Dataset Information

Where should I send it? Optimizing the submission decision process.

ABSTRACT: How do scientists decide where to submit manuscripts? Many factors influence this decision, including prestige, acceptance probability, turnaround time, target audience, fit, and impact factor. Here, we present a framework for evaluating where to submit a manuscript based on the theory of Markov decision processes. We derive two models, one in which an author is trying to optimally maximize citations and another in which that goal is balanced by either minimizing the number of resubmissions or the total time in review. We parameterize the models with data on acceptance probability, submission-to-decision times, and impact factors for 61 ecology journals. We find that submission sequences beginning with Ecology Letters, Ecological Monographs, or PLOS ONE could be optimal depending on the importance given to time to acceptance or number of resubmissions. This analysis provides some guidance on where to submit a manuscript given the individual-specific values assigned to these disparate objectives.

SUBMITTER: Salinas S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4304711 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Where should I send it? Optimizing the submission decision process.

Salinas Santiago S Munch Stephan B SB

PloS one 20150123 1

How do scientists decide where to submit manuscripts? Many factors influence this decision, including prestige, acceptance probability, turnaround time, target audience, fit, and impact factor. Here, we present a framework for evaluating where to submit a manuscript based on the theory of Markov decision processes. We derive two models, one in which an author is trying to optimally maximize citations and another in which that goal is balanced by either minimizing the number of resubmissions or t ...[more]

PMID: 25616103

Similar Datasets

Project description:When researchers complete a manuscript, they need to choose a journal to which they will submit the study. This decision requires to navigate trade-offs between multiple objectives. One objective is to share the new knowledge as widely as possible. Citation counts can serve as a proxy to quantify this objective. A second objective is to minimize the time commitment put into sharing the research, which may be estimated by the total time from initial submission to final decision. A third objective is to minimize the number of rejections and resubmissions. Thus, researchers often consider the trade-offs between the objectives of (i) maximizing citations, (ii) minimizing time-to-decision, and (iii) minimizing the number of resubmissions. To complicate matters further, this is a decision with multiple, potentially conflicting, decision-maker rationalities. Co-authors might have different preferences, for example about publishing fast versus maximizing citations. These diverging preferences can lead to conflicting trade-offs between objectives. Here, we apply a multi-objective decision analytical framework to identify the Pareto-front between these objectives and determine the set of journal submission pathways that balance these objectives for three stages of a researcher's career. We find multiple strategies that researchers might pursue, depending on how they value minimizing risk and effort relative to maximizing citations. The sequences that maximize expected citations within each strategy are generally similar, regardless of time horizon. We find that the "conditional impact factor"-impact factor times acceptance rate-is a suitable heuristic method for ranking journals, to strike a balance between minimizing effort objectives and maximizing citation count. Finally, we examine potential co-author tension resulting from differing rationalities by mapping out each researcher's preferred Pareto front and identifying compromise submission strategies. The explicit representation of trade-offs, especially when multiple decision-makers (co-authors) have different preferences, facilitates negotiations and can support the decision process.

Project description:Little is known on how to best prioritize various tele-ICU specific tasks and workflows to maximize operational efficiency. We set out to: 1) develop an operational model that accurately reflects tele-ICU workflows at baseline, 2) identify workflow changes that optimize operational efficiency through discrete-event simulation and multi-class priority queuing modeling, and 3) implement the predicted favorable workflow changes and validate the simulation model through prospective correlation of actual-to-predicted change in performance measures linked to patient outcomes.SettingTele-ICU of a large healthcare system in New York State covering nine ICUs across the spectrum of adult critical care.PatientsSeven-thousand three-hundred eighty-seven adult critically ill patients admitted to a system ICU (1,155 patients pre-intervention in 2016Q1 and 6,232 patients post-intervention 2016Q3 to 2017Q2).InterventionsChange in tele-ICU workflow process structure and hierarchical process priority based on discrete-event simulation.Measurements and main resultsOur discrete-event simulation model accurately reflected the actual baseline average time to first video assessment by both the tele-ICU intensivist (simulated 132.8 ± 6.7 min vs 132 ± 12.2 min actual) and the tele-ICU nurse (simulated 128.4 ± 7.6 min vs 123 ± 9.8 min actual). For a simultaneous priority and process change, the model simulated a reduction in average TVFA to 51.3 ± 1.6 min (tele-ICU intensivist) and 50.7 ± 2.1 min (tele-ICU nurse), less than the added simulated reductions for each change alone, suggesting correlation of the changes to some degree. Subsequently implementing both changes simultaneously resulted in actual reductions in average time to first video assessment to values within the 95% CIs of the simulations (50 ± 5.5 min for tele-intensivists and 49 ± 3.9 min for tele-nurses).ConclusionsDiscrete-event simulation can accurately predict the effects of contemplated multidisciplinary tele-ICU workflow changes. The value of workflow process and task priority modeling is likely to increase with increasing operational complexities and interdependencies.

Dataset Information

Where should I send it? Optimizing the submission decision process.

Publications

Where should I send it? Optimizing the submission decision process.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets