Unmasking the Process: Perils and Facilitators of Successful Publishing in Forum

One of the most common questions I receive as editor is how to get an article published in the Oncology Nursing Forum (Forum). Now in my fifth year as editor, I have gained insights into the publishing process that I was not fully aware of as an author. I would like to share some of these insights and suggestions for prospective authors considering submission to Forum. Our journal thrives on authors submitting their best work, and we aim to continue publishing dynamic and meaningful articles from oncology nurse scientists and their teams.

For authors, the first decision is determining whether Forum is the right journal for their submission. The Forum mission statement provides an overview of its purpose and focus: “to amplify oncology nursing science and support the translation of research evidence to practice and policy.” The intent of Forum is to foster health equity for individuals, families, and communities affected by cancer through the dissemination of research that transforms cancer care in health systems and communities. Although broad, this statement offers a framework for understanding the scope of the journal and the types of articles that align with Forum’s current mission. Before submitting, authors can email the editor with an abstract to determine whether their manuscript might be a good fit for the journal. Although many authors are encouraged to submit at this stage, I can guide authors to other journals if their article is outside the scope of Forum, saving them time by directing them to a more suitable journal.

Once a manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Manager platform, it is checked and processed by the editorial staff and assigned to the editor for review. Forum has standard publishing guidelines posted online (www.ons.org/onf/authors) that most authors follow. However, more than 50% of submissions are not sent for peer review. In publishing vernacular, this is called a “desk reject,” meaning that the manuscript is not considered for peer review and is returned to the author. The following issues may lead to a desk rejection:

• Readability and coherence: If a manuscript lacks readability and coherence, it will not be sent for peer review.
• Similarity Check score: A high Similarity Check score, indicating potential plagiarism, can lead to desk rejection. This often occurs with DNP projects and PhD dissertations that have not been embargoed after student graduation. An embargo is a restriction that allows only the title, abstract, and citation information of your dissertation to be publicly released, while the full text is unavailable to others for a specified period of time (Rasuli et al., 2023). Although we work with authors to accommodate these circumstances, we recommend that faculty guide doctoral students to pursue an embargo so that graduates can publish articles without additional hurdles.
• Design and methodology issues: The most frequent reason for desk rejection is design problems, such as an inadequate sample size for the conclusions or inappropriate statistical inferences.
• Potential U.S. Food and Drug Administration issues: Manuscripts examining drugs and devices that are not approved or cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will receive a desk rejection.

For manuscripts sent out for peer review, reviewers recommend one of the following: reject, major revision, minor revision, or accept. It is rare for manuscripts to be accepted after peer review without any revisions. Most manuscripts that undergo peer review receive one of two revision decisions: major or minor. As a beginning author, I was often dismayed to receive a “minor revision” or “major revision” decision, believing naively that my article was finished upon submission. However, many years later, when I or my students and coauthors receive such a decision, I am excited about the opportunity to improve the manuscript and increase the chances of publication.

Authors sometimes choose not to pursue a revision after receiving a “minor revision” or “major revision” decision. However, editors encourage resubmission only if they see potential in a manuscript, and we strongly recommend that authors work with their teams to submit the revision. Writing a rebuttal letter, which includes responses to the editors and reviewers, is essential (Jalongo & Saracho, 2023). It is also important to highlight changes in the manuscript so reviewers and editors can assess how well the author has addressed the feedback. Not all recommended changes can be implemented, particularly if they involve critiques of the design and sample size. In such cases, authors can provide a balanced rebuttal explaining the strengths and limitations of their chosen design. Most manuscripts meet the required revisions after one or two rounds. It is rare for authors to be asked for more than two revisions. If an author does not address the critiques, the manuscript may be rejected. However, most “minor revision” or “major revision” manuscripts are eventually accepted when authors focus on making suggested changes.

For authors whose manuscripts are accepted, the final steps of the publishing process involve reviewing technical edits from the editor and additional queries from editorial staff. These queries may relate to language, grammar, terminology, structure, flow, and overall presentation. Responding to these queries is crucial to ensure the integrity of the publication process. After publication, we ask authors to complete an evaluation form about the various aspects of the publishing process. We rely on authors’ feedback to modify our processes as needed, helping us facilitate authors choosing Forum as the preferred journal for their oncology nursing science manuscripts. Please let us know if you have any questions or suggestions for our publication process by contacting pubONF@ons.org. We value our authors and want to remain your journal of choice.

About the Author

Debra Lyon, RN, PhD, FNP-BC, FAAN, is a professor and Kirbo Endowed Chair in the College of Nursing at the University of Florida in Gainesville. Lyon can be reached at ONFEditor@ons.org.