Dr. Joe Appleford is the editor in charge of more than 60 periodicals under BMC. His job description is "managing executive editors". He gave a lecture on paper submission at a publishing conference held in the University of Sussex, England, and compiled some contents that he found very helpful. 1. Critically evaluate your results. A valuable job should have one of these characteristics: original results, methods or tools; Re-analysis or interpretation of published data; Meta analysis); Many previous studies; A summary of a theme; Negative results are sometimes valuable. If your work is like this, it may not be worth publishing, or it may be difficult to publish: outdated research; Defective or forged data; Simply repeat the previous research. So how do you evaluate your results, or how do you track the progress in this field? 1) database retrieval (such as PubMed, Google Academic, Scopus), try different keyword combinations. 2) Make full use of the special tools of many databases, such as the list of related documents (list of cited articles, etc.). ) and a list of related articles based on the same keyword. 3) Many publishers also have domain-based or topic-based web pages, which bring together similar documents. Simply put, it is necessary to pay attention to the published research in this field in real time. 2. Choose the right periodical to understand the review process (choose the right periodical to understand the process). Target readers; The exhibition degree of periodicals; The speed of peer review. Therefore, when selecting periodicals, we should consider the following related issues. 1). This can often be seen from the front page of a journal. It is very important to browse the topics of articles published recently in magazines. 3) Show it regularly. For example, look at the Google ranking of journals and the degree of open access. 4) editorial department structure. Periodical editors can generally be divided into two categories: full-time editors (full-time engaged in publishing industry, no longer engaged in research) and "amateur" editors (scientists still engaged in research), who are the final deciders of peer review opinions. 5) Peer review process. After the submission is completed, the editorial department will first evaluate the manuscript (preliminary evaluation), and often the editor-in-chief or domain editor will evaluate whether the manuscript is suitable for the positioning of the journal and its academic value. For some journals, especially high-level journals with a large number of contributions, it is more important to inquire before submitting, and it is necessary to be prepared to include the main research results (abstract &; Outline) and research significance. After that, the editorial department will select reviewers. For contributors, it is necessary to make rational use of the policy of allowing journals to recommend and blocking reviewers. When selecting reviewers, editorial departments often consider inviting reviewers who evaluate both data quality (method part) and academic value (results and discussion). For BMC series journals, journals with high rejection rate may also be transferred to more professional journals, such as those rejected by Genome Biology or published in BMC Genomics. When writing a good paper, you must keep these points in mind: 1) Ensure that the content is clear and the discussion is logical; 2) Concise: too long a seminar makes the focus not prominent; 3) The discussion should be based on evidence, and don't exaggerate your own conclusions; 4) clearly and concisely explain the research purpose and scientific problems you are concerned about; 5) Put the work in the field background: Be sure to quote key documents in the right place; 6) Strictly abide by the periodical regulations (author's guide). Title (title) A good title helps to attract readers and the citation rate better, so the title should be clear and concise, with wide appeal (avoid any unnecessary details), and avoid overly professional words and abbreviations. In fact, editors and reviewers will also pay attention to whether the topic correctly reflects the content of the article. Abstract (abstract). It should include: the purpose of the research and why the scientific problems you are concerned about are important; Key methods and materials; Main results and conclusions. Choose keywords carefully. Good keywords can attract readers better, increase retrieval and citation, and avoid using abbreviations with multiple meanings. Editorial departments usually only send abstracts when inviting reviewers, so a bad abstract may make editors think that the paper has no scientific value or reviewers refuse to review it. Cover letter. To write a contribution letter, you should know the answers to the following questions. What is your scientific focus? What are the important findings about these problems? What is the evidence to support this conclusion? What are the three recently published papers related to your scientific concerns? What is the significance of your research results to your research field? What is the significance of your research results to a wider group (biologists or the general public)? What new discoveries did your paper provide? Is there any other information that needs to be notified to the editorial department? Other issues needing attention: please read and make suggestions before submitting; Whether the drawings and forms are clear and appropriate; When revising the paper, we must take seriously the opinions of the reviewers; If you switch to another journal, you must modify the title and content of the submission letter. 4. Calling peer review is not a democratic process, and different reviewers often have different peer review opinions. In addition, the editor can veto the reviewer's opinion. Therefore, for a rejected manuscript, it is sometimes necessary to seize the opportunity to appeal. When complaining, you should clearly show your attitude and viewpoint, and supplement useful new data and information as much as possible; Don't take advantage of the author's position or fame, don't use threatening and insulting language, don't take advantage of the support of prestigious peers, and don't repeat the contents of the submission letter in the complaint letter.