments in class. I recommend blocking out two-hour intervals on your research then take a break, walk away, go outside, stretch, go for a walk, get a snack. This also permits you to do other things without getting anxious that you haven’t finished other tasks or responsibilities. These intermissions create more space to return with fresh eyes, mindset, and less tension in your body from sitting. Or even better yet, use a standing desk!

4. Creating a few folders; one on your desktop and one in your bookmarks, where you will collect and manage the content for each component of your research paper helps with the organization of each of the sections involved in a scholarly research paper. Then you can add multiple subfolders for each part of the paper. For example, I had a folder entitled, RES501 Thesis, then subfolders entitled Introduction, Methods, Discussion, Results, and Conclusions. I had one folder titled Notes so that I could cut and paste notes from the highlights taken from research articles and journals that help me to formulate my findings, data interpretations, and key points. One last thing that helped was keeping a file titled Books/Citations so they are all in one place and you don’t have to go looking for them afterward. Another way to decrease your anxiety and stress!

5. I also recommend creating two bookmarks to collect all the supportive websites, journals, and resource materials so you don’t have to look for them each time you need them. For example, I had one bookmark entitled, Research Platforms, where I had links to PubMed, Elsevier, Google Scholar, LIRN, Oxford, and BMC. Then I had a second one entitled, Writing Tools, where I had American Psychological Association (APA) publication manual, Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL), and citation checkers such as Citation Machine and Cite This For Me.

Keep all your supportive tools at your fingertips. Use highlights of different colors to capture the key points within the articles and journals you collect so you are less likely to forget where you read specific data to support your hypothesis. More importantly, it is my hope these tools and tips from personal experiences help support you on your writing adventure and the journey your academic career takes you. It is a very exciting time and it brings great opportunities for success, increased confidence, and empowers you to continue working hard at what you love.

When you find yourself in a writing slump, feel your anxiety increasing or you’re just having a bad day, it is okay to ask for help and support from your fellow peers, your professors, your home support team, they all want you to succeed. I want you to succeed and if you would like to discuss some strategies or need help from a fellow researcher please don’t hesitate to reach out and email me. I would be thrilled to help you produce the best paper you can while being true to yourself and your vision. Be well and happy writing!

Melissa Abbott

References: [1] American Psychological Association (APA), (2021). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Retrieved from https:// apastyle.apa.org/products/publication-manual-7th-edition [2] Citation Machine® – write smarter. (n.d.). Retrieved April 02, 2021, from https://www.citationmachine.net/ [3] Save time and improve your marks With CITETHISFORME, the No. 1 citation tool. (n.d.). Retrieved April 02, 2021, from https://www.citethisforme.com/ [4] Purdue Writing Lab. (n.d.). Purdue owl // Purdue Writing lab. Retrieved April 02, 2021, from https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/purdue_owl.html

Contact info: Resilient RootZ Wellness, LLC. [email protected] [email protected] @resilient.rootz

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to treat, diagnose, cure, or prevent disease. This article has not been reviewed by the FDA. Always consult with your primary care physician or naturopathic doctor before making any significant changes to your health and wellness routine.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I am an alumni American College of Healthcare Sciences, the Institution that publishes this blog. However, all opinions are my own. This blog may contain affiliate links. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

About American College of Healthcare Sciences

This commitment to our students and graduates reflects in our current survey results that reflect 98% of our students would recommend ACHS to a friend or family member.

We believe education is the most powerful tool for changing an individual and the world around us.

When a person enrolls as ACHS, it is vitally important that they graduate with tools they need to forge their own holistic and sustainable missions, build up their communities confidently and changing the face of healthcare with knowledge.

Campus & Apothecary Shoppe

5005 S. Macadam Ave. Portland, OR 97239

Campus & Shoppe Hours

Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. PST

800-487-8839 503-244-0726

Business Hours

Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. PST

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » How to Publish a Research Paper – Step by Step Guide

How to Publish a Research Paper – Step by Step Guide

Table of Contents

Publishing a research paper is an important step for researchers to disseminate their findings to a wider audience and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their field. Whether you are a graduate student, a postdoctoral fellow, or an established researcher, publishing a paper requires careful planning, rigorous research, and clear writing. In this process, you will need to identify a research question , conduct a thorough literature review , design a methodology, analyze data, and draw conclusions. Additionally, you will need to consider the appropriate journals or conferences to submit your work to and adhere to their guidelines for formatting and submission. In this article, we will discuss some ways to publish your Research Paper.

How to Publish a Research Paper

To Publish a Research Paper follow the guide below:

• Conduct original research : Conduct thorough research on a specific topic or problem. Collect data, analyze it, and draw conclusions based on your findings.
• Write the paper : Write a detailed paper describing your research. It should include an abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
• Choose a suitable journal or conference : Look for a journal or conference that specializes in your research area. You can check their submission guidelines to ensure your paper meets their requirements.
• Prepare your submission: Follow the guidelines and prepare your submission, including the paper, abstract, cover letter, and any other required documents.
• Submit the paper: Submit your paper online through the journal or conference website. Make sure you meet the submission deadline.
• Peer-review process : Your paper will be reviewed by experts in the field who will provide feedback on the quality of your research, methodology, and conclusions.
• Revisions : Based on the feedback you receive, revise your paper and resubmit it.
• Acceptance : Once your paper is accepted, you will receive a notification from the journal or conference. You may need to make final revisions before the paper is published.
• Publication : Your paper will be published online or in print. You can also promote your work through social media or other channels to increase its visibility.

How to Choose Journal for Research Paper Publication

Here are some steps to follow to help you select an appropriate journal:

• Identify your research topic and audience : Your research topic and intended audience should guide your choice of journal. Identify the key journals in your field of research and read the scope and aim of the journal to determine if your paper is a good fit.
• Analyze the journal’s impact and reputation : Check the impact factor and ranking of the journal, as well as its acceptance rate and citation frequency. A high-impact journal can give your paper more visibility and credibility.
• Consider the journal’s publication policies : Look for the journal’s publication policies such as the word count limit, formatting requirements, open access options, and submission fees. Make sure that you can comply with the requirements and that the journal is in line with your publication goals.
• Look at recent publications : Review recent issues of the journal to evaluate whether your paper would fit in with the journal’s current content and style.
• Seek advice from colleagues and mentors: Ask for recommendations and suggestions from your colleagues and mentors in your field, especially those who have experience publishing in the same or similar journals.
• Be prepared to make changes : Be prepared to revise your paper according to the requirements and guidelines of the chosen journal. It is also important to be open to feedback from the editor and reviewers.

List of Journals for Research Paper Publications

There are thousands of academic journals covering various fields of research. Here are some of the most popular ones, categorized by field:

General/Multidisciplinary

• Nature: https://www.nature.com/
• Science: https://www.sciencemag.org/
• PLOS ONE: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/
• Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS): https://www.pnas.org/
• The Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/
• JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association): https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama

Social Sciences/Humanities

• Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/psp
• Journal of Consumer Research: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/journals/jcr
• Journal of Educational Psychology: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu
• Journal of Applied Psychology: https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/apl
• Journal of Communication: https://academic.oup.com/joc
• American Journal of Political Science: https://ajps.org/
• Journal of International Business Studies: https://www.jibs.net/
• Journal of Marketing Research: https://www.ama.org/journal-of-marketing-research/

Natural Sciences

• Journal of Biological Chemistry: https://www.jbc.org/
• Cell: https://www.cell.com/
• Science Advances: https://advances.sciencemag.org/
• Chemical Reviews: https://pubs.acs.org/journal/chreay
• Angewandte Chemie: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/15213765
• Physical Review Letters: https://journals.aps.org/prl/
• Journal of Geophysical Research: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/2156531X
• Journal of High Energy Physics: https://link.springer.com/journal/13130

Engineering/Technology

• IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=5962385
• IEEE Transactions on Power Systems: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=59
• IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=42
• IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=87
• Journal of Engineering Mechanics: https://ascelibrary.org/journal/jenmdt
• Journal of Materials Science: https://www.springer.com/journal/10853
• Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan: https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/browse/jcej
• Journal of Mechanical Design: https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/mechanicaldesign

Medical/Health Sciences

• New England Journal of Medicine: https://www.nejm.org/
• The BMJ (formerly British Medical Journal): https://www.bmj.com/
• Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama
• Annals of Internal Medicine: https://www.acpjournals.org/journal/aim
• American Journal of Epidemiology: https://academic.oup.com/aje
• Journal of Clinical Oncology: https://ascopubs.org/journal/jco
• Journal of Infectious Diseases: https://academic.oup.com/jid

List of Conferences for Research Paper Publications

There are many conferences that accept research papers for publication. The specific conferences you should consider will depend on your field of research. Here are some suggestions for conferences in a few different fields:

Computer Science and Information Technology:

• IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM): https://www.ieee-infocom.org/
• ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Data Communication: https://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/
• IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP): https://www.ieee-security.org/TC/SP/
• ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS): https://www.sigsac.org/ccs/
• ACM Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (CHI): https://chi2022.acm.org/

Engineering:

• IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA): https://www.ieee-icra.org/
• International Conference on Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering (ICMAE): http://www.icmae.org/
• International Conference on Civil and Environmental Engineering (ICCEE): http://www.iccee.org/
• International Conference on Materials Science and Engineering (ICMSE): http://www.icmse.org/
• International Conference on Energy and Power Engineering (ICEPE): http://www.icepe.org/

Natural Sciences:

• American Chemical Society National Meeting & Exposition: https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/meetings/national-meeting.html
• American Physical Society March Meeting: https://www.aps.org/meetings/march/
• International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology (ICEST): http://www.icest.org/
• International Conference on Natural Science and Environment (ICNSE): http://www.icnse.org/
• International Conference on Life Science and Biological Engineering (LSBE): http://www.lsbe.org/

Social Sciences:

• Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association (ASA): https://www.asanet.org/annual-meeting-2022
• International Conference on Social Science and Humanities (ICSSH): http://www.icssh.org/
• International Conference on Psychology and Behavioral Sciences (ICPBS): http://www.icpbs.org/
• International Conference on Education and Social Science (ICESS): http://www.icess.org/
• International Conference on Management and Information Science (ICMIS): http://www.icmis.org/

How to Publish a Research Paper in Journal

Publishing a research paper in a journal is a crucial step in disseminating scientific knowledge and contributing to the field. Here are the general steps to follow:

• Choose a research topic : Select a topic of your interest and identify a research question or problem that you want to investigate. Conduct a literature review to identify the gaps in the existing knowledge that your research will address.
• Conduct research : Develop a research plan and methodology to collect data and conduct experiments. Collect and analyze data to draw conclusions that address the research question.
• Write a paper: Organize your findings into a well-structured paper with clear and concise language. Your paper should include an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use academic language and provide references for your sources.
• Choose a journal: Choose a journal that is relevant to your research topic and audience. Consider factors such as impact factor, acceptance rate, and the reputation of the journal.
• Follow journal guidelines : Review the submission guidelines and formatting requirements of the journal. Follow the guidelines carefully to ensure that your paper meets the journal’s requirements.
• Submit your paper : Submit your paper to the journal through the online submission system or by email. Include a cover letter that briefly explains the significance of your research and why it is suitable for the journal.
• Wait for reviews: Your paper will be reviewed by experts in the field. Be prepared to address their comments and make revisions to your paper.
• Revise and resubmit: Make revisions to your paper based on the reviewers’ comments and resubmit it to the journal. If your paper is accepted, congratulations! If not, consider revising and submitting it to another journal.
• Address reviewer comments : Reviewers may provide comments and suggestions for revisions to your paper. Address these comments carefully and thoughtfully to improve the quality of your paper.
• Submit the final version: Once your revisions are complete, submit the final version of your paper to the journal. Be sure to follow any additional formatting guidelines and requirements provided by the journal.
• Publication : If your paper is accepted, it will be published in the journal. Some journals provide online publication while others may publish a print version. Be sure to cite your published paper in future research and communicate your findings to the scientific community.

How to Publish a Research Paper for Students

Here are some steps you can follow to publish a research paper as an Under Graduate or a High School Student:

• Select a topic: Choose a topic that is relevant and interesting to you, and that you have a good understanding of.
• Conduct research : Gather information and data on your chosen topic through research, experiments, surveys, or other means.
• Write the paper : Start with an outline, then write the introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion sections of the paper. Be sure to follow any guidelines provided by your instructor or the journal you plan to submit to.
• Edit and revise: Review your paper for errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Ask a peer or mentor to review your paper and provide feedback for improvement.
• Choose a journal : Look for journals that publish papers in your field of study and that are appropriate for your level of research. Some popular journals for students include PLOS ONE, Nature, and Science.
• Submit the paper: Follow the submission guidelines for the journal you choose, which typically include a cover letter, abstract, and formatting requirements. Be prepared to wait several weeks to months for a response.
• Address feedback : If your paper is accepted with revisions, address the feedback from the reviewers and resubmit your paper. If your paper is rejected, review the feedback and consider revising and resubmitting to a different journal.

How to Publish a Research Paper for Free

Publishing a research paper for free can be challenging, but it is possible. Here are some steps you can take to publish your research paper for free:

• Choose a suitable open-access journal: Look for open-access journals that are relevant to your research area. Open-access journals allow readers to access your paper without charge, so your work will be more widely available.
• Check the journal’s reputation : Before submitting your paper, ensure that the journal is reputable by checking its impact factor, publication history, and editorial board.
• Follow the submission guidelines : Every journal has specific guidelines for submitting papers. Make sure to follow these guidelines carefully to increase the chances of acceptance.
• Submit your paper : Once you have completed your research paper, submit it to the journal following their submission guidelines.
• Wait for the review process: Your paper will undergo a peer-review process, where experts in your field will evaluate your work. Be patient during this process, as it can take several weeks or even months.
• Revise your paper : If your paper is rejected, don’t be discouraged. Revise your paper based on the feedback you receive from the reviewers and submit it to another open-access journal.
• Promote your research: Once your paper is published, promote it on social media and other online platforms. This will increase the visibility of your work and help it reach a wider audience.

Journals and Conferences for Free Research Paper publications

Here are the websites of the open-access journals and conferences mentioned:

Open-Access Journals:

• PLOS ONE – https://journals.plos.org/plosone/
• BMC Research Notes – https://bmcresnotes.biomedcentral.com/
• Frontiers in… – https://www.frontiersin.org/
• Journal of Open Research Software – https://openresearchsoftware.metajnl.com/
• PeerJ – https://peerj.com/

Conferences:

• IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) – https://globecom2022.ieee-globecom.org/
• IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) – https://infocom2022.ieee-infocom.org/
• IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM) – https://www.ieee-icdm.org/
• ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Data Communication (SIGCOMM) – https://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/
• ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS) – https://www.sigsac.org/ccs/CCS2022/

Importance of Research Paper Publication

Research paper publication is important for several reasons, both for individual researchers and for the scientific community as a whole. Here are some reasons why:

• Advancing scientific knowledge : Research papers provide a platform for researchers to present their findings and contribute to the body of knowledge in their field. These papers often contain novel ideas, experimental data, and analyses that can help to advance scientific understanding.
• Building a research career : Publishing research papers is an essential component of building a successful research career. Researchers are often evaluated based on the number and quality of their publications, and having a strong publication record can increase one’s chances of securing funding, tenure, or a promotion.
• Peer review and quality control: Publication in a peer-reviewed journal means that the research has been scrutinized by other experts in the field. This peer review process helps to ensure the quality and validity of the research findings.
• Recognition and visibility : Publishing a research paper can bring recognition and visibility to the researchers and their work. It can lead to invitations to speak at conferences, collaborations with other researchers, and media coverage.
• Impact on society : Research papers can have a significant impact on society by informing policy decisions, guiding clinical practice, and advancing technological innovation.

Advantages of Research Paper Publication

There are several advantages to publishing a research paper, including:

• Recognition: Publishing a research paper allows researchers to gain recognition for their work, both within their field and in the academic community as a whole. This can lead to new collaborations, invitations to conferences, and other opportunities to share their research with a wider audience.
• Career advancement : A strong publication record can be an important factor in career advancement, particularly in academia. Publishing research papers can help researchers secure funding, grants, and promotions.
• Dissemination of knowledge : Research papers are an important way to share new findings and ideas with the broader scientific community. By publishing their research, scientists can contribute to the collective body of knowledge in their field and help advance scientific understanding.
• Feedback and peer review : Publishing a research paper allows other experts in the field to provide feedback on the research, which can help improve the quality of the work and identify potential flaws or limitations. Peer review also helps ensure that research is accurate and reliable.
• Citation and impact : Published research papers can be cited by other researchers, which can help increase the impact and visibility of the research. High citation rates can also help establish a researcher’s reputation and credibility within their field.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Research Paper Introduction – Writing Guide and...

International Scientific Journal of Engineering and Management

An international scholarly || multidisciplinary || open access || indexing in all major database & metadata.

Impact Factor: 6.674

• Current Issue
• Past Issues
• Terms and Conditions
• Peer Review Policy
• Publication Topics
• Publication Procedure
• Publication Ethics
• Copyright Infragmentation
• Call for Papers
• Editorial Board
• Submit Paper Now

What are the advantages of publishing a research paper?

Publishing a research paper can have many advantages for researchers, including: Career advancement, professional recognition, opportunities for collaboration, increased visibility, impact on society, credibility and trust, professional development, inspiration for future research, and contribution to the field. It can help researchers to establish themselves as experts in their field, open doors to new opportunities, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge and understanding in a specific field.

• Career Advancement: Publishing a research paper is often a requirement for academic promotions and tenure. It can also help researchers to establish themselves as experts in their field and to gain recognition for their work. This can lead to new opportunities for advancement and can help researchers to build a reputation for high-quality research.
• Professional recognition: Publishing a research paper in a reputable journal can lead to professional recognition and prestige, both within the academic community and outside of it. This can open doors to new opportunities, such as funding, collaborations, and speaking engagements.
• Opportunities for collaboration: Publishing a research paper can lead to opportunities for collaboration with other researchers and institutions, both within the researcher’s field and across different fields. This can help to further the research and accelerate progress.
• Increased visibility: Publishing a research paper can increase visibility for the researcher and their work, which can lead to new opportunities, funding, and collaborations.
• Impact on society: Publishing a research paper can have a positive impact on society by contributing to the advancement of knowledge and understanding in a specific field. This can lead to new discoveries, technologies, and understanding that can improve people’s lives.
• Credibility and trust: Publishing research papers in reputable journals lends credibility to the researcher and the research, and can increase public trust in the researcher and their work. This can help the researcher to secure funding, collaborations, and other opportunities.
• Professional development: Publishing a research paper is a process that requires the researcher to conduct a thorough literature review, to understand the research methodologies and the ethical considerations, it helps the researcher to develop their skills and knowledge in their field.
• Inspiration for future research: Publishing a research paper can inspire future research by identifying gaps in the literature or by suggesting new directions for research. This can help researchers to identify new opportunities for investigation and to stay at the forefront of their field.
• Contribution to the field: Publishing a research paper adds to the body of knowledge in the field. It helps researchers and practitioners to understand the current state of research and knowledge in the field and it helps to advance the field.

Overall, publishing a research paper can be a valuable experience for researchers, providing opportunities for career advancement, professional recognition, collaboration, and impact on society. It can also help researchers to develop their skills and knowledge, and to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their field.

What is the difference between a Research Paper and a Review Paper?

What is doi, what do you need to do during production of your research paper, ways to support your academic wellbeing which preparing the research paper/article, how to improve your research paper writing skills, is doi compulsory to publish a research paper in a journal, in what ways does research paper give weight to career development, how to develop a research paper from scratch, how plagiarism report plays crucial role in research paper publication.

The Higher Education Review

• Engineering
• Jobs and Careers
• Media and Mass Communication
• Education Consultancy
• Universities

Importance of Research and Journal Publications in Higher Studies

Download now complete list of top private engineering colleges.

• Resources Research Proposals --> Industrial Updates Webinar - Research Meet
• Countries-Served
• Add-on-services

Text particle

feel free to change the value of the variable "message"

Benefits of Publishing a Research Paper

Publishing your research paper is a form of acknowledging your work in your field. It is a way of presenting your work and your contribution in front of the whole world. It guarantees that you have experience, exposure, expertise, and views recognized in the field of research. Let’s discuss a few points on how publishing your research paper is going to be beneficial for you as a high school student or an undergrad.

1. Improves writing and research

In the process of doing research, writing, editing, and publishing an article for the first time, valuable feedback will be provided, giving you an idea of where you need to improve and where your strengths are. For a professional career and graduate studies, writing skills are helpful.

2. Experience with the Scholarly Publication Process

The publication is required in many disciplines. It is something that we will use in our future career. It also provides a connection to and understanding of the field.

3. Build connections and networks

You meet people and build a lot of connections and networks during a research project. It’s very important and very beneficial. Similarly, when you publish your work, you meet a lot of different people from different journals. A lot of students submit their projects and thesis for review and are returned with many questions and corrections. The way you present and document your hard work and all the data you have collected is a very important criterion for journals. Often it is seen that a publication may be rejected by a well-known journal but may be accepted by a less known or less impact journal. During this process, you learn a lot and build connections that can help you in your future work and career.

4. Professionalize the undergraduate experience

Publishing papers/projects will provide a level of professionalization to a resume that many undergraduates still need to have. Publishing a paper will also be helpful as a writing sample for graduate school applications. It will signal to the graduate school committee that serious steps were taken to pursue research interests.

5. Inform a future career path

Publishing a paper might help inform a future career path, and opportunities have yet to be considered. After completing their undergraduate degree, it piques students’ interest in publishing as the next step. Working with other students and faculty will allow students to enter a scholarly community that helps them decide their future plans.

6. Higher Education

With the growing competition in higher education, research gives you an upper hand in the crowd. Every school and college has a different selection process. A published research paper shows that you have academic excellence. Hands-on research at an early age brings many benefits, and you learn many skills and values. Colleges select candidates based on the potential and abilities displayed in the applied field. Experience in research and a published paper as a high school student or an undergrad adds a big advantage to your profile. So the earlier you begin, the faster you can achieve your goal. There are many other benefits to publishing the research paper that you will realize as you go further. For example

• Experience the scholarly publication process.
• Be eligible to share your work in conferences and seminars.
• Help you set a mark in the research world.
• Prove your area of interest and genre of expertise.
• Be eligible to obtain scholarships and funding for your work.
• Display leadership and initiative.
• Gain access to better work opportunities, etc.

7. To earn money

Master’s and Ph.D. students’ CVs need outstanding information that attracts employers. In this regard, some published papers in peer-reviewed journals will attract employers in academia and the research industry. Research and publishing in journals are very important Key Performance Indicators (KPI) of academicians or researchers in many universities in different countries. Hence, to earn more, you have to research and publish because promotion to a higher level always brings extra money into your pocket.

Research would allow you to explore in deep and help reach a conclusion, which could be right or wrong, but as you have read a lot, you have learned a lot. Your subconscious mind will store the knowledge that you have learned from research on an issue. Thus, you will be an expert in some particular areas that would develop your confidence to make viable arguments with colleagues and peers, who will admire you and give you a promotion, especially when you are in academia. So, doing research and publishing papers in journals creates the opportunity to earn money!

8. To Get Scholarship

There are many scholarships for masters and Ph.D. courses in the universities, especially in developed countries in the UK, Europe, Australia, Japan, USA, Canada, and Middle Eastern countries. However, if you have at least one research paper published in a peer-reviewed journal, your application will be preferred by the scholarship selection team. It is because you have already shown your passion and hard work regarding research. So to secure a good scholarship, you should have at least 2-3 published papers in peer-reviewed journals.

9. To be an Independent and Critical Thinker

A published research paper in a journal indicates to a prospective employer that you have excellent powers of endurance. Developing a research paper requires an investment of a long time in being independent and critical of the issue. Thus, the article shows that you can think independently and critically and complete a long project, i.e., a research paper of many pages.

10. To Developing Communication Skills and Network

When a master’s or Ph.D. student writes a paper, he or she reads many articles of many authors, and sometimes he or she has to email them or even call them. As a result, it becomes easier for them to develop academic and research communication skills. This eventually gives an excellent opportunity to create and establish a network with intellectual people around the world.

Furthermore, in writing and developing a detailed research paper, master’s and Ph.D. students can practically develop analytical and networking skills by themselves that are globally sought-after and incredibly beneficial.

11. To develop determination

People often say that they are determined, but they are actually not. However, if you write a research paper and publish it finally, it shows your determination to achieve something by exploring more than hundreds of research papers. In the publication process, a student has to revise and resubmit papers to get acceptance. The entire process takes a long time and positive determination. Sometimes, they feel broken and frustrated, but they feel successful if they finally get the paper published. Hence, doing research and getting published a research paper makes a master’s and Ph.D. student determined. This ultimately makes every master’s and Ph.D. student determine what employers look for in the applicants.

Now you know the importance of publishing research papers in peer-reviewed journals. Yes, you also know the importance of peer-reviewed articles in your CV. So, do research and publish. All the best!

https://www.lawordo.com/benefits-of-publishing-research-papers/

https://xelerateacademics.com/2020/07/28/benefits-of-publishing-your-research-paper/

https://rpajournals.com/the-importance-of-publishing-research-papers-for-masters-phd-student/

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 8.4.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Longitudinal Monitoring of Clinician-Patient Video Visits During the Peak of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Adoption and Sustained Challenges in an Integrated Health Care Delivery System

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Jessica A Palakshappa 1, 2 , MD, MS   ; 
• Erica R Hale 1, 2 , MS   ; 
• Joshua D Brown 1 , PhD   ; 
• Carol A Kittel 2 , MA   ; 
• Emily Dressler 2 , PhD   ; 
• Gary E Rosenthal 1, 2 , MD   ; 
• Sarah L Cutrona 3, 4 , MD, MPH   ; 
• Kristie L Foley 2 , MS, PhD   ; 
• Emily R Haines 2 , PhD   ; 
• Thomas K Houston II 1, 2 , MD, MPH  

1 Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, Winston Salem, NC, United States

2 Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston Salem, NC, United States

3 Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States

4 Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Veterans Affairs Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, United States

Corresponding Author:

Jessica A Palakshappa, MD, MS

Wake Forest University School of Medicine

1 Medical Center Blvd

Winston Salem, NC, 27157

United States

Phone: 1 336 716 8465

Email: [email protected]

Background: Numerous prior opinion papers, administrative electronic health record data studies, and cross-sectional surveys of telehealth during the pandemic have been published, but none have combined assessments of video visit success monitoring with longitudinal assessments of perceived challenges to the rapid adoption of video visits during the pandemic.

Objective: This study aims to quantify (1) the use of video visits (compared with in-person and telephone visits) over time during the pandemic, (2) video visit successful connection rates, and (3) changes in perceived video visit challenges.

Methods: A web-based survey was developed for the dual purpose of monitoring and improving video visit implementation in our health care system during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey included questions regarding rates of in-person, telephone, and video visits for clinician-patient encounters; the rate of successful connection for video visits; and perceived challenges to video visits (eg, software, hardware, bandwidth, and technology literacy). The survey was distributed via email to physicians, advanced practice professionals, and clinicians in May 2020. The survey was repeated in March 2021. Differences between the 2020 and 2021 responses were adjusted for within-respondent correlation across surveys and tested using generalized estimating equations.

Results: A total of 1126 surveys were completed (511 surveys in 2020 and 615 surveys in 2021). In 2020, only 21.7% (73/336) of clinicians reported no difficulty connecting with patients during video visits and 28.6% (93/325) of clinicians reported no difficulty in 2021. The distribution of the percentage of successfully connected video visits (“Over the past two weeks of scheduled visits, what percentage did you successfully connect with patients by video?”) was not significantly different between 2020 and 2021 ( P =.74). Challenges in conducting video visits persisted over time. Poor connectivity was the most common challenge reported by clinicians. This response increased over time, with 30.5% (156/511) selecting it as a challenge in 2020 and 37.1% (228/615) in 2021 ( P =.01). Patients not having access to their electronic health record portals was also a commonly reported challenge (109/511, 21.3% in 2020 and 137/615, 22.3% in 2021, P =.73).

Conclusions: During the pandemic, our health care delivery system rapidly adopted synchronous patient-clinician communication using video visits. As experience with video visits increased, the reported failure rate did not significantly decline, and clinicians continued to report challenges related to general network connectivity and patient access to technology.

Introduction

Interest in telehealth from policy makers, health care providers, patients, and families continues to grow [ 1 ], including newer modalities such as video visits [ 2 ]. Video visits refer to clinician-patient communication that includes real time video and audio assessment of the patient when the clinician is in a different location. Video visits have the potential to improve efficiency for clinicians and to improve access for patients, particularly those who reside in rural areas or with transportation barriers [ 3 ]. The technology to support video visits has existed for decades; however, only a small minority of clinicians used this form of telehealth in their practices [ 4 ] prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. There are multiple reasons why telehealth adoption was slow despite its potential benefits including changing cost and reimbursement policies, federal and state licensing laws, incompatible electronic health records, and gaps in internet access in certain areas.

The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent public health emergency led to fundamental shifts in how health care was delivered in the United States, including the rapid adoption of telehealth services. Before the public health emergency, approximately 13,000 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries received telehealth services in a week and that number increased to nearly 1.7 million beneficiaries by the last week of April 2020 [ 5 ]. While the need to avoid in-person contact fueled the initial rapid rise, regulations and restrictions were temporarily lifted during this time facilitating its use. Clinicians were also paid for telehealth services at the same rate as in-person medical services. Several studies have reported on the rapid uptake of telehealth, including video visits, in this context [ 6 - 8 ]. However, few reports have explored rates of success and failure of video visits over time. The challenges clinicians face in conducting video visits have also not been explored. Understanding these challenges will be important for improving and expanding the reach of telehealth services after the pandemic has ended.

In the context of the rapidly increasing use of telehealth to conduct video visits, and consistent with the sociotechnical model’s [ 9 ] emphasis on monitoring the implementation of health information technology in complex adaptive health care systems, our health care delivery system initiated a series of brief assessments of video visit adoption. The research objective of this report is to summarize the findings of the video visit monitoring including (1) the use of video visits (compared with in-person and telephone visits) over time during the pandemic, (2) video visit successful connection rates, and (3) changes in perceived video visit challenges. With patient and clinician skills and experience with video visits increasing over time, our primary hypothesis was that clinicians’ perceived challenges to completing video visits (eg, software, hardware, bandwidth, and technology literacy) would decline over time.

Study Design

The design was a longitudinal series of 2 cross-sectional assessments (2020 and 2021). In summary, for the dual purpose of monitoring and improving telehealth implementation in our health care delivery system, institutional leaders developed a brief web-based survey regarding the use of video visits and challenges. The survey was initially distributed in 2020. Given the ongoing public health emergency and the need to re-evaluate telehealth use, the survey was repeated in 2021. Institutional leaders encouraged clinicians to complete the survey, communicating encouragement via emails and announcements at in-person faculty and departmental meetings.

Ethical Considerations

As the brief assessments were distributed by the clinical system as part of ongoing quality improvement, the project was approved as an research protocol as exempt from human participants approval by the Wake Forest University School of Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB00077473). The survey did not collect identifying information from the participants.

Survey Development

Published in 2010 by Sittig and Singh [ 9 ], the sociotechnical model of health information technology was the first to fully emphasize the importance of system monitoring in implementation frameworks. Key aspects of monitoring, including measuring how the technology is being used by clinicians and whether implementation outcomes are being achieved, were considered when developing the survey. The survey was developed with a literature search, expert review, and iterative pilot-testing (see Multimedia Appendix 1 ). The final survey included 12 questions related to rates of in-person, telephone, and video for clinician-patient encounters; the rate of successful connection for video visits; and perceived challenges to video visits (eg, software, hardware, bandwidth, and technology literacy).

Study Population

The study population included all outpatient clinicians practicing across the health care delivery system; we excluded clinicians without direct patient care responsibilities. The system includes 5 hospitals and over 350 primary care and specialty clinics that provide care to over 2 million persons annually. The brief assessment was distributed to clinicians in 2020 and 2021 (1937 clinicians and 2843 clinicians, respectively).

Survey Distribution and Data Collection

As we are an integrated health care delivery system, we had access to the contact details of all providers. Our group practice clinical operations executive committee facilitated the survey distribution by requesting that each department chair and clinical service line director send an email to their team of providers to notify them of the survey and encourage completion. Surveys were collected and managed using REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture), a secure, web-based app designed to support data capture [ 10 , 11 ]. A unique survey link was distributed via email to each clinician in May 2020 and March 2021. The system sent up to 2 reminder emails if the recipient had not yet completed the survey.

Statistical Analysis

To take full advantage of the data collected, we first analyzed the results as 2 cross-sectional surveys. In this primary analysis, we included all respondents in each year. We recognize that a subset of clinicians also responded in both years. Thus, as a secondary analysis, we analyzed the data limited to the longitudinal cohort who participated in both years. First, summary statistics are presented as count (frequency) for categorical variables and mean (SD) or median (IQR) for continuous variables as appropriate. Generalized estimating equations were then used to model frequency distributions of in-person, telephone, and video visits, and patient and clinician challenges. These logit models were adjusted for within-respondent correlation across surveys via an exchangeable correlation structure. P values of .05 were considered statistically significant. P values for multiple comparisons in frequency distributions of in-person, telephone, and video visits between physicians, advanced practice professionals (APPs), and other clinicians were adjusted via the Tukey-Kramer method to control for type I errors with a corrected P value <.05 deemed statistically significant [ 12 ]. All statistical analyses were performed with R (version 4.2.1; R Core Team) [ 13 ].

We recognize that a subset of clinicians responded in both years. Thus, as a secondary analysis, we analyzed the data limited to the longitudinal cohort who participated in both surveys. For the secondary analysis, matched pairs analyses were performed as were performed in the entire sample with only those responses from clinicians that completed both surveys.

Surveillance Participation and Participant Characteristics

In 2020, 1937 surveys were sent and 511 responses were received (response rate 26.4%). In 2021, 2843 surveys were sent and 615 responses were received (response rate 21.6%). In both years, over 55% of the respondents were physicians from a wide range of clinical specialties. About half of the clinicians who completed the survey in 2020 also completed it in 2021 ( Table 1 ).

a n=511 responses in 2020 and n=615 responses in 2021.

b n=300 responses in 2020 and n=353 responses in 2021.

Health Care Delivery by In-Person and Telephone

To place the volume of telehealth in context, we first asked about the number of in-person encounters completed over the past 2 weeks ( Table 2 ). The distribution of responses differed between 2020 and 2021 ( P <.001). Modeled probabilities show fewer respondents reported zero (22.2% vs 4.9%) or 1 to 10 (33.5% vs 11.5%) in-person visits in 2021 as compared with 2020. The volume of in-person visits increased over time ( Table 2 ). Further, the majority of respondents (399/509, 78.4%) reported at least 1 telephone visit in 2020 and 65.7% (369/562) in 2021 although the distribution of responses differed from 2020 to 2021 ( P <.001).

a Differences in frequency distributions between 2020 and 2021 tested via generalized estimating equation modeling; P value adjusted using Tukey-Kramer method to control for type I errors.

Health Care Delivery by Video Visits

Many health care providers were engaged in virtual care, with 65.9% (336/510) health care providers reporting video visit encounters in 2020 and 57.6% (325/564) health care providers reporting video visit encounters in 2021 ( Table 2 ) although the distribution of responses again changed from 2020 to 2021 ( P <.001). Compared with 2020, fewer 2021 respondents reported 11-25 (18.6% vs 6.7%), 26-50 (5.9% vs 2.8%), or over 50 (2.4% vs 2%) visits.

Secondary analyses were robust to missing data and showed that the results (distributions of in-person, phone, and video visits) did not change when limiting the data to only respondents who participated in both surveys.

Comparing Health Care Delivery by Physicians, APPs, and Others

We also compared health care delivery modality by type of clinician (physicians, APPs, or others). Patterns of health care delivery reported in the overall sample were similar in the physician, APP, and other subgroups. There were no significant differences between physicians and APPs in the number of patient encounters that were completed as in-person, telephone visits, or video visits in 2020 or 2021.

Perceived Challenges to Patient-Clinician Connection Using Video Visits

The use of video visits came with challenges. In 2020, only 21.7% (73/336) of clinicians reported no difficulty connecting with patients during video visits and 28.6% (93/325) of clinicians reported no difficulty in 2021 ( Figure 1 ). The distribution of the percentage of successfully connected video visits (“Over the past two weeks of scheduled visits, what percentage did you successfully connect with patients by video?”) was not significantly different between 2020 and 2021 ( P =.74, Figure 1 ). There was also no significant difference between physicians and APPs in the rate of successful video connection with patients in either year.

Clinicians were asked about the challenges in successfully completing video visits (see Table 3 ). The most commonly reported challenge was poor connectivity. This response increased over time with 30.5% (156/511) selecting it as a challenge in 2020 and 37.1% (228/615) selecting it as a challenge in 2021 ( P =.01). Patients not having access to their electronic health record portals was also a commonly reported challenge (109/511, 21.3% in 2020 and 137/615, 22.3% in 2021; P =.73).

a P value adjusted using the Tukey-Kramer method to control for type I errors.

b For some clinical video visits, a prerequisite was that patients needed to have registered with the patient portal.

Principal Findings

Although telehealth technology was available in our health care delivery system prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, it saw only limited use for providing synchronous care to patients prior to the pandemic. Inconsistent reimbursement for services, restrictions on the physical location of patients and clinicians during telehealth, and rules about types of visits that were acceptable for telehealth services all contributed to its limited use [ 14 , 15 ]. With the pandemic, and consistent with other reports, our health care delivery system rapidly expanded the provision of clinical care by way of video visits. Later in the pandemic, in-person visits did increase, but the use of video visits remained well above prepandemic levels.

Overall, there has been a shift toward a more positive sentiment about telehealth and telemedicine since the start of the pandemic. A scoping review by Doraiswamy et al [ 16 ] reported 543 telehealth-related papers (mostly opinions, commentaries, and perspectives; 61%) published across 331 different journals from January to June 2020. Most of these new reports had a “celebratory” or favorable sentiment about the use of telehealth. The scope of the increase in telehealth during the public health emergency likely contributed to this sentiment though concerns about patient and clinician connection, the lack of physical examinations, and cost-effectiveness were still noted by some. Although our providers reported benefits for clinical video telehealth beyond audio-only calls for patient-provider visits, failure to connect using clinical video visits was common.

While reports have documented challenges with clinical video telehealth [ 17 ], few have monitored these challenges over time. During the pandemic, as our health care delivery system’s experience with video visits grew, clinicians did not report a meaningful reduction in connection failure rate. The most frequently reported challenges were general network connectivity and those related to the digital divide (eg, patient lack of internet access, needed software, or internet-connected cameras). Gaps in access to technology and the internet for telehealth may impact some patient groups more than others. For example, older age, rural residence, dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollment, and non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic race or ethnicity have been shown to be associated with a lower probability of technology ownership, access to the internet, and use of the internet for communication in cancer survivors [ 18 ]. Further, over 10% of clinicians also reported that they experienced software or hardware challenges (eg, limited availability of internet cameras at a clinical location). Expanding telehealth will require ongoing investments in technology for clinicians. New workflows to support successful connection during video visits and follow-up processes may also be needed.

Our video visit monitoring results were shared with clinical operations leadership. In response to the sustained challenges noted, we initiated a new video visit program to provide patient support prior to scheduled video visits. Our technology navigators are a specially trained, centralized team and are directed to reach out to vulnerable patients and families to facilitate video visit access. A new electronic health record dashboard identified patients with (1) a scheduled video visit and (2) 1 or more risk factors (eg, lack of a prior successful video visit and lack of patient portal access). We further prioritized patients older than 65 years and those living in rural areas. Technology navigators reached out by telephone to contact these at-risk patients to assess their technology access (eg, internet, software, webcam, or smartphone), technology literacy and perceived competence, and availability of at-home support from family and friends. The technology navigators then troubleshoot any challenges noted by the patients and offer to conduct a “practice” video visit. Evaluation of this program is ongoing. In 2022-2023, the navigators contacted 1266 patients at high risk for video visit failure. Among those contacted, 515 requested and were provided assistance. With previsit support from the navigators, the patient-provider scheduled video visit completion rate was 84% as compared with a 60% completion rate among those patients who did not receive support.

Limitations of our video visit surveillance analysis include that the data were collected across 1 health care delivery system with an integrated electronic health care record system. The perceptions and challenges may be different in a smaller health care system and in those with different health care record systems. The survey measured only clinician-reported telehealth use and success rates which may be limited by recall. As with all surveys, our results may be biased as only about one-quarter of the sample responded. It is possible that respondents experienced more challenges conducting video visits than those who did not respond. Further, not all clinicians longitudinally completed both the 2020 and 2021 surveys—due both to response rates and providers leaving and entering the health care system. Thus, changes over time may represent differences in the underlying sample. For example, new clinicians may have been more or less familiar with conducting video visits.

Conclusions

Recent reviews have noted the need for more evidence related to telehealth’s implementation, effectiveness, and health equity in telehealth access [ 16 , 19 , 20 ]. Although internet and smartphone access has increased over the last decade (with older adults being one of the fastest-growing subgroups of new adoption), our longitudinal video visit surveillance reveals that the digital divide is still a significant barrier to video visit access.

Although Healthy People 2030 (a set of national objectives to improve health and well-being) includes developmental and research objectives related to patient portals and increasing the use of telehealth to improve access to health services [ 21 ], some social determinants of health taxonomies do not include technology access. If telehealth is increasingly an important component of health care access, then technology access (eg, internet, smartphone, patient portal, and connected hardware, such as internet-connected video) should be considered a social determinant of health [ 22 ]. A comprehensive solution to overcoming the digital divide has not yet been achieved. However, some partial solutions include directly providing technology to patients, providing detailed instructions, and support services (eg, our technology navigator program), and engaging trusted caregivers (family and friends) who may be able to assist patients [ 23 - 27 ].

Acknowledgments

The project was supported through the National Cancer Institute Cancer Moonshot initiative—iDAPT: Implementation and Informatics–Developing Adaptable Processes and Technologies for Cancer Control (P50 CA244693); the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Award (5UL1TR001420); and also a career development award to JAP (1K23AG073529).

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Brief Provider Telehealth Assessment.

• World Health Organization. Telemedicine: Opportunities and Developments in Member States: Report on the Second Global Survey on eHealth 2009. Geneva, Switzerland. World Health Organization; 2010.
• Moulaei K, Shanbehzadeh M, Bahaadinbeigy K, Kazemi-Arpanahi H. Survey of the patients' perspectives and preferences in adopting telepharmacy versus in-person visits to the pharmacy: a feasibility study during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022;22(1):99. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Nesbitt TS. The evolution of telehealth: where have we been and where are we going? In: Lustig TA, editor. The Role of Telehealth in an Evolving Health Care Environment: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC. National Academies Press; 2012;11-16.
• Kane CK, Gillis K. The use of telemedicine by physicians: still the exception rather than the rule. Health Aff (Millwood). 2018;37(12):1923-1930. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Kane CK, Gillis K. The use of telemedicine by physicians: still the exception rather than the rule. Health Aff (Millwood). Dec 2018;37(12):1923-1930. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Weiner JP, Bandeian S, Hatef E, Lans D, Liu A, Lemke KW. In-person and telehealth ambulatory contacts and costs in a large US insured cohort before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(3):e212618. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gilson SF, Umscheid CA, Laiteerapong N, Ossey G, Nunes KJ, Shah SD. Growth of ambulatory virtual visits and differential use by patient sociodemographics at one urban academic medical center during the COVID-19 pandemic: retrospective analysis. JMIR Med Inform. 2020;8(12):e24544. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hatef E, Wilson RF, Hannum SM, Zhang A, Kharrazi H, Weiner JP, et al. Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Era. Rockville, MD. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2023.
• Sittig DF, Singh H. A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19(Suppl 3):i68-i74. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap): a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377-381. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O'Neal L, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Midway S, Robertson M, Flinn S, Kaller M. Comparing multiple comparisons: practical guidance for choosing the best multiple comparisons test. PeerJ. 2020;8:e10387. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2023.
• Shaver J. The state of telehealth before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Prim Care. 2022;49(4):517-530. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hyder MA, Razzak J. Telemedicine in the United States: an introduction for students and residents. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(11):e20839. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Doraiswamy S, Abraham A, Mamtani R, Cheema S. Use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(12):e24087. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Garfan S, Alamoodi AH, Zaidan BB, Al-Zobbi M, Hamid RA, Alwan JK, et al. Telehealth utilization during the Covid-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med. 2021;138:104878. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lama Y, Davidoff AJ, Vanderpool RC, Jensen RE. Telehealth availability and use of related technologies among medicare-enrolled cancer survivors: cross-sectional findings from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(1):e34616. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Moulaei K, Moulaei R, Bahaadinbeigy K. Barriers and facilitators of using health information technologies by women: a scoping review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023;23(1):176. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rodriguez JA, Shachar C, Bates DW. Digital inclusion as health care: supporting health care equity with digital-infrastructure initiatives. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(12):1101-1103. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Healthy people 2030: health IT. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. URL: https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/health-it [accessed 2024-03-14]
• Benda NC, Veinot TC, Sieck CJ, Ancker JS. Broadband internet access is a social determinant of health!. Am J Public Health. 2020;110(8):1123-1125. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Francis J, Kadylak T, Makki TW, Rikard RV, Cotten SR. Catalyst to connection: when technical difficulties lead to social support for older adults. Am Behav Sci. 2018;62(9):1167-1185. [ CrossRef ]
• Cotten SR, Yost EA, Berkowsky RW, Winstead V, Anderson WA. Designing Technology Training for Older Adults in Continuing Care Retirement Communities, 1st Edition. Boca Raton, FL. CRC Press; 2016.
• Sadasivam RS, Kinney RL, Lemon SC, Shimada SL, Allison JJ, Houston TK. Internet health information seeking is a team sport: analysis of the Pew internet survey. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(3):193-200. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Luger TM, Hogan TP, Richardson LM, Cioffari-Bailiff L, Harvey K, Houston TK. Older veteran digital disparities: examining the potential for solutions within social networks. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(11):e296. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Houston TK, Richardson LM, Cotten SR. Patient-directed digital health technologies: is implementation outpacing evidence? Med Care. 2019;57(2):95-97. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]

Abbreviations

Edited by G Eysenbach, T Leung; submitted 26.10.23; peer-reviewed by K Moulaei; comments to author 19.12.23; revised version received 24.01.24; accepted 09.03.24; published 08.04.24.

©Jessica A Palakshappa, Erica R Hale, Joshua D Brown, Carol A Kittel, Emily Dressler, Gary E Rosenthal, Sarah L Cutrona, Kristie L Foley, Emily R Haines, Thomas K Houston II. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 08.04.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Reumatologia
• v.59(1); 2021

Peer review guidance: a primer for researchers

Olena zimba.

1 Department of Internal Medicine No. 2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine

Armen Yuri Gasparyan

2 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UK

The peer review process is essential for quality checks and validation of journal submissions. Although it has some limitations, including manipulations and biased and unfair evaluations, there is no other alternative to the system. Several peer review models are now practised, with public review being the most appropriate in view of the open science movement. Constructive reviewer comments are increasingly recognised as scholarly contributions which should meet certain ethics and reporting standards. The Publons platform, which is now part of the Web of Science Group (Clarivate Analytics), credits validated reviewer accomplishments and serves as an instrument for selecting and promoting the best reviewers. All authors with relevant profiles may act as reviewers. Adherence to research reporting standards and access to bibliographic databases are recommended to help reviewers draft evidence-based and detailed comments.

Introduction

The peer review process is essential for evaluating the quality of scholarly works, suggesting corrections, and learning from other authors’ mistakes. The principles of peer review are largely based on professionalism, eloquence, and collegiate attitude. As such, reviewing journal submissions is a privilege and responsibility for ‘elite’ research fellows who contribute to their professional societies and add value by voluntarily sharing their knowledge and experience.

Since the launch of the first academic periodicals back in 1665, the peer review has been mandatory for validating scientific facts, selecting influential works, and minimizing chances of publishing erroneous research reports [ 1 ]. Over the past centuries, peer review models have evolved from single-handed editorial evaluations to collegial discussions, with numerous strengths and inevitable limitations of each practised model [ 2 , 3 ]. With multiplication of periodicals and editorial management platforms, the reviewer pool has expanded and internationalized. Various sets of rules have been proposed to select skilled reviewers and employ globally acceptable tools and language styles [ 4 , 5 ].

In the era of digitization, the ethical dimension of the peer review has emerged, necessitating involvement of peers with full understanding of research and publication ethics to exclude unethical articles from the pool of evidence-based research and reviews [ 6 ]. In the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, some, if not most, journals face the unavailability of skilled reviewers, resulting in an unprecedented increase of articles without a history of peer review or those with surprisingly short evaluation timelines [ 7 ].

Editorial recommendations and the best reviewers

Guidance on peer review and selection of reviewers is currently available in the recommendations of global editorial associations which can be consulted by journal editors for updating their ethics statements and by research managers for crediting the evaluators. The International Committee on Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) qualifies peer review as a continuation of the scientific process that should involve experts who are able to timely respond to reviewer invitations, submitting unbiased and constructive comments, and keeping confidentiality [ 8 ].

The reviewer roles and responsibilities are listed in the updated recommendations of the Council of Science Editors (CSE) [ 9 ] where ethical conduct is viewed as a premise of the quality evaluations. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) further emphasizes editorial strategies that ensure transparent and unbiased reviewer evaluations by trained professionals [ 10 ]. Finally, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) prioritizes selecting the best reviewers with validated profiles to avoid substandard or fraudulent reviewer comments [ 11 ]. Accordingly, the Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications encourages reviewers to register with the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) platform to validate and publicize their scholarly activities [ 12 ].

Although the best reviewer criteria are not listed in the editorial recommendations, it is apparent that the manuscript evaluators should be active researchers with extensive experience in the subject matter and an impressive list of relevant and recent publications [ 13 ]. All authors embarking on an academic career and publishing articles with active contact details can be involved in the evaluation of others’ scholarly works [ 14 ]. Ideally, the reviewers should be peers of the manuscript authors with equal scholarly ranks and credentials.

However, journal editors may employ schemes that engage junior research fellows as co-reviewers along with their mentors and senior fellows [ 15 ]. Such a scheme is successfully practised within the framework of the Emerging EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) Network (EMEUNET) where seasoned authors (mentors) train ongoing researchers (mentees) how to evaluate submissions to the top rheumatology journals and select the best evaluators for regular contributors to these journals [ 16 ].

The awareness of the EQUATOR Network reporting standards may help the reviewers to evaluate methodology and suggest related revisions. Statistical skills help the reviewers to detect basic mistakes and suggest additional analyses. For example, scanning data presentation and revealing mistakes in the presentation of means and standard deviations often prompt re-analyses of distributions and replacement of parametric tests with non-parametric ones [ 17 , 18 ].

Constructive reviewer comments

The main goal of the peer review is to support authors in their attempt to publish ethically sound and professionally validated works that may attract readers’ attention and positively influence healthcare research and practice. As such, an optimal reviewer comment has to comprehensively examine all parts of the research and review work ( Table I ). The best reviewers are viewed as contributors who guide authors on how to correct mistakes, discuss study limitations, and highlight its strengths [ 19 ].

Structure of a reviewer comment to be forwarded to authors

Some of the currently practised review models are well positioned to help authors reveal and correct their mistakes at pre- or post-publication stages ( Table II ). The global move toward open science is particularly instrumental for increasing the quality and transparency of reviewer contributions.

Advantages and disadvantages of common manuscript evaluation models

Since there are no universally acceptable criteria for selecting reviewers and structuring their comments, instructions of all peer-reviewed journal should specify priorities, models, and expected review outcomes [ 20 ]. Monitoring and reporting average peer review timelines is also required to encourage timely evaluations and avoid delays. Depending on journal policies and article types, the first round of peer review may last from a few days to a few weeks. The fast-track review (up to 3 days) is practised by some top journals which process clinical trial reports and other priority items.

In exceptional cases, reviewer contributions may result in substantive changes, appreciated by authors in the official acknowledgments. In most cases, however, reviewers should avoid engaging in the authors’ research and writing. They should refrain from instructing the authors on additional tests and data collection as these may delay publication of original submissions with conclusive results.

Established publishers often employ advanced editorial management systems that support reviewers by providing instantaneous access to the review instructions, online structured forms, and some bibliographic databases. Such support enables drafting of evidence-based comments that examine the novelty, ethical soundness, and implications of the reviewed manuscripts [ 21 ].

Encouraging reviewers to submit their recommendations on manuscript acceptance/rejection and related editorial tasks is now a common practice. Skilled reviewers may prompt the editors to reject or transfer manuscripts which fall outside the journal scope, perform additional ethics checks, and minimize chances of publishing erroneous and unethical articles. They may also raise concerns over the editorial strategies in their comments to the editors.

Since reviewer and editor roles are distinct, reviewer recommendations are aimed at helping editors, but not at replacing their decision-making functions. The final decisions rest with handling editors. Handling editors weigh not only reviewer comments, but also priorities related to article types and geographic origins, space limitations in certain periods, and envisaged influence in terms of social media attention and citations. This is why rejections of even flawless manuscripts are likely at early rounds of internal and external evaluations across most peer-reviewed journals.

Reviewers are often requested to comment on language correctness and overall readability of the evaluated manuscripts. Given the wide availability of in-house and external editing services, reviewer comments on language mistakes and typos are categorized as minor. At the same time, non-Anglophone experts’ poor language skills often exclude them from contributing to the peer review in most influential journals [ 22 ]. Comments should be properly edited to convey messages in positive or neutral tones, express ideas of varying degrees of certainty, and present logical order of words, sentences, and paragraphs [ 23 , 24 ]. Consulting linguists on communication culture, passing advanced language courses, and honing commenting skills may increase the overall quality and appeal of the reviewer accomplishments [ 5 , 25 ].

Peer reviewer credits

Various crediting mechanisms have been proposed to motivate reviewers and maintain the integrity of science communication [ 26 ]. Annual reviewer acknowledgments are widely practised for naming manuscript evaluators and appreciating their scholarly contributions. Given the need to weigh reviewer contributions, some journal editors distinguish ‘elite’ reviewers with numerous evaluations and award those with timely and outstanding accomplishments [ 27 ]. Such targeted recognition ensures ethical soundness of the peer review and facilitates promotion of the best candidates for grant funding and academic job appointments [ 28 ].

Also, large publishers and learned societies issue certificates of excellence in reviewing which may include Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points [ 29 ]. Finally, an entirely new crediting mechanism is proposed to award bonus points to active reviewers who may collect, transfer, and use these points to discount gold open-access charges within the publisher consortia [ 30 ].

With the launch of Publons ( http://publons.com/ ) and its integration with Web of Science Group (Clarivate Analytics), reviewer recognition has become a matter of scientific prestige. Reviewers can now freely open their Publons accounts and record their contributions to online journals with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). Journal editors, in turn, may generate official reviewer acknowledgments and encourage reviewers to forward them to Publons for building up individual reviewer and journal profiles. All published articles maintain e-links to their review records and post-publication promotion on social media, allowing the reviewers to continuously track expert evaluations and comments. A paid-up partnership is also available to journals and publishers for automatically transferring peer-review records to Publons upon mutually acceptable arrangements.

Listing reviewer accomplishments on an individual Publons profile showcases scholarly contributions of the account holder. The reviewer accomplishments placed next to the account holders’ own articles and editorial accomplishments point to the diversity of scholarly contributions. Researchers may establish links between their Publons and ORCID accounts to further benefit from complementary services of both platforms. Publons Academy ( https://publons.com/community/academy/ ) additionally offers an online training course to novice researchers who may improve their reviewing skills under the guidance of experienced mentors and journal editors. Finally, journal editors may conduct searches through the Publons platform to select the best reviewers across academic disciplines.

Peer review ethics

Prior to accepting reviewer invitations, scholars need to weigh a number of factors which may compromise their evaluations. First of all, they are required to accept the reviewer invitations if they are capable of timely submitting their comments. Peer review timelines depend on article type and vary widely across journals. The rules of transparent publishing necessitate recording manuscript submission and acceptance dates in article footnotes to inform readers of the evaluation speed and to help investigators in the event of multiple unethical submissions. Timely reviewer accomplishments often enable fast publication of valuable works with positive implications for healthcare. Unjustifiably long peer review, on the contrary, delays dissemination of influential reports and results in ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism of a manuscript under evaluation [ 31 ].

In the times of proliferation of open-access journals relying on article processing charges, unjustifiably short review may point to the absence of quality evaluation and apparently ‘predatory’ publishing practice [ 32 , 33 ]. Authors when choosing their target journals should take into account the peer review strategy and associated timelines to avoid substandard periodicals.

Reviewer primary interests (unbiased evaluation of manuscripts) may come into conflict with secondary interests (promotion of their own scholarly works), necessitating disclosures by filling in related parts in the online reviewer window or uploading the ICMJE conflict of interest forms. Biomedical reviewers, who are directly or indirectly supported by the pharmaceutical industry, may encounter conflicts while evaluating drug research. Such instances require explicit disclosures of conflicts and/or rejections of reviewer invitations.

Journal editors are obliged to employ mechanisms for disclosing reviewer financial and non-financial conflicts of interest to avoid processing of biased comments [ 34 ]. They should also cautiously process negative comments that oppose dissenting, but still valid, scientific ideas [ 35 ]. Reviewer conflicts that stem from academic activities in a competitive environment may introduce biases, resulting in unfair rejections of manuscripts with opposing concepts, results, and interpretations. The same academic conflicts may lead to coercive reviewer self-citations, forcing authors to incorporate suggested reviewer references or face negative feedback and an unjustified rejection [ 36 ]. Notably, several publisher investigations have demonstrated a global scale of such misconduct, involving some highly cited researchers and top scientific journals [ 37 ].

Fake peer review, an extreme example of conflict of interest, is another form of misconduct that has surfaced in the time of mass proliferation of gold open-access journals and publication of articles without quality checks [ 38 ]. Fake reviews are generated by manipulating authors and commercial editing agencies with full access to their own manuscripts and peer review evaluations in the journal editorial management systems. The sole aim of these reviews is to break the manuscript evaluation process and to pave the way for publication of pseudoscientific articles. Authors of these articles are often supported by funds intended for the growth of science in non-Anglophone countries [ 39 ]. Iranian and Chinese authors are often caught submitting fake reviews, resulting in mass retractions by large publishers [ 38 ]. Several suggestions have been made to overcome this issue, with assigning independent reviewers and requesting their ORCID IDs viewed as the most practical options [ 40 ].

Conclusions

The peer review process is regulated by publishers and editors, enforcing updated global editorial recommendations. Selecting the best reviewers and providing authors with constructive comments may improve the quality of published articles. Reviewers are selected in view of their professional backgrounds and skills in research reporting, statistics, ethics, and language. Quality reviewer comments attract superior submissions and add to the journal’s scientific prestige [ 41 ].

In the era of digitization and open science, various online tools and platforms are available to upgrade the peer review and credit experts for their scholarly contributions. With its links to the ORCID platform and social media channels, Publons now offers the optimal model for crediting and keeping track of the best and most active reviewers. Publons Academy additionally offers online training for novice researchers who may benefit from the experience of their mentoring editors. Overall, reviewer training in how to evaluate journal submissions and avoid related misconduct is an important process, which some indexed journals are experimenting with [ 42 ].

The timelines and rigour of the peer review may change during the current pandemic. However, journal editors should mobilize their resources to avoid publication of unchecked and misleading reports. Additional efforts are required to monitor published contents and encourage readers to post their comments on publishers’ online platforms (blogs) and other social media channels [ 43 , 44 ].

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 08 April 2024

Tumor-selective activity of RAS-GTP inhibition in pancreatic cancer

• Urszula N. Wasko 1 , 2   na1 ,
• Jingjing Jiang 3   na1 ,
• Tanner C. Dalton 1 , 2 ,
• Alvaro Curiel-Garcia   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6249-3267 1 , 2 ,
• A. Cole Edwards 4 ,
• Yingyun Wang 3 ,
• Bianca Lee 3 ,
• Margo Orlen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9834-6282 5 ,
• Sha Tian 6 ,
• Clint A. Stalnecker   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0570-4416 7 , 8 ,
• Kristina Drizyte-Miller 7 ,
• Marie Menard 3 ,
• Julien Dilly   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4006-5285 9 , 10 ,
• Stephen A. Sastra 1 , 2 ,
• Carmine F. Palermo 1 , 2 ,
• Marie C. Hasselluhn   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9765-4075 1 , 2 ,
• Amanda R. Decker-Farrell 1 , 2 ,
• Stephanie Chang   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-2026-5215 3 ,
• Lingyan Jiang 3 ,
• Xing Wei 3 ,
• Yu C. Yang 3 ,
• Ciara Helland 3 ,
• Haley Courtney 3 ,
• Yevgeniy Gindin 3 ,
• Karl Muonio 3 ,
• Ruiping Zhao 3 ,
• Samantha B. Kemp 5 ,
• Cynthia Clendenin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4535-2088 11 ,
• Rina Sor   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2042-5746 11 ,
• William P. Vostrejs   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1659-0186 5 ,
• Priya S. Hibshman 4 ,
• Amber M. Amparo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3805-746X 7 ,
• Connor Hennessey 9 , 10 ,
• Matthew G. Rees   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2987-7581 12 ,
• Melissa M. Ronan   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4269-1404 12 ,
• Jennifer A. Roth   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5117-5586 12 ,
• Jens Brodbeck 3 ,
• Lorenzo Tomassoni 2 , 13 ,
• Basil Bakir 1 , 2 ,
• Nicholas D. Socci 14 ,
• Laura E. Herring   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4496-7312 15 ,
• Natalie K. Barker 15 ,
• Junning Wang 9 , 10 ,
• James M. Cleary 9 , 10 ,
• Brian M. Wolpin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0455-1032 9 , 10 ,
• John A. Chabot 16 ,
• Michael D. Kluger 16 ,
• Gulam A. Manji 1 , 2 ,
• Kenneth Y. Tsai   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5325-212X 17 ,
• Miroslav Sekulic 18 ,
• Stephen M. Lagana 18 ,
• Andrea Califano 1 , 2 , 13 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ,
• Elsa Quintana 3 ,
• Zhengping Wang 3 ,
• Jacqueline A. M. Smith   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5028-8725 3 ,
• Matthew Holderfield 3 ,
• David Wildes   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0009-3855-7270 3 ,
• Scott W. Lowe   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5284-9650 6 , 24 ,
• Michael A. Badgley 1 , 2 ,
• Andrew J. Aguirre   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0701-6203 9 , 10 , 12 , 25 ,
• Robert H. Vonderheide   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7252-954X 5 , 11 , 26 ,
• Ben Z. Stanger   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0410-4037 5 , 11 ,
• Timour Baslan 27 ,
• Channing J. Der   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7751-2747 7 , 8 ,
• Mallika Singh 3 &
• Kenneth P. Olive   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3392-8994 1 , 2  

Nature ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

• Pancreatic cancer
• Pharmacodynamics

Broad-spectrum RAS inhibition holds the potential to benefit roughly a quarter of human cancer patients whose tumors are driven by RAS mutations 1,2 . RMC-7977 is a highly selective inhibitor of the active GTP-bound forms of KRAS, HRAS, and NRAS, with affinity for both mutant and wild type (WT) variants (RAS(ON) multi-selective) 3 . As >90% of human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) cases are driven by activating mutations in KRAS 4 , we assessed the therapeutic potential of the RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor RMC-7977 in a comprehensive range of PDAC models. We observed broad and pronounced anti-tumor activity across models following direct RAS inhibition at exposures that were well-tolerated in vivo . Pharmacological analyses revealed divergent responses to RMC-7977 in tumor versus normal tissues. Treated tumors exhibited waves of apoptosis along with sustained proliferative arrest whereas normal tissues underwent only transient decreases in proliferation, with no evidence of apoptosis. In the autochthonous KPC model, RMC-7977 treatment resulted in a profound extension of survival followed by on-treatment relapse. Analysis of relapsed tumors identified Myc copy number gain as a prevalent candidate resistance mechanism, which could be overcome by combinatorial TEAD inhibition in vitro . Together, these data establish a strong preclinical rationale for the use of broad-spectrum RAS-GTP inhibition in the setting of PDAC and identify a promising candidate combination therapeutic regimen to overcome monotherapy resistance.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Urszula N. Wasko, Jingjing Jiang

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Urszula N. Wasko, Tanner C. Dalton, Alvaro Curiel-Garcia, Stephen A. Sastra, Carmine F. Palermo, Marie C. Hasselluhn, Amanda R. Decker-Farrell, Basil Bakir, Gulam A. Manji, Andrea Califano, Michael A. Badgley & Kenneth P. Olive

Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Urszula N. Wasko, Tanner C. Dalton, Alvaro Curiel-Garcia, Stephen A. Sastra, Carmine F. Palermo, Marie C. Hasselluhn, Amanda R. Decker-Farrell, Lorenzo Tomassoni, Basil Bakir, Gulam A. Manji, Andrea Califano, Michael A. Badgley & Kenneth P. Olive

Revolution Medicines, Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA

Jingjing Jiang, Yingyun Wang, Bianca Lee, Marie Menard, Stephanie Chang, Lingyan Jiang, Xing Wei, Yu C. Yang, Ciara Helland, Haley Courtney, Yevgeniy Gindin, Karl Muonio, Ruiping Zhao, Jens Brodbeck, Elsa Quintana, Zhengping Wang, Jacqueline A. M. Smith, Matthew Holderfield, David Wildes & Mallika Singh

Department of Cell Biology and Physiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

A. Cole Edwards & Priya S. Hibshman

University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Margo Orlen, Samantha B. Kemp, William P. Vostrejs, Robert H. Vonderheide & Ben Z. Stanger

Cancer Biology & Genetics Program, Sloan Kettering Institute, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

Sha Tian & Scott W. Lowe

Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clint A. Stalnecker, Kristina Drizyte-Miller, Amber M. Amparo & Channing J. Der

Department of Pharmacology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clint A. Stalnecker & Channing J. Der

Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA

Julien Dilly, Connor Hennessey, Junning Wang, James M. Cleary, Brian M. Wolpin & Andrew J. Aguirre

Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Cynthia Clendenin, Rina Sor, Robert H. Vonderheide & Ben Z. Stanger

The Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA

Matthew G. Rees, Melissa M. Ronan, Jennifer A. Roth & Andrew J. Aguirre

Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Lorenzo Tomassoni & Andrea Califano

Bioinformatics Core, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

Nicholas D. Socci

UNC Michael Hooker Proteomics Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Laura E. Herring & Natalie K. Barker

Department of Surgery, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

John A. Chabot & Michael D. Kluger

Departments of Pathology, Tumor Microenvironment and Metastasis; H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA

Kenneth Y. Tsai

Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Miroslav Sekulic & Stephen M. Lagana

Department of Oncology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

Andrea Califano

J.P. Sulzberger Columbia Genome Center, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

Chan Zuckerberg Biohub New York, New York, NY, USA

Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Chevy Chase, MD, USA

Scott W. Lowe

Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

Andrew J. Aguirre

Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, San Francisco, CA, USA

Robert H. Vonderheide

Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Timour Baslan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Mallika Singh or Kenneth P. Olive .

Supplementary information

Supplementary figure 1.

uncropped Western Blot images with marked areas of interest, and target molecular weight.

Reporting Summary

Supplementary tables.

This file contains Supplementary Tables 1-10.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Wasko, U.N., Jiang, J., Dalton, T.C. et al. Tumor-selective activity of RAS-GTP inhibition in pancreatic cancer. Nature (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07379-z

Download citation

Received : 18 July 2023

Accepted : 02 April 2024

Published : 08 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07379-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

World Economic Situation and Prospects: April 2024 Briefing, No. 180

Debt Sustainability Challenges in Africa: The Role of Domestic Debt

In 2024, more low-income countries are facing debt distress or are at risk of debt distress than ever before. According to the latest IMF low-income countries debt sustainability analysis, 10 countries are in debt distress, while 52 countries are at moderate or high risk of debt distress. Out of these 62 countries, 40 are in Africa. African countries have suffered gravely from global shocks such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine and spillover effects of high interest rates in many developed countries, which have increased debt levels across the continent. Debt levels are particularly high in the continent’s larger lower middle-income economies, including Egypt at 92 per cent of GDP, Angola at 84.9 per cent, and Kenya at 70.2 per cent.

Whether debt is external or domestic can be assessed along three criteria: currency of issuance, the governing jurisdiction, or residence of debt holders. Domestic debt can therefore be described as debt which is issued in the sovereign’s local currency, or debt which is governed by the domestic sovereign laws. It can also be defined as debt which is held by residents of the issuing sovereign.

Most African countries have historically relied on external debt in the form of long-term concessional financing from multilateral and bilateral lenders, or non-concessional private finance. However, in efforts to diversify financing sources and reduce risks of external debt vulnerabilities, many countries have increasingly turned towards domestic debt markets over the past two decades, reflecting a trend seen more broadly across developing countries. In emerging markets and developing economies, on average, domestic debt made up approximately 58 per cent of debt in 2022 and accounted for approximately 66 per cent of government debt accumulation since 2010.

Domestic debt has, however, presented a new set of challenges on debt sustainability. The S&P Global Africa Domestic Debt Vulnerability Index ranks Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Angola and Zambia among the most vulnerable countries as of 2023. Due to limits in data availability, subsequent data analysis in the brief will focus largely on these countries. Figure 1 shows the total public debt in selected countries, with the corresponding share of domestic debt. Figure 2 shows the trend in domestic debt accumulation in the selected countries.

Potential benefits derived from domestic debt in Africa

Most of the domestic debt in Africa is denominated in local currencies and is therefore shielded from exchange rate volatility and currency mismatches. Since 2022, a number of African currencies recorded significant depreciation against the US dollar as shown in figure 3. Currency depreciation leads to an increase in foreign currency-denominated external debt. In Kenya for instance, as of December 2023, external debt – 67.3 per cent of which was dollar denominated – increased by $1.3 billion owing in part to depreciation of the Kenyan shilling. As well, approximately 98 per cent of Ghana’s external debt stock growth in 2023 was a result of the cedi’s depreciation against the dollar. Nigeria’s external debt in 2023 also increased by 100.1 per cent over a year because of the naira’s depreciation. Avoiding sharp and unexpected depreciation of domestic currencies can ensure that governments maintain predictability on domestic debt stock and movements. In addition to this, issuance of debt in domestic currency grants central banks and governments flexibility to employ monetary policy tools in domestic debt management.

Domestic debt defaults tend to be rarer than external debt defaults

This could be because policymakers have the option of inflating away domestic debt than recourse to outright default (Herman, Ocampo, and Spiegel, 2012). Also, in countries where domestic financial institutions are the main holders of government domestic debt, effects of a domestic debt default could be severe, and if not properly managed, could result in a widespread financial crisis. In the case of debt default, domestic debt tends to be easier to restructure since it is subject to the jurisdiction of domestic courts. A case study conducted by the IMF on debt restructurings between 1988 and 2020 concluded that domestic debt restructuring took considerably less time to complete compared to external debt restructuring, largely due to a greater sovereign control of the terms and laws governing domestic debt. Additionally, by restructuring domestic debt, countries can avoid the reputational costs associated with external debt restructuring and, in some cases, maintain access to external finance.

Risks associated with domestic debt

Increased reliance on domestic debt, even with the benefits outlined above, carries risks, which if not well managed, could be detrimental to economic growth. One of the key arguments against domestic debt is that it can entail significant crowding-out effects for the domestic private sector. When government is the largest borrower, credit from banking and non-banking financial institutions available to the private sector could diminish (Bua, Pradelli and Presbitero, 2014). Arnone and Presbitero (2010), note that domestic public debt might undermine economic activity through crowding out effects and inflationary pressures if it represents a large share of bank deposits. In Egypt, as of October 2023, domestic public debt was approximately 77 per cent of total domestic credit. In Kenya, as of 2022, exposure of financial institutions to government securities was approximately 40 per cent of the total deposits. As a result, private sector is more credit constrained than the public sector in many African countries. This in turn curtails the private sector’s growth potential since reduced private credit discourages investments into the private sector. Ultimately, crowding out can affect government revenue in the long run if the private sector taxable base grows at a subpar pace, which could in turn hamper the government’s ability to repay its debts. Banks may also find it challenging to adequately diversify their risks, if the high cost of capital leaves a preponderance of more risky projects seeking finance.

Another considerable challenge is the maturity structure of domestic debt instruments. Many developing countries are unable to issue long-term government instruments at reasonable interest rates, in turn issuing mainly short- and medium-term securities (0–9 years). As of 2022, Zambia and Kenya’s domestic debt portfolio comprised of 78.5 per cent and 77.8 per cent of short- and medium-term securities, respectively. The proportion was even higher in Ghana, where short- and medium-term securities accounted for approximately 89.8 per cent of marketable instruments at the end of 2022. This short-term maturity structure increases rollover risks, where governments continually borrow to settle maturing obligations, thus risking macroeconomic instability.

High domestic debt service burdens in some African countries weigh heavily on government finances, further reducing spending which could be directed to investments in critical sectors such as health, education, and infrastructure. Figure 5 compares domestic and external debt service payments in selected African countries in 2022. In this time period, in all the countries below, domestic debt service was higher than external debt service, despite domestic debt stock being lower than external debt stock. Mozambique, for instance, paid 5.5 per cent of GDP in service for domestic debt, which was a quarter of total debt stock, compared to 3.1 per cent of GDP for external debt which made up three quarters of the debt stock. Even more alarming, in 2022, Kenya, Uganda and Zambia spent lower on education than they did on domestic debt service, at approximately 4 per cent, 2.5 per cent and 3.5 per cent of GDP respectively.

In principle, policymakers could lower the cost of domestic debt servicing by inflating away the debt. In such cases, governments may adopt expansionary monetary policies to increase inflation thus effectively lowering the real value of its debt. While this might have some short-term benefits, in the long-term, high inflation may reduce investors’ confidence, increase cost of borrowing through an inflation-risk premium, and affect the long-term performance of the economy.

In some African countries, average real interest rates on domestic debt tend to be higher than nominal interest rate on external debt. This is, however, not always the case because of high inflation in many countries. According to the IMF, the projected average real interest rate on domestic debt for Ghana and Zambia over the period 2023–2032 will be lower than the nominal interest rate on external debt. Figure 6 shows the 10-year Government bond yield in selected countries, with Kenya and Nigeria above 18 per cent as of March 2024. This high yield spread, compared to the US 10-year Government bond yield at 4.21 per cent, illustrates the high-risk perception of many African sovereign debt instruments. Market sentiments, including preference of short-term maturities, as well as a narrow investor base, are some of the factors that could drive up the interest rate on domestic debt.

Implications of domestic debt restructuring on the financial sector and broader economy: Ghana’s experience Ghana’s debt default (external and domestic) and the subsequent restructuring has put the spotlight on domestic debt in Africa. The country’s public debt has steadily risen in the last decade, from 55.4 per cent of GDP in 2015 to 76.6 per cent in 2021. This trend was driven by Ghana’s access to the international financial markets, having had 15 outstanding Eurobonds at end-2022. In the same time period, domestic debt grew from 22.4 per cent of GDP to approximately 39.6 per cent of GDP mainly because of government borrowing to finance the energy sector and to bail out the finance sector following the 2018–2019 financial crisis. The COVID-19 related expenditure also increased debt by approximately 4.6 per cent of GDP in 2020.

At the time of default in December 2022, total public debt stood at 92.3 per cent of GDP. Some of the factors contributing to the default included an inflated import bill due to effects of the war in Ukraine, drastic depreciation of the cedi and increased cost of debt service. At the same time, external shocks triggered significant capital outflows and diminished access to international financial markets. Moody’s and Fitch downgraded the country’s sovereign credit rating in September 2022, and foreign exchange reserves dwindled to 2.7 months of import cover at end-December 2022, down from 4.3 months at end-December 2021.

In December 2022 the Government initiated a domestic debt exchange programme, aimed at restoring sound public finance management and debt sustainability. Domestic bond holders were offered a chance to exchange their holdings with a fresh issuance of bonds with longer average maturities and lower coupon rates. New bonds were issued at a coupon rate staggered between 0 and 10 per cent. Before the exchange, interest rates for 2–6 years notes ranged between 21.5 per cent and 29.85 per cent. Although the programme managed to lower interest rates on government securities and lengthen their maturities, analysis by the country’s financial sector regulators showed that it adversely affected the solvency of some banks and insurance companies. The Government formed the Ghana Financial Stability Fund to minimize impacts of the restructuring process to the financial sector, and to avoid risks of a potential financial crisis. The IMF demanded satisfactory completion of the domestic debt exchange programme as a prerequisite for continued engagement with external creditors. The restructuring also took a relatively short time, with the domestic debt exchange programme concluding successfully in 2023. In January 2024, Ghana reached an agreement with official creditors under the G20 Common Framework on Debt Treatment.

Some lessons can be derived from Ghana’s experience with the domestic debt restructuring. These include the need to cushion the financial sector from adverse impacts of a domestic debt default. Importantly, countries should also focus on safeguarding vulnerable people by improving social protection in times of economic hardships. In 2023 Ghana doubled benefits distributed through the cash transfer programme targeting people living in poverty. The Government also increased allocations in the education and health sector. Through this experience, Ghana has maintained a growth momentum buttressed by sound financial and monetary policies aimed at restoring macroeconomic stability and debt sustainability. Inflation declined from 54.2 per cent in December 2022 to 23.2 per cent in February 2024. The economy also grew at an average of 2.8 per cent in the first three quarters of 2023, almost double the Government’s initial target of 1.5 per cent GDP growth. In January 2024, the IMF noted that “ambitious structural fiscal reforms are bolstering domestic revenues, improving spending efficiency, strengthening public financial and debt management, preserving financial sector stability, enhancing governance and transparency, and helping create an environment more conducive to private sector investment.”

How can African countries better access and manage their domestic debt?

Domestic debt is a valuable source of finance for African countries. However, it remains a potential source of vulnerability and the consequences of a default on domestic debt can quickly reverberate throughout the economy. The viability of domestic debt will continue to be challenged by short-term maturity preference, limited – or financial sector concentrated – investor base and high interest rates. If these challenges persist, governments will continue to struggle to meet debt repayment obligations and thus worsening debt sustainability.

African countries need to improve macroeconomic policies, debt management and regulatory frameworks to ensure long term sustainability of domestic debt. Firstly, a stable macroeconomic environment, especially a low and stable inflation rate, is necessary to build investor confidence and appetite in medium- and long-term government debt instruments. In addition, a broad investor base, including non-financial institutional investors is also required to reduce the risk of a private credit crunch caused by overexposure of financial institutions to government lending. This will also accelerate development of domestic bond markets, in turn improving resilience to global shocks by reducing reliance on external borrowing. Finally, and most importantly, proceeds from debt must be used productively – by investing in projects with high economic returns – to ensure governments’ ability to sustainably service their debt obligations.

Going forward, as African governments continue to seek an optimal debt structure, they will need to strengthen their debt sustainability frameworks to adequately balance the trade-offs associated with domestic debt. Lack of timely action on this will only exacerbate existing debt vulnerabilities, which could negate development progress and put the SDGs even further out of reach for countries most in need.

The Monthly Briefing on the World Economic Situation and Prospect is part of the monitoring and analysis activities of the Global Economic Monitoring Branch (GEMB) in the Economic Analysis and Policy Division (EAPD) of UN DESA. This issue was prepared by Nelly Rita Muriuki under the supervision of Hamid Rashid (Chief, GEMB) and general guidance of Shantanu Mukherjee (Director, EAPD).

• Office of the Director
• Global Economic Monitoring Branch
• Development Research Branch
• Development Policy Branch
• Secretariat of the Committee for Development Policy
• CDP Plenary

27th session: Tentatively 24-28 February 2025

• Least Developed Countries
• LDCs at a Glance
• International Support Measures
• Economic and Environmental Vulnerability Indicators
• Human Assets Indicators
• Inclusion into the LDC Category
• Graduation from the LDC Category
• Graduation Preparation & Smooth Transition
• LDC Resources
• Contacts and Useful Links

LDC resources

• List of LDCs
• Reports and Resolutions
• Analytical documents
• Impact Assessments
• Vulnerability Profiles
• Monitoring Reports
• Country Snapshots

Committee for Development Policy

• CDP Members
• CDP Resources
• News & Events
• Least Developed Countries (LDCs)

CDP Documents by Type

• Reports & Resolutions
• Policy Notes
• LDC Handbook
• Background Papers
• CDP Policy Review Series

CDP Documents by Theme

• Sustainable Development Goals
• Financing For Development
• Productive Capacity
• Social Issues
• Science & Technology
• Small Island Developing States
• Fraud Alert
• Privacy Notice
• Terms of Use